Films: Rate and Discuss

But the origin story isn't particularly compelling at all, not to mention that it's deliberately undermined as possibly being untrue.
 
That particular origin story has been established canon in every single Batman continuity other than the Nolanverse, and not to mention the Killing Joke is regarded as one of the best comic books in the DC universe. You're argument is invalid.
 
SpotEnemyBoats said:
That particular origin story has been established canon in every single Batman continuity other than the Nolanverse
Click to expand...

That's... not even remotely true.

I love The Killing Joke, but I wouldn't want to see a film translation of it.
 
I meant the skin bleached Joker story, which is in the Bruce Timm continuity (JL:U, BTAS, BTNAS, Batman & Superman: Apocalypse, and Batman Beyond), Tim Burton continuity and even in Batman: Arkham games. Heck even god awful The Batman cartoon even had a skin bleached Joker.

It probably wouldn't work as live action adaptation, but animation might work.
 
I don't think it would work as that, either. The Killing Joke's backstory for the Joker was never intended to be definitive (read the Foreword). That they took it and canonised it shows only that they misunderstood the book's intentions.
 
So it was taken out of context? Makes sense, considering what Alan Moore stated.

But all in all, it's DC's fault for establishing as a major event in the Batman mythology.
 
SpotEnemyBoats said:
That particular origin story has been established canon in every single Batman continuity other than the Nolanverse, and not to mention the Killing Joke is regarded as one of the best comic books in the DC universe. You're argument is invalid.
Click to expand...
Well we already covered your ignorance on point 1, so moving on I guess I must point out that I never even mentioned its quality as a comic. I said the Joker origin story (which makes up 40% part of the book and I think that's me being generous because I don't want to understate it and have my memory prove wrong) isn't particularly compelling. And it isn't. It doesn't really have to be. The eventual final event which finishes his transformation is deliberately a completely out of nowhere, dull, freak accident. And up to that it's just a standard "ordinary guy gets in a desperate out of hand criminal situation". It works well for the comic and has a point, but if anything I'd say it's deliberately typical, nothing I'd love to see become animated. I do love the book, and the rest of it's very compelling.
 
It would be a great shame indeed if someone closed The Killing Joke and the best they got out of it was "Oh, so the Joker has bleached skin."
 
If it is so uncompelling, why did DC canonize it - just like when the changed from Batman being a killer, to not killing at all? Mark Hamill said he'd come out of retirement just to do a Killing Joke animated film, so that's one person that disagrees with you.

One of the theme's of the comic is to show the Yin and Yang between Batman and Mr J. As he said it "One bad day" can make you crazy. It's shown that Bats is just as crazy as the clown prince of crime.

Nolan didn't do the bleached Joker for a variety of reasons, one being that it simply doesn't fit his vision for a more realistic Batman continuity, the other being that Heath Ledger wanted to be original and do his own take on Joker. So Nolan and Ledger were on the same page there.
 
See, your problem is you keep taking my comments about the origin story being dull as criticism of the book in general. It's not. I think it's appropriate and works perfectly for the story. Still doesn't mean it'd make a good movie.
 
For those who didn't like The Dark Knight Rises, rumour has it that Christopher Nolan is making a Director's Cut (something he doesn't usually do, so who knows) that would add an extra 30 minutes to the film. I feel like that's a LOT of time to play with and could correct several of the pacing issues.
 
That's good to hear Yorick. Pacing was one of my biggest problems with that movie, so I look forward to seeing this extended version (if it does in fact exist).
 
I'd be really happy with an extended version, let's hope it's not just a rumor!
 
Old Boy - What the ****?
That was interesting. I can't say I wasn't sort of entertained but uh...I don't really understand why this film is a big deal. I guess the cinematography was really good but the plot was just bonkers. I don't really have any desire to watch that again. Can someone explain why this film is supposed to be amazing?
 
ríomhaire said:
Old Boy - What the ****?
That was interesting. I can't say I wasn't sort of entertained but uh...I don't really understand why this film is a big deal. I guess the cinematography was really good but the plot was just bonkers. I don't really have any desire to watch that again. Can someone explain why this film is supposed to be amazing?
Click to expand...

Engaging and superbly acted characters, an incredibly intriguing story, a thriller that unlike 95% of watered down Western output actually does not pull any punches, an amazing and not unearned/cheap/impossible twist?

The plot really isn't bonkers, is it? Hard to stomach most of the time, but not outside the realms of possibility. The twist is pretty complex, sure, but not entirely impossible. And it moves with the motivations of the characters, not just through Hollywood's plot conveyor.
 
If you want something a bit less bonkers but in the same sort of vein, try the first movie in that "trilogy"*, Sympathy for Mr Vengeance. It's a lot more grounded plot-wise, but it has a similar tone, if a little darker. I actually prefer it to Oldboy in some ways. Can't really say the same for Lady Vengeance.

* The films are all unrelated but share the theme of vengeance.
 
