Wot films are you watching?

[The JG Man]

LoTR and Donnie Darko I enjoyed upon seeing them, but on reflection think they were pretty dull or bad. LoTR has a lot of ground to cover, ground I've admittedly never read the source material of, but it can drag on for so damn long. It also comes across as being unnecessarily hammy at times. I remember watching Return of the King with a couple of housemates at uni and we spent most of it making fun of what was going on. In LoTR's defence, it does have a spectacular scale, but I don't believe I could sit through the trilogy now 'seriously', whilst I could probably enjoy it considerably if I was able to sit through it mocking it. When it hits its stride though, it can be great.

For Donnie Darko, my problem is the choice at the ending. Putting aside all ideas of time travel, because the whole damn film is so bloody weird that it feels perfectly acceptable, [spoiler]the fact that at the end he's happy to set everything right...but let himself die?[/spoiler] Perhaps it's supposed to be a great character dilemma - how do you know what they're thinking? And so on. My problem with that is that there is no indication prior that he would even consider this as a course of action to take. Sure he has some problems, but it just seems odd. There's absolutely no reason why he couldn't have done all he had and averted his 'fate'. For me, that undoes a lot of the film. The more I've thought about it, the more I've disliked that too.

Despite that, I enjoyed a fair bit of the dialogue, the tone and characters. Also, I'd be far more willing to sit through it again than any of the LoTR films because it's been a good few years since I saw it and I might have misunderstood some of the content when I was younger. I wouldn't be surprised if I missed something integral to the ending that I've discussed, although I don't believe that's the case.

[SirKicksalot]

I could have done with the farmhouse section being cut down a bit though.

Farmhouse section had Emily Blunt, so I could do with more of that. Hell, I'd pay to see two hours of Emily Blunt hopelessly attacking that tree stump.

[Xercies]

Just saw Looper myself and have to say was really damn good had good characters and a really good plot that had many good themes which was all about changing yourself and whether you can or not and also would you be willing to kill Hitler because is he always going to be hitler. I think i was surprised though about the brutalness of the action its not kind to the fingers or anything else. Also one bit i was like wow did it just went there!

I didnt mind the time travel you could argue that through all this the film never happened but it served its purpose to tell the themes it had to tell and i thought it was pretty clever at the end. I could have done with a little less over explainy and obvious narration at the start but its not to bad.

[Voon]

I had nostalgia rush last night when The Rocketeer was on TV. I watched it a few times when I was a kid but never from the start. Finally spent a coupla hours with my brother watching it and it was fun as heck. Timothy Dalton seems to be a better villian than Bond.

Also, The Quick and The Dead was on tv too, a few hours ago. Damn, should've had some popcorn ready

[SirDavies]

I saw Looper last weekend and I have to say, I don't get what all the fuss is about. It's like people had never heard of time travel before. Yes, it has a high production value. Yes, it has good actors (loved the unintentionally funny moment where Joseph Gordon Levitt suddenly transformed into Bruce Willis), but the story and the setting seem terribly uninspired, and the action scenes are so ordinary and typical.

They could have done so much with the semi-futuristic setting, but they went for a mundane and non amusing world. The movie's comedy factor is tiresome, based on repeating three jokes that might have been funny on their own but get old with the continuous repetition (the Kid Blue character, Willis calling Gordon a kid, and dudes levitating coins), a recourse that portrays the lack of imagination that spreads throughout the movie. Some scenes take too long and have no visible effect on the plot or the characters (like the one involving Seth, which itself is a part of an exposition of the movie's world, that takes way too long) and the character development of "future Joe" (Bruce Willis) and his wife is almost non-existent. Then there's the time travel thingy. As interesting as time travel can be, that is not by any means a quality of the movie or the director, in fact the movie clearly dismisses any discussion on time travel's paradoxes and expects the viewer to just follow along the movie's inconsistent view of time travel, as represented by the scene where Willis, almost like he's talking to the audience, states that it's "too complicated" to be talked about [in a blockbuster movie]. I loved Jeff Daniel's interpretation though. Overall, it is an ok movie, good mindless entertainment, if you're one of those who believe such a thing exists.

