Films: Rate and Discuss

DEATHMASTER said:
The Amazing Spider-man: 9/10
Damn good for a hero movie. Definitely loved Andrew Garfield as Peter, a nice breath of fresh air to the character instead of Tobey again. Biggest flaw I saw was
the villain basically was a guy with an identity crisis and the real villains (Oscorp people?) were more or less behind the scenes the whole time.
Click to expand...

Spoilers! :(

Moonrise Kingdom 9/10

If you like the whimsy, random, unrealistic aspects to Wes Anderson's other films, you would like this. It's basically Rushmore meets Fantastic Mr Fox, with extra what-just-happened.

There was really nothing I didn't like about this actually. I think I took one mark off because there wasn't more of it.
 
KiplingsCat said:
Spoilers! :(

Moonrise Kingdom 9/10

If you like the whimsy, random, unrealistic aspects to Wes Anderson's other films, you would like this. It's basically Rushmore meets Fantastic Mr Fox, with extra what-just-happened.

There was really nothing I didn't like about this actually. I think I took one mark off because there wasn't more of it.
Click to expand...
Tagged, might want to adjust your quoting of me as well :indy:
 
I rewatched Collateral the other day, with Jamie Foxx and Tom Cruise. In terms of blockbuster-y crime/action films, especially ones with Tom Cruise, it's actually pretty decent. The plot is obvious but has enough twists to make it seem smart, it's very stylishly shot (interestingly it's all shot at maybe like 60 fps and digital, so it has that weird surreal thing that digital sometimes has) and the lead actors are good enough to keep it hanging together. I would give it a six out of ten!

Also more recently than that I rewatched Inside Man, and it's actually way better than last time I saw it. It's got this bizarre combination of themes, it's like three seperate movies. One's the violent, grimdark crime film starring Clive Owen, one's a funky NY cop buddy movie with Denzel Washington, his smoking hot girlfriend, and Chiwetel Ejiofor as his sidekick - complete with slapbass soundtrack, comically spot-on noir reference shots, and a struggle against white powers. And then you've got the glitzy, quick-talking crime/espionage jewish revenge story with Julianne Moore as a tough and smart fix-it lady. Somehow they all get rammed together around a bank robbery. It's excellent as a heist film and better as a cop buddy film. It sort of flabs out in a fourth act, but it's still very cogent and extremely rewatchable. I would give it an eight out of ten!

Finally I watched Top Gun (for the first time) and it's actually pretty great. I'm sure everyone else has seen it but I think it is a very hilarious film!
 
Moonrise Kingdom 9/10

I take off a point because I liked the first half much more, personally.

Spiderman (2012): 2/10

Horrible, horrible movie. One of the worst I've seen in theaters in a long time. I wanted to walk out.
 
Moonrise Kingdom 9/10

I take off a point because I liked the first half much more, personally.

Spiderman (2012): 2/10

Horrible, horrible movie. One of the worst I've seen in theaters in a long time. I wanted to walk out.
 
ZT said:
Moonrise Kingdom 9/10

I take off a point because I liked the first half much more, personally.
Click to expand...

Yeah it became a bit unhinged towards the end there alright. I still loved it though. Fantastic soundtrack throughout, too.
 
Actually saw this a couple of weeks ago but just to counter ZT's comically negative reaction to it...

The Amazing Spider-Man - 8/10...

I enjoyed this so much more than Sam Raimi's Spidey, Andrew Garfield was born to play Peter Parker, he made me believe that he was just a teenager who suddenly gets super powers and has to incorporate them into his every day life.

The only thing I'll give Raimi credit for is having better villains... well Doc Ock atleast, since the guy playing the Lizard was just not that great of an actor here, though the scenes with him were fun to watch.

I definitely wouldn't say no to a sequel.
 
It's hard for me to imagine any reason one could like the film. I really feel like I could write two pages on why this film was so bad. Like, really, really, really, really bad.

I will just make some points. WATCH OUT GUYS SPOILERS IN CASE YOU WEREN'T FAMILIAR WITH SPIDERMAN

-Worst dialogue ever. Like, Star Wars Prequel bad.
I knew instantly this film was going to have shitty dialogue when, in the beginning, his mother stops to say "He likes the crust cut off his sandwiches, and his light on at night"
My Bad-Dialogue sense was tingling.
Seriously mom? That is the last thing you say to your CHILD and his and aunt an uncle? Well okay, I really got a great sense of what sort of parents you are; the really ****ing weird kind. They would have been better off not saying anything.

-Uncle Ben dies sacrifices his life to stop a chocolate milk thief.

