Latest rendition of The Thing. I liked it, though in most respects it's nearly identical to the John Carpenter version, and Rob Botin's all solid/liquid makeup effects still look creepier than the CGI. Nevertheless, it was a nice, dark, tense horror movie with imaginative monster creations, not played for laughs and not PG-13.

Goldfinger

The evil plot is surprisingly plausible even now. Overall though, pretty cheesy. Fun, yes, but cheesy.

rjprice wrote:

Goldfinger

The evil plot is surprisingly plausible even now. Overall though, pretty cheesy. Fun, yes, but cheesy.

That was the highest-grossing Bond movie ever ... I believe that in today's dollars it took in a billion dollars.

Re-watched GoodFellas with my GF. She never saw this movie. In 40 minutes I am gonna re-watch Tintin but this time a blu-ray rip.

On my 1200p MBP Screen !

OMG How can I watch 1080p content on my MBP without a blu-ray drive ? Sorcery, Sorcery, I tell you !

Lombo wrote:

Re-watched GoodFellas with my GF. She never saw this movie. In 40 minutes I am gonna re-watch Tintin but this time a blu-ray rip.

On my 1200p MBP Screen !

OMG How can I watch 1080p content on my MBP without a blu-ray drive ? Sorcery, Sorcery, I tell you !

Rotfl.

Planet of the Apes 35th anniversary edition. Gift from my brother for my birthday. Full screen, though - boo hiss.

So was Ms Stewart supposed to service all three of the males? Not that anything about the expedition made any sense. I need to read the book.

user wrote:

Planet of the Apes 35th anniversary edition. Gift from my brother for my birthday. Full screen, though - boo hiss.

So was Ms Stewart supposed to service all three of the males? Not that anything about the expedition made any sense. I need to read the book.

The book was very different.

But I do think you should watch this.

Also, this. It's really fascinating.

My son and I went to Act of Valor yesterday. The acting was dodgy, the dialogue was often laughable... but for sheer testosterone pumped battle sequences, it was excellent. We both enjoyed it, in spite of a few missteps. I know they were trying to appeal to the crowd that play first person shooter games, but the frequent use of scenes to make it look like a first person shooter game were distracting and annoying. Worth seeing though!

Terminator Salvation

I just saw a few Brit gangster movies on Netflix - Rise of the Footsoldier, The Krays.

not terrible. The Krays was better. Both have some flaws though.

Also watched the season of the Killing (though technicaly that is tv and not a movie). Engrossing, but perhaps there is more to the ambience of the show than there is actual content.

I just came back from John Carter (OF MARS GODDAMMIT).

And it didn't suck. I know the word for a while has been that it was done in months ago by idiots in marketing and that is pretty accurate.

It wasn't the best movie I've seen, but it was enjoyable. I think a lot of that is because I read the books long enough ago I wasn't too bothered by plot changes, but having read them let my brain smooth over any problems with character/setting introduction.

Before I saw this, I noticed that a lot of professional reviewers panned it but people who were looking forward to a Barsoom movie enjoyed it. That seems accurate.

Also, green Martians are the best Martians.

Everyone I know who saw John Carter thought it was great (and understood that every space adventure since Flash Gordon has stolen from this story, and not vice versa). I hope to catch it before it goes away.

Should I read the book before or after seeing it? I've read a lot of ERB, but not that one.

The Muppets

Geesie wrote:

I just came back from John Carter (OF MARS GODDAMMIT).

And it didn't suck. I know the word for a while has been that it was done in months ago by idiots in marketing and that is pretty accurate.

It wasn't the best movie I've seen, but it was enjoyable. I think a lot of that is because I read the books long enough ago I wasn't too bothered by plot changes, but having read them let my brain smooth over any problems with character/setting introduction.

Before I saw this, I noticed that a lot of professional reviewers panned it but people who were looking forward to a Barsoom movie enjoyed it. That seems accurate.

Also, green Martians are the best Martians.

I heard Disney is expecting to lose around a quarter billion dollars on that movie.

The Artist. I think I've seen only three or four movies in the past year. Can't even remember what I saw.

The Lorax... good movie

Meet the Fockers

The Hound of the Baskervilles (1959) Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee. Hammer Studios doing what it does best.

Get Smart with Ann Hathaway and Steve Carrell. I went in with low expectations, but nothing worked. They got it all wrong. An unredeemable mess from start to finish. I felt bad for Ann.

Enter the Dragon.

