I watched Brave a few days ago. I thought it was pretty good. The story was a bit generic but once you get passed that it's an enjoyable movie.

I also watched The Amazing Spider-Man. I liked it a lot better than the original movies. Andrew Garfield is a much better spider-man than Toby Maguire, who I found to be quite annoying. There's a few points in the movie that seemed a bit stupid, like near the end there's a point where he seems to forget he can climb up walls, overall it was a pretty good movie though. Probably my favorite Marvel film.

I watched "Safety Not Guaranteed" and "Casino Royale" today. Safety Not Guaranteed I thought was pretty mediocre. It was a bit boring and I didn't find it that funny. I wouldn't recommend watching it.

Casino Royale was pretty good, although to be honest I'm not much of a fan of James Bond. Should I watch Quantum of Solace.. or should I just skip it and watch Skyfall?

At 11/3/12 11:05 AM, DannyIsOnFire wrote: Watched Sherlock Holmes 2 yesterday. I love the style of both the first movie and this one, and Guy Richies' signature touch is clearly visible on them. The plot was a little hard to follow at times, but overall it was a decent sequel and only slightly inferior to the first.

I liked the first Sherlock Holmes.. but after watching BBC's Sherlock I couldn't really enjoy Robert Downey Jr's version. I didn't like Sherlock Holmes 2.

Watched American Pie: Reunion and Ill Manors last night.

American Pie was ok, but not a patch on the original film or it's sequel. I'd say it's on the same level as American Wedding, but a damn sight better than most of the spin-off series. What made the first films work was the fact that the characters were dumb, inexperienced kids. Now that there all grown up and still getting into the same mishaps, it seems a lot less effective. There were a few generally laugh out loud moments but not as many as you'd expect as a fan of the franchise. Overall, while it was fun to see the gang back together one last time, that's what it should be. One last time. Don't throw another sequel at us. 6.5/10

Ill Manors was great. As a fan of Plan B (as both an actor and musician), I went into the film with high hopes. The story weaved together perfectly and the raps to explain characters back stories was a stroke of genius. The stories came at you think and fast and I don't think I blinked much during the viewing due to my constant fix on the screen. Ben Drew's set the bar fairly high with his directorial debut and I hope he can live up to the hype he's created with his next movie. 9/10 - check it out!

At 11/8/12 05:33 AM, Jolly wrote: I also watched The Amazing Spider-Man. I liked it a lot better than the original movies. Andrew Garfield is a much better spider-man than Toby Maguire, who I found to be quite annoying. There's a few points in the movie that seemed a bit stupid, like near the end there's a point where he seems to forget he can climb up walls, overall it was a pretty good movie though. Probably my favorite Marvel film.

Laughed my ass off at the crane scene.

Casino Royale was pretty good, although to be honest I'm not much of a fan of James Bond. Should I watch Quantum of Solace.. or should I just skip it and watch Skyfall?

You could watch it for the sake of "having watched all the Daniel Craig Bond films", but if you don't care about that you can give Quantum of Solace a miss. It's the weakest and most forgettable James Bond film of the past 20 years in my opinion. Skyfall is way better.

At 11/3/12 11:05 AM, DannyIsOnFire wrote: Watched Sherlock Holmes 2 yesterday. I love the style of both the first movie and this one, and Guy Richies' signature touch is clearly visible on them. The plot was a little hard to follow at times, but overall it was a decent sequel and only slightly inferior to the first.

I liked the first Sherlock Holmes.. but after watching BBC's Sherlock I couldn't really enjoy Robert Downey Jr's version. I didn't like Sherlock Holmes 2.

I've been watching that series as well. It's great :)

Quantum of Solace may not have been as awesome as Casino Royale, but I still really liked it.

So, what do you guys think of the World War Z trailer? I think it looks neat.

I watched Men In Black 3 some days ago. I have watched the other one's too. Personally I think its good that the series of movies can keep up. (in my opinion: most dont x/)

Definitly watchable (recomended that you watch the other one's first!)