-Gwen is a High School intern and has access to pretty much any lab in Oscorp

-Gwen making the antidote. "Gwen, can u make a antidote 2 save the city?" "lol ya sure, np, i have an antidote machine at oscorp. it will take 10 minutes"

-The child rescue scene. A child is being engulfed in flames while wearing his mask "Come on, you can do it! Put the mask on!"

-Constant jokes about Spiderman being strong. OH, HEY, THANKS, I TOTALLY MISSED THE LAST 3 SPIDERMAN FILMS, I HAD NO IDEA SPIDERMAN HAD SUPERHUMAN STRENGTH. GLAD YOU COULD FIT A JOKE IN THERE EVERY TEN MINUTES ABOUT HIM BEING STRONG. LOL LOOK, HE THREW A FOOTBALL REALLY FAR. LOL I GET IT.

-The jock wearing a Spiderman shirt at the end "Lol chicks luv it!!" :|

-Everything is a forced rehash of the first Spiderman film from 2002.
 
On the other hand, I felt that it captured the essence of the comic pretty well in every regard.
Cheese and all.
 
I thought this movie was so terrible here are two or three examples of a time when an event was mildly implausible, unrealistic, or unbelievable. Worst movie ever, don't see why people would choose this over suicide.
 
The Amazing Spiderman may not have been my favourite movie of all time, but so long as Jar Jar Binks exists, this movie doesnt even come close to Star Wars Prequel dialogue in terms of being bad.

I also preferred this depiction of Peter Parker and Oscorp. Parker seemed like a more believable teenager in this one, and I just plain like experimental genetics.

I do agree that the "evil scheme" of the villain was kinda dumb though:

So he wants to make humans evolve into superior beings? By... uh... detonating a bomb that would affect one city out of the entire world? Exactly how does that encompass the entire human race?

Anyways, with all of that said I still liked going to watch it. It's a summer superhero movie, so just adjust your expectations as such and you'll probably have a good time.
 
Sheepo said:
I thought this movie was so terrible here are two or three examples of a time when an event was mildly implausible, unrealistic, or unbelievable.
Click to expand...

I guess you confused the number 8 with the number 3, and confused "mildly implausible" with "****ing retarded"

I am just glad they had a hologram that simulates rat tumors, and that you can just repeatedly click a button until you win. Oscorp named this "The Fix Everything Machine"

Also, it's great that Dr. Connor had some spare time in the sewers to make a lizard-simulator on his laptop. You know, the one that has an animation showing little lizardmen being dispersed all over New York. I guess he made that just in case he forgot what his evil plan was.
 
I'm just saying having some forced or overly convenient plot circumstances and science stuff in a summer superhero movie, let alone a movie at all, shouldn't be what makes it an abysmal abomination. Yeah, perhaps they could do better, but if you really want to talk about a movie being poor why don't you come up with something other than "plot can be dumb sometimes", which is what you've managed to say in about four paragraphs of post. Because I'm personally not shocked by that and if I'd ever had amazing expectations for it an incredibly smart plot with a realistic depiction of a corporate laboratory wouldn't have been a part of them.
 
The Amazing Spiderman - 8/10

Genuinely surprised by this. There was some serious deja vu in some sections, almost like they weren't even trying, but overall this one was just...I cant even put into words how much better than that ***t pile of a trilogy (how the...) that was the previous spider man..'s.

I dont read comics, so forgive me when I say, I though this 'version' of spider man was so much cooler. You could relate more. He has powers, sure, but he's still relying on gadgets, so it's kind of the best of both worlds.

Garfield was pretty damn good I thought. Gives me faith for the next generation of actors we'll watch growing up over the next 30-40 years.

And Emma Stone. Jesus christ. That girl better marry quick. Seriously Garfield, but a ***king ring on that woman. She is just...ridiculously gorgeous. Those eyes (blue eyes = my kryptonite, and her's are ridiculously beautiful). Those legs. Holy **it. Shame about the blonde though. Much prefer her as a hazel. I may have gone to far with this...

So yeah, it was cool, funny in places, and you felt more connected with the characters. Wasnt as dark as I thought it would be, and the CGI is pretty poor in places, but overall, pretty damn good job.

Ted - 9/10

Friggin' shweet film. No-brainer, surprisingly touching, tailed off toward the end, but I'd say the first...half of the film, reeks of Family Guy, is ridiculously funny, and I enjoyed pretty much every minute. Unfortunately Seth needs to get his timing down, as, well, the last 15 minutes or so didnt feel like a comedy at all. Then again, this is kind of a romcom in a way...yeesh...so I guess it's expected.

