Thread: Films (RetopicViewed, rants & anything else)
<<     >>
Are films always less excellent than books? This film is at least as good as the book!
ELIJAH WOOD ELIJAH WOOD ELIJAH WOOD ELIJAH WOOD ELIJAH WOOD ELIJAH WOOD ELIJAH WOOD ELIJAH WOOD ELIJAH WOOD ELIJAH WOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BALROGS AND ORCS R SCARY BALROGS AND ORCS R SCARY BALROGS AND ORCS ARE SCARY BALROGS AND ORCS R SCARY BALROGS AND ORCS R SCARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
it seems 2 me that every1 else is 4gettin LotR. can ne1 guess wat my fave movie is(and fave actor! )
[Edited on 29/10/2002 by CrystalBolger]
my 2nd fave movie, ne1 care 2 guess?
STAR WARS STAR WARS STAR WARS STAR WARS STAR WARS STAR WARS STAR WARS STAR WARS STAR WARS STAR WARS STAR WARS STAR WARS STAR WARS!!!!!
HAYDEN CHRISTENSON HAYDEN CHRISTONSON HAYDEN CHRISTENSON HAYDEN CHRISTENSON HAYDEN CHRISTENSON HAYDEN CHRISTENSON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BEWARE THE DARK SIDE BEWARE THE DARK SIDE BEWARE THE DARK SIDE BEWARE THE DARK SIDE BEWARE THE DARK SIDE BEWARE THE DARK SIDE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets.
So, I got to see this movie at the previews on Friday 8th November, and this time I took the precaution of taking my girlfriends kids so that I didn’t look like some sort of weirdo. However, was it worth the money? Well, that really depends on your viewpoint.
Once again, it looks fantastic. However, not too long into the movie, it occurred to me that this is going to be a terribly limited series visually speaking. What I mean by this, is that the whole series is going to be set pretty much in the same places, with a lot of the same things going on again. Whereas last year, when the Quidditch scene came on, I was suitably gobsmacked and amazed by the effects, and the smoothness of the whole scene, this year, it was a different story. More a case of ’oh god, not more Quidditch! Been here, seen this, show me something else’.
With a series like the Star Wars saga, for example, there is the freedom to astound the viewer with new and exciting settings each time. And even the Lord of the Rings trilogy has a huge stockpile of exotic locations for each movie. However, Harry Potter has to go to school, so the majority of the movie is set in the same place, good old Hogwarts. Which was really exciting to see in the Philosophers Stone, but second time around I’d like to say it was like an old pair of comfy shoes and a joy to slip into again. But it wasn’t really; it was a lot like actually going back to school used to be, tedious.
Obviously, plot wise it’s been sliced and diced for the silver screen, and if you, like me, were hoping to see Nearly Headless Nick’s deathday party, or the de-gnoming of the Weasley’s garden, then I’m afraid you’ll be disappointed. Similarly, Christmas has been cancelled (I always wanted to say that) so as to keep it down to a mere 2 hours and 40 minutes of Wizardry.
On the plus side though, there are a lot more laughs than last time round, and for my money, Rupert Grint (who plays Ron Weasley) steals the movie. I think we need to keep an eye on this lad, I foresee great things for him, possibly the best comedy timing I’ve seen in a long time, and in one so young. We do get to see The Burrow briefly (all too briefly I’m afraid) and the flying Ford Anglia sequences are absolutely magnificent. The spiders and the basilisk all look really good, the Mandrakes are actually worth the price of admission in themselves (shame about the lack of pink earmuffs though) and there’s enough corny sentimentality at the end to give your Mum something to weep about.
New characters to watch out for are Mark Williams as Arthur Weasley, who is very funny, as always. And surprisingly, Kenneth Branagh does a great job as Gilderoy Lockhart (a choice that originally perplexed me somewhat). The chap they’ve got in as Lucius Malfoy (can’t remember his name I’m afraid) should go out as a Johnny Winter tribute act though. But I’m pretty sure that’s how he’s supposed to look anyway.
And so we come to the most hotly debated character/effect of the movie, Dobby. What can I say? Well, when I was reading the book, I never considered him to be quite so much of a Gollum-a-like, but on the screen his inspiration becomes terribly apparent. The CGI work on him is just fine though; he looks great, and provides yet more laughs, which as I said before are already abundant. Oh, and by the way, is it just me, or does an unnecessary amount of action in these stories happen in toilets? Can you say fetish Ms Rowling?
Of course, it has to be noted that the Chamber of Secrets is the most pointless book of the series to date. As it does nothing to advance the plot and is merely a short aside before the real story gets going in the Prisoner of Azkaban (which is nicely hinted at, by the way). So if you have actually read the book, and seen the first movie, there is absolutely no need for you to go and see this movie at all. There are only one or two new surprises in there, and you might not notice them (or see the point of them) if you don’t know the whole book backwards and inside out.