I rented El Gringo starring Scott Adkins (Yuri Boyka from Undisputed 2 and 3, the Russian guy in Expendables 2, Weapon XI in Wolverine) and will watch it at some point this weekend. I only even knew about it from looking at Adkins' IIMDb page. This dude rules. He needs more prominent action roles.

Just saw the new Masters of Cinema release of Passion of Joan of Arc.

They've outdone themselves with this one. They were already the best UK distributor, only really rivalled globally by Criterion, but this thing is just gorgeous.

Waiting for mine in the post.

El Gringo was freaking awesome. I'll probably buy a copy of it at some point.

And they're making a sequel to Ninja. sweetness. I hope he uses the ninja suit and weapons throughout the whole movie instead of just at the end like the first one.

Scott Adkins is awesome.

Also, I saw Wreck it Ralph yesterday. I loved it, and I loved all the references. The MGS exclamation point was priceless.

I saw Wreck-It Ralph, which was great.

I also finally got around to watching the Avengers, which I loved.

I went to see Lawless today.

A pretty good film overall with a great cast. However, it fails to leave much of an impression though. There's just nothing really special about it and the climax near the ending didn't pack much punch in my opinion. I don't what it lacks. Maybe the characters needed a bit more depth or maybe the plot wasn't all that wow.

It's quite forgettable if you ask me, but maybe worth a watch if you're bored.

I decided to also watch the 2005 adaptation of The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. Mostly out of curiosity, since I read the books earlier this year. I knew this wasn't going to be that great and yeah... this is probably one of the worst book-to-film adaptations that I've ever seen.

I get that it's impossible to capture the entire book series into one film and I'm perfectly fine with them cutting away some (large) bits. However, I do think it's odd that they decided to add some (very pointless) scenes themselves and only covered so little of the original material. What was left in there wasn't very well executed either. What also annoyed me is that Mos Def is completely miscast as Ford Prefect. He made no impression whatsoever.

On the positive side: The Vogon costumes looked absolutely great, the "factory floor" part with Bill Nye looked amazing, Stephen Fry and Alan Rickman do a good job voicing The Guide and Marvin and Martin Freeman is a good pick for Arthur Dent if you ask me.

But these positive points actually only make it worse. I mean, they had accumulated a good cast for this film, they had good people in their special effects team, they had good source material to work with and STILL they fucked up.

Perhaps it's more enjoyable if you haven't read the books, I don't know.

At 11/22/12 05:47 PM, Auz wrote: I decided to also watch the 2005 adaptation of The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. Mostly out of curiosity, since I read the books earlier this year. I knew this wasn't going to be that great and yeah... this is probably one of the worst book-to-film adaptations that I've ever seen.

With Hitchhiker's you've got to keep in mind that the books themselves are adaptations, not the original article, and give any further adaptations some slack. I haven't seen it in years, but I remember quite enjoying the film, despite how loose an adaptation it was. It got the feel and tone right, which was enough for me.

Perhaps it's more enjoyable if you haven't read the books, I don't know.

The BBC TV version might be worth a look if you want something a bit closer to the text.

I went to see Looper today.

This is a very good sci-fi thriller in my opinion, which reaches about the same level as Twelve Monkeys I would say. I do think the ending is slightly predictable, but in the middle of the film I honestly had no idea what was going to happen and that kept me at the edge of my seat all throughout.

At 11/22/12 07:33 PM, TheMaster wrote:

At 11/22/12 05:47 PM, Auz wrote: I decided to also watch the 2005 adaptation of The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. Mostly out of curiosity, since I read the books earlier this year. I knew this wasn't going to be that great and yeah... this is probably one of the worst book-to-film adaptations that I've ever seen.

With Hitchhiker's you've got to keep in mind that the books themselves are adaptations, not the original article, and give any further adaptations some slack. I haven't seen it in years, but I remember quite enjoying the film, despite how loose an adaptation it was. It got the feel and tone right, which was enough for me.