I'd watch it again, no doubt. And any Family Guy fan will be in hysterics. Anyone that cant stand Family Guy, particularly Peter Griffin, stay away.

And I have to say, I was impressed with Whalberg. I mean, Kunis is gorgeous of course, but it could have been anyone in her place (Seth chose her as she's of course Meg in Family Guy), and I loved the cameos from
members of the Family Guy cast (lots of 'omg that's the guy/gal that does xxx's voice!)
, but Whalberg showed a side I had never seen before, and he's actually quite funny. It's weird seeing him in a non serious-face-all-the-time, where's-my-family revenge flick.

Seth McFarlane steals the shows as Ted though. This is about Whalberg and Ted, and it works 100%.

It's a bit goofy, a bit immature, but at the same time, manages to somehow be mature and touching. Almost tear-jerking in places. I cant help but feel it kind of didnt know what kind of film it wanted to be, but as a Family Guy fan, part of me doesnt care.

Pretty damn good first try at making a movie Seth.
 
Sheepo said:
I'm just saying having some forced or overly convenient plot circumstances and science stuff in a summer superhero movie, let alone a movie at all, shouldn't be what makes it an abysmal abomination. Yeah, perhaps they could do better, but if you really want to talk about a movie being poor why don't you come up with something other than "plot can be dumb sometimes", which is what you've managed to say in about four paragraphs of post. Because I'm personally not shocked by that and if I'd ever had amazing expectations for it an incredibly smart plot with a realistic depiction of a corporate laboratory wouldn't have been a part of them.
Click to expand...

Sorry, last time I talk about Spiderman and I'm done.

I admit some of the plot points mentioned could slide because whatever it's a summer superhero movie. The one part I had a big problem with (aside from the "evil plans") was the very end of the movie, no idea how I forgot about that before.

The fact that Parker basically blows off the promise he made to his girlfriend's dying father merely a couple of days after he made it. I get that it makes for a happier ending that the two get back together, but it was so ridiculous that he basically says "I promised your dad to keep you safe, but whatever lol"

Maybe other people didn't think it was a big deal, but I really disliked that part. Movies don't have to always end perfectly, hell if they wanted to they could've waited until the sequel to get them back together.
 
Batman
3/10

Fragments of a pretty solid film buried under jumpy and distracting editing, flabby meaningless plot sections, terrible supporting cast in meaningless red herring roles, an invasive and ill-suited soundtrack, and a general sense of utter malaise that something with so much expectation and money put in to it could turn out to be so utterly uninspiring.
 
The Dark Knight Rises - 8/10

I loved this movie. Being a big fan of the previous two, I couldn't be happier with the ending to the trilogy. I was worried about Catwoman and how she was going to fit in, but it worked well in my opinion. Bane was great as well, Tom Hardy plays a great brawler it seems.

It has it's downsides, it feels a bit scattered at times with lots of different things going on, but overall very enjoyable. It feels quite different to the previous two films, it's much grander and more intense.

Something I was so glad about Selena Kyle is, (minor spoilers)

She is never referred to as catwoman.

I love that.
 
I saw two incredibly enjoyable films recently.

Porco Rosso

One of the few Ghibli films I hadn't seen, it's instantly jumped up the list to sit among my favourites. This film is just pure fun. Everything in it is designed to make you smile or laugh, and the animation is so fluid and crisp and full of life I could just ****ing diiiiiieeeeeeeeeeeeee

Bronson

Tom Hardy is my new hero. A little unconventional in terms of tone and pacing, but his sheer ownership of the character pulls it all together and makes it into something quite special.
 
The Dark Knight Rises - 9/10...

Easily the best of the trilogy, loved everything about it.
Just might be my favorite movie of the year too.

Anne Hathaway was excellent and slipped into the role of Catwoman with a chaotic grace.
Really blew me away how good she was, really.

The action sequences were beautiful and with that booming soundtrack they were just so great.
The ending was just perfect, even though it ended exactly how I thought it would.

For a movie that was 2hrs and 45mins long, it felt so much shorter... I sincerely hope that Nolan releases a director's cut that's an hour longer or something.
Also, Marion Cotillard was probably the only bad thing about the movie... her acting was just really terrible I felt.
 
The Dark Knight Rises 9/10

This was an excellent movie. Hands down the best of the trilogy, the suspense, the action, it all felt much higher than the other films. It also gave you a sense of urgency and despair while making you angry just as how Batman felt. The third movie in a Trilogy is usually the worst of the three (The Matrix, Ninja Turtles, Alien etc the list goes on and on) but for some reason this movie blew me away. Batman when I was growing up (the 1990s movies) were never this good. The pacing was good, the sounds, the acting, etc just all around great movie. I hope Joseph Gordon-Levitt at least gets a Best Supporting Actor, in my opinion played a great role, probably the best.

