Rate the Last Movie You Watched

[Capt.Toilet]

Scrolling back 4 pages of reviews I have noticed one thing

Lruce Bee you are one picky movie goer. Granted not as bad as Kantham expecting a Grade A story from a movie like Shoot em up, but damn bro you getting there.

[Lruce Bee]

Well my personal standards for films are high, so yeah, I'm really picky when scoring films.
I save the best scores for movies that deserve it, that way you get a realistic score across all films I watch - I don't think I've ever scored a film 10/10 - I've done a couple of 9/10 and quite a few 8/10 as well - these are usually films that range from great to fantastic.
Only awesome should get a 10 and that means it sits up there with the greats.
I see scores for 10/10 for films like Batman and The Avengers - just ridiculous scores for average films that aren't that amazing or ground breaking in story, acting or just scope of awesomeness - those films are rare but they do exist.
I do score low but that only means the films I do score high I think you might want to check out.
It's all subjective though.

[shadow_dragon]

Originally Posted by Lruce Bee

The Hunger Games - 4/10

Another film that should have gone straight to DVD - low quality production and poor story make this really cheap.

Absolute rubbish

Donald Sutherland was awesome! I take three stars away from your credibility!

[Lruce Bee]

Originally Posted by shadow_dragon

Donald Sutherland was awesome!

Dude - Al Pacino in Scent of a Women was awesome - Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman in The Shawshank Redemption were awesome.
Donald Sutherland in The Hunger Games was ****e.

[Manticore]

Originally Posted by Lruce Bee

Well my personal standards for films are high, so yeah, I'm really picky when scoring films.
I save the best scores for movies that deserve it, that way you get a realistic score across all films I watch - I don't think I've ever scored a film 10/10 - I've done a couple of 9/10 and quite a few 8/10 as well - these are usually films that range from great to fantastic.
Only awesome should get a 10 and that means it sits up there with the greats.
I see scores for 10/10 for films like Batman and The Avengers - just ridiculous scores for average films that aren't that amazing or ground breaking in story, acting or just scope of awesomeness - those films are rare but they do exist.
I do score low but that only means the films I do score high I think you might want to check out.
It's all subjective though.

Fair enough!

[IronMonkey]

Brave 6/10

Never less than enjoyable, this suffered from a rather thin story.

I should note that my kids rated this well above 10 and as they are the target audience perhaps that is the score that should count.

There are a couple of scenes that are perhaps too scary for very young children (judging by the annoying levels of crying immediately after them) but 5 and up should be fine.

Interestingly, there were a few of uses of vernacular that lead me to suspect that the cast were allow some degree of ad libbing.

It's Pixar, the animation was never less than superb. I felt the accompanying short was quite weak, whimsical but weak.

I have not counted in the rating the unfortunate manner in which the film reinforces the bogus Braveheart stereotypes. Sadly, it is not an urban myth to find visitors whose knowledge of Scotland is derived from Braveheart who are surprised to discover that we know about electricity and even use it.

[Al]

TDKR - 10/10

[shadow_dragon]

Originally Posted by Lruce Bee

Dude - Al Pacino in Scent of a Women was awesome - Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman in The Shawshank Redemption were awesome.
Donald Sutherland in The Hunger Games was ****e.

He played the part exactly as demanded of him. The role was simple but he made an impression. I came away from the movie thinking.
"Well they represented the books well enough and I'm glad Donald Sutherland was in it, he did President Snow well... convincingly evil!"
That's ALL I expect from an actor.

You might need to reach climax to be impresed by a performance but some of the rest of us are just content with a story well told... (Which isn't to say Hunger games is an awesome movie but I personally felt Sutherlands performance to be one of the highlights and I wouldn't use my disdain to the rest of the movie taint my judgement...)

[das_ben]

So... I just saw "The Dark Knight Rises". I'm sorry, but it's ****? There are so many of the elements I dislike about most modern blockbuster movies present there that I felt weren't in the previous two "Batman" installments by Nolan, or at least not to the same degree and easily offset by more positive aspects.

"So you came back to die with your city?" - "No. I came here to stop you."

Seriously? That's your idea of a cool comeback? :facepalm:

[Thrallala]

John Carter - 1/10
Probably the worst movie I've seen this year and it's my own fault, I knew this would suck but I went ahead and wasted nearly 2 hours(?) of my life on it anyway.

Battleship - 1.5/10
Crazy coincident! main guy from John Carter has the lead in this one aswell, probably the 2nd worst movie. One might wonder why they put Rihanna in this movie but really it's all about the money glad I didn't pay to see it.

Hunger Games - 5/10
Twilight 2.0 a little better this time around, I bet the second installment will have more of that triangle drama we all love so much. Reminded me a bit of Battle Royal (for obvious reasons) but less gore, more bore and way more drama. Citizens of whatever the city was called where all wearing halloween costumes? Jennifer Lawrence pretty good as the lead.

[Kyllian]

Battleship could have been a better movie if they had dumped all the references to the board game

[das_ben]

My review of the massive disappointment that is "The Dark Knight Rises".

[rejecht]

This is a.. 6-part movie. Yeah.

"Bastard!!"