Yeah I read that it was originally a radio show, but that the film also differs widely from that. I don't know, I just didn't like the film and I'm not sure if I would've if I hadn't read the books.

Perhaps it's more enjoyable if you haven't read the books, I don't know.

The BBC TV version might be worth a look if you want something a bit closer to the text.

Yes, I might look into that.

I went to see Amour today, a French film by Michael Haneke.

It's about an elderly couple of which one (the wife) gets a stroke. Afterwards her condition starts to decline rapidly and her husband does everything he can to take good care of her. It's a touching subject that a lot of people will have to deal with at some point in their lives. It's worthy of making a film about in my opinion.

I had pretty high expectations because this film got like 5 star reviews in about every paper in my country. However, I left the cinema feeling slightly underwhelmed. I think the problem is more on my end though. I didn't know what to expect and I wasn't really in the mood for a film like this. However, the only real complaint that I have is that the monotonous pacing of the film irked me a little. I get that this film has to be slow, but the pace never really picks up and that gets a bit tiring eventually.

Other than that, it's still a good film in my opinion. Especially the performances by the two lead actors are fantastic. In fact, I would totally agree with Emmanuelle Riva getting nominated for an Oscar for her role. What I also liked is that, despite the impression that not much is happening, you could sense that there is a lot happening below the surface. You could feel the main characters' struggles to keep their dignity in tact, the woman's struggle to still find a reason to live and to still make sense of everything, the man's struggle to love his wife even though she's not even a shred anymore of what she used to be... I think those are really plus points for the actors again.

All in all, I would recommend this film, even though I don't love it as much as the papers do. I guess I just went to see it with the wrong mood and hyped up expectations.

Watched 1976's Bad News Bears recently and loved it. Great film that really made a subtle yet strong point about how over-competitive people get with trivial things like youth sports. Also, the coach was an asshole from start to finish which was refreshing to see after having watched so many movies with forced character progressions.

I watched Hesher yesterday. It's one of the first times I didn't pay attention to the movie description, ratings, etc. The only thing I knew about it is that Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Rainn Wilson were in it, so it had to be good. (And funny, because it has Rainn Wilson in it)

Description:
"Struggling to accept the death of his mother, T.J. (Devin Brochu) befriends Hesher (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), a twentysomething misfit who becomes both a mentor and a bad influence on the lost and awkward teen. Hesher soon invites himself to live with T.J. and his self-medicating dad (Rainn Wilson). Their bizarre relationship is tested when T.J. develops a crush on a supermarket checkout girl (Natalie Portman) who rescues him from a gang of bullies."

I probably would have liked it a lot more had I known that. I went into a movie that's fairly depressing at times expecting it to be funny. There were pretty funny moments in it but it was mainly just depressing. I think, with a character like Hesher, it would have been a lot better if it were more of a comedy movie.

Other than that I liked the movie. But the only thing I really liked about it is the character Hesher, and he isn't the main focus of the movie. The rest of the characters were boring, without him the movie would have sucked.. So I wouldn't recommend it to most people unless they really like JGL. He was the main reason I watched the movie, and the main reason I enjoyed it.

I watched Cloud Atlas today. A film for which the makers of The Matrix teamed up with Tom Tykwer (Run Lola Run, Perfume).

I read that this was a very large and ambitious project and that really shows in my opinion. It's an almost three hours long film with many actors playing many different roles in many different settings. It costed $102 million to make, which means it's the most costly German film production ever.

I have to say that I really enjoyed this film. When I walked out of the cinema I really had the impression that I watched something fresh and original. There were many scenes that I thought were well made and the themes in the film give you something to think about.

Not everything in the film is great obviously. There were some make-up jobs and costume designs that weren't exactly on par with others. I also found myself enjoying certain plot lines more than others. I loved the plot lines with the Asian girl (Sonmi) and the old producer, but the plot line with the lawyer was so-so for example. So there were some inconsistencies with quality here and there, but that's what you get when you have multiple directors working on it and multiple settings. I think they still did a good job, considering.

