 The International
#3144 posted by RickyT33 on 2010/01/15 11:38:41
I really like Clive Owens movies on the whole, but this just bored me. I tried to watch it twice, but its just not very engaging and actually sent me to sleep once. Booooo!
 Fair Enough
#3145 posted by nitin on 2010/01/15 11:48:24
I prefer this to the usual action stuff I guess.
 Chavatar.
#3146 posted by Shambler on 2010/01/20 23:55:22
Just saw this. I thought it was pretty awesome in it's genre. It promises a cheesy soppy sci-fi spectacle and woe betide you if you expect anything else because it delivers pretty much the pinnacle of that in cinema so far. Basically lots of fancy shit, laid over an entirely generic story - you can't polish a turd but if you gild it enough you can make it look pretty damn cool.
Score: higher than nitin's / 10
 P.S.
#3147 posted by Shambler on 2010/01/20 23:56:33
I saw it in 3D at Imax which obviously means I got the full benefit of that fancy shit.
And yes I would bang the princess woman, and yes I want a hammer head rhinocerous.
 Avatar
#3148 posted by Vigil on 2010/01/21 00:35:21
As much as I loathe to say this, I pretty much agree with Shambler. The film oozes polish and love, and that's why I thoroughly enjoyed it.
The 3D effects weren't really utilized that well, and with the glasses the movie looked way too dark.
 Yeah
#3149 posted by nitin on 2010/01/21 00:44:58
but why does it have to be cheesy? Star Trek (review coming) proved you dont have to be totally dumb to make a sci fi spectacle.
Anyway, what do I know, it will be the biggest movie of all time in a few days.
 But Didn't
#3150 posted by ijed on 2010/01/21 00:48:58
They just steal Cartman's Smurfs return to fern gulley idea?
Spose will have to see it now.
 Nitin.
#3151 posted by Shambler on 2010/01/21 10:18:55
Lowest common denominator, appeal to the herds. But yes then again Star Trek was a little bit better.
It's a disease of cinema / blockbusters in general...
 Speaking Of SF...
#3152 posted by bal on 2010/01/21 10:36:54
Anyone seen Moon? I really enjoyed it, need more SF like this in cinema, and less crazy aliens with laser guns (or bow and arrows).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twuScTcDP_Q
 Nope, But Might Do.
#3153 posted by Shambler on 2010/01/21 10:48:49
 Bal
#3154 posted by nitin on 2010/01/21 11:16:46
hopefully arriving tomorrow so that I can watch on the weekend. It looks a little bit 2001 and a little bit Solaris.
 Bal
#3155 posted by Vigil on 2010/01/21 11:26:33
I caught it completely by accident while in New York, which was very nice, because it never got a proper theater release here.
Very good, very highly recommended.
 Nitin
#3156 posted by bal on 2010/01/21 12:06:30
Yeah, it's a bit of both, but not quite like either in the end, which is good (both of those are in my favorite movie list, I'm a sucker for SF), can't say more or I'd be spoiling.
Vig yeah I waited a long time for it to come out here (usually most movies get at lease a small release in Paris), but it never came out. Would have really liked seeing it at the cinema. =\
 Shambler
#3157 posted by JPL on 2010/01/21 18:58:45
Avatar = Pocahontas bis.... 8|
Damned.. I was about to go seeing it at the cinema.. you just ruined my evening :(
 Hmm
#3158 posted by nonentity on 2010/01/21 19:06:18
Wtf are you chatting about? Star Trek was horrible. And got worse the longer you sat through it... At least Avatar has amazing CGI
#3159 posted by JneeraZ on 2010/01/21 19:11:43
"Damned.. I was about to go seeing it at the cinema.. you just ruined my evening :("
There are 7 stories in the world. You've seen them all by now. Don't worry about it.
#3160 posted by Zwiffle on 2010/01/21 19:19:42
I thoroughly enjoyed Star Trek, I thought it was fast paced and it brought me into the world.
I haven't seen Avatar, and I don't plan to. I am not one who generally gets excited about pure CGI movies (Transformers, ahem) and if the story doesn't look all that good I will probably not bother watching it. 3D effects or not.
 Transformers = 11/10
#3161 posted by RickyT33 on 2010/01/21 19:59:55
Star Trek = 6/10 maybe 7
 !!!
#3162 posted by RickyT33 on 2010/01/21 20:04:21
#3163 posted by Zwiffle on 2010/01/21 21:01:17
The Transformers movies were atrocious. Just horrible. I can't believe anyone but the most hardcore fanboy would like them.
 Transformers
#3164 posted by Vigil on 2010/01/21 22:08:44
The reason Michael Bay is such a shitty director isn't because Transformers are movies aimed at kids. It's because he is a shitty director. There's no substance to his movies, and even what he claims to do well, action, is pretty non-engaging and formulaic. Big budget movies where nothing really happens, and even the explosions are a chore to get through.
 Last Comment From Me On Avatar
#3165 posted by nitin on 2010/01/22 01:03:13
I dont think its the story that's lacking, theres been many many successfull riffs on the pocahontas story, but the execution.
Michael Bay action scenes are ok sometimes, the problem is he knows only one way to shoot them, most the time so close to the action that you cant really tell or care whats going on, especially with the subwoofer going beserk to drown your ears at the same time.
 Ricky
 Mr Bay
#3167 posted by DaZ on 2010/01/22 09:16:46
I actually find his older films are better... I really enjoyed The Rock, it was a very solid action film!
As for his newer stuff, I also really enjoyed The Island, and I think it got unfairly written off as a "Bay movie" without people giving it a fair chance. Its by no means perfect, and the constant product placement will drive a few people nuts, but the story and characters are a lot deeper than any of his other films that I can think of.
Moon, looks good Bal! Thanks for linking.
 Island
#3168 posted by nitin on 2010/01/22 09:36:01
would have been ok if no other sci fi films had ever been made :) too much rippage going on there to get away with.
|