Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

"Now Showing"

Hmmmm. I watched Superman Returns last night...

It confirms my theory...

While it's impossible to make an actually "bad" film nowadays, it doesn't mean good films are being made.

There is nothing to stop a director from producing anything their imagination desires. This means that films like this end up pretty soul-less affairs, with nothing actually awful about them, but nothing which makes them stand out as being interesting in any way shape or form.

Meh...
 
Disturbia

I wasn't expecting a whole lot from this film to be honest, considering it's a remake of a famous Alfred Hitchcock film. My first thought was that it was going to be a rip off version which wasn't as good. Well, I was wrong.

Disturbia was a very good remake of Rear Window, and it wasn't too similar either. I decided to appreciate it for what it was, instead of focusing on the fact that it's a remake of what could very well be Alfred Hitchcock's best movie. There's a lot of modernizing, such as a teenage relationship, which is more interesting to people these days rather than seeing 50 year olds make out. The kid is on house arrest instead of having a broken leg, and the cast is fairly decent looking.

Overall, I really liked it. A lot of it wasn't the same as Rear Window, and shouldn't really be compared. Very suspenseful.

8/10
 
I'M GOING TO WRITE A PROPER REVIEW BECAUSE I THINK I KNOW A LOT ABOUT MOVIES.

Today I watched The Shining.

I haven't read the novel before anyone asks, so no, I didn't think it was crap in comparison to the novel. It was fairly good, though it wasn't particularly scary as such (not that that bothers me, horror pisses me off): but those god damn girls sure were freaky as ****. I thought it kind of fizzled out a bit out after the first hour and I didn't really get the very ending scene at all. Or, well, I did, it just seems retarded.

I'd give it a good old solid 8/10. Oh, I lied, I'm not doing proper reviews.

Hotel Rwanda

It was pretty good, basically what you expect from a genocide film, fairly touching, etc.

It can have an 8 as well.
 
Blades of Glory

I would definately recommend 'Blades of Glory'
It has to be one of the funniest films i have ever saw in my entire life.
It had the whole cinema screaming with laughter.
10 out of 10
 
Last night I saw a preview for Bridge to Teribithia.

:?

I was expecting it to be like Narnia in which you spend the majority of the film within this exciting new world. Oh how misleading this film is, you don't even spend half the film in Teribithia which I was really disapointed by. The kid's corny accents really annoyed me too.

The story is ok but for kids...well...lets just say its a bit too dark for a kids film. This really confused me because its like all bright etc but its got really dark moments. There are also lots of moments which made the adults of the audience jump, let alone the kids, which I've never heard of in a kids film.

I think Walden Media have once again out done themselves but it would have been nice to see more of their unusual creations.

2/5

P.S. That kid really can't draw.
 
Tesco had The Meaning of Life for two quid, and so I bought it.


And, I must say, despite never liking it before, it's bloody hilarious as I watch it now.


Might buy the others, and then go and see Spamalot <3.
 
Ben said:
Tesco had The Meaning of Life for two quid, and so I bought it.


And, I must say, despite never liking it before, it's bloody hilarious as I watch it now.


Might buy the others, and then go and see Spamalot <3.
Click to expand...

You know you want to go see it Ben, its awesome, the sets are coolios too. As I type this I'm listening to the soundtrack lol.

The meaning of life is funny especially the every sperm is sacred song, love it! Not as good as The holy grail but what is?
 
Sorry for double posting but I've recently got back from seeing Spiderman 3.

Where the hell do I start? So much happens in this exciting action flick. I personally found the first two Spidey films fairly boring apart from the slick action sequences. I found that the first two films focused too much on the love story side of things. Interestingly I found number 3 nicely spread out and had a great story, plently of action and love story stuff. What shocked me the most is how funny some of the scenes are in this film. There is also a scene at a French resturant which is just completly stolen by Bruce Campbell (he played Ash in Evil dead films and is a great friend of Sam Raimi who directs the Spidey films. He also has small guest appearances in the first two films).

Anyways its a great film with some spectacular action sequences and special effects (I think I would kill myself if I was the bloke who had to animate Sandman). Its definatly one for everyone to enjoy having a bit of everything and keeping it in good proportion. Bascially I recommend to all, kids probably won't understand it as well as other films as there are loads of twists but they will probably enjoy it still.

4/5
 
I saw Spider Man 3 yesterday and I was not impressed. I just did'nt like it and it was way to long. It did'nt help either that the cinema was boiling and there was loads of babies screaming and crying throughout the film. Why would someone bring a baby to the cinema?

It was alright, I thought it was the worst out of the 3 but I liked the last half hour of it.

6.5/10.
 
