Rate the Last Movie You Watched

Apparently my GF has read the book.
She places the movie in the same tier as Twilight

Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014) [IMAX 3D] : 3.5/10
Below average, just terrible movie IMO. The first CA was much more solid.

toniglandyl said:

Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014) [IMAX 3D] : 3.5/10
Below average, just terrible movie IMO. The first CA was much more solid.

Click to expand...

I try to avoid criticising the reviews of others - beauty is in the eye of the beholder after all - but you are just so wrong on this one!

The only significant criticisms that I can make of CA:TWS is that it is perhaps 5-10 minutes too long and there is the occasional implausibility that is convenient for the plot.

For the most part the action is good.

Chris Evans is once again outstanding in the role.

I get very confused - an action star who acts, even in action scenes; just watch him in one scene where he is battling the Winter Soldier beneath a flyover. He has the look of a desperate man on the very limits of his abilities. His acting added a whole layer to the scene, it wasn't just a set piece, the outcome mattered to the character and as a result it mattered to the audience.

Captain America has the potential to come across to foreign audiences as jingoistic and both the films (Evans and the script) have succeeded capturing what is great in the USA without tipping over into patriotic excess. Captain America is a thoughtful patriot, not a Decataur patriot.

I don't know if it was serendipity or not but the film does turn out to be a Franklinesque commentary on the dangers of trading liberty for safety in a surveillance society. Maybe it's not indie cinema but it is quite subversive for a summer blockbuster.

The whole production has an emotional range that I just do not expect to see in a big summer movie.

It so happens that this week I got the chance to see a bona fide terrible movie. Curiously, it involved another American hero - Abraham Lincoln, that well-known vampire hunter. I could have forgiven the many implausibilities if the action had been up to scratch but it was not. Every scene was flat, the CGI was very poor and despite the conceit of the title, the whole approach was far too reverential. I picked the DVD up from the bargain bin. I now known what it was there.

I ask you - compare Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter and tell me which is the terrible movie?

IronMonkey said:

I try to avoid criticising the reviews of others - beauty is in the eye of the beholder after all - but you are just so wrong on this one!

Click to expand...

hey, it's all about opinions ! bring it on !

For the most part the action is good.

Click to expand...

maybe for "yay punches go boom and guns go bang" public, but I was expecting something a bit more elaborate. Most of the action scenes has the parkinson half-second camera-angle syndrome, which is really annoying. Hell, even when there's only talking going on, the camera is unstable. how expensive is a tripod ? but I digress.
some action scenes are good, but then again I reminind myself of a frightening scene at the beginning of the scene : a guy takes Captain America 1 on 1. He's fucking taking a drugged up supersoldier straight on with his fists ! I'm like "whoa, so the plot will be about enemy supersoldiers". Nope ! the guy is finally beaten by the captain, and it's not spoken of ever again.

Chris Evans is once again outstanding in the role.

Click to expand...

I don't know if he's outstanding, but he fits well what I imagine captain america to be like.

I get very confused - an action star who acts, even in action scenes; just watch him in one scene where he is battling the Winter Soldier beneath a flyover. He has the look of a desperate man on the very limits of his abilities. His acting added a whole layer to the scene, it wasn't just a set piece, the outcome mattered to the character and as a result it mattered to the audience.
[...]
The whole production has an emotional range that I just do not expect to see in a big summer movie.

Click to expand...

I disagree. The movie is as moving emotionally as airplane ! 2.

It so happens that this week I got the chance to see a bona fide terrible movie. Curiously, it involved another American hero - Abraham Lincoln, that well-known vampire hunter. I could have forgiven the many implausibilities if the action had been up to scratch but it was not. Every scene was flat, the CGI was very poor and despite the conceit of the title, the whole approach was far too reverential. I picked the DVD up from the bargain bin. I now known what it was there.

I ask you - compare Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter and tell me which is the terrible movie?

Click to expand...

I haven't seen Abraham lincoln : vampire hunter, but It's not a movie you watch with the same mindset as Captain America. You know that you go in for very cheesy dialogs, over the top action, and I would rate it better than Captain America TWS if I find it more enjoyable. If it ever takes itself too seriously, wants me to feel the emotional strain on the characters, It would loose some points. Different movies, different expectations.

Saw this movie a while ago.

