I will in about 20 years when it's on national television or some shit ahh but seriously I should really watch more films and stuff last time I went to the cinema was for The Hobbit and Prometheus before that and before that god knows what it was I'd hazard a guess at Castaway or some shit...

YES...watched it last night and it was one of the most disturbing movies I have seen in years. You know its hit you hard when you wake up the next day after watching it and still think about it.

Connolly played the part awesomely (nice fur shot BTW) . The mother in the movie should have won the oscar for it! Marlon Wayans even did a great job! 4.5/5 for me

I've never understood why people nitpick The Dark Knight Rises and not the others. All three films have their share of plot holes and ridiculous moments. I love all three films regardless. Easily my favourite super hero movies.

The first two are exciting and epic. TDKR is shapeless and boring, and doesn't even keep up its ludicrous plot for half of the film. Films are about more than just a mechanized list of bulleted plot points and flaws - it's about the experience. The reason people don't nitpick the other two is because those people - me being one of them - think the first two are great experiences that suck them into Gotham City as if it were real, sweeping them up into the intrigue and the action. TDKR is a bloated mess with no substance or real message to it.

I saw The Conjuring last night and thought it was terrific. I'm not one to fawn over movies very easily and I was very impressed. I loved the nods to classic horror, the lack of gore, and the overall feeling of dread the movie maintained throughout the entirety of the film. Definitely worth the hype, in my opinion. I'd go as far as to say that it is the best horror movie to come out in years.

It's rare nowadays that horror films get massive critical praise, so the ones that do get said praise are usually completely worth the hype. The only horror films I know of to get such critical acclaim in the modern day are Let the Right One In and its remake, Let Me In.

I really can't believe, even in my wildest dreams, that any of these ghost possession Exorcist shaky camera rip off movies are anywhere above 'abysmal' on the rating scale...because of this I am actually curious to see what it is people like about The Conjuring so much.

Frankly I usually feel the opposite way from the mainstream on new horror movies. The Orphan and The Purge were panned and I thought they were both swell.

The Purge I think looks like a really good thriller/horror flick. I've yet to see it, but I heard mostly mixed things about it, although in a case like this it looks a lot better than people are giving it credit for.

I think TDK was also terrible and messy. One thing I can't pass over is how un-Gotham is the universe looking; I mean, the whole movie is going on at daylight and the city chosen just look like your average city. Bruce Wayne doesn't exist, Batman is barely featured, the movie is too long, the Joker, while the acting was good, the character wasn't... too serious I think. The script was also utterly lacking, almost like a Ahnold movie. I do appreciate Begins, but I think the whole trilogy wasn't really that good.

The good thing is that Batman gets a reboot now with the new Man of Steel-Superman/Batman movie.

See, I don't agree. The city looks cool and sleek, the plot was fast paced and pretty intricate, and the action was kick ass. Batman was in the shadows a lot and Wayne you didn't see that much, but every time they were on screen you got to really feel their presence. Mostly I love it because it's just so monumentally, exhaustively action-packed...it is a huge steamrolling tank of a movie, that just keeps coming. It's got its fair share of problems in the pace and some of the characters get lost in how big it is, but I still like it every time. I don't care about the problems it has.

I liked all three of the Nolan Batman movies. Sure, some parts are better than others, and the second movie was definitely the peak, but there's nothing about any of them that I out and out disliked except for Bale's Batman voice.

Just saw Pacific Rim. Rocked pretty hard. Plot holes and/or dumb plot elements ran rampant but I didn't really give much of a fuck because giant robots fighting giant monsters. It felt much shorter than it really was; they could've added a half hour to it and had another full-fledged fight. Maybe something like:

Yeah, I think the Chinese and Russian teams definitely could've been given more time, but the movie was really long anyway. It basically had enough characters and plot points to be an entire 26 episode anime series.

I'm going to be annoying and catch up on conversations from the last page...

