Anyone watch any movies? Redux

[aquaknight]

Since the big summer movies will start rolling out this weekend (Fast Five), figured to get a thread started, like I did previously (link here). This thread is more oriented to new movies/still in theaters. I liked my out of 10 ratings, so I'll keep those.
Suckerpunch; 8 out of 10. This film has received a decent amount of negative publicity about both the content of the movie (somewhat understandable) and for the film itself (completely not understandable). First the content, anyone know thinks this film is about portraying "too young of girls" doesn't have the foggiest of clues. Emily Browning, who plays the main character is 22 in real life, and her character is 20 in the film. If 20 year olds can't be sexed up a bit, or have adult messages, I think we may be at a loss.... About the film itself, I just can't see where people can go to really disliking this film. I understand that Zach Snyder has been on a roll with 300 and then Watchmen, and yes, I will say it isn't on the same level as those other two, but it's still a terrific film. Each of the, let's say "events" as to limit any spoilers, are visually stunning, and hugely imaginative. The story was pretty cool/unique as was the ending. What else were people wanting?
Scream 4; 7.5 out of 10. The score may seem a little high, and it probably its. But for a recent horror flick that's not just about raw gore (Hostel/Saw), it's pretty good, especially considering this is the 4th Scream movie, it's just as fresh as the first, and some say, the best one yet. You play the Scream-guessing-game, and keep changing your pick of who you think Ghostface is, till the very end. That's what a Scream movie is about, and it delivered on that promise. Another absolute beacon of light in this movie, and one of my biggest hollywood crushes, Alison Brie. She rocked her part. There are a few negatives, first the analysis, after analysis of horror movies, and what movie taught us this about this, and what the rules about this are, grew old pretty fast. Only a true diehart horror fan would appreciate it. Secondly, while Emma Roberts may no longer be a Nickelodeon tween, her voice still is. When she started yelling, it was like cat nails on a chalkboard, AAWWW!
Source Code; 6.5 out of 10. Not overly a lot of say about this movie, plus a little drawn out after typing the first two reviews.... Source code felt like a film I've seen twice already, and I have, formerly called Inception and The Adjustment Bureau (sorta). The biggest fault to Source Code, is it's failure to develop into anything significant. The entire film is solely based on just one source code, and gets repetitive. Secondly the scene in which they explain how 'source code' works, the guy does it rather quickly and quite mumbly, sort of like it was almost on purpose, so you just say "okay" and accept that's how it works. Gyllenhaal turned out a decent performance, but I'm convinced Michele Monaghan is some type of 'happy' robot. She was just weirdly happy and smiley at what seemed like wrong times.

 

[aquaknight]

Fast Five; 7.5 out of 10. Honestly, this film wasn't bad if you realize that you're watching a Fast and Furious movie. If that's the case, the score is more like a 8.5 out of 10. From as series standpoint, it's the best movie wise, but has probably progressed farthest from the original street racer and car enthusiast themes. It's more of a heist film then anything. This film has some strong positive points, that earned it's high score. First, I thought they did a decent job convincing me that the movie was actually filmed in Rio, not just where it's convenient to film (usually Vancouver). They genuinely looked to be running through the favelas of Brazil..... For an action film, it was very refreshing to see real action, and real cars get smashed. In Transformers, as an example, even while they may have stunning CG, a CG robot smashing a CG cement truck, is well, still CG. In Fast Five, these were real cars getting smashed, and boy, there were lots of them getting smashed And the eventual fight scene between Dom (Vin Diesel) and Hobbs (Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson) was really good as well. The film did have some faults, what would be quiet predictable, a mediocre storyline, however there still a few twists in the film, which took me by surprise. The film dragged a touch here and there, mostly in the middle, as they were "gearing up" for the heist which definitely should have been trimmed in editing (this film is 2hrs. 10mins long). As with more and more films, you'll definitely want to stay during the credits, there's a bonus

.
Which, as Five Fast made an estimated. $83.6mil on it's opening weekend (highest for a Fast/Furious movie), a sixth installment will definitely be on the way. Five Fast's opening weekend was so good, it's the highest ever for a film in April, and the 3rd highest ever grossing opening weekend outside of summer and holiday weekends. It would be 27th all-time, which is still very impressive.

 

[aquaknight]