My only complaint with the movie was I predicted a lot this time around. Other than that it was amazing :D
 
Man you guys are crazy. TDKR was a complete mess. 4/10 for trying.

I know I'm supposed to explain more about why I say this, but I mean, there is so much. There is so much stuff. The plot was a mishmash of irrelevant asides, pointless wheels-within-wheels and gaping holes. The pacing was totally off-kilter, racing through important content and taking ages to get to the point. Character beats feel obligatory rather than complementary. Bane has fantastic screen presence but an utterly stupid voice and not a slice of the ideological edge that made the Joker actually interesting. All plans are made of deus ex machinas and xanatos roulettes. They failed to make use of either Bruce Wayne's seclusion or his anger. Everyone speaks like each other, nobody is written with their own voice. The entire 'clean energy' subplot is irrelevant, boring, clumsy exposition, the only purpose of which is to allow Bane to get his hands on a bomb. The whole pseudo-occupy/'revolutionary' thing was incomprehensible and a bad rehash of Tale of Two Cities. There was no effort to show why people might be angry with Gotham and no attempt to show who was actually participating in this supposed revolution. Bane magically got these zealots who believed totally in his cause from nowhere, but they were also described as 'mercenaries'; I think the scriptwriters forgot which they were supposed to be. As a whole, this was a movie made of vaguely good chunks floating in a splodgy soup that would be straight-up fascist if it was actually capable of having coherent politics.

The performances were great - and as with Inception, that's all that really holds things together. Good production values, though. I recommend anyone go see it because it was kind of fun to just watch everything fall apart. Also I liked the last 10 minutes. So there you go.
 
The Dark Knight Rises - 6/10

I dunno, this was a pretty heavy disappointment. Not bad, by any means, but there was a lot wrong with it. I think it tries far too hard to be too many things. Thematically it's all over the place and is ultimately hits quantity over quality. Bane, who initially seems so promising ends up being little more than a cool looking, weirdly speaking, pretty clever, ruthless badass guy who shows no mercy. Yeah, maybe that's an alright villain, but it's hard not compare it to the Joker, and there's really no comparison. And
completely undermining his importance with that silly twist didn't help either.
Along with the fact that the villain motives are all pretty much all tied up in Begins, so it's pretty much just a generic senseless evil threat. So much of the dialogue was cheesy and forced (yeah, I'm struggling to recall it now, but some of the stuff with Bane, in the prison, cops, yeah). And what cool scenes were there? Frankly, I can recall the big three actiony sequences from the Dark Knight practically shot for shot. But does this really have anything that compares besides the very ending? And frankly, the ending doesn't offer anything besides a much larger scale compared to TDK. On the positive, all these flaws don't make it a bad movie, just not a great one. I enjoyed it, and loved the very ending stuff, Catwoman, a lot of the early Bruce Wayne stuff (sans forced Alfred conflict), and kinda the prison stuff (mostly good).

Edit: And Sulks says it better.
 
The Dark Knight Rises - I have simple tastes/10
Loved it. Seen it twice now and one of the most enjoyable films I've seen in ages. Bane was an excellent (if not complex) villain and sorry Mr Dodds but I loved his voice. It's threatening but always so jovial. He's a ridiculous comicbook villain and he carries himself like he should be in a fine coat and tophat while strutting around in a bulletproof vest and gasmask. I admit I ate that shit up. Anne Hathaway surprised me with how good she was as Catwoman. I didn't give her enough credit beforehand. The characters, directing and action is where this film shines. I will not try to pretend the story was a masterpiece, in fact, I'm about to try and tare it apart. Keep in mind though that despite all this, I still loved the damn film.

As Sulk said some plot points are just thrown out there to be used as one-time plot coupons to get things moving forward. The green energy programme might be in character for Bruce but it does exist just to give Bane a bomb. It's not helping my opinion of it that every single ****ing thing they said about it was ridiculous. I know this is a series that doesn't follow the laws of physics very closely and I'm completely willing to let the Batwing slide but they basically just used and abused random 'nuclear' words all over the place. Whoever wrote it doesn't seem to really know the difference between fusion and fission and they constantly treat it as if it's something highly radioactive (yet have no problems with practically hugging the damn thing or worrying in the least about fallout from the blast.