Re Requiem for a Dream:

Bah, humbug. Requiem for a Dream is nowhere near as bad as you make it out to, nor as Aronofksky's films generally - The Fountain is the only overly large pile of steaming excrement there, I'd say. Pi especially was a great film, in my view; when Aronofsky uses a sparser, subtler style, he can be quite effective, I think.


I'd say that Splice is certainly worth checking out, if only for some of the concepts and the rather interesting realisation of the creature itself; there are also a couple of fabulously disturbing moments that can surprise purely because the writers actually went there,, so to speak, and - as I've said in this thread before - I found the whole film quite memorable and the characters generally intriguing (if not always consistent or well-constructed).


Not really - not in the, again, Gibson-esque, sense of 'grimy, tortured hacker' that I was referring to. And the mere presence of futuristic headset things doesn't make something cyberpunk - the whole world was a sleek corporate one; there was never that sense of a vast, chaotic metropolis with different levels and social groups interacting (which I always associate with cyberpunk movies - like Strange Days).

It's fine for you to not like these movies but at least have valid reasons. I'll give you the movie being too long, but that's hardly something to dismiss a film over, especially considering how common it is. Oh heaven forbid Gotham looks different in a Batman movie, what is the world coming to. Perhaps you missed the memo that the Nolan trilogy is a more realistic turn at Batman. You're right, I can see Jack Nicholson's turn at Joker really suiting the character in this movie, he needed more bad puns and goofy costume dance numbers. Arnold movie, I mean really? Because a majority of the dialogue is short and concise? What exactly would be a more appropriate script, because it seems you'd have preferred a narrator and slew of unnecessary scenes showing every commute and every trivial discussion.

TDK didn't make it to me, simple as that. I also think the movie was very predictable. Once Nolan shows the Joker is the boss of the movie (and not Batman), everything it's easy to imagine. Also, I think the Dent/Two Faces-arc was underdeveloped and sometimes it went against the pace of the film, it could have been out of the movie and nothing particularily important would have been missed, excepting the pseudo philosophical face Nolan wanted to give the movie, which also fell flat with the next film. His 'motives' to turn evil were laughable, sorry. For someone with such strong will, he should have grabbed his balls and go ahead! the chat with the Joker was nonsensical.

I also have the problem of a more 'realistic' movie when the Joker did what we wanted in unbelievable ways. The guy was known for killing his assistants and menacing the rest of the goons around, yet he was no short of help, particularily at the second half of the movie. How did he put all the explosives at the hospital? alone? with help? how in hell no one noticed? So, the movie had a quite realistic look and acting for everyone, BUT the Joker. He ensambled a whole organization in days, right? those were supposedly insane guys from the Asylum? if it were like that, they for sure acted very sane, controlled, professionally and obediently. Makes sense, sure.

The cellphone thing was ridiculous. The dog scene was ridiculous, c'mon!

Of course, the Joker's presence itself. There's no introduction or background, he simply appears and becomes the #1 villain (cause Stone Cold Said So?), being more a wannabe Nietzsche than anything else.

TDKR neither did the trick. Just 1 example: the bomb was utterly unnecesary.

The Brain that Wouldn't Die-After escaping from a car accident alive but his girlfriend decapitated, a man decides to utilize his surgical skills to save her and sets out to find a new body to transplant it onto, unaware of her desire to finally die and be rid of him forever. This here was a massive disappointment overall and really didn't have a lot going for it. One of the biggest issues here is the fact that this one doesn't really do a lot of anything during it's running time. Keeping the head inactive by chaining it up to the machines doesn't do anything but provide the visual of it in that condition and the only thing it can do is communicate with the grotesque monstrosity off-camera and nothing more, leaving it quite unsatisfactory as a villain capable of accomplishing fear or terror with it's swim-cap on as a hat to keep it in check, so the majority of the film amounts to the doctor walking around doing absolutely nothing just checking on women to be viable candidates for his surgery, and when that provides only teasing and not much else even that falls apart. The cheapness of the film really sets it down when the final monster looks too goofy to amount to anything anywhere imposing or threatening, and the climactic fight in the laboratory is really the only thing all that impressive as it goes out in a blaze the way all these films work. Overall, had this given the head something more imposing to do, it could've helped out as it's the main problem with this one.

