Surprisingly The Last Movie You Saw Didn't Suck Pt. 2

Audition - 1/5 - Made very little sense, and the shock factor was rather dull. Largely forgettable performances, as well.
 
[quote name='parKer']Seven Psychopaths. I thought it was pretty good.[/QUOTE]

I really liked the first half or so of it. I really wanted to love the movie (reminded me of Snatch, one of my favorite movies ever), but I thought it was weak after the reveal.
 
[quote name='GhostShark']Audition - 1/5 - Made very little sense, and the shock factor was rather dull. Largely forgettable performances, as well.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I have no idea how that movie even gets mentioned in best horror movie lists. It's not scary, nothing is really going on. It's dragged out.
 
Fargo.

First time ive watched it since it first came out. Reaction is the same as then, very good movie but overhyped by a lot of folks
 
[quote name='DestroVega']Alice in Wonderland was dark?[/QUOTE]

For a PG rated film, yes it was a pretty dark film. Especially when compared to Oz...and almost any other PG rated film since there has been a PG-13 rating.
 
Day two of the movie festival.
Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence- This is sort of a little mini dream come true to me. Never thought I'd see this on the silver screen. Happy I did. The movie is about British soldiers being detained by the Japanese in 1942. It shows a clash of different cultures and how they try to function in this current situation. And hey David Bowie is in the film. Always have been a fan of the main theme which sounds great outside the movie as well as when it is sparingly used for specific scenes in the movie.
 
Audition works on the basis of misdirection. Starts off as a potential romantic comedy. Ends up somewhere completely different. There are a bunch of ways to do horror. For example, Silence of the Lambs isn't scary either, but it's still a great horror film.

Rather than going for scares this went for being disturbing. It works especially well considering the initial romance overtones of the first half of the film. If you can't deal with that setup, you'll hate the rest of the film. Watch it with your parents or someone who doesn't usually watch horror and see how the film affects them. In randomly showing it to people when I first came upon it, a lot of people had really bad reactions to watching how the story turned out.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Incredible Burt Wonderstone was good if you like Steve Carrell. Think this was funnier from him than a chunk of his other movies. But the movie is pretty much what you would expect it to be. Trust your instincts with this movie.
 
Sat down and watched two movies:
Queen of Versailles, as recommended by CheapyD last month. I thought it would be something like you would be forced to feel sorry for the 1% or something, but I pity them. That husband really does have problems in expressing his emotions. I was also really shocked at the dog poop all around the house, jeez toilet train why don't ya? The oldest was a lazy prick, at least the 12/14 year old was shaping up.

Men in Black 3- I actually liked it, minus most of the action sequences. The relationship between the two leads could've been worked on a little more, but I thought it was fine. Jemaine Clement was the highlight, and I felt sad that Emma Thompson was underutilized.
 
[quote name='detectiveconan16']Sat down and watched two movies:
Queen of Versailles, as recommended by CheapyD last month. I thought it would be something like you would be forced to feel sorry for the 1% or something, but I pity them. That husband really does have problems in expressing his emotions. I was also really shocked at the dog poop all around the house, jeez toilet train why don't ya? The oldest was a lazy prick, at least the 12/14 year old was shaping up.

Men in Black 3- I actually liked it, minus most of the action sequences. The relationship between the two leads could've been worked on a little more, but I thought it was fine. Jemaine Clement was the highlight, and I felt sad that Emma Thompson was underutilized.[/QUOTE]

The dog shit is because they have nannies and housekeepers for everything. Why train them? I remember that happening on the Osbournes in their mansion all the time. They treat pets like toys.

I did feel bad for them though. I just read that they resumed construction on the house last month.
 
Moonrise Kingdom-4/5
Really liked it, felt very Wes Anderson-ish. Got a bit weird in the middle, but otherwise I really enjoyed it:D would recommend to people that like weird of tilter stuff like Submarine and Fantastic Mr Fox
 
After having seen Hot Fuzz a billion times, I finally watched Shaun of the Dead.

Would probably have liked it more if I didn't hate every single character.
 
Silent Hill: Revelation - I don't think it was nearly as bad as every site made it out to be, but it wasn't all that great either.
 
Almost 2 weeks worth of films:

03.06.13: Dracula: 8.5
03.07.13: Notorious: 9.2
03.08.13: The Man Who Shot Liberty Vallance: 8.9
03.09.13: Parade: 8.4
03.10.13: Poetry: 8.7
03.11.13: 20th Century Boys: Beginning of the End: 7.5
03.12.13: Battlefield Baseball: 7.2
03.13.13: Life of Pi: 9.2
03.14.13: Taken 2: 6.7
03.14.13: Young Dragons: 6.4
03.15.13: Secret Sunshine: 8.9
03.16.13: Jiro Dreams of Sushi: 9.4
03.16.13: Moon and Cherry: 7.3
03.17.13: God of Gamblers: 7.9
03.18.13: I Am An S&M Writer: 6.3
 
[quote name='The Crotch']After having seen Hot Fuzz a billion times, I finally watched Shaun of the Dead.