Of course, I am reviewing this from an adult movie-buff’s point of view, and so my opinion really counts for nothing, as you might love to slip back into the warm fuzzy world of Hogwarts after all. And if you want a bit of a laugh (and some pretty things to look at) and don’t mind it once again sticking rigidly to the plot, then go see it, it’s just as good as the first one. Almost a carbon copy in fact.
Most importantly though, the kids loved it, but what do kids know about Movies?
[Edited on 11/11/2002 by PlasticSquirrel]
Of course, it has to be noted that the Chamber of Secrets is the most pointless book of the series to date. As it does nothing to advance the plot and is merely a short aside before the real story gets going in the Prisoner of Azkaban (which is nicely hinted at, by the way).
This is a good point and one I had considered while waiting for the new movie to make its debut. I will, of course, go to cinema to get my annual dose of HP, but I am looking forward to the next one.
Oh, and by the way, is it just me, or does an unnecessary amount of action in these stories happen in toilets? Can you say fetish Ms Rowling?
Oh, good review by the way Mr. Squirrel.
Allyssa: I think Plastic Squirrel wrote elsewhere that he used to write reviews for a magazine or newspaper once upon a time in his multi-faceted career.
And the toilet thing was a joke really, but nevertheless, a good point I think.
Good werewolf movies are in desparately short supply.
Not for much longer, thanks to this and a couple of others, 2003 will be the year of the wolf, much like 2002 was the year of the spider.
Plus, the term "disturbing" was used by some people that seemed to think Dawn of the Dead was a downright lighthearted romp... I think I'll pass for now
But Dawn of the Dead was a downright lighthearted romp, had me in stitches. Mind you, I do find Cannibal Holocaust to be the most disturbing Movie I've ever seen. (I also found "I spit on your Grave", and"Last House on the left" to be laughably amusing btw.)
It was not a Star Trek Movie, nor was it an action movie and it failed on both fronts, shame really....
Also saw Sleepless in Seattle for the first time...such a wondeful movie! There's one bit where Meg Ryan and Rosie O'Donnell are watching a movie and saying the words along with it and crying, and my friend turns to me and goes "That's totally us in like 20 years"...
I see your point, Plastic, that it wasn't really Star Trek, but I thought the action scenes were really good. About as much spaceship fighting as all the episodes combined. Special effcts are finally catching up now and able to do films like this justice at last.
Grondy, the movie you saw was Battlefield Earth and your right, it WAS AWFUL (imagine, I payed $8 to see it the day it came out in theaters ). I read the book (by L. Ron Hubbard... don't get me started on Dianetics and Scientology ) and it was a pretty good sci fi epic. The movie is a prime example of a really, really bad film adaption.
That the caveman-like human-animals could learn to use the alien's technology in a week and blow up their home planet as well find and fly our old combat jets was laughable.
This was very badly explained in the movie. In the book, it's clear how this comes about- Terl (John Travolta in the film) captures Johnny Goodboy Tyler (Barry Pepper) and performs experiments on him with a machine that can download information (such as how to use mining equipment, speak their language, etc.) directly into the brain. His motivation is to use humans as slaves to mine ores in areas that the Psychlos can't go (the gas that they breath reacts rather badly to radiation and the mountains are full of uranium... this is very important but not explained AT ALL in the movie).
Eventually Johnny learns enough to operate the learning machine itself and starts sneaking and using it on his own, becoming super-intelligent in the process while still playing the "dumb animal" for the Psychlos.
Another important point that was missed in the film was that this whole episode (only the first half of the book, BTW) takes place over a period of DECADES! Johnny is an old man by the time the attack happens!
Anyway, the book was good (though, not great ) but the movie is an absolute embarrassment. If Hubbard were still alive he would say, as would all of his hundreds of thousands of brainwashed minions, Mr. Travolta included, that both the book and the film are the greatest works of science fiction in their respective mediums in all the universe.
Can you say, delusional?
So if anyone ever tries to tell you that PJ's LotR is the worst film adaption ever, tell them to go read the book and then watch the movie Battlefield Earth.
I need Borg or all is no good.
You cannot beat Voyager if you are into the Borg. The later episodes have a lot of Borg encounters. Personally, I have the hots for the Borg queen (seriously). There's something very erotic about about a woman covered in slime who can detach her body at the pelvis.
Yeah, the Borg probably top all as Star Trek villains go. Wouldn't know about Voyager as I only watched the first half of the first season and then gave up on it. Now I hear it got pretty good after that. Oh well.
