What Movie Did You Just Watch? ...Rises

Dr Frankenollie · Post by **Dr Frankenollie** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 10:47 am

jpanimation, I haven't seen Skyfall, but out of curiosity, what did you think of Javier Bardem?

jpanimation · Post by **jpanimation** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:03 pm

dvdjunkie wrote:I am so glad that you aren't a film critic that everyone reads.

Film critics are normal people with opinions like everyone else. They see the same film we all do. Whether someone reads their opinions or not doesn't lend credibility to it.

dvdjunkie wrote:"Skyfall", according to most of the critics I read and myself, thought this was the best of the Bond films since "Goldfinger".

Too bad I don't give a shit what most critics think. They're just people with opinions and theirs are no more credible then somebody I work with. Nothing they say is scripture and their opinions certainly aren't fact. Should I suddenly love Brave now that it won Best Animated Feature? Of course not. Besides, it's my opinion that they're older critics who ate up all the fan service jammed into this movie.

dvdjunkie wrote:Daniel Craig is recreating the Bond character, with the help of Barbara Brocolli, and has signed to do the next two bond films which will put him at five, and I can't wait. Casino Royale was a great introduction to this series of Bond films, and for the first time we actually had a sequel in Quantum of Solace, while not the best sequel, it was still James Bond.

I feel like you've stopped expressing your opinions and started marketing the film lol

dvdjunkie wrote:To call "Skyfall" a very boring, poor film, is very wrong in my view.

Prove it, with facts.

dvdjunkie wrote:You evidentally don't like these types of films

Boring films??? Not exactly sure what you're suggesting when you say "these types of films"

dvdjunkie wrote:I think you need to watch films that fit into your genre of films that you like and let the rest of us, who like these types of films, watch and enjoy.

My "genre" is good movies. I dislike bad movies. It's as simple as that. I would never limit myself to a genre as you suggest.

Dr Frankenollie wrote:jpanimation, I haven't seen Skyfall, but out of curiosity, what did you think of Javier Bardem?

Nothing really memorable. Just your run of the mill Bond villain, which disappointed me, since I'm a fan of Javier Bardem. Hell, I'm a fan of pretty much everyone involved in the production, which probably led to my overall disappointment with the film.

Dr Frankenollie · Post by **Dr Frankenollie** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:42 pm

jpanimation wrote:
dvdjunkie wrote:I am so glad that you aren't a film critic that everyone reads.
Film critics are normal people with opinions like everyone else. They see the same film we all do. Whether someone reads their opinions or not doesn't lend credibility to it.

Don't feed trolls.

jpanimation wrote:
Dr Frankenollie wrote:jpanimation, I haven't seen Skyfall, but out of curiosity, what did you think of Javier Bardem?
Nothing really memorable. Just your run of the mill Bond villain, which disappointed me, since I'm a fan of Javier Bardem. Hell, I'm a fan of pretty much everyone involved in the production, which probably led to my overall disappointment with the film.

I'm a fan of Bardem too. He's sublime in No Country For Old Men. A shame he's only mediocre in Skyfall; he was one of the few reasons I was considering watching it.

PeterPanfan · Post by **PeterPanfan** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 3:01 pm

Just adding in that while I agree Skyfall is merely an average film, the opening credits sequence is stunning.

dvdjunkie · Post by **dvdjunkie** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:10 pm

Let's just put an end to all this good movie or bad movie. Everyone has their own likes and dislikes and it is always open to sharing your thoughts on them. What I object to is the flat 'this movie was boring' or 'I wish they hadn't done that!' or something that you have no control over.

As far as the newest James Bond film "Skyfall" goes, I have seen it in the theater five times, and was first in line at Best Buy when it was released on Blu-ray.

Is "Skyfall" the perfect movie, NO!!! It is a very rare film that gets that acknowledgement of being the perfect movie, one comes to mind right now and that is "The Sting".

If you haven't been a fan or seen all of the James Bond movies, or even read the Ian Fleming novels and novellas, which these movies are based on, then you should not be so harsh in your criticism. James Bond films have been around for 50 years now and it all started with "Dr. No" starring Sean Connery, followed by "From Russia With Love". Sean Connery was the perfect Bond actor but he said that after six films he would never again do a James Bond film.

If you follow these good spy-thrillers you will know that in 1983 Sean Connery returned as James Bond in "Never Say Never Again", which was a box office flop, and its biggest competition was a Roger Moore Bond film called "Octopussy".

Before a person slams a franchise that has been around for 50 years I think they would do well to watch a couple of the movies before issuing a statement that the movie is "slow", or "poorly directed".