What's far worse is the 'clean slate'. It serves absolutely no purpose other than for two characters to dangle it in front of Selena's face to get her to follow the script. Not only is it a completely ridiculous programme (on par with the one from season two of Sherlock) but it is given such awkward and forced exposition; the worst by a wide margin in the entire film. Taken as close to verbatim as I can remember from the film: "Where is the clean slate?" "Oh you mean the programme that you put in your name and date of birth and it deletes all information about you from every database on the planet?" It's more painful to watch than Bruce's spine being broken and reset. Dear god Nolan should be slapped for allowing that in his film. It doesn't even come to anything in the end. It's just a little thumb drive that Bruce gives Selena to make her do what he wants. It's a "please follow the script now" box that should not have existed in the film.

Besides the one mentioned above there were plenty of bad script moments. Like Sulk characters often don't seem to be speaking with their own voice. Bane's reading of Gordon's extremely simple prose that he had prepared as a speech to the entire city is immediately followed by Gordon giving some much more flowery language to justify his actions. They just don't seem like they'd come from the same person.

It also seems odd that Bruce never revealed himself, considering the whole angle about the importance of the truth that Alfred and Blake start trumpeting half way through the film but then forget about by the end. It would have made a good counterpoint to the ending of the Dark Knight and beginning of Rises. As it stands the moral of the story is "lying to the world is fine as long as you have good intentions and are powerful." This is especially odd as it would have cost him nothing, as he faked his own death as Batman and as Bruce.

I will end on a positive note: I've seen some criticism of the character but I liked Blake and as cheesy as it was I liked the closing shot of him standing on the platform as it ascends out of the water. It hammers the point home a bit unsubtly when the title of the film splashes up on screen immediately after, but at least it makes the title of the film actually make sense finally; it's not referring to Bruce, it's referring to Blake.
 
I thoroughly enjoyed TDKR. I went into it without any expectations (and, unlike with TDK, I hadn't endured several months of Samon constantly ejaculating over it) and I thought it was great. I even took my kids with me, and brought them back home again!
 
The Dark Knight Rises - Dafuq/10

What the f*ck? I mean really. We get so much out of Bane from the previews/trailers, he looks incredible. I spend the last few months quivering with excitement for the villain who will surpass Heath Ledger's Joker, the sequel that will surpass one of the best movies ever.
And we get this? I'll break into key points:

- Bane is sick, maybe not better than the Joker, but certainly as entertaining to watch (though perhaps not repetitively). But then they ruin the big, tough-as-anything, beat-the-shit-out-of-Batman Bane by making him a slave (or servant) ready to do the bidding of some woman that came from nowhere? "Goodbye my friend"? Marion Cotillard's character was so unnecessary and so diminishing of purpose. WHY NOLAN?
- The inclusion of Catwoman was totally unnecessary, like they included her just so Wayne would have someone to run away with at the end.
- As people have said previously, the bomb thing didn't make any sense, other than serving the purpose of providing a bomb. Stupid.
- Not enough Alfred, and he was far too sad in every scene. Too depressing. (Emphasis on the 'too'.)
- Batman's flying thingy (whatever it was called) was stupid. That's all there was to it, it was f*cking stupid. As if when writing they were like: "What's the natural progression? Car... motorbike... flying car. Yeah that'll do."
- Ended too quickly: Batman lives happily ever after with Catwoman, Robin becomes The Dark Knight and that's that. Done and dusted. Is it time for Superman yet?

The film had its good elements too, mind you:
- Bane was so awesome. So big and tough, yet sound of mind in his delivery of speech (like his speech for the so called 'revolution').
- Obviously you cannot really beat "When Gotham is ashes, you have my permission to die."
- I liked Blake, and just the really subtle "You should use your real name... Robin" - and also how it explains the eluding title of the film.
- Music was superb, Hans Zimmer never disappoints.
- The prison was cool, the chanting, "What does it mean?" "RISE."

Not relevant to the film, but seeing this was a celebration of one year with my girlfriend - took her to Gold Class. So I was extremely comfortable at least during my disappointment. Kind of a bonus, right?
 
Pi Mu Rho said:
I thoroughly enjoyed TDKR. I went into it without any expectations (and, unlike with TDK, I hadn't endured several months of Samon constantly ejaculating over it) and I thought it was great. I even took my kids with me, and brought them back home again!
Click to expand...
I went into it without any expectations...and they were met!
 