I'd all heartily recommend that everyone here checks out The Chaser as well. There's no decent trailer for it on youtube, but for a grisly Korean thriller it ranks highly.
 
I saw Looper, it was pretty good I suppose. There's a lot to be had in drinking a few beers afterward and picking apart all the time-travel flaws and paradoxes, but that's probably a thing you can do with literally any movie involving time travel. It reduces the movie to something flimsy and irritating, but if we ignore all that it's a very, very good action movie. The beginning 3rd in particular is incredibly strong, with elements of very believable near-future dystopia (which owe a lot to Children of Men, I think), a lot of excellent general film-work (cinematography, acting even with JGL's weird face, all the rest). I will admit that I lost interest hugely in the classic flabby middle-section, where everything got very emotional - the pace changed abruptly enough for the important story bits to be lost in a bit of a drudgery of mother-son relationship issues. It sort of picks up towards the end, but I think the change of setting and pace is enough to make it seem still a bit jarring. It resolves semi-neatly, but there's still a sort of emptiness to the whole affair.

I dunno, 7/10???
 
Skyfall - sure it's a good laugh lad y'know what I mean sure

Loved it. I'm not a big Bond nerd but it seemed like a good mix of the old and new. Going back to the roots of Bond was a theme in the film and being a Bond film they weren't massively subtle about it. I'll bring up specific instances in the spoilery part of this review. The mix of action, to drama to humour was very good and Craig, Dench and Chigurh gave solid performances. The film is peppered with a few shitty moments such as a hacking scene as bad as you'd expect from a big budget film. The film's bond girl also seems a bit tacked on, but that's hardly unusual. The film raises interesting questions regarding its ties to the other films, which I'll talk about in spoilers.

It's possibly intentional but the film is really confusing to analyse for the "James Bond is a code name that's passed on" theory where all the films have actually happened in one continuity. While the more down to earth presentation of Craig's other films it very much indulges in some old-style bond silliness, the most blatant example is that Bond owns the Aston Martin from Goldfinger, Thunderball, etc. for absolutely no given reason, down to the ejector seat, machineguns and registration number! The new Q makes a joke about not making silly gadgets like exploding pens. Orphans making good agents is also mentioned, something that I think was a plot point in GoldenEye too, along with the exploding pens.

On the other hand the film completely confirms that Craig's Bond's real surname is in fact Bond. We even get to see his family home and a gravestone bearing the Bond name. We also get to meet the new Moneypenny in a way that suggests that is her actual name and not a passed-on codename for M's secretary.

Either way where the hell did Bond get that car? He didn't get it from MI6 because M didn't know about it and it doesn't really seem like Craig's (or should I call him Six like with Doctor Who?) style to get that thing commissioned. I think it might be time for a crazy theory: James Bond was actually Connery's birth name. Lazenby through Brosnan get the codename James Bond in honour of him. Craig is Connery's son so is actually called Bond as well (and is Scottish as shown in Skyfall, despite Craig's accent). It would at least explain where the hell he got the car. In case you can't tell that car is really bugging me.
 
I am really hyped for Skyfall. How did you get to see it so early?

EDIT: Ah, I used google to answer my own question. Lucky!
 
Not out in the cinema in the States yet? Ha! Now you know how it feels!
 
The Amazing Spider-man: Two thumbs up. Much better than the trilogy Spidey. Much more likable guy than the other guy, forgot his name.
 
Brave

Typical-ass Pixar plot except for the bear thing which was honestly kind of a weird way of tackling the subject matter, but I guess they pulled it off alright. ****ing holy christ the animation is gorgeous though. I couldn't stop looking at her hair bouncing around the whole movie, and those facial expressions, oh my god. A few times my brain was like "that's an actual-ass face."

Looper

Transcends it's silly premise to become something quite engrossing. Just try not to think too hard about the time travel mechanics. Or look too hard at JGL's makeup.
 
Cloud Atlas

The plot is quite varied but woven from about 6 different timelines (1849, 1936, 1973, 2012, 2144, 2321). They go through events that are either revolutionary or play some part that influences the future. Enjoyable film but it might've been doing too much at once.

9.5/10
 
Avatar: The Legend of Korra - Episodes one through six
Only just got around to seeing some of this show due to the college sci fi society doing a marathon last night. It's pretty damn good. The story is interesting and I like the characters, thought Bolin is kind of annoying. The show is a lot funnier than Legend of Aang and it looks bloody gorgeous. The plot is picking up nicely and it's definitely better than book one of Legend of Aang, though I've not made up my mind how it compares to the other two seasons.
 
Monsters 7.5/10

Pretty interesting movie alright. It's sort of a mix of Cloverfield and Lost in Translation, which is a strange mix indeed. The creatures and the creature devastated Mexican setting are really just a backdrop by which the characters can have an astounding adventure to change them and flesh out their background. And it works very well. The characters are pretty solid, although the girl's situation is a bit obvious/predictable, and it's quite well acted.