Score: 1/1 (Enjoy)

I recommend the dub over the original Japanese on this one.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0309340/

"Kazushi Hagiwara is an enthusiastic fan of heavy metal music and Dungeons & Dragons, using ideas from both of these in the Bastard!! story." - Wikipedia

[Lruce Bee]

Total Recall (2012) - 4/10

And another summer blockbuster gets the Lruce thumbs down I'm afraid in this shambolic remake of Arnie's 1990 classic.
I've never been a big fan of Colin Farrell and asking him to fill Schwarzenegger's boots was a tall order, especially if you have zero screen presence - it's not going to happen is it.
Film seemed all over the place with no real pacing - plot kinda deviates from the original in that the original actually tapered towards some sort of meaningful ending, whereas the remake seems to have no intention of reaching any kind of conclusion.
The special effects department did a great job of recreating a future metropolis - very convincing and nicely done.
Pretty but forgettable movie all round really - the original is still the best in my book.

[IronMonkey]

The Dark Knight Rises 7/10


Some mixed feelings about this one.

There was a significant move away from the horror element in the previous two outings and Bain, despite his place in the pantheon of Batman baddies felt fairly generic - certainly not frightening in the way that Scarecrow or the Joker were frightening. I also struggled with the character sounding more like Deckard Cain from Diablo rather than someone hell bent on destroying Gotham.

Ahh... Gotham - much changed in this outing. I know that Gotham had just had 8 great years but it was looking implausibly tarted up when compared to the previous two films.

One reason for Gotham looking different was, I think, that so much more of this film took place in daylight. I imagine that was so we could better appreciate the grand scenes constructed by the film makers but I felt that was out of place. Batman is a creature of the night.

There was a definite drift away from reality (!) and towards doing thing because they looked cool rather than because they made sense e.g. the "batcopter" being chased by the missiles.

The twists (knife and ending) were too crudely telegraphed and there were no surprises in the ending.

The film was also just too long and consistency with the previous outings was somewhat iffy.

So, none of the above sounds very mixed.

What went well?

The emotional arc of the key characters worked far better than the plot that got them there. There was an ending and it didn't feel like a cheat.

And there was no denying the excitement of several scenes - they were a bit generic and could have come from any old action adventure but they were very well done and genuinely exciting.

Michael Caine turned in a fine performance as Alfred, perhaps overdoing it a couple of times but the intensity of the emotion was convincing enough.

Although possessed of manifest deficiencies, this one passes the "Will I buy the Blu-ray?" test.

[Manticore]

The Dark Knight Rises-8.5/10

I'd would almost give the flick full marks for the following reasons:

1. It is a great ending to Nolan's trilogy.

2. This film is three hours long and didn't drag one bit. The pacing of the story/script is perfect.

[Capt.Toilet]

Expendables 2 - 7/10

A lot better than the first, but it also shares quite a few negatives from the first film so only a point extra. Action was much more focused and a helluva lot less downtime compared to the first movie. Terry Crews and his AA12 are back and still badass. Was good to see Van Damme, Chuck, and especially Arnie on the big screen again, I am really amazed at how well they have aged, especially Chuck. My 80's child hood was certainly brought back.

Now for the bad

CGI blood - Again stop this ****, or at least make it look somewhat relevant. 100mil budget and the blood still looks out of place. Stick to squibs as I stated before

Script - 80's action means cheesy lines yes, but holy crap cringe worthy incoming. Arnie made a joke about "being back" a few too many times.

Shaky Cam - Again stop with the bull****. You barely get to see who was shot before it moves onto the next victim. The limited screentime that Jet Li had was somewhat tarnished by the shaky cam, especially since his fight scene was pretty well done.

[Lruce Bee]

The Cabin In The Woods - 4/10

Weird movie that's basically a horror version of

The Trueman Show

and any other B movie that has kids wandering off for a dirty weekend in a log cabin.

[N1ghtmare]

Originally Posted by Lruce Bee

The Cabin In The Woods - 4/10

Weird movie that's basically a horror version of

and any other B movie that has kids wandering off for a dirty weekend in a log cabin.

You know that the entire point of the movie was a commentary on how horror movies are produced rite?

[HugoMarques]

Originally Posted by Capt.Toilet

Expendables 2 - 7/10

A lot better than the first, but it also shares quite a few negatives from the first film so only a point extra. Action was much more focused and a helluva lot less downtime compared to the first movie. Terry Crews and his AA12 are back and still badass. Was good to see Van Damme, Chuck, and especially Arnie on the big screen again, I am really amazed at how well they have aged, especially Chuck. My 80's child hood was certainly brought back.

Now for the bad

CGI blood - Again stop this ****, or at least make it look somewhat relevant. 100mil budget and the blood still looks out of place. Stick to squibs as I stated before

Script - 80's action means cheesy lines yes, but holy crap cringe worthy incoming. Arnie made a joke about "being back" a few too many times.

Shaky Cam - Again stop with the bull****. You barely get to see who was shot before it moves onto the next victim. The limited screentime that Jet Li had was somewhat tarnished by the shaky cam, especially since his fight scene was pretty well done.

I just finished watching it.

You're pretty much spot on, but I think you forgot some extra negative stuff.

Not only cam is shaky, but it looks like the whole thing was shot with weak cams or some idiot remembered to put some grain film effect, perhaps to give it an 80's look. Not cool, bro. The whole film is just too blurry.

Chuck's character was completely out of place IMO.

Jet Lee beating other people with frying pans was somewhat satisfactory, given his limited screen time. Also, the final showdown was weak compared to what I was expecting. There's a crapton of old Van Damme movies with endings more climatic than that.

However, I still recommend this film. If you're looking for an 80's rock 'n roll styled action film, this won't completely dissapoint you.