T3
Made me really miss James Cameron.

Zombie Apocalypse (from SyFy).

Made me miss the 90 minutes I wasted watching it (though I wasn't expecting much).

21 Jump Street, it was hilarious.

The Running Man. We actually drove to a video store and rented it. And yes, we got drunk first. And it was awesome.

Got drunk first after driving to the video store, right?

He said they rented The Running Man so I'd say odds are before driving to the video store.

I marathoned all the Harry Potter films last week. I had seen the first one with my nephews when it came out, but I remember it being called the Philosopher's stone not the Sorcerer's stone. I don't know why they changed it.

I was surprised at how much I enjoyed them. Better than I expected.

Ribtor wrote:

I marathoned all the Harry Potter films last week. I had seen the first one with my nephews when it came out, but I remember it being called the Philosopher's stone not the Sorcerer's stone. I don't know why they changed it.

I was surprised at how much I enjoyed them. Better than I expected.

I think Philosophers Stone was the Brit version.

Odd. Perhaps they feared backlash from the American Alchemical Society?

Ribtor wrote:

Odd. Perhaps they feared backlash from the American Alchemical Society?

I don't know. I just seem to recall the first book was named differently, but i never looked into why.

justine wrote:

Ribtor wrote:

Odd. Perhaps they feared backlash from the American Alchemical Society?

I don't know. I just seem to recall the first book was named differently, but i never looked into why.

Quote:

Scholastic Corporation bought the U.S. rights at the Bologna Book Fair in April 1997 for US$105,000, an unusually high sum for a children's book. They thought that a child would not want to read a book with the word "philosopher" in the title and, after some discussion, the American edition was published in October 1998 under the title Rowling suggested, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone.

As usual, it's because American's are stupid.

Anyway, Sorcerer or Philosopher, they were thoroughly enjoyable films.

Waterworld.

The recent buzz over bad big budget films made me curious. Not great but not awful. Seems well within the standard for its genre to me. Hopper looked like he was having fun. Credits say Jack Black had a part as a pilot.

Lord of the Rings (saw each of the three over the course of a few days)

6.5/10

I had seen these in the theater and liked then enough, but the things I didn't like were amplified in the second viewing.

I cannot stand the repeated and constant use of slow motion as used as some dramatic device.

Some of the staginess is almost silly (Elrond seems to get the most insipidly staged parts).
The battle and combat scenes are hit and miss. The calvary charges of the Rohim are great, but then it goes into some really unconvincing special effects.

The sound constantly bothered me, i was constantly adjusting the levels on my system. music would be swelling while characters are whispering to each other--there is a LOT of whispering.


Then the last hour or so felt like an eternity as there is even more slow motion as the fellowship is reunited and we are treated with what seemed like hours of everyone smiling at each other while the hobbits frollic in the bed:
" Look I'm smiling at you!"
" me too! I am smiling at you also!"
" and look, Gimli is here! He is smiling at me so I am going to mouth his name so the audience knows that I know his name!!"
and I am smiling at him, and here comes Aragorn!!"

Séamas wrote:

The sound constantly bothered me, i was constantly adjusting the levels on my system. music would be swelling while characters are whispering to each other--there is a LOT of whispering.

I hate it when movies do that. I use the subtitles when they do.

Macskeeball wrote:

Séamas wrote:

The sound constantly bothered me, i was constantly adjusting the levels on my system. music would be swelling while characters are whispering to each other--there is a LOT of whispering.

I hate it when movies do that. I use the subtitles when they do.

It seems more prevalent in the more recent movies where the explosions and loud parts are super loud and the quiet parts are extremely quiet.
It makes it difficult to keep a consistent volume when you are trying not to wake sleeping children.

Whispering dialogue is certainly an annoyance. 30 Rock made fun of that pitting Will Arnett against Alec Baldwin.

Ribtor wrote:

Whispering dialogue is certainly an annoyance. 30 Rock made fun of that pitting Will Arnett against Alec Baldwin.

Any scene with Will Arnett and Alec Baldwin is awesome.
The Liz / Jack scenes are also among the best scenes of the show.

That is one show where I could actually do without most of the side characters (I cannot stand anything about Jenna Mulroney's character or acting, Tracy Morgan is hit or miss).

Little Fockers

I could tell they were probably doing a lot of parody of The Godfather and I laughed, but I haven't seen those movies yet. The first one's in my queue but #76. I've heard they're great movies, among the best.

I can't imagine ever watching Little Fockers.