Spiderman, 10/10 easily. Best film I've watched since Lord of the Rings: Return of the King.

Great story of love and friendships aswell as the main plot with the Sandman and, ofcourse, Venom.
 
Well, I've just got back from seeing Spiderman 3 and my first thoughts are, danthecoasterman, I think we saw different films.

I need a little time to think my thoughts over a little though and will post a proper review some time tommorow.
 
I saw Spiderman yesterday.

5/10

Blech. I did not like it at all. I liked the end...great action but other than that it kinda fell flat. The fight scenes with sandman didnt excite me very much. It was very action-packed...but sandman just didnt grab my attention too well. The movie would have been better without him, to be honest.

Too many villains...took away attention from other villains...then I felt that they werent really that interesting. It was too long. Then 3/4 of the way through when he turns emo and starts dancing around the streets for 10 minutes kind of just ruined the momentum that it was trying to build up.
 
Spider Man3 lacked a good story and was just all over the place. In order to fit in the Sandman they changed the story from the 1st film and it just did not work.

The affects were good but the film was fall of bad acting by the person who plays Spider Man have never liked the guy anyway. When he was trying to be "cool" I just cringed.

I was very close to leaving after an hour thats how bad I thought the film was. They could have taken 20 mins out of the film some parts were just not needed.

I really hope they do not make a 4th film as I think this one has ruined the them.
 
Right, my review... AND BE WARNED, IT MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS!!!

Although it is not part of the film, can I just point out how sorry the state of affairs must be if out of the 5 movie trailers shown, 4 of them are for sequels!

My first criticism would be the acting. They weren't totally awful in a Batman & Robin sense of the word but Maguire alone was really flat in his performance. As mentioned previsouly, the section in which he played the cocky cool guy was totally beyond anything I could buy into. It just didn't work. The stupid dance, for instance. Whoever they drafted into add the comedy in this film needs a serious talking to.

The comedy that was included seemed totally out of context with the other films too. I don't remember the other two films relying on very bog standard slapstick and enuendo to get a few quick laughs and it really didn't suit the film.

The story itself really did not do much to exhibit any character development. All of the posters and the such like make out to have this big inner battle for Peter but to be honest, the inner battle was no more then in the previous films. He was questioning his own motives and actions etc etc throughout the first two films and this was just an extension of it rather then a full out story that it could of been. This notion was further dulled by the fact the Venom essense was not actually with Peter all that long.

Furthermore, character development was totally poor throughout. Sandman and Venom are new characters so there isn't really much you can say but in terms of the existing characters I honestly felt I was learning nothing new. Peter isn't totally sure if he likes his powers and the dark side they could bring. MJ questions how much she loves Peter and whether he loves her in return. This is nothing new because they have been tugging on that now frayed and exhausted heart string since the first film.

The only character in which I was interested in the development was Harry. It felt as though he was fighting the internal battle with the memory of his father a lot more so then Peter and to be honest, he actually over shone Maguire in this movie. I wanted to see more of how they were going to push Harry and see how bad he could be but again, it wasn't given chance to develop. Needless to say, I was dissapointed in the failure to bring on the Red Goblin which is where the comic books actually take the Harry character.

The character of Sandman, to me, could have been totally left out. It actually felt like an obvious stroke in making Spiderman/Peter ask Harry for help and thus to kill him off. The whole thing is basically expecting to rewrite what we had learnt in the first film. Something that very rarely can be pulled off succssfully.

Now, before anyone pounds me for disliking this like they did with the last dissapointing film I saw (Casino Royale) I will say this.

Spiderman is essentially, an action film. In terms of the movies themselves, it isn't really about the story so much as the effects they can pull and how crisp and cool it can look. Something that they have actually got right. The effects were totally stunning and effortlessly fluent throughout. Sandman generally hogged the glory in this department. It took an effect we have seen in the Mummy and took it to a whole new level. Especially when you can see parts of the floor and his surroundings are stuck to him etc etc.

Venom in alien guise again looked totally fantastic and was a joy to watch.

So yeah, you could argue that it's an action flick and that is what I got. Even if the action itself seemed a little bit flat and rushed in places. The effects themselves were great and therefore why I am complaining. Well to be fair, effects don't make a film for me. I know how brilliant they can be with blue screen and the such like, i've seen LOTR. So why did it feel the whole film was an effort to show off more effects as apose to telling a story. Something that has been growing as a trend for several years now.

Even Danny Elfman was a bit flat in his composition of the score which was a whole different shocker, although I do need to listen to is seperately to decide on that one.