Man of steel: crap/10

There's nothing adventurous/superheroic about this movie, they've tried turning superman into a "real" human being, but that didn't work. At all. Superman does not change back into clark kent, he is and always will be Superman. One with powers so (often as in the superman 4 fiaso f.e.) ridiculous or immense he's detached from well.. the average human being with the usual burdens/plights.
And doing so they've also turned him into a superasshole. Superman always seemed to save the day, didn't he. All previous movies, as far as I know, he saves people and puts in great effort. Say all you want about the previous movie "Superman returns", but he saves Metropolis just fine. Think of all the lives he saved in that movie. I'm putting a strong emphasis on the word save here.

None of that here. Smallville is leveled and so is Metropolis. Thousands, if not millions die and Superman doesn't really seem to be doing anything noticeable about it. Aside from fighting the bad guy with the bad haircut. (Genious move banning Zod into that .. what was it.. other dimension... in his battleship and his crew btw)
And all those people die. And Superman saves none. ...
Except for the military guy.... and Lois lane... and those eh... three people in the .. townhall was it? Like we should suddenly have cared? Or about him suddenly seeming to care? But yeah, this time it was really necessary I guess.

There's so much going on, so much crap on the screen. It's so dark, ominous, troubled.....depressing......tiring.......so out of touch with what a Superman movie should be about. And his character.
Again, he's become a superasshole. Why should people give a flying fuck about this guy.

And Lois lane. Probably the worst I've seen so far. She's supposed to be intense, inquisitive, hilarious, strong character, sneaky; bit weird. Terri hatcher made for a good Lois. This one, can't remember her name, just didn't. She kept annoying me.

Flat, boring character just as clark, superman, zod, father kent. Btw, nice going dad telling your son he should've considered not saving those people in the bus. Hell of a way of tearing down any potention for a good moral/ethical code for "your" boy.

What a dark, boring movie.

And naturally they had to include a kissing scene between Lois and Supes. That was probably among the worst in the movie. You didn't really see anything grow between them, no real interest, emotions, anything blossoming.. building up.. just a forced "to please a certain part of the audience" kiss.

Terrible, terrible movie.

I completely agree with this review btw.

[m]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4u-HLm8maE[/m]

The Amazing Spoderman 2 - 5.5/10

Less good than the predecessor. Foxx is alright when he is in villain form, terrible when he is not. Actor who played Harry Osborn was good.


It felt like there wasn't much of a plot and it had way too much screentime for Peter Parker + Gwen Stacy's banter. Was also a good 30-45 minutes too long.

Soundtrack was decent, vfx was great and the fight scenes with Electro where pretty good.

The Amazing Spiderman 2 3/10.

Probably the worst movie I've seen all year. I wanted it to end. I think they ran out of ideas or money or something, because the ending was just suck. I really liked the kid that played Harry Osborn, he did a great job up until the end. Way too much screen time between Peter and Gwen. This movie was light hearted and should have been darker or more 'realistic' I guess. I mean, the guy falls into a tank with electric eels and now he does all this crazy fantastic shit... my cat could come up with something better.

The music was ok. It was strange at times, like they couldn't decide what they wanted so they kept it all. Could have been much better, but they really dropped the ball on this one.

The Amazing Spiderman 2

I remember being generally dismissive of the reboot. I liked the Lizard, but overall I felt the new origin story was redundant and not up to the caliber of the actors (all improvements from the casting abortion that was the Sam Raimi Spiderman trilogy). Peter and Gwen were cute together, Sally Field was great as Aunt May. All the actors were on point but the movie was mostly a bland affair.

The sequel takes these characters and gives them an exciting movie. Finally we have a Spiderman movie that feels right. I had a blast watching this one. It does everything a Spiderman story needs to do and doesn't overstep. The new score was fantastic, the action scenes with Electro being the highlight tracks (as well as the film's best scenes). Some people have told me that the film meanders and that there are too many characters, but I did not feel this way. I felt it was right to the point, not a scene was wasted. The new Harry Osbourne craps all over James Franco, and this new take on Green Goblin does what Dark Knight did for Harvey Two-Face; a late but effective appearance that results in a climax with dire ramifications. I even liked Paul Giamatti's take on Rhino.