Would probably have liked it more if I didn't hate every single character.[/QUOTE]

I guess I can see your viewpoint here.
 
[quote name='evildeadjedi']
The Sitter - Not bad and had some laughs. However, I liked this better with Elizabeth Shue in the 80's, when it was called "Adventures in Babysitting".[/QUOTE]

:applause:
 
Evil Dead - Really good remake. I'm a huge Evil Dead fan so I was a little cautious with this but they did a great job making it their own while also putting in references from the original. I was surprised with the amount of gore in it, that was very well done too. I got passes for free to a prescreening but I will gladly pay to see it again when it releases.
 
[quote name='tcrash247']Evil Dead - Really good remake. I'm a huge Evil Dead fan so I was a little cautious with this but they did a great job making it their own while also putting in references from the original. I was surprised with the amount of gore in it, that was very well done too. I got passes for free to a prescreening but I will gladly pay to see it again when it releases.[/QUOTE]

Did you see the red-band trailer? If you did and are still surprised by the gore that would really be something.

I hate that kind of shit so I will most likely never see this movie.
 
[quote name='DestroVega']Did you see the red-band trailer? If you did and are still surprised by the gore that would really be something.

I hate that kind of shit so I will most likely never see this movie.[/QUOTE]

I actually didn't. I think I only saw the first normal trailer for it. Gore is always welcome for me, especially if it's over the top.
 
[quote name='tcrash247']Evil Dead - Really good remake. I'm a huge Evil Dead fan so I was a little cautious with this but they did a great job making it their own while also putting in references from the original. I was surprised with the amount of gore in it, that was very well done too. I got passes for free to a prescreening but I will gladly pay to see it again when it releases.[/QUOTE]


I'm obviously as well ;). I might not have to boycott this remake anymore.
 
There is supposed to be a sequel to Army of Darkness coming out sometime in the future according to Raimi. So don't worry, The Chin will return I'm sure.
 
[quote name='moon_knight']^ Why were you boycotting it to begin with?[/QUOTE]

First, I'm a big fan of the Evil Dead Trilogy and didn't want to see it remade.

Second, I don't like most remakes. They tend to present more style over substance.

Third, no Bruce Campbell as Ash.
 
I think one of the main reasons I liked it is because they didn't put Ash in it. I think if there was a character named Ash and he cut his hand off and replaced it with a chainsaw yada yada then I would have hated it. They did this remake the right way.
 
[quote name='evildeadjedi']First, I'm a big fan of the Evil Dead Trilogy and didn't want to see it remade.

Second, I don't like most remakes. They tend to present more style over substance.

Third, no Bruce Campbell as Ash.[/QUOTE]
Just because some remakes suck doesn't mean all of them do. Avoiding a movie just because its remake isn't a very valid reason imo.
 
"Killer Joe"

Yeah, Matthew McConaughy is fucked up in this movie. chuckles. I mean I heard he was a sob in this.

Oh and I'm sure a lot of you here would like to see Gina Gershon play a White trash housewife. chuckle. :D

Willaim Friedkin directed it. It's not as weird as "Bug" but it does have some scenes.
 
[quote name='evildeadjedi']First, I'm a big fan of the Evil Dead Trilogy and didn't want to see it remade.

Second, I don't like most remakes. They tend to present more style over substance.

Third, no Bruce Campbell as Ash.[/QUOTE]

I may be wrong but isn't it being remade by the same people who made the originals (Produced by Bruce Campbell and Sam Raimi). I could see if you boycotted it if it was made by someone else entirely. Then again there is the George Lucas factor.
 
Oz, the Great and Powerful - I originally wanted to see it on opening weekend, but couldn't fit it into my schedule so I kind of lost interest in this, but I had some cheap tickets so I went and saw this last night. I loved it. The story wasn't anything spectacular, but the charm was there and the visuals were top-notch. James Franco definitely helped it, but really the rest of the cast was great as well.
 
Chernobyl diaries 3.75/5 - I really liked this because it had great immersion, made you feel like you were there too. It starts off great and goes downhill, but still stays good enough.
 
[quote name='J7.']Chernobyl diaries 3.75/5 - I really liked this because it had great immersion, made you feel like you were there too. It starts off great and goes downhill, but still stays good enough.[/QUOTE]
I've wanted to blind buy this for a long time but there's never a deal on it. How can a movie hated on by so many hold a $20 price tag?
 
[quote name='moon_knight']Just because some remakes suck doesn't mean all of them do. Avoiding a movie just because its remake isn't a very valid reason imo.[/QUOTE]


From what I've read, it doesn't establish itself as it's own film, but tries to throw in as many homages to the original as possible. It's one of the biggest reasons the premake of The Thing was horrible... It relied too heavily on recreating scenes which happened in Carpenter's version, which then took you out of the film... It didn't have it's own identity, it was too busy waving it's arms in the air saying "We know what you want and here it is!!!"