Pi Mu Rho said:
I thoroughly enjoyed TDKR. I went into it without any expectations (and, unlike with TDK, I hadn't endured several months of Samon constantly ejaculating over it) and I thought it was great. I even took my kids with me, and brought them back home again!
Click to expand...
How old are your children?
The idea of people younger than (about) 13 watching that film is a bit weird
 
dark knight rises is pretty tame, tamer than dark knight by miles. it all boils down to wap, fap, zang, boof! style violence ala adam west batman, it's just a darker tone. brief knife scene and a couple of cracking noises in the lower back area but eh, it's probably better if younger kids do shy away from that particular scene because watching it as a 22 year makes it almost comical, or the medical science behind it at least.

my appreciation of cinema comes from growing up watching jaws, tremors, nightmare on elm street, etc.
 
I liked TDKR, but it definitely wasn't without flaws. Hardy and Hathaway were both fantastic in it, but I was a bit let down by Cotillard. I actually think The Cat may have been my favourite anti-hero since Han Solo.

Even Bane sounding an awful lot like Deckard "Stay a while and listen" Cane didn't particularly bother me. I thought he sounded intelligent and sophisticated, which is (I assume) what they were going for.

My biggest problems revolve around the ending, though.

I have no problem with Blake picking up the Batmantle. It was pretty clear through the entire movie that that was where his character was going (Being disillusioned with the police force, freaking out about killing someone, being an orphan, etc. He really "understood" Bruce in a way that no one else ever had). So I felt it unnecessary and stupid for his birth name to be Robin. How goddamn silly. Even Robin's birth name wasn't Robin.

Bruce faking his death bothered me. From the moment he "died", I knew he'd be back, but I hoped he wouldn't. The entire trilogy is based around how "anyone can be a hero" and how most of them do it without a mask (Bruce's parents, Harvey Dent, Rachel, etc). And sure, those people have all died because of it, but surely Bruce can't have expected to always survive with some of the stuff he has come up against.

But Bruce's escape to lead a happy life bothers me. Yes, he was too old to be Batman anymore, and yeah, Gotham needed something different, but it was like he abandoned everything that he had believed. He throws the responsibility off of himself and onto Blake. They could have at least set up some kind of Batman Beyond thing where he's still a mentor. ****, he could have done much more to help Gotham even without being Batman anymore.

Not to mention, what the hell good is Blake going to be as Batman? I mean, most of what makes Batman is his gadgets. With Wayne Enterprises nearly gone, and certainly having no affiliation with this kid, where exactly is he going to get anything new? Even cutting-edge technology becomes outdated quickly.

The ending itself just felt so unfinished. For it to be Nolan's final movie in the series, there are a lot of loose ends. And sure it's rather like Nolan to leave things up to the viewer's imagination, and I have no problem with that in theory, but "Does Jim Gordon get fired" is not quite the same intensity as "Is DiCaprio still dreaming?"

Bruce basically runs away, and ****s up the lives around him so that he can go to Paris and **** Anne Hathaway. Now I'm not saying that I wouldn't, but he's supposed to be better than that.
 
Yorick [Dark Knight Rises Spoilers]
I agree that Bruce is being kind a dick not helping out Blake, but I think Blake has the resources. I think it will still take some number of years before his gadgets are outdated and in the mean time there should be a plentiful supply in the Bat Cave; Bruce had to order tonnes of them to make it look like a reasonable order for Wayne Enterprises. Speaking of which, Wayne Enterprises it not completely demolished. I think it will remain going under Lucius and once he realises there's a new Batman in town he's find Blake and offer his assistance.

He also doesn't have to be as hands on with the fighting and jumping around with the gadgets as Bruce. He can play it differently. There have been many depictions of Batman, not all of them with so much kung fu. He could be the more detective and patience heavy version who gathers information and lays traps rather than ambushing ten guys at once and beating them up. All in all, I agree that Bruce should have stayed around to train him, and he's being a massive dick by not doing that and encouraging him to still go out there, but Blake should be able to manage.

Also it would have been better if they had just left it at Alfred looking over and nodding to the camera without actually showing Bruce and Selena.
 
Prometheus - 2/10
A totally predictable and dull film packed to the brim with plot holes, inconsistencies and bad acting across the board. Not to mention it was over hyped as shit. The intention to make it an Alien prequel is a joke and the hints towards the rest of the series are so obviously tacked on last minute that it feels incredibly cheap and unnecessary. In summary - I predicted the ending of the film 5 minutes in, and I was 100% correct. Only saving grace for this film is Fassbender's acting and how good the CGI visuals were.

The Dark Knight Rises - 7/10
While it wasn't nearly as predictable as Prometheus, a lot of this film was ruined by the pointless and stupidly obvious foreshadowing which really helped to spoil upcoming 'twists' or 'shock moments'.