All that said, I'm not sure if everyone will love this film. It could be a typical "hit and miss", but it seems to be getting lots of positive reviews so I suppose most people do enjoy it. Anyway, I strongly recommend it to everyone here. For me it'll go into my top favourite films of 2012.

Twilight: Eclipse was on TV tonight and I felt obligated to watch it after having seen 1, 2 and 4 (and now that 5 is out in the theatre).

It started out being fairly watchable I have to admit, but after 45 minutes or so the film got really long winded and boring. In the end, I came to the conclusion that they might as well have skipped this film entirely. They could've just gone from the ending of 2 straight to the beginning of 4 and the series would still have been coherent.

Also, the soundtrack is once again God awful. In none of the scenes with music did the music actually fit and it was so incredibly distracting.

It's not worth your time, but you guys probably already know that.

At 12/9/12 01:33 PM, EclecticEnnui wrote:

At 12/8/12 01:16 PM, Auz wrote: All that said, I'm not sure if everyone will love this film. It could be a typical "hit and miss", but it seems to be getting lots of positive reviews so I suppose most people do enjoy it. Anyway, I strongly recommend it to everyone here. For me it'll go into my top favourite films of 2012.

I've been wanting to see it. I know one critic actually named it the worst film of the year, although the year isn't over yet. That pick has also gotten a backlash.

I think Mary Pols was just trying to provoke reactions there. It might be one of the biggest flops of the year (having grossed only half of its budget so far), but of course that doesn't immediately make a film terrible. I can imagine some people think the film is a mess, but you still have to give the creators credit for trying to come up with something original.

There were far worse films released this year, trust me.

I recently watched a Norwegian thriller called Headhunters. It was really good. I recommend it.

At 12/11/12 08:36 PM, SG3 wrote: I watched The Cabin In The Woods recently. It's great fun.

hah. That one was fun.

Serious point here. Who is worried that the stupid Mayan apocalypse will ruin the release of The Hobbit?

At 12/9/12 08:12 PM, EclecticEnnui wrote:

At 12/9/12 05:07 PM, Auz wrote: I think Mary Pols was just trying to provoke reactions there. It might be one of the biggest flops of the year (having grossed only half of its budget so far), but of course that doesn't immediately make a film terrible. I can imagine some people think the film is a mess, but you still have to give the creators credit for trying to come up with something original.

Mary explained her opinion on Time and she's been Tweeting about the film, recently. I don't think she's lying. With The Fountain, a film that's apparently similar to Cloud Atlas, film critic Richard Roeper called it one of the worst films of 2006. When it comes to a film's originality or uniqueness, I'd say Gummo falls into those categories. That hasn't stopped people from hating the film. Personally, I love it and I've seen it several times. I think it all goes back to the old saying: To each his (or her) own.

Yeah I guess so. Still, I can not believe anyone truly thinks it is THAT bad.

At 12/11/12 10:28 PM, Sense-Offender wrote: I recently watched a Norwegian thriller called Headhunters. It was really good. I recommend it.

I remember wanting to see that film earlier this year. It was released here around April or so apparently, but I think it had a very short run as I completely missed it.

At 12/12/12 02:58 AM, hostileburritos wrote: Serious point here. Who is worried that the stupid Mayan apocalypse will ruin the release of The Hobbit?

Wasn't The Hobbit released yesterday? It premièred at my local cinema yesterday night at least, so that's still ten days before the supposed apocalypse.

At 12/12/12 11:15 AM, Auz wrote: I remember wanting to see that film earlier this year. It was released here around April or so apparently, but I think it had a very short run as I completely missed it.

heh. The bad guy happens to be from the Dutch military.

It's a really good movie. You should check it out. It's a bit more gory than necessary, which may cause you to scoff, but it's still really good.

Wasn't The Hobbit released yesterday? It premiÃf¨red at my local cinema yesterday night at least, so that's still ten days before the supposed apocalypse.