On top of that, Diablo Cody's writing is extremely one-dimensional. Are people only excited because this movie is full of gore?
 
[quote name='Jodou']I've wanted to blind buy this for a long time but there's never a deal on it. How can a movie hated on by so many hold a $20 price tag?[/QUOTE]

That's weird. If I were you I would rent it instead. Not sure I'd watch it again.

[quote name='Vulgarism']From what I've read, it doesn't establish itself as it's own film, but tries to throw in as many homages to the original as possible. It's one of the biggest reasons the premake of The Thing was horrible... It relied too heavily on recreating scenes which happened in Carpenter's version, which then took you out of the film... It didn't have it's own identity, it was too busy waving it's arms in the air saying "We know what you want and here it is!!!"

On top of that, Diablo Cody's writing is extremely one-dimensional. Are people only excited because this movie is full of gore?[/QUOTE]

I was a huge fan of the original The Thing, and I found the remake to be excellent. One of the best remakes ever made. It was the same yet just... updated.
 
[quote name='Vulgarism']From what I've read, it doesn't establish itself as it's own film, but tries to throw in as many homages to the original as possible. It's one of the biggest reasons the premake of The Thing was horrible... It relied too heavily on recreating scenes which happened in Carpenter's version, which then took you out of the film... It didn't have it's own identity, it was too busy waving it's arms in the air saying "We know what you want and here it is!!!"

On top of that, Diablo Cody's writing is extremely one-dimensional. Are people only excited because this movie is full of gore?[/QUOTE]

I think it does a terrific job of making itself it's own film. Obviously it has some scenes and homages to the original, it's a fucking remake. But there's enough in here to stand on it's own. Maybe you should see it before making assumptions based on reviews.

I agree that The Thing prequel was awful, but that's because it was a prequel and not a remake. If it were a remake then of course you can get away with using specific scenes from the original, but a prequel has the task of being new and fresh while setting up for the next movie. So honestly, comparing The Thing and Evil Dead is completely pointless, a prequel and a remake are in no way the same thing.
 
[quote name='moon_knight']Just because some remakes suck doesn't mean all of them do. Avoiding a movie just because its remake isn't a very valid reason imo.[/QUOTE]

Nope.

People also like saying a movie sucks just because it's a remake.
 
Terrible "The Wolverine" Poster:

the-wolverine-poster-1.jpg
 
[quote name='tcrash247']I think it does a terrific job of making itself it's own film. Obviously it has some scenes and homages to the original, it's a fucking remake. But there's enough in here to stand on it's own. Maybe you should see it before making assumptions based on reviews.
[/QUOTE]


Oh, if I made assumptions based on reviewS, I'd say I would be in for a treat... But, one of the two people I tend to side with (Devin Faraci) made valid points that I was worried about. From that one sentence write-up, it sounds wonderful. It takes the over-used friends going to the woods for a weekend of partying and sex, and replaces it with something very grounded in reality and intriguing. I am also sure the gore is fantastic, but I've watched enough splatter films and exploitation in my life to need more than that in a film. The marketing also seems to be so up it's own ass that it's completely turned me off from the film... Now, mind you, I know that isn't any credit to any of the talent attached to the film, but rather the production company, but regardless, if you have to go out of your way these days to label yourself as the "best" or "greatest" or even "scariest" film ever, you need to get off your pedestal. This movie was completely unnecessary. It took a film with a little bit of black humor (everybody says that The Evil Dead was completely serious, but they are for the most part, wrong) and turned it into something that your typical teenager will go into and come out saying it is, indeed, the scariest movie ever. I'll eventually watch it, but I'm not going to sit in a theater distracted by the ominous glow of phones tweeting out how scared shitless each attendant is. Bleh.


[quote name='moon_knight']Just because some remakes suck doesn't mean all of them do. Avoiding a movie just because its remake isn't a very valid reason imo.[/QUOTE]


There are some exceptional remakes. Say what you will about little character development in Dawn of the Dead, but it took something that had a loud message and shed a lot of the weight to make it a more lean experience. Sure, it tripped over itself a few times, but it worked out so well in the end by bringing a pulse to a dying genre. Plus, The Ring is somewhere in my top twenty, as Verbinski didn't sacrifice the terrifying "what if" scenario to make a movie that over explained itself. Plus, Naomi Watts in that movie...

In The Evil Dead, it was such a shallow film, but it was executed with such a fun atmosphere. You could tell Raimi and Campbell were loving every second they shot. There wasn't much in the way of plot development or even character development, but Ash became such a recognizable character that it spawned not only two sequels, but also a pretty interesting career for Campbell. It's going to be extremely hard to find a character to latch onto like you did with Ash in a remake that seems to be so much style over substance. Again, the idea of going into the woods for an intervention is such a great, fresh take on the genre, but there seems to be a lack of any strong lead or character in the film at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top