Daniel Craig is the perfect star to have in this re-birth of the James Bond series, and I am looking forward to the next two films.

Dr. Frankenollie wanted to know about Javier Bardim's performance, and I will tell you this he holds his own on the screen. He doesn't make an appearance until just over 1 hour into the film, which runs 2 hours and 23 minutes.

Avaitor · Post by **Avaitor** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 6:35 pm

dvdjunkie wrote:It is a very rare film that gets that acknowledgement of being the perfect movie, one comes to mind right now and that is "The Sting".

I don't think true perfection exists, but if there was such a thing as a perfect film, this would definitely be up there.

See, the Oscars do get it right sometimes.

jpanimation · Post by **jpanimation** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 7:06 pm

dvdjunkie wrote:Before a person slams a franchise that has been around for 50 years I think they would do well to watch a couple of the movies before issuing a statement that the movie is "slow", or "poorly directed".

How about this; before a person slams my opinion, they might want to read it first. I never said the movie was "slow" or "poorly directed". I said Bond was poorly written in comparison to Casino Royale, in which he had somewhat of an emotional arc. You might not want to make assumptions about me either. I have indeed seen at least a dozen of these Bond films, the ones that get the most praise, or I wouldn't have said what I did about the franchise. I'd like to remind you that this is just my opinion, I don't know why you're letting it upset you. Not everyone has to agree with you all the time. I personally welcome differing opinions.

Dr Frankenollie, I don't know what other Bond films you've seen or whether you enjoy them or not (if you've enjoyed them in the past, then you'll probably enjoy this one) but I wouldn't let my opinion dissuade you from viewing it.

Argo (2012) 7.5/10 - Pretty damn good, just as good as The Town. I think it's safe to say that Affleck is a much better director then he is an actor. It kept me glued to the screen the whole time, with one or two sequences having me holding my breath they were soo intense. I also found the subject matter interesting, as it was nice to see the CIA involvement in Iran and how they fucked it up brought to the public this way. I haven't seen enough of the nominated movies yet to comment on whether it deserved Best Picture and I'm too tired to really write anymore about it. Suffice to say, I wholeheartedly recommend it.

dvdjunkie · Post by **dvdjunkie** » Tue Feb 26, 2013 7:59 am

At least we agree on one film - "Argo". It is now a part of my Blu-ray collection also.

Was happy to see it win "Best Picture" at the Oscars Sunday night. Too bad the Oscar Committee left him out of the running for Best Director because I think he would have won it all.

Pokeholic_Prince · Post by **Pokeholic_Prince** » Tue Feb 26, 2013 10:07 am

"Skyfall" is a solid film. My only problem with it is its pacing. It gets really dull at times, but te action scenes are well directed and the film has good cinematography. Javier Bardem's character is actually pretty good in the film as well as Judi Dench and Danial Craig. However, like I said the film has some inconsistant pacing and can get a bit contrived.

Dr Frankenollie · Post by **Dr Frankenollie** » Tue Feb 26, 2013 12:14 pm

jpanimation wrote:Dr Frankenollie, I don't know what other Bond films you've seen or whether you enjoy them or not (if you've enjoyed them in the past, then you'll probably enjoy this one) but I wouldn't let my opinion dissuade you from viewing it.

I'm not interested in Bond. I was curious about Skyfall due to the reverent praise it's received, so I briefly pondered the notion that it was a genuinely great film rather than the usual Bond flick.

dvdjunkie · Post by **dvdjunkie** » Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:57 pm

Dr.Frankenollie wrote:

I'm not interested in Bond. I was curious about Skyfall due to the reverent praise it's received, so I briefly pondered the notion that it was a genuinely great film rather than the usual Bond flick.

Again, there has to be something good about a franchise that has produced 23 hit films over 50 years. There is no other franchise that can brag about that many films in that many years.

I find the Bond films entertaining, but sometimes they take theirself too seriously. The Sean Connery films were great and never failed to make a profit and when Roger Moore took over, they started the slow decline or what some of call a roller coaster ride. "Live and Let Die", "The Man With the Golden Gun" and "The Spy Who Loved Me" were definitely good movies, but started the up-and-down hill box office for the series. George Lazenby was the worst James Bond in the series and only appeared in one film, thank goodness. Timothy Dalton only made two films in the Bond genre, but both did solid box office. Pierce Brosnan played Bond in four films and then came the era of Daniel Craig. Craig has signed on for at least two more films.

Everyone has their likes and dislikes, so I don't expect everyone to like these movies. But I own all of them on Blu-ray, even the Lazenby film, and they aren't too far away from the Blu-ray player. They are what I call good escapist-fare for a movie junkie.