I remember that movie was on MST3K back in the day. It looked like a stereotypical 50s sci-fi film.

Premium Rush - I will give this some credit for an unusual premise (a PG-13 action movie about a bike messenger?), Michael Shannon doing his Boardwalk Empire thing (playing a lawman who's more of a sick freak than many of the criminals he's after), and for wrapping things up in under 90 minutes. On the other hand, I thought the protagonist was sort of a douchebag, and the main thing I got out of this movie was "I'm glad I live somewhere I can walk and drive around without some cyclist with a deathwish crashing into me."

Oldboy - I had to watch this after seeing the trailer for the remake and reading about the original here a page or three ago. I correctly guessed part of the ending very early on, but this was still pretty good and had some very memorable scenes. I'm more excited for the remake now than I was before seeing the Korean version.

I'm not looking forward to the Oldboy remake. I'll admit that I don't truly love Oldboy, but I have tons of respect for the film for it's unique filming aspects as well as it's willingness to go into some truly controversial subject matter without holding back. It also has what I considered to be one of the best fight scenes in film history. As for the remake, I got the impression of the trailer that it means well and wants to truly honor the orriginal, but I also got the feeling that it's missing it's mark and won't succeed. I'll say this, it does look better then what would have happened if Will Smith and I think Spielberg had made it.

I know exactly the fight scene you're talking about, and I, too am worried that they'll fuck that up. I really don't know how they couldn't.

I liked Oldboy but thought that it was pretty overrated, some good scenes sure and the acting is excellent. I <3 Josh Brolin and the trailer looked promising, we'll see. Some remakes can be great like Funny Games.

I adore Funny Games and think it's an absolutely brilliant film, but what was 'great' about its remake? It was shot-for-shot identical! Which I suppose is superior to the Gus Van Sant school of remakes (shot-for-shot duplicate except for a new, inferior ending) but still rather pointless. Haneke's reasoning that since Funny Games is an indictment of American mainstream cinema, the American public should see it at their own cineplexes with their own actors is a weak one because the only people who would see it anyway are the artsy/'open-minded' types who are probably at least distantly familiar with Haneke anyway and more than a little aware of the sham that is Hollywood.

Still, even the remake was better than most of the crap we see today. It's just that it seemed a bit... well, pointless.


Which provides a perfect segue into my next 'feature' (more like a barstool rant), "Why Darren Aronovsky is an enemy to film" that I'll write up... later.

Funny Games remake did so poorly at the cinema over here, it was scolded by critics as torture porn and was off the screen within a couple of weeks. So many people fail to see the point of the movie. It's doubly strange considering how heralded the original was.

I've seen all of his movies except The Fountain, and The Wrestler is easily my favorite. I found Black Swan overrated, but part of that is because I just don't like Natalie Portman. Requiem for a Dream and Pi I saw too long ago to remember much about them, but I'm sure I didn't like them as much as I liked The Wrestler.

Holy shit, I just read the plot summary for The Fountain.



That sounds kind of like Cloud Atlas, but at 96 minutes it's only about half as long.

I was going to wait until I had watched the last film of the trilogy, but I'll do it now instead.