Thor; 8 out of 10. A Thor that was a Thor! As is the tricky part of Hollywood, getting actors who look the part. This is especially tough for "superhero" movies because most of the time, they're of some totally unobtainable physique. While there may be a bevy of people that have that look, there is only the slightest percentage that can actually, well, act. Chris Hemsworth certainly looked the part as Thor. I am not suggesting it's a requirement, but when you have actors like Topher Grace playing these roles, it taints the palate to a certain degree. For the film itself, Thor was great. It never really dragged at any point during the film, probably because of the iimmersiveness. There are a number of quick plot lines to grab at the beginning of the film, and your left puzzling them together. Thor also scores big points with it's "love interests." Without spoilering too much, I liked how more grounded in reality it was, different then a typical film's 'flash in the pan' so to speak. This is a slight complaint, but for being a PG-13 film, it must have just barely gotten that. More towards PG, then R, I mean. The violence that there was, was really clean, no real blood, very limited gun fire, etc. Other then the "true" bad guys, no one really died. Though likely they were trying to include a younger audience (Thor toys are everywhere). But still being rated PG-13 I bet they cut some of the kiddos out of seeing it. But the thing that holds Thor back from a higher rating, is it's CG. At times the CG was awesome, and reflective of this films $150mil budget. However in a handful of scenes, I though the CG was just terrible. It usually involved Thor flying, but it was just rough. These scenes were at best 2-3 seconds long, so they don't distract from the film too much, and so Thor is definitely a must see.
I saw Thor in 2-D and I would suggest unless you have an IMAX near you (the IMAX version is supposedly awesome), don't waste the money on the 3-D (Real-D) version. It's only a couple of scenes of "3-D" as the film was not shot in 3-D. As always with marvel films, stay till after the credits are completely over, for bonus (future) content.

 

[stdreb27]

lol, I the fast and furious movies, (except tokyo drift...)

 

[kjr_trig]

I saw Thor on Monday...I liked it!! Entertaining for sure, the dude that played Thor was good.

 

[aquaknight]

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides: 7 out of 10. Yep. Read that one correctly. Seven out of ten, Fast Five received a higher score from me then the latest POTC. Why? Well the answer to this film's relative disappointment perhaps stems entirely from two things, this is the first film of the POTC franchise for new director Rob Marshall. The second 'hurdle,' I guess is the term I'll use, was the production budget. It's less then the previous three POTC's. To say exactly who's to blame is tough. When you realize what the costs for a filming at sea are, you might lean towards the budget, but none the less here goes; I sorta felt like I was watching a remake of Congo, maybe a Jurassic Park (minus the dinosaurs). They spent more time trekking through the jungle, then at sea. The locale is not the only problem, when you realize exactly what they're after, it's almost excusable. However they spend a lot of time talking and arguing, rather then awesome action scenes that the POTC films are known for. The film is rumored to be the first of a trio of new POTC films, and it sorta felt it. There were a whole lot of old plot lines being closed and new ones being opened. Character development is pretty much limited to just one, well I guess sorta two if you count the one that ended, and neither is Jack Sparrow's.
To spite what seems like an overly critical review, should you go see it? Undoubtedly yes. It's a great film for most ages. This is the role Johnny Depp was born to play and it's always great to watch him on the big screen.
This film was actually shot in 3D, so the 3D quality is better then most other films that were converted to 3D post production. However there really are just a few moments of actual 3D effect, and really only one that was worth remembering. If you are easily upset by paying the ~$3 or so more per ticket for 3D, stick to the 2D. If you can, stick around till after the credits (all the way, the credits are immensely long unfortunately).

 

[aquaknight]

Fun movie facts;
POTC: On Stranger Tides opened at 4,155 locations, however 2,747 of them were 3D presentation, the most ever for any film.
POTC: On Stranger Tides is estimated to make $90.1 million on opening weekend, the most so far this year, just edging out Fast Five (gonna be blown to bits by a certain Transformers movie in July however). It's only the third highest grossing POTC. More then the first, however if you adjust the first film's prices to today, and factor that On Stranger Tides had 66% of it's income from even higher 3D prices, it's really much less. For comparison, POTC Dead Man's Chest, raked in a then record $135.1 million in July 2006, with no 3D inflated ticket prices.

 

[aquaknight]

Little disappointed in the board there wasn't a Hangover 2 thread

...
Anyway, it's sort of older so just a short review...
Hangover: Part II: 8 out of 10. A virtual copy of the original, but with a dirtier spin (how this film was rated R and not NC-17, I have no idea). Not as good as the original, but to me, I think the original is probably the best comedy since Ace Venture/Dumb and Dumber (I mean that too). The sequel isn't on quite the same page, but it's a funny film worth a watch if you're a fan of adult potty-humor.
Super 8: 9 out of 10. Super 8 does get a super 8, A 9!!!

Realized I have not given out an 9 yet in any of my reviews (including previous threads, though I didn't review the original Hangover), and if any film so far deserved it, it was Super 8. The biggest thing is that you just get the whole package. A wonderful story, a heart-felt coming of age laced over top an alien invasion, with plenty of explosions, excellent CG, and what I was most impressed with, superb acting. All of these kids somehow turned out performances that topped many adults. Elle Fanning in this role completely outshined most of the roles of her older sister Dakota. The film has a have a few minor faults. First, indirect spoiler, but as a person that has a reasonable grasp on physics, the train crash sequence was a little too much. More so just the apparent speed the train cars were given. This wasn't no Japanese-bullet train. Second is another nerd-out, but some of the cars used post-date 1979 when the film was suppose to be set (all those International Buses). And that might lead to the biggest complaint, not being around myself then, but it sorta felt like in brief moments, I was watching a movie set today, modern mannerisms and such.
Overall, I was hugely impressed with this film. It's been touted as good as E.T. or the Goonies. I think it's better.

 

[gemmy]

I heard Hangover 2 wasn't that good.

I don't have time to go to the movies often. I did see Kung Fu Panda 2 last night.