Avaitor · Post by **Avaitor** » Tue Feb 26, 2013 4:20 pm

Lazenby's film is one of my personal favorite Bond films. He did not have a great turn as 007, but everything else about the film is top-notch.

I'm a Bond fan myself, but it's not a big deal if not everyone else is. There is not one thing in life, be it art, literature, food, experience, etc that is going to please literally every single person that's alive. And that's just fine.

dvdjunkie · Post by **dvdjunkie** » Tue Feb 26, 2013 5:45 pm

Agreed!!

PixarFan2006 · Post by **PixarFan2006** » Sat Mar 02, 2013 4:03 pm

Wreck-It Ralph: 7/10 - While this film had a pretty good story, animation and many humorous sight gags, I still felt there was something missing from it. I felt the voice acting on Vanellope was annoying most of the time and there could've been a few more video game cameos (but that's just me). It's not the best Disney movie but it's not the worst either.

Chernabog_Rocks · Post by **Chernabog_Rocks** » Sat Mar 02, 2013 10:43 pm

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. (Silent)

I found it quite hard to sit through, it's the first time I've ever sat through a silent film (Not counting the Oswald shorts), so it was a rather different experience.

I will have to try watching it again another time, so that I can better gather my thoughts on the film as a whole.

Dr Frankenollie · Post by **Dr Frankenollie** » Sun Mar 03, 2013 4:04 am

Chernabog_Rocks wrote:it's the first time I've ever sat through a silent film

If you want to watch more, I recommend Nosferatu. From the silent films I've seen, it's the most compelling, and in my opinion features the most chilling portrayal of Dracula on-screen (Max Shreck is ten times the vampire Bela Lugosi is). Others might recommend Metropolis; while the visuals are excellent for its time, I don't enjoy it.

2099net · Post by **2099net** » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:02 pm

Dr Frankenollie wrote:
Chernabog_Rocks wrote:it's the first time I've ever sat through a silent film
If you want to watch more, I recommend Nosferatu. From the silent films I've seen, it's the most compelling, and in my opinion features the most chilling portrayal of Dracula on-screen (Max Shreck is ten times the vampire Bela Lugosi is). Others might recommend Metropolis; while the visuals are excellent for its time, I don't enjoy it.

And I recommend Universal's Phantom of the Opera and Hunchback of Notre Dame. Both are superb and enthralling today. To consider them at the time of release, they must have been incredible!

Flanger-Hanger · Post by **Flanger-Hanger** » Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:47 pm

2099net wrote:
Dr Frankenollie wrote: If you want to watch more, I recommend Nosferatu. From the silent films I've seen, it's the most compelling, and in my opinion features the most chilling portrayal of Dracula on-screen (Max Shreck is ten times the vampire Bela Lugosi is). Others might recommend Metropolis; while the visuals are excellent for its time, I don't enjoy it.
And I recommend Universal's Phantom of the Opera and Hunchback of Notre Dame. Both are superb and enthralling today. To consider them at the time of release, they must have been incredible!

Yes, but be sure its the actual 1925 version of Phantom and not the 1929 re-release with the poor quality dubbing attempt to sell it as a "talkie", and has a decent score attached. Sounds complicated, but it can be done with the right research first.

Avaitor · Post by **Avaitor** » Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:34 pm

Add some Chaplin and Keaton in there, as well. You can't go wrong with either.

Dr Frankenollie · Post by **Dr Frankenollie** » Sun Mar 03, 2013 3:12 pm

Blood Simple - Darker than most of the Coens' later work (No Country For Old Men being the obvious exception), and very reminiscent of Hitchcock. It almost felt like the kind of film Hitch could have made if he had worked longer and tried to attempt more Frenzys over Family Plot. Moreover, it seemed to be something of a prototype Fargo, featuring the same neo-Shakespearean plotlines and chaotic scruples of characters painted in broad black-and-grey strokes; interestingly, in place of the charming epitome of goodness Marge Gunderson, there's a much more treacherous detective character. Unnamed in the film but supposedly called Loren Visser, he's a private investigator who is happy to do anything -even if it's illegal - if money is involved. Corpulent, slimy and creepy, like many Coen villains he's a larger than life character you love to hate, commanding an unforgettable screen presence. But unlike other Coen villains, I found myself rooting for Visser over the brainless protagonists. He sadly receives a bloody comeuppance, yet it's a superb and memorable way to go, and the very last moments are phenomenal. It's a deliciously entertaining and violent movie, worth a watch just to see the fun of a few fools' plans going wrong in every way imaginable.

DVDizzy Forum

Latest Movie Reviews

🎬 DVDizzy Top Stories️️

What Movie Did You Just Watch? ...Rises