Overall, great fun if you just want to see the effects but you would be better off waiting for the DVD and skipping the majority of the film for it. I liked the film for the effects it portrayed but in all other areas it let me down. not worth the £7.90 I paid to see it. 3/10
 
Right ok, my mind is changing a tad about Spidey now after actually listening to a few points by other peoples and calming down from the hype. I agree with Mark about the way the characters were rushed and that we needed to see more of the development of them. I also agree on a few more points made. IMO I have never liked the character of Peter Parker, only his Spidey side. It could be the way its been written or it could just be that Maguire is just, IMO, a cripe actor, maybe a mix of both. Now if the origional cast drop out when the script for Spidey 4 is released then I hope they bring Gyllenhal (sp?) in to play spidey as I think he could really add something to the franchise.

Oh yeah, people who moan about franchises, Sony have recently announced, due to the popular demand of Spiderman 3 there will now be a second trilogy.

Mark said:
Although it is not part of the film, can I just point out how sorry the state of affairs must be if out of the 5 movie trailers shown, 4 of them are for sequels!


.................................................


Even Danny Elfman was a bit flat in his composition of the score which was a whole different shocker, although I do need to listen to is seperately to decide on that one.
Click to expand...


Mark completely agree about that comment, films that are released now are either a sequel, a re-make of a classic done badly, a foriegn film only some people want to see or are indie so no-one gets to see them.

Also you might want to know that Danny Elfman did NOT do the soundtrack for any of the Spiderman films, he just created the theme for it, just like he did for The Simpsons and Desperate Housewives. Thus the reason for the soundtracks always being quite rubbish.
 
southend_marc said:
Spider Man3 lacked a good story and was just all over the place. In order to fit in the Sandman they changed the story from the 1st film and it just did not work.

The affects were good but the film was fall of bad acting by the person who plays Spider Man have never liked the guy anyway. When he was trying to be "cool" I just cringed.

I was very close to leaving after an hour thats how bad I thought the film was. They could have taken 20 mins out of the film some parts were just not needed.

I really hope they do not make a 4th film as I think this one has ruined the them.
Click to expand...

Finally someone who agrees with me.


Anyways I watched Employee of the Month the other day, stupid story, it has some funny bits but I thought it would be better and funnier but it is the best film I have seen all week. 7.5/10
 
Right I'm gonna stick up for Spidey here.

Before my review, this has been my most anticipated movie ever. The buildup last week was immense and I caught a bus in to town and literally ran to the train station so I could get the train to the cinemas. I arrived there an hour after school had finished with a large group of friends. Anyway I arrived, ready for the film to start, just in time.

The film started off pretty different to the first 2, well mainly the second one in that there was no here's spidey, little action sequence. The action was prolonged to at least 20 minutes, which was fine by me. I can see where everyone is coming from, perhaps if Spiderman 2 came out last year, this film wouldn't be as anticipated and the disapointment to some people wouldn't be as great. Anyway I really liked the film. Yes it wasn't as in depth as the first two and there was little character development, however I felt like I knew many of the characters from the first two well enough. Venom was amazing and I'm glad he had so little screen time; I felt it created tension, because you were waiting to see him.

I felt like the acting wasn't too bad. I personally couldn't have done better and for me Topher Grace was great, yes everyone in the cinema did laugh at Peter's crying and perhaps there was a great "cheese" factor in this film, but it made for an enjoyable movie going experience, at least with my friends and the cinema audience. I liked the action sequences a lot, I noticed a few rough bits on the CGI, but otherwise I thought they were great. Can you imagine how the people who had to animate sandman felt? That must have been one huge task.

Another trend films seem to be doing nowadays, is having lots and lots of plots. Pirates 2 had lots of subplots, where none of them were really resolved. At least this film resolved them, and you must say that Sam Raimi managed to pull them off, although not with enough depth. Sure after thinking about it, there wasn't much of an inner struggle with Peter, but nonetheless I enjoyed this part of the film. Perhaps the only storyline I would have liked to see changed was the MJ/Gwen Stacy thing. I would have like to see that either not resolved leaving it open in the next film or just keep it for the next film, as I think Gwen Stacy would have been quite an interesting character to have in the next film if pulled off right.

Anyways a lot of people I have talked to have enjoyed the film, apart from at least one and a couple who suggest "yes it could have been better" and in some places I agree it can be. However I felt it was an enjoyable popcorn flick and it didn't dissapoint me. I know everyone will probably turn on me now.....

8.5/10
 
Nah, we are all entitled to an opinion and we all enjoy different things. Ironically, before I went to see it, I really thought I was going to enjoy it. I wanted to.
 
I watched Blue Velvet last night.

It was one of the most wonderful movies I have ever seen.

Watch it immediately.

9.5/10
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top