 

[aquaknight]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gemmy http:///forum/thread/385383/anyone-watch-any-movies-redux#post_3390178
I heard Hangover 2 wasn't that good.

I don't have time to go to the movies often. I did see Kung Fu Panda 2 last night.

I guess it just sorta depends what you expect going in to see the film. From the trailers/commercials, my guess was that it was going to be a slightly better then okay film, not where near the original, which IMHO it turned out to be (perhaps my 8 out of 10, is a little generous, more 7/7.5). If someone expected it to be laugh-for-laugh funny as the original, I can see how someone would be disappointed.
But look at the other comedies out this year. Hall Pass, The Dilemma, Just Go With It, if you compare Hangover to them, I think Hangover 2 has easily been the best comedy so far.
Nice on Kung Fu Panda 2..., What trailers did you get?

 

[1guydude]

I liked hall pass....thought it was really funny....
Have u seen the X-men movie yet aquaknight? I saw it last thur and thought it was pretty good seeing its the third installment in the series! Now i have to watch the 2nd one again lol...i cant remember much of it prob for good reasons.

 

[gemmy]

Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaKnight http:///forum/thread/385383/anyone-watch-any-movies-redux#post_3390218
I guess it just sorta depends what you expect going in to see the film. From the trailers/commercials, my guess was that it was going to be a slightly better then okay film, not where near the original, which IMHO it turned out to be (perhaps my 8 out of 10, is a little generous, more 7/7.5). If someone expected it to be laugh-for-laugh funny as the original, I can see how someone would be disappointed.
But look at the other comedies out this year. Hall Pass, The Dilemma, Just Go With It, if you compare Hangover to them, I think Hangover 2 has easily been the best comedy so far.
Nice on Kung Fu Panda 2..., What trailers did you get?
I don't really remember many of the trailers. I know there was a smurf trailer (I'm a dork that is an 80's child so I will probably see this). There was one for Mr. Popper's penguins which (IMO) looks stupid and emphasizes how old Jim Carrey is getting. Also, there was one for Puss in Boots. It is a spin off from the Puss in Boots character in Shrek (I think it looks dumb). The last one I remember was Happy Feet 2, which looks like a really cute movie.

 

[btldreef]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gemmy http:///forum/thread/385383/anyone-watch-any-movies-redux#post_3390178
I heard Hangover 2 wasn't that good.

I don't have time to go to the movies often. I did see Kung Fu Panda 2 last night.

I saw it last night, it was okay, but I also didn't think the original was as great as everyone made it out to be. Honestly, if I had actually paid to see it, I probably would have been more unhappy. It has its funny moments, but there's a lot of down time, and it is a virtual repeat of the original.
I agree, how the heck did this get rated R and not NC-17?!?

 

[gemmy]

What about Transformers??

 

[1guydude]

Quote:
What about Transformers??
indeed! We need an update! asap lol
im gonna see it...just havent gotten around to it.

 

[gemmy]

 
indeed! We need an update! asap lol
im gonna see it...just havent gotten around to it.
I saw it in 3d and must say it was not that good. There was not much in the way of a plot and I found myself very bored during the movie. I did like the 3d aspect. I would give it a 6.

 

[1guydude]

really? Its getting great reviews over here!
Im not gonna c it in 3D however....seems to me that that would be just to much going on and such lol

 

[gemmy]

I thought the same thing, but it really wasn't. It's hard to explain, but it wasn't like the 3d simulators that are in your face with the graphics. It just brought you closer to the film. It was really neat.

 

[1guydude]

hmm....go on
lol
idk maybe, theres a couple more out but i cant seem to think of em
wheres the movie guy, when we need him>?

 

[aquaknight]

Sorry, out racing at the track all day (and buying fireworks

). But yea, sorta been slacking on this thread. I did see Transformers on Thursday though....
Definitely spend the extra 3 bux or so for 3D. It's the first film I've seen since Avatar (cause Avatar was mostly dark/dimly lit anyways...) that doesn't have an overall darker/poorer image because of the 3D effect. It's a very nice and clear picture. And as Gemmy noted, it's not really about objects flying out of the screen, but more so about providing extra layers depth you don't get with 2D. Submersive....
Yea, TF3 is getting a lot of positive reviews, which would include mine. With Transformers 3, an action flick, I go into TF3 expecting robots to fight and lots stuff to blow up. That's what TF3 delivered, in stunning detail. I think to hold TF3 to having a weak plot/storyline, is sorta cliche. There's really only so many points to an action movie, and it's hard to add variety to them. Add to that TF3 is long, two and half hours, and I can see how some would tire during the film. I thought there were enough highs and lows, it kept me entertained throughout. I liked that this 3rd was a bit different from the first 2, in without spoiling anything, expendability is higher. There's definitely going to be a fourth installment, so it will be interesting to see how they spin that movie inline with the first 3. I was definitely saddened by the fact Megan Fox isn't in this one, but I can see why, the female role just wasn't suited for her.
Of the movies out now, Larry Crowe, Monte Carlo, Transformers 3, Cars 2, Green Lantern, Bad Teacher, I think the pick is easy.