The obvious foreshadowing felt like the writers were treating the audience as idiots while blocking all opportunities to surprise their viewers. God forbid we actually get a shocking plot twist as opposed to something blatantly foreshadowed 20 minutes into the film. I also had a few problems with minor plot holes which really managed to drag me out of the experience, and not to mention the huge amount of inconsistencies when compared to the Batman universe. As for the rest of the film, the acting was pretty solid, music was brilliant, visually stunning and pretty enjoyable as a whole.
 
I meant to mention, that the inclusion of Ravel's "Pavane Pour Une Infante Defunte" was an excellent addition to the soundtrack. I adore its inclusion, it fit perfectly.

Also, that's very true Riomhaire, but I still don't love the way it was handled.
 
TDKR stands halfway between being a passively entertaining movie and a really bad movie with no thematic or emotional anchor. Which obviously means it's both. It's a film with flaws so magnificent in their stature that I'm left incredulous Nolan's name is on the script. The lazy and uninspired ambience surrounding the film's entire direction left me pretty dumbstruck for those two and a half hours I languished under this colossal mess. You guys are way too forgiving and way too easily entertained.

There's a megaton of reasons for the movie's failings but I think a lot of them orbit a few key errors that generate the rest. The literal plot ties to Begins bog down a lot of its narrative capabilities. The uniqueness of the threat is diminished because you're dealing with the same villainous organisation that roughly has the same agenda, only now its a hollow revenge story. I am not saying Begins posed or explored interesting questions with 'the League' but it did at least try. Having matured as a film maker, here was Nolan's opportunity to expand those pop philosophy ideas he had in his head eight years(?) ago and give them a little more credibility. The opportunities only grow when you have a villain prepared to take over a city state and impose his own sense of justice on its trapped population. All of the grand ideas the film hints and winks at are clear as day when you're discussing the film's set-up, but they fail to materialise in the film itself. A final act doesn't need to bend over itself to cater to plot points set up in the beginning. Where did this dumb approach to conclusive parts come from? Such laziness.

Nolan's Gotham has been the story of the American metropolis since TDK. Begins shows something different and isn't worth talking about so we'll stick with TDK. The apogee of the modern Western world, referred to within the film - more than once - as 'America's finest city'. It's what makes TDK so great: you've got a living city with all the voices - the political, the law, the citizenry, the crime. All of these voices are represented by people. TDKR doesn't have any of that. It's not a city. At least, it's not a city with a population that has anything to say. It's cityscape shots and isolated cliques (e.g. Blake's foster home). Bane addresses the people of Gotham but no one responds. We don't know how the people of Gotham felt about a draconian piece of legislation (Wayne and Gordon thought Gotham was 'better' because it had become authoritarian inclined? I don't buy that). There's a hint that there's been wide-scale social stratification but it's just that, a hint, and Bane's class warfare rhetoric is rendered utterly mute because of it. The film's pacing is so piss poor that 3 months pass and not a sense of life under Bane's tyrannical rule is given to us. There's a situation, but the situation is posed, stated, never shown or explored or given life. TDKR raises the stakes like never before, but it never once justifies raising those stakes. In the end, we've got policemen beating up the degenerates because, well, law and order and all that. The film doesn't actually tackle the problems and it doesn't say anything. It's vacuous and empty and completely pointless. I can think of no greater criticism to level against it than this.

Bane's voice was brilliant. And that's the highest praise it is going to get.
 
Rossjg said:
The literal plot ties to Begins bog down a lot of its narrative capabilities. The uniqueness of the threat is diminished because you're dealing with the same villainous organisation that roughly has the same agenda, only now its a hollow revenge story. I am not saying Begins posed or explored interesting questions with 'the League' but it did at least try. Having matured as a film maker, here was Nolan's opportunity to expand those pop philosophy ideas he had in his head eight years(?) ago and give them a little more credibility. The opportunities only grow when you have a villain prepared to take over a city state and impose his own sense of justice on its trapped population. All of the grand ideas the film hints and winks at are clear as day when you're discussing the film's set-up, but they fail to materialise in the film itself. A final act doesn't need to bend over itself to cater to plot points set up in the beginning. Where did this dumb approach to conclusive parts come from? Such laziness.
Click to expand...
This is exactly how I felt. The trailer really misled me as to what the main conflict would be. There was a lot of building up of Bane as some smart, powerful, anti-fascist counter to Batman. I read how Bane was this classically educated man from South America who grew up in a prison, wanting freedom and ultimately revenge. This immediately invoked ideas of people's armies and communist groups of South American from history, in my head, by association.