Nemesis isn't the worst trek movie ever, that accolade still does, and always will belong to the Final Frontier (the afore mentioned "stinky" no. 5).
The best part of The Final Frontier was when Spock said "I am preparing to toast a "marshmellon." It all went downhill from there.
Here's my breakdown of Star Trek films:
I. The Motion Picture - not really Star Trek, is it? That said, it's not as bad as some would have you think. The concept behind it was rather inventive and worked pretty well. The special effects were quite special for the time.
II. The Wrath of Kahn - undoubtedly one of the best of the whole series so far... some say the best. Massive starship battles, hair raising suspense and... Kirstie Alley with pointy ears! The death and subsequent funeral of Spock was one of the best scenes in the whole franchise IMHO but come on! Did anyone think he was DEAD dead? It's Star Trek for crying out loud!
III. The Search for Spock - Overall, quite dull. This one just basically serves as a bridge between the second and fourth films and that's it. Christopher Lloyd did make one heck of Klingon though, didn't he?
IV. The Voyage Home - Among my favorites. Yeah, I know, it's corny with it's "Save the Whales" postBody but it's also one of the fuynniest films in the franchise... IMHO again. Spocks use of profanity is a riot, as is his handling of the obnoxious punk rocker on the bus
V. The Final Frontier Huh? Something about God living at the center of the galaxy and Spock's long lost half-brother and a subtle jab at the Church of Scientology and the pseudo-science of Dianetics. The camping scenes that start and end the movie aren't too bad though.
VI. The Undiscovered Country A bit over-rated IMHO. Some nifty special effects and action sequences. Sort of a murder mystery with Klingons (who happen to quote Shakespeare A LOT, BTW).
VII. Generations - As under-rated as the sixth is over-rated. It's just cool to see TOS and TNG characters in the same movie. The whole nexus thing was well done. Most notable for the death of Captain Kirk. And yes, he's DEAD dead... I think.
VIII. First Contact - Rivals The Wrath of Kahn for title of "Best Trek Film" and is my personal #1 favorite of the franchise. The Borg queen is kinda sexy, but in a creepy way. Zephram Cochran looks absolutely nothing like the guy that played him in an ep of TOS, but that's a good thing. Deanna doing shots of tequila was hilarious.
IX. Insurrection - Somewhat under-rated. Plays out like an episode of the TV series... but a good episode. Overall, It's rather good, especially if you compare it to stinkers like III and V!
X. Nemesis - Haven't seen it yet. I'll be sure to post a review when I do.
Okay, my version of Prog's breakdown (it's a lot shorter)
I. The Motion Picture - I defy you to stay awake, I've never done it, but it's very pretty.
II. The Wrath of Kahn - WOOHOO! Fantastic! Nuff said...
III. The Search for Spock - I like this one, if only for the scenes where Kirk nicks the Enterprise from under the federations nose.
IV. The Voyage Home - Not as great as it's made out to be, bloody whales! But has it's funny moments, sadly lacking in the franchises biggest star, the Enterprise herself.
V. The Final Frontier Why?
VI. The Undiscovered Country I like this one a lot, Shakespeare was a Klingon!
VII. Generations - Rocks like a big rocking thing, Kirk and Picard together, what more could you ask for?
VIII. First Contact - Only seen it once, but I really liked it. Agree with Prog here really.
IX. Insurrection - Really liked this one, Worf with a zit, Riker and Troi getting jiggy, laugh a minute, What a great episode.
X. Nemesis -Another one that could just as well have been an episode of TNG, and not a great one either.
So what if all the bad guys couldn't shoot Mamma Cass if she was three feet in front of them? So what if James Bond can withstand 100,000 volts of electricity but everyone else drops like a gnat from a bug zapper? Who cares why that Korean guy never plucked those diamonds out of his face? So what if absolutely nothing about it is realistic and there's no real plot to speak of?! It's a Bond movie! It's a series of really, really cool action sequences strung together with a title and some scenes thrown in here and there!
But I have to admit, I just couldn't buy Madonna as a fencing instructor
I also figured out what I was doing wrong while watching Bond films in the past- over-analyzing!
Spinal Tap, Pure brilliance. the bit with his speaker's, confused inches with feet, His girlfriend (shuder)!
And to anyone who's ever worked in the music industry, disquieteningly true to life...
"Stonehinge where the demons dwell, and they do it well..."
Citizen Kane (revolutionized film)
Saving Private Ryan (best ww2 film ever)
Seven Samurai (the GREATEST adventure film ever)
Paths Of Glory (awesome)
Gallipoli (ending : unforgettable)
All Quit on the Western Front (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
Gladiator (a great modern film)
The Deer Hunter (!!!)
