What Movie Did You Just Watch? - Shh! It's Starting!

[blackcauldron85]

^ Saddest. Movie. Ever.

[Escapay]

Any movie that features Big Bird crying is definitely Saddest Movie Ever.

As for Star Wars, it's essentially a big-budget modern-in-1977 version of 1930s film serials like Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers, with a story based on Kurosawa's The Hidden Fortress.

albert

[jpanimation]

jpanimation, if you thought *I* trashed your favorite film, you should read some of the comments on IMDb. I'm being gentle with you!

I know you are

Yeah, IMDB has a lot of those people. Either a movie is "vastly overrated" or "vastly underrated," sometimes it's true and other times it's not. The fact is not everyone shares the same taste in movies and not all films are meant to appeal to everyone. Sometimes it's just an internet troll looking for trouble, sometimes people just don't understand a movie, sometimes people are nostalgia blind, sometimes it's a different brand of humor or other times a movie just caters to a certain demographic. Either way, IMDB has disappointed me on a number titles, so I can feel your pain on Star Wars disappointing, especially with the rating it has.

I'm still trying to figure out The Dark Knight and how it was for the longest time the highest rated movie on IMDB. Even though it dropped, I still think it's WAY to high (well, I'd never rank it in the top 10 movies of all time list).

[Lazario]

The fact is not everyone shares the same taste in movies and not all films are meant to appeal to everyone.

Obviously. And you're also talking about sci-fi here. How do those films usually do, financially, with mainstream audiences? And of course there's that stigma that these movies only appeal to nerds.

sometimes people just don't understand a movie

That's always been one of the key things that turns me off about sci-fi. All the technical terms of inventions and concepts they came up with especially-for the movie of space and time travel, etc. And the fact that a lot of experts (nerds) actually debate these details with each other. It's not that I can't understand it. It's more that I don't care to watch a movie that is basically fantasy-routed try to bring the audience back to school. Grab your paper and pencils, kids: 'cause it's note-taking