It would have made sense for the whole arc of the series. The city goes from being run by crooks (Begins beginning), to moderate peace, to almost anarchy with the Joker, to the suggestion of being a police state (beginning of TDKR), and was finally veering toward a populous upheaval through Bane.

There were elements throughout the movie that were working toward a reversal of society:
the stock market scene, the abducting of the rich in their homes, Bane's letting the criminals arrested by the Dent act go, Catwoman's Robin Hood justification against Bruce and his ilk, Bane's people's court. Clear cut allusions to the Occupy movement. The script built up all these elements and then just did nothing with them. Bane's court is a mockery of criminals executing the rich, not justice by the people. Bane reveals the truth about Dent--an event that the movie is driving toward for hours and that all the good guys dread--and we see no indication of its effect on the average Gotham citizen. Instead of seeing how Gotham's lower and middle class deal with Bane's takeover (hell, we don't even see how they deal with Gotham as a police state before Bane), we only see the vestiges of power--Wayne enterprises, the police, the rich--squatting in buildings and hiding. We never get a sense that the people of Gotham cared either way if Bane would triumph outside of their efforts of basic survival. To me it seemed that Bane's goal was for Gotham to be governed by its people (From the trailer, mind you. It becomes pretty clear in the movie proper that he just wants to rule it himself). I interpreted "When Gotham is ashes" to be figurative: when Gotham's structures for power are burned away, the people will rise and create new ones, like a Phoenix--thus fitting with the theme of ascension and rebuilding.

Then the plot does a 90 and suddenly the whole motivation for Bane is to destroy all of Gotham. Turns out all along he just wants to nuke the place for Raz's daughter. Um, what? I really think there were two script drafts with two different villain storylines, one good and one shit, and they decided to go with both. The shift gave me narrative whiplash.

While I don't share the same vitirol as Samon for the movie as a whole (I can shut off my brain during movies for the most part), I think they really squandered opportunity with the script this time around.
 
Rossjg said:
The lazy and uninspired ambience surrounding the film's entire direction left me pretty dumbstruck for those two and a half hours I languished under this colossal mess. You guys are way too forgiving and way too easily entertained.
Click to expand...


Despite raising several very interesting points against the film, I would argue, Ross, that you often occupy the opposite end of the spectrum.
 
Rossjg said:
You guys are way too forgiving and way too easily entertained.
Click to expand...


I'm so glad you didn't enjoy it, because I did. I revel in the fact that my tastes in movies are almost exactly opposed to yours.
 
brad92 said:
Despite raising several very interesting points against the film, I would argue, Ross, that you often occupy the opposite end of the spectrum.
Click to expand...

Then argue away.

Pi Mu Rho said:
I'm so glad you didn't enjoy it, because I did. I revel in the fact that my tastes in movies are almost exactly opposed to yours.
Click to expand...

It's always been a cornerstone of our relationship, especially when we're working together creatively.
 
You guys are so cute!

Funny Games: Very unusual movie, in a good way. The plot is one of those very simple yet totally engaging concepts. Some extra twists thrown in that make you go 'did that just happen'. Great acting, I really enjoyed it.

Punch Drunk Love: Another unusual one (save you some time, all of these are) the best acting I've seen Adam Sandler do, which doesn't sound like much but he's amazing in his role. The movie conveys specific feelings very well, like being overwhelmed. This is done through the camera work and especially the sound design. Funny parts too. Just a well done movie. Good payoffs.

Happiness: One of those several-storylines-vaguely-connected movies. It was enjoyable and uncomfortable at the same time. Lots of dark stuff. Not too strong as a whole, but it's at least different. Good performances, including good old Philip Seymour Hoffman.

Bronson: Totally artful movie, probably the best I've seen in a while. I couldn't believe that I hadn't heard of it because I was blown away by how well done it was. You have to see this movie, it's really good. Don't watch it with family though.

Shotgun Stories: A simpler movie that isn't so weird. The story of a family rivalry in Mississippi. The events are very straightforward, but the characters are just so enjoyable. The only gripe I have is that they should have expanded the movie into at least 2 hours, since things pick up a little too fast without enough exposition, and they could have drawn things out a lot more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Terminator
Long time...
Replies
10
Views
558
Raziaar
Raziaar
Krynn72
You guys, what the **** is up.
Replies
11
Views
1K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
HL2.NET HORROR SLAP
Replies
7
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Chris D
Half-Life: Alyx announced
Replies
32
Views
25K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
To Those That Stand, Those That Fell
Replies
6
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Back
Top