[LaunchJC]

They could have done so much with the semi-futuristic setting, but they went for a mundane and non amusing world. The movie's comedy factor is tiresome, based on repeating three jokes that might have been funny on their own but get old with the continuous repetition (the Kid Blue character, Willis calling Gordon a kid, and dudes levitating coins), a recourse that portrays the lack of imagination that spreads throughout the movie. Some scenes take too long and have no visible effect on the plot or the characters (like the one involving Seth, which itself is a part of an exposition of the movie's world, that takes way too long) and the character development of "future Joe" (Bruce Willis) and his wife is almost non-existent. Then there's the time travel thingy. As interesting as time travel can be, that is not by any means a quality of the movie or the director, in fact the movie clearly dismisses any discussion on time travel's paradoxes and expects the viewer to just follow along the movie's inconsistent view of time travel, as represented by the scene where Willis, almost like he's talking to the audience, states that it's "too complicated" to be talked about [in a blockbuster movie]. I loved Jeff Daniel's interpretation though. Overall, it an ok movie, good mindless entertainment, if you're one of those who believe such a thing exists.

I actually enjoyed the way they handled time travel, including the scene you mentioned with Willis. Rather than get bogged down in the endless possibilities it was a case of seeing only what relates to the characters in the moment.

[Xercies]

The movie's comedy factor is tiresome, based on repeating three jokes that might have been funny on their own but get old with the continuous repetition (the Kid Blue character, Willis calling Gordon a kid, and dudes levitating coins)

The last one wasn't really meant to be funny but get you used to what the kid does later and I have to say for what wasn't meant to be a comedy had some funny moments and those were actually quite good ones as well(the fact that bruce willis is calling his past self a kid and reckless i thought was quite funny).

like the one involving Seth, which itself is a part of an exposition of the movie's world, that takes way too long

More of a visible representation of why you don't eff with the looper gang and some nice gruesome imagery.

But I agree with LaunchJC it would of bogged down the movie and as i said with the way time travel was depicted it served its themes well and made sense within the movie especially watching the scenes with Seth and stuff.

[sabrage]

Watched Slither tonight. Elizabeth Banks, The Thing-style body horror, cannibalism, Nathan Fillion cracking wise... Why didn't I see this earlier?

[Bobtree]

Looper entertained me.

Beyond the Black Rainbow just hit Netflix, and the title might be my favorite part of it. There are some interesting audiovisual elements, good performances and directing, but it's long and slow and basically goes nowhere. The last 5 minutes are an unnecessary slasher flick. I was intrigued to watch it, drawn in, and ended up annoyed and disappointed that it didn't develop better. The ending is pointless. Oh well.

[Ravelle]

Troll 2.

I've seen both The Room and Troll 2 and can now tell the difference between two kids of horrible, one being so bad it's brilliant and the other (Troll 2) was so awful it became frustrating and annoying.

[SirKicksalot]

Magic Mike is another solid Soderbergh flick. Not as good as Contagion and not as... visceral as Haywire, but it's damn fine entertainment.

[The JG Man]

The List continues to be whittled down, with this entry being Casablanca. It's hard to really gauge a proper reading on it because so much of it has already been absorbed by culture. That said, I did enjoy it a lot. I simultaneously knew what to expect and had no idea. It wasn't a comedy, but had a lot of humorous parts. It wasn't a romance, even though it was a pivotal part. A war drama? Sort of. It was enjoyable, that's enough for me. Would I have enjoyed it more if I hadn't have known so many things about it? Who knows.