It's just a better movie than all the other Spiderman flicks, honestly. The one before this wasn't distinct enough. Where the Raimi movies were cheesy while trying to pretend heroism, this one manages to drive the point unscathed. Gwen Stacy is the girlfriend Mary Jane wasn't in the original trilogy (Kirsten Dunce took Marvel's girl next door and turned her into a depressing, needy bore) and Peter Parker isn't the clueless doormat Tobey Maguire played him as. He's Peter Parker as he is supposed to be; a kid with a good heart who tries to do the right thing no matter what, because it's in his blood (in more ways than the obvious).

Damn fun movie. Now I have to watch Captain America so I can check out this sequel everyone is saying kicks face.

Nothing like spending an entire day in the air to get you to watch some movies.

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug - 7/10
Considerably improved over the first outing, this film suffers a lot less from pacing issues and actually has a coherent plot instead of a nonsensical string of action scenes. Art direction this time doesn't also consist of blue with orange backlighting. It's a reasonably fun outing if you're not looking for anything serious.

Gravity - 8/10
Some great direction, photography and acting make this a surprisingly good film, but it's let down by playing too loose with the laws of physics, rendering the whole thing annoyingly implausible to the point where you just can't find your suspension of disbelief. Nevertheless, this is definitely a film worth watching.

Planet of the Apes (2001) - Dumb/10
Predictable, inane garbage. Don't waste your time - this film is a genuine insult to your intelligence.

The Book Thief - 9/10
What starts off a little shaky, comes to fruition quite quickly and becomes a fairly entrancing film. Whilst the writing is imperfect (perhaps owing to it's origin as a novel#), the characters are all very believable and extremely well acted and leading girl Sophie Nelisse probably has a bright future ahead of her as an actress. This isn't one to watch if you're the emotional type, as it will probably reduce you to a gibbering wreck.

Deep Water - 8.5/10

Beautiful cinematography, lots of water shots, interesting story, and emotionally fulfulling.

Gravity was good the first time, I made the mistake of seeing it twice though - way, way worse the second time, but I still loved the soundtrack and climax at the end.

ambershee said:

Planet of the Apes (2001) - Dumb/10
Predictable, inane garbage. Don't waste your time - this film is a genuine insult to your intelligence.

Click to expand...

Didn't see that one, but 2011's Rise of the Planet of the Apes is one of my favorite movies. Can't wait to see Dawn of the PotA when it comes out in July (must have gotten pushed back, because I thought it was coming out in May.) Still pumped for it

It's a good thing you don't remember much of the 1998 version. Quite frankly, there isn't much to remember. Aside from that the monster looked impressive. Otherwise...down the drain.

And about the spiderman movies. So, in 12 years times that'e about five movies. And still no Felicia hardy. What's taking so long?
(haven't watched the two new movies yet, I will perhaps)

The 1998 Godzilla was a horrid abomination.

NeoNite said:

None of that here. Smallville is leveled and so is Metropolis. Thousands, if not millions die and Superman doesn't really seem to be doing anything noticeable about it. Aside from fighting the bad guy with the bad haircut. (Genious move banning Zod into that .. what was it.. other dimension... in his battleship and his crew btw)
And all those people die. And Superman saves none. ...
Except for the military guy.... and Lois lane... and those eh... three people in the .. townhall was it? Like we should suddenly have cared? Or about him suddenly seeming to care? But yeah, this time it was really necessary I guess.

Click to expand...

I don't care to debate a person's opinion about a film, so like it or like it, I don't care, but I'm sick of this completely ridiculous argument.

The planet is literally being ripped apart, and if the process isn't stopped, all of humanity will be lost. Superman is actively trying to stop this. It's true, there are doubtlessly people who died in the fighting and the attack, but that's not because superman doesn't care or try, but rather because, well, there is a massive thing destroying the world.

Likewise, there were bound to be casualties of the super-fight between supe and zod, and that sucks and all, but, again, this is actively saving millions and billions of lives by fighting him.

Yes, people died in this film. No, not a single one of them is because superman is a jerk or isn't trying.

People can rant and rave about what a superman film should or shouldn't be (they've all been absolute trash), but I'm sick of the idea that because some people surely must have died in an event that could have potentially destroyed the world, this means Superman killed people or let them die. It's inane.

Oh, yeah, movie I just saw...

Jack Reacher: Surprisingly good flick. Occasionally a scene would have some really bad dialog, but it was mostly a tense film with fun little twists and some solid action. A little ridiculous at the end, but cool. I was not expecting much out of it, so I came away pleasantly surprised.