The August Underground movies are the most pointless fucking movies EVER. For those who don't know of the series, it's basically three movies of simulated snuff films strung together with zero plot or purpose. The third one, which I think still uses that same formula, eschews the visual approach of the first two movies (really degraded, shitty looking and sounding DV camera home movies) in favor of full HD, but after watching the 2nd one, I know that it's gonna be just as stupid as the first two. The first one, while containing a fair share of torture scenes (it opens on a bound and gagged nude women covered in human feces and with one nipple cut off kept in a dude's basement, and the first half of the movie keeps going back to the two main characters doing degrading shit to her, like cutting off her dead boyfriend's toe and forcing her to eat it, making her eat her own shit, etc.), it features more scenes of the main characters just kind of fucking around. They harass a hitchhiker and beat her to death on the side of the road, they get kicked out of a nu metal show (it was 2001, after all) while the band onstage is covering Blind by Korn, they murder a convenience store clerk and abuse the two customers unlucky enough to be inside the store at the time, among other things. Probably the strangest scene of the killers just dicking around is they go on a road trip to Roadside America (those from eastern Pennsylvania probably know what that place is), and they just walk around the place acting normal. One of them gets a tattoo afterwards, they kidnap the tattoo artist and his identical twin brother, bring them to the basement, and kill them violently (their kidnapping is completely offscreen and unexplained, I might add). The whole thing ends with a 15 minute scene of them screwing around with plus sized hookers, leading one of them into the basement to see the other one being bludgeoned to death with a hammer, she gets away, movie stops. The end.

However, that doesn't even compare to the 2nd one, which is pretty much just a showcase for violent murder and torture scenes and absolutely nothing more. There are almost no scenes of the killers dicking around, and the only bit of character that any of them gets is the main female killer and her brother fuck each other. That's it, nothing more. I think whoever made this movie was just trying as hard as he could to make the most disgusting film possible, and you can't fault him for trying on that front. Various disgusting bits throughout include:

-A man being violently castrated, then his severed penis is used to rape a woman bound and gagged in a box.
-Two plus sized women are forced to vomit on each other, while the killers slice open their ass cheeks and puke into the open wounds.
-One of the women being disemboweled, her womb and ovaries eaten, and then the hole in her gut is raped by one of the killers.
-The killers visit another serial torturer, who reveals a large room in his house filled with decaying corpses, skeletons, stacks of decapitated heads, and a dead toddler with no head and covered in maggots, One of them then eats the toddler.
-Our main killers abduct a family, hanging the father, slicing the throat and nipple of the mother, and one of them rapes the corpse of the daughter, before he slits his own throat.

Keep in mind that each of these scenes go on for at least 10 minutes, The longest uninterrupted scenes of torture and murder go on for about 25-30 minutes, those being the stuff involving the plus sized women and the castration scene.

Basically, these movies, especially the 2nd one, serve absolutely no purpose outside of just being the gore equivalent to gonzo porn. I know they're exploitation films and whatnot, but at least A Serbian Film, an exploitation film which did actually gross me out, had a point to it. With that movie, you could tell that the filmmakers were trying to make something of value as a movie, and the excellent direction and acting only helped it. I wasn't shaking my head throughout it wondering why anybody would make something this stupid (well, outside of the baby rape scene, which I still maintain was a completely unnecessary addition to the movie), August Underground and August Underground's Mordum, aside from the one positive both of them share of looking like real serial killer home movies (to the point that I want to take the two of them, transfer them over to VHS without the end credits or the first movie's warning sign at the start, and show them to somebody under the auspices of the two movies being real snuff films), are just worthless exercises in mindless violence.

The August Underground trilogy is like Enmity: A worthless exercise of mindless br00tality. It's shocking for the sake for being gross and brings absolutely 0 reedeming qualities to the table. It's not even THAT shocking to begin with.

Matchstick Men: An alright and entertaining film. Nicholas Cage is his annoying self, but fits well into the role. Pretty good cast all around and well executed, but somehow it seemed a bit... too quirky and off-beat to really draw one in. I suppose the Hollywoodian aspect can be endearing, the way Cage's character is drawn into a more regular life without his psychosomatic problems by the appearance of an unheard daughter. But all in all, the whole resolution felt a bit tagged on.

