What's new

"Now Showing"

kimahri said:
gavin said:
Christian Bale's Batman voice got on my **** ing tits. I have no idea why he was allowed to get away with doing it; it just sounds so, so stupid. I can only assume that the director was too scared to have a word with the arrogant cock about it since nobody in their right mind would find it appropriate.

It was Christopher Nolan who made his voice that stupid in post, apparently. 'needed it to be grittier' is what Ive heard. :|

It does however lead to one of the most undeliberately hilarious cinema moments of 2012, when he yells "WHERE'S THE TRIGGER?" at Bane before Marion becomes a burden...
 
Re: RE: "Now Showing"

This is 40

Absolutely loved it. Just like an Apatow film, hilarious at the beginning, then gets serious, and lightens back up at the end a bit. It was perfectly cast (except for the Asian girl who works at Leslie Mann's characters store, she is the female equivalent too Michael Cera, so absolutely horrible and impossible to understand due to no volume in the voice) and Megan Fox may have made herself relevant again, and she did that by making fun of herself.

So yeah, hilarious and awesome, especially if you enjoy Apatow films.
Sent from my throne
 
Les Miserables

I'm not gonna lie, I knew VERY little about the storyline until about yesterday, so I decided to go see it today and UGH, I was crying through most of it. They managed to make pretty much every single scene sooo emotional </3 I'm not gonna go into it too much in case I spoil it for anyone who doesn't know the story. My only qualm is that some bits that seemed like they didn't seem so much attention got more attention than some of the parts that didn't get as much as they deserved.

8/10
 
Finally caught up with Cemetery Junction last night.

I have a love/hate thing with Ricky Gervais, but fortunately he's not in the film very much.

It's an odd film in that the entire thing is telegraphed right from the start (and it's hardly a complex story), but it's just a really good film anyway. I'd like to say that it helps being a child of the 70's (and council estate too) and understanding the film from that perspective, but Minor_Furie thought it was excellent too, due to the childish nature of the comedy (which is excellent :lol: ).

So it must cross an age gap somewhere.

It's a heart warming, obvious, hilarious at times and generally great film. Though Voldemort is much under used ;)
 
Cosmopolis

Now, I'm a huge Cronenberg fan, but the past.....5 years or so he's gone on a kind of serious stint, with things like A History of Violence and A Dangerous Method which were OK if you like that sort of thing, but I just found them boring and for me that is the exact opposite of what I usually get from a Cronenberg film. So, with that in mind, I held my breath a bit whilst watching Cosmopolis.

And I really rather liked it! It's kind of an American Psycho for a 21st Century audience, but with less murder and naked Christian Bale. Touches on the themes of how capitalism is **** the world, tons of metaphor and Cronenbergian weirdness, not on the same level as films like Videodrome or whatever, but it's in the same region. Robert Pattinson is very very good in it and I adore the weird Orwellian style dialogue. At some points in the film I even thought that the people were going to turn out to be robots (I still don't even know if they're meant to be?). It's really deep and takes a lot of thinking about, but the strangeness it oozed and the overall sense of foreboding built up throughout the film was awesome, and all done on such a tiny scale. Very enjoyable, will definitely have to re-watch a couple of times to fully get the gist of what the heck was going on but if you like weird, sic-fi-ish strange kind of films then give it a watch, it won't be like the same thing we see all the time and it'll make you think.

7/10
 
ECG said:
I only have one other minor grip & that's with the one line that didn't belong in the movie. It was when they were burying the treasure in the cave & one of the dwarfs says "This is a long-term deposit", which isn't Tolkienesque at all.

I disagreed with this point privately at the time of writing, because I was sure it was very much so 'Tolkienesque'. Now after rereading The Hobbit and having launched myself well into LotR (in case you'd only read that and not the Hobbit so were basing your judgement on that alone) I stand by my original thought of disagreement. What with Tolkien's constant asides and nods through the fourth wall toward reality, combined with a wondrous sense of humour and satire that pierces even the most tense and serious of moments. It's fair to say he does it considerably less in LotR, but it's part of the fixtures and fittings which makes The Hobbit and its loveable characters tick saying things like "This is a long term deposit". In fact when Bilbo and Gandalf return from the lonely mountain it's even written that they collected their deposit of coin and jewels from the previous springs misadventures with the trio of trolls.

With reference to furie, I'm also discovering why so many fans of the books were left feeling a little short changed by (even by the extended film editions) LotR. There is sooooooo much missing. But it is stuff that really would not work on the screen and has (despite its relevance) been kept out for good reason. And I agree about Azkaban... what the hell happened to the Quidditch in the film?! That was the start of the end of that franchise for me! Unlike LotR, HP cut the wrong bits and even invented unnecessary new ones lol.

So yeah, Tolkien <3
 
Random question, but since Hobbit is a prequel will I be confused if I see it having not seen the others? My boyfriend wants to see it since I dragged him to Les Miserables :(
 
Not at all. If anything it would make LotR more entertaining and you would understand what was going on.

And probably deserve it for taking him to that.
 
^ Hey, it was actually a good movie and he ended up liking it! And okay, now that I know that, I'll give Hobbit a try. I just suck at following the story lines of LoTR type movies, same with Harry Potter and stuff.
 
How can you suck at following the storyline of Harry Potter haha Taylor <3

Yeah, The Hobbit is a separate film on its own, just in the same world as LOTR with some of the same characters.
 
^ Oh okay, I thought I was gonna be like, the person left out in the theatre who didn't care or understand anything </3 And I just suck at following story lines in general to be fair. Some Harry Potter films I was able to understand but there were others I was just sitting there like, what?
 
Have you read the Potter books? Because watching the films I just kept thinking my god, anybody who hasn't read the books must be utterly lost. They introduce random themes and characters with little to no explanation, or fleetingly make a reference to something that is actually really important. So actually, thinking about it, the films are totally wtf and confusing. I found a list the other day of all the things that the films miss out and it really shows how much they skipped.
 
Harry Potter may be some of the worst book adaptation movies out there since they just scrap so much and put parts in here and there that make absolutely zero sense if you don't know the stories. Give it 5-10 years and then Peter Jackson will remake all books back to back and they will be 3+ hours each, since Hollywood remakes everything inside 10 years now it seems.
 
I wouldn't mind seeing Potter remade, I actually loathe the films but I <3 the books, so I wouldn't mind seeing someone else's version of them.
 
Princess Diaries - Meh
Princess Diaries 2 - Meh 2
Stick It - Rebellious gymnast forced to train again. Predictable.
Happy Feet - Yawn
Bring It On: All or Nothing - Beyonce's sister and a cameo from Rihanna. WTF?
Bring It On: In It to Win It - A cheerleeding version of West Side Story. Again, WTF?
Fired Up - FFS
Fast Girl - Not what I was expecting it to be. Gentle (read: slow and dull) and predictable
Wild Child - Better than it should've been.

Yes, I do watch a load of ****.
 
^^Why?

Where do you even find that much total s**te to watch?
 
LiveForTheLaunch said:
Random question, but since Hobbit is a prequel will I be confused if I see it having not seen the others?

Wait, wait, wait, wait... What???

Why has nobody picked up on this?

Prime opportunity for sarcasm and Tay knocking and nobody took advantage? What is up CF?

And Nic... Please... Put yourself out of your misery? :p
 
Nic you just seem to watch all of the **** girly films. Face it, Mean Girls is the only one that is any good.

And actually, yeah Taylor, what the hell, why haven't you seen LOTR?
 
Top