Oldboy 8/10

Holy shit.
 
DJANGO UNCHAINED

I am, as my mom would put it, "desensitized" to violence, sexual abuse, and death in movies. You name it and I could probably watch it happen in a film and not really bat an eyelash. In Kill Bill: Volume 1 when Uma Thurman starts hacking people's limbs of in black and white I started cracking up. In Inglorius Basterds when Brad Pitt starts carving a swastica into that dude's face I was like "Oh shit!" It is not often that while watching a movie that my skin will actually start to feel like it's trying to crawl off of my body. There are some scenes in Django Unchained that had this effect of me. I'm in amazement, though, because the end of the same scene could break the tension with something so hilarious or thought provoking that I am left on the verge of tears.

Saying that this movie is worth watching is a huge understatement. If only there wasn't so much violence I would say that high schools should require students to watch this movie instead of reading Huckleberry Finn. This movie takes you away to another time and place as any escapist would want to be taken away, yet you are taken somewhere you definitely don't want to be. Don't fear though, the world you are taken to gets shaken up to a point that by the time you are in your seat watching movie credits you are ready to go right back.

I can hear the negatives that the pessimists on this forum will say: Too much 'N' word. Too long. Too sudden. too violent. I say OK, it is all of those things. I still can't wait to watch it again.
 
The Hobbit

There's a quote early on in the movie that emerges as a recurring theme towards the end: "true courage is knowing when not to kill." This movie should have been made with a similar sense of restraint. Instead, we get an over-bloated fantasy epic in the shoes of a silly adventure story which incorporates the frivolity of the book, with the sheer ridiculousness of the LOTR movies (and plenty more to spare) along with their overbearing grandiosity whenever something vaguely poignant happens. Oh my god a character is about to let slip a minor motivation or development CUE THE ****ING ORCHESTRA SWELL Y'ALL. Give me a break, you could make a ****ing drinking game out of this.

... And yet, it was pretty enjoyable when it wasn't so thoroughly full of itself. Jackson doesn't know the meaning of subtlety but the love he has for the source material is palpable, even if I thought it was a pretty poor adaptation, film-wise. Or rather 1/3 of an adaptation. Which was already far too long by itself. Yeah, I have zero interest in following the sequels any more.

Oh yeah, saw it in regular FPS and, while the effects looked really sharp (got a bit of a Blizzard cinematics vibe from parts), I can definitely see why Peter wanted it to be screened in 48. There's so much shit going on it was actually visually taxing to keep up with a lot of it. Also I noticed the editing was much more frenetic than LOTR, seemed like the cuts were much more rapid, sometimes to a disorienting degree.
 
I saw The Hobbit at a midnight launch and left completely disappointed I felt it was dragged out to a point where there was no real point to the first movie (especially if you've read The Hobbit).

I went and saw it in 3D IMAX. Holy f**k batman it was like watching a completely different movie. All the things you've said still remain true but the 3D technology in this movie alone are worth watching and do add a bit of brilliance to the dull parts.
 
Just skimming posts here:
Rorschach120 said:
I can hear the negatives that the pessimists on this forum will say: Too much 'N' word. too violent.
Click to expand...
Welcome to this forum. I do not know how this forum feels about this movie but I can just about guarantee no one would ever just drop these comments as real criticism for a movie.
Rorschach120 said:
I would say that high schools should require students to watch this movie instead of reading Huckleberry Finn.
Click to expand...
I'm really not familiar enough with this movie to find this as funny as I do.
 
Perhaps "The Color Purple" would have been a better example.. There's a lot more going on in Huck Finn, I liked that book.

LMFAO at that stand-up.
 
Django Unchained - 8.5/10

I'm a sucker for Quentin Tarantino movies. This was a great addition to his collection.
 
Agreed. Best, most fun, most badass action movie since the Raid. Far from just being an action movie though, it has great writing and a compelling cast of characters, in that signature Tarantino style. Needless to say, Christoph was incredible. Less needless to say, so was Leo.
 
I didn't read anything about the movie or watch any trailers or anything before I went. I was surprised time and time again by the cast. Just when you think "holy shit, that's a big name actor!" Ten minutes later they throw another, and another. Jonah Hill? Wasn't expecting that. It was a great part too, hilarious!

And yes, Christoph Waltz was fantastic. His character was really reminiscent of the one he played in Inglorious Basterds, I noticed (which isn't a bad thing at all).

And why does Quentin's cameo characters always die in these weird hilarious ways?
 
That's kinda what Tarantino is good at... getting a bunch of really big named actors in one room. Fantastic... Haven't seen django yet. Looking forward to it. I just got the Tarantino XX bluray collection though... I"m a huge fan.
 
Star Trek: TNG Blurays- Awesome. Totally worth it if you have a DTSHD system. Going down in price too.
 
I saw a film called Ichi the Killer and it was a film called Ichi the Killer.

ichi/ichi
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Terminator
Long time...
Replies
10
Views
457
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