There might have been a premier, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't get a wide release until Friday.

I went to see The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey today.

I think the film lives up to expectations and Lord of the Rings fans will probably not be disappointed with this. It's a good portrayal of the book as far as I could tell (though it's been a long time since I last read the book). Of course there are a few parts which they've added from other Tolkien books, but they blended in quite nicely.

There's just one thing that concerned me a bit and that's the inclusion of The Necromancer. I'm a bit worried that The Necromancer might take the wind out of Smaug's sails when it comes to the role of the major villain.

Anyway, I strongly recommend this film for the upcoming holidays. It's very enjoyable.

By the way, I went to see the version in 3D and with this new technology called HFR. Basically it's just that the film is played with 48 FPS instead of 24 FPS. It's kinda odd in the beginning as you have the feeling that the film is on fast forward. You'll quickly get used to it though, but whether it makes much difference I couldn't really tell.

At 12/12/12 06:56 PM, Sense-Offender wrote:

At 12/12/12 11:15 AM, Auz wrote: I remember wanting to see that film earlier this year. It was released here around April or so apparently, but I think it had a very short run as I completely missed it.

heh. The bad guy happens to be from the Dutch military.

He can't be that menacing then :p

It's a really good movie. You should check it out. It's a bit more gory than necessary, which may cause you to scoff, but it's still really good.

Well I don't mind gory films, so that won't be a problem.

Wasn't The Hobbit released yesterday? It premiÃffÃ'¨red at my local cinema yesterday night at least, so that's still ten days before the supposed apocalypse.

There might have been a premier, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't get a wide release until Friday.

Perhaps it hasn't been released in the US yet, but it already had its release here and I'm sure it's been released in lots of other countries as well yesterday (and today).

The Hobbit was okay. The CGI orks look fucking awful compared to the ones done with makeup in Lord of the Rings. Especially their one-armed leader. Whenever it cuts to a closeup of him it feels like you've stepped into an animated film. It really, really doesn't work.

It is too long, as many have suggested, but not hugely so. Maybe 15-20 minutes longer than it should have been. Sequences like the stone giants could be removed completely because all they do is drag this shit out without advancing the plot, but I have no problem with the addition of Radaghast or the White Council stuff.

Also, Bilbo is a fucking quick author. Sits down to write his book on the day Lord of the Rings starts, which means he rattled the whole thing off in that afternoon before leaving the Shire in the evening.

Is HFR the standard for The Hobbit screenings, then? My local cinema is mostly showing it in 2D 24fps, which I saw it in, with a couple of 3D screenings scattered around, also in 24fps. No HFR at all.

I'd probably have gone for HFR 2D if they'd offered it, just to see what it looks like. I'm more interested in Doug Trumball's new tech, though, since it looks like it could do away with many of the complaints that have been levelled against higher frame rates so far.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkWLZy7gbLg

At 12/14/12 01:38 PM, TheMaster wrote: Also, Bilbo is a fucking quick author. Sits down to write his book on the day Lord of the Rings starts, which means he rattled the whole thing off in that afternoon before leaving the Shire in the evening.

And in perfect handwriting too!

At 12/14/12 04:42 PM, SG3 wrote: One thing that really pleased me was the inclusion of the necromancer sub-plot. I re-read the book over summer and the thing that struck me most was how casually it was brought up at the end. Naturally, I hoped it would get some expansion in the films and I wasn't disappointed.

Oh I completely forgot about that. I thought the Necromancer was something from The Silmarillion that they included in this film.

I can't say it levelled or exceeded the greatness of the original trilogy, but I didn't expect it to. The story just isn't as expansive and, fun as it is, there's no way it could rival the scale of LOTR.

Not sure yet, but I might like the Hobbit better. It's not as epic as the Lord of the Ring of course, but I thought the book was more fun.

At 12/14/12 06:29 PM, TheMaster wrote: Is HFR the standard for The Hobbit screenings, then? My local cinema is mostly showing it in 2D 24fps, which I saw it in, with a couple of 3D screenings scattered around, also in 24fps. No HFR at all.