Half Nelson: An interesting character study of a druggie-turned-teacher, but without kicking the habit and the relationship he develops with a student who catches him getting high. I'm not a big fan of Gosling though don't hate him either - Seen both good and bad performances from him. Or perhaps it's the films themselves? Anyway, his understated, un-phased, nonplussed acting fits well here. The whole movie and its plot is rather understated - Maybe a slice of life, if you allow the term. Child actors tend to be annoying and bring rather poor performances (Little Miss Sunshine, Beasts of the Southern Wild), but the actor who plays Drey is very convincing. Perhaps it is again the understated nature of the film.

X-Files: I Want to Believe: Seen it before, but my brother wanted to watch it. I remembered it being entertaining, but altogether a bit dull. And that it was. The themes of Scully's religion and the comparison of their beliefs - his in supernatural, hers in... well, other, more accepted supernatural - is a bit tagged on and a bit off as well. The film is much better than the first one though. Mostly because it completely ignores the whole big conspiracy thing that went on during the series.

Star Trek: Nemesis: Interesting idea, the whole tumult in Romulan society and politics - Poor execution. A clone? Of Picard? Christ... And another android from whatshisname? Meh.

What

Ugh...Mortal Instruments...

http://www.regmovies.com/Movies/Movie-F ... 60760?ka=1

I'm so sick of these "I thought I was just a normal teenager, but it turns out I'm destined to take part in a supernatural quest that goes beyond my wildest dreams!!!11!!!!!111!" stories. Fucking hell, this looks like some retarded mashup of Twilight, Harry Potter, and Underworld. Oh wait, "Downworld."

That's basically the fantasy of every child ever. Those stories will never go out of fashion.

I honestly can't see that movie doing too well with a ludicrous name like that. Though, watching that trailer did make me realize how awesome a Witcher movie could potentially be.

Urrg, and they're releasing a sequel to Percy Jackson? Whaaat the fucking hell, man, did the first one even break $10m? How is that even....? I watched the first one online and it was godawful.

Speaking of which, I tried to watch a Transformers movie for the first time the other night (Dark of the Moon) and it was so much worse than I was even expecting. Pretty sure it lowered my IQ to a measurable degree. Didn't last more than an hour or so in before I just had to turn it off. All I really wanted from it was some spectacle but I couldn't even get that. In the first hour I got roughly one token action scene that lasted approximately 1 minute and then about 59 minutes of Shia LeBuffnut going to job interviews and fighting with his girlfriend. What the fucking hell. Though I will say I was entertained by the first 10 minutes or so, if only because the concept of the Apollo moon landing having anything whatsoever to do with Transformers technology was too insanely fuckdumb to NOT laugh at. That and JFK's CGI mask-face, that was good. Anyway. FUCK. Stopping ranting now. Yes, I'm an idiot for having even pressed play.

The first Percy Jackson film made about a quarter of a billion dollars against a comparatively paltry budget of $95 million. There'll probably be at least a trilogy of them.

Keep in mind the book it's based on was wildly popular.

And written by an author who achieved her initial fame through writing popular Harry Potter fanfics.

Fucking hell... it blows my mind that Percy Jackson actually turned a profit, let alone a significant one. We are lost.

Yeah, the Transformers movies are nigh unwatchable. Some of the action scenes are vaguely cool but at the same time they're just so goddamn *busy*. So much CGI, so many whirring, unnaturally moving parts. It makes it sort of hard to follow them when they really get going, and they're the coolest parts of the movies by far. The acting is fucking awful, the dialogue veers between offensively bad and plain offensive, the plots are basically the National Treasure movie with energon instead of gold and Decepticons instead of confederates. Shit, Shia The Beef is basically just a young Nic Cage anyway.

Yeah, I absolutely hate that they're probably going to be what people associate with Transformers now. The original Transformers movie was fucking great, and the Michael Bay movies just take a giant, giant shit all over what Transformers are supposed to be.

For Transformers fandom, I always return to the Headmasters, Masterforce and Victory japanese series. They are the only worthy sequels to the original GI-G2 series and movie. I couldn't get into the new movies at all, it felt more like a better looking Beast Wars movie than a Transformers one.

Beast Wars was actually good, though.