Otherwise, I watched Star Wars: Episode 3 earlier. If I had to be positive about it, the CG is stunning and it's the best of the prequel trilogy. Of course, those don't really amount to too much. It was hard to know what was going on at times, Christopher Haydensen's delivery was strained, like someone who had no idea what was going on. Christopher Lee and Samuel L. Jackson were criminally under-used considering that they're, respectively, Christopher Lee and Samuel L. Jackson and just so much of it was bad. It was great fun to mock, but yeah. Pretty crappy.

[doctor_roxo]

Just saw The Expendables 2. didn't enjoy it as much as the 1st movie.
Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter was better than i expected.

Of all the movies I've seen this year, the one i watched just about a month ago was the best. and that was Iron Sky. Best movie i've seen all year, without a doubt. I assumed it was gonna be good before i watched it but it blew me away. it's just a fun movie. the premise is way out there but it's so entertaining. if you haven't seen it yet, i urge you to find it and watch it immediately.

[Xercies]

May I recommend everyone check out You've Been Trumped on BBC iplayer right now, it enraged me with its story of corruption in all levels based on one mans money and ergh just makes me pissed off that this kind of thing happens.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode..._Been_Trumped/

[Kaira-]

I watched The Unbreakable last night. Very enjoyable and I quite liked the ending, even if it wasn't all that surprising. Solid characterisation and very good soundtrack to accompany the movie.

[sabrage]

not as... visceral as Haywire

That's not what I heard.

[doctor_roxo]

Just watched Killer Joe recently and I must say that I loved it. great freaking movie. the director William Friedkin is one of my favorite directors these days. his older movies were great, French Connection, The Excorcist but then he kinda started making mediocre movies, imo. now his last 2 movies are some of my favorites. Bug, and now Killer Joe. most of the thanks goes to the screenwriter Tracy Letts(a man btw) for such amazing writing. killer joe was a play he wrote that was on broadway in the late 90's i believe.

what makes william such a good director in my opinion is that he takes actors/actresses that aren't very good and gets amazing performances out of them. For example, Ashley Judd in Bug and Matthew McConaughey in Killer Joe.

This is a Must-See. Check it out!

[Ravelle]

Just watched Killer Joe recently and I must say that I loved it. great freaking movie. the director William Friedkin is one of my favorite directors these days. his older movies were great, French Connection, The Excorcist but then he kinda started making mediocre movies, imo. now his last 2 movies are some of my favorites. Bug, and now Killer Joe. most of the thanks goes to the screenwriter Tracy Letts(a man btw) for such amazing writing. killer joe was a play he wrote that was on broadway in the late 90's i believe.

what makes william such a good director in my opinion is that he takes actors/actresses that aren't very good and gets amazing performances out of them. For example, Ashley Judd in Bug and Matthew McConaughey in Killer Joe.

This is a Must-See. Check it out!

I want to but it has Matthew McConaughey who likes to think he's an cowbow in every movie he's in, which strikes me the wrong way but I'll give it a try anyway because it has Juno Temple in it.

[Shane]

Daybreakers Piece of shit. Willem Defoe is wasted in this.

The Hunger Games Another piece of crap. I haven't read the books but the idotic plot felt very rushed, the acting sucked and the director's idea of making the audience contemptuous of the elite/viewers was to dress them like faggots. That they were trying to show the ugliness and debauch nature of reality television was so in your face that it defeats the purpose.

Oldboy Quite good. Lacking in story and the end reveal seemed a bit too lazy, but it's a good film. Worth watching for the hammer fight scene alone.

[Ravelle]

Daybreakers Piece of shit. Willem Defoe is wasted in this.

The Hunger Games Another piece of crap. I haven't read the books but the idotic plot felt very rushed, the acting sucked and the director's idea of making the audience contemptuous of the elite/viewers was to dress them like faggots. That they were trying to show the ugliness and debauch nature of reality television was so in your face that it defeats the purpose.

Oldboy Quite good. Lacking in story and the end reveal seemed a bit too lazy, but it's a good film. Worth watching for the hammer fight scene alone.

All this hype and media attention about the hunger games and then such a mediocre film.