I don't know if it's standard. My cinema offered a regular 2D version, 3D + HFR, 3D and IMAX.

At 12/17/12 03:06 PM, EclecticEnnui wrote: So I saw Cloud Atlas. I wasn't blown away, but I think it's very good. It's emotionally engaging, unpredictable, visually interesting, and well-acted, though I had some trouble understanding the dialogue in the post-apocalyptic story.

I liked that they actually paid some attention to the fact that language changes too through the ages. I had no trouble at all understanding the dialogues, but I had subtitles to help me. I was wondering whether those parts would be subtitled in English speaking countries as well. I guess not.

My favourite story is probably the Neo Seoul one, which has particularly fascinating visuals.

That was my favourite story too. I thought the floating motorbike chase scene looked awesome.

The makeup isn't very realistic when actors play different races and genders, like Jim Sturgess as Hae-Joo Chang, but it's still decent. Maybe it's not suppose to be realistic. As an editor, I have to say some of the editing transitions are top notch. The pacing became a bit too slow after awhile, but it picked up again, though I can't remember why. For such an ambitious film, Cloud Atlas definitely succeeds.

I'm glad you liked it too.

I've been watching a lot of movies recently compared to the past few months. I saw The Road, Dear Zachary, The Prestige (again), The Perks of Being a Wallflower, The Imposter, Reservoir Dogs, A Thousand Words, American History X, Jackie Brown, Indie Game: The Movie, The Mist, Craigslist Joe, and The Lookout (again).

I started using Letterboxd again and rated all these.

My anticipation for Django Unchained is unrivalled. I cannot wait for this movie. I plan on going out to see it on Christmas when it releases, but I'm not sure if the local cinema is open then, so I'll be there the next day if it's closed.

I went to the cinema to see Wreck-It-Ralph today.

I think the plot is a bit run-off-the-mill in terms of the themes, but I just loved to see all the video game references and also how the makers created "the video game world". I got a few good laughs here and there as well. For example, I thought it was hilarious how that FPS babe cracks out all these cheesy one-liners and how Fix-It-Felix is this stereotypical goody two-shoes guy.

But most of all, I'm just happy to see another film that hooks into video game culture. I hope we'll see another one like Wreck-It-Ralph and Scott Pilgrim in the future.

At 12/22/12 12:15 PM, Auz wrote: I went to the cinema to see Wreck-It-Ralph today.

Did you notice the spray paint tags?

At 12/22/12 07:33 PM, Sense-Offender wrote:

At 12/22/12 12:15 PM, Auz wrote: I went to the cinema to see Wreck-It-Ralph today.

Did you notice the spray paint tags?

Yeah, I was actually looking at them because I was sure there were going to be a bunch of references in there. However, I didn't recognize many of them.

I'm not that familiar with arcade games though so that might explain.

At 12/22/12 11:46 PM, Cootie wrote:

At 12/22/12 12:15 PM, Auz wrote: I went to the cinema to see Wreck-It-Ralph today.

I think the plot is a bit run-off-the-mill in terms of the themes, but I just loved to see all the video game references and also how the makers created "the video game world". I got a few good laughs here and there as well. For example, I thought it was hilarious how that FPS babe cracks out all these cheesy one-liners and how Fix-It-Felix is this stereotypical goody two-shoes guy.

I thought the movie was very well acted as well, it has been a while since I have seen voices that fit the character so perfectly.

Yeah, I agree. I liked Sarah Silverman the most.

This move could also pull on your heart strings more than I expected and when *spoiler* Ralph has to destroy the race kart that he made for Penelope it was pretty freaking sad.

Indeed, that scene was pretty sad. I thought there was going to be some interruption and Ralph wouldn't do it in the end, but then I was a bit surprised that he did wreck the cart.

They said that they are going to make a sequel which focuses more on console gaming and MMOs. This pleases me.

Great!