Chinatown (good film noir)
Memento (concentrate or dont watch)
Easyrider (best for 40+ americans)
High Noon (great western)
Invasion of the body snatchers(science fiction paranoia)
Platoon (probably best vietnam film)
Ben-hur (very good)
E.T. (need i say more)
Schindlers list (!!!)
Jean De Florette (great french film)
Le Grande Illusion (fine)
Night of the Living Dead (also DoTD)
Picnic at Hanging Rock (great aussie film)
Sullivans Travels (!!!!)
The Third Man (!!)
Rosemarys Baby (very fine)
White Heat ("look ma top of the world")
Taxi Driver (deniro at his finest)
Its a Wonderful Life (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
The Night of the Hunter(eldrich film)
The Searchers (best western)
Days of Heaven (odd film)
The Exorcist (very creepy)
Mad Max (also road warrior)
Dances With Wolves (great)
ANY OF THIS FILMS ARE A MUST IF YOU HAVE NOT ALREADY SEEN THEM!!!!!!!
p.s. if youve already seen 2/3 of these films you rock
[Edited on 23/6/2003 by Excelsior]
I take it Excelsior is not a reference to Stan Lee's old Bullpen Bulletin signature is it?
Your right excelsior is not a reference to stan lee's bullpen (its from the latin word meaning "high" or "above")
Score:10/10(ofcourse im going to give it a 10,its the best Western).
Best romance: GhostScore:7/10,im not big on romance films ,but this one was rather good.Unrealistic, but many films are.
I couldnt say(yet) what the bestdrama,action,anima,fantasy film is,being that there are so many of the above that are great that either it would take to long to type,or im too undecided.
Crouching Tiger,Hidden Tiger
Saving Private Ryan
Black Hawk Down
The Deer Hunter
Dances With Wolves
Its a Wonderful Life
Meet the Parents
I could go on-and-on but lifes too short.
You can see me and my brother(Excelsior) have similer tastes when it comes to movies.
P.S. And anything with Russel Crowe is good
[Edited on 27/6/2003 by LadyFeawen]
[Edited on 28/6/2003 by LadyFeawen]
Anyone seen The Hulk yet? I’m curious? I have mixed feelings about the various clips I’ve seen, but I’m willing to give the benefit of the doubt because I do like Ang Lee.
No i haven't seen it but the people I've talked to said it was really good... but not for kiddies. It sounds as if Ang Lee has taken the recently created genre, "Comic Book Movies That Take Themselves Way Too Seriously", to the next level. This is a good thing... for adults that want to see more than "Hulk smash!" But I'm told the kiddies are bored senseless for the first 45 minutes or so. And 45 minutes in crowded movie theater with a bored senseless kid is a bad, bad thing...
I have to wonder why they got Ang to do Hulk. I can see the teasers now:
From the director of such rip-roaring action classics as "Sense and Sensibility" and "Eat Drink Man Woman" comes "Hulk"!
I know, I know... he also did "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" and "Ride with the Devil", but let's face it, while they were both good movies, neither was an adrenaline-fest which is what you expect in a movie that's based on... well, adrenaline!
Word has it that he did quite good with the action scenes though. My biggest question is the Hulk himself. We've all seen him and we all know he looks like he's molded out of clay by an 8 year old. From what I've seen, Hulk at his best looks like PJ's Gollum at his worst. It's sorta funny that the special effects pioneers at ILM were bested by the relatively unknown Kiwis at WETA. Maybe George Lucas should take a trip to New Zealand before the next Star Wars...
P.S. And anything with Russel Crowe is good
I'm guessing you've never seen Virtuosity?
I have one thing to say, I saw Donnie Darko yesterday, finally, blimey... those who have seen it know what I mean, those who haven't, why not?
And when the Matrix Revolutions comes out on Nov. 5th, I already have plans to see it three times!
I truly love these movies and if haven’t seen them yet, do so!!
But I've watched A Knight's Tale,hehe and I didn't like it much.
I'm guessing you've never seen Virtuosity?
Well,No I havn't but im supposing it is terrible,but even great actors have a bad movie here and there.I am more judging his acting on his part in the Gladiator,which is an awesome movie.
I have not watched X-Men 2 or Matrix-Reloaded,yet( ).
What??????????? Honestly the best movies I've ever seeen LadyF, you should really give it a try. Hey X2 is coming out in DVD in couple days ...cool
Anyone seen Flash Gordon already? it's freakin hilarious. never laughed so good since i saw Monty Python's meaning of life.
If it is, I've seen it a bunch of times, it is fun and almost as corny as the original B/W serials staring Buster Crabbe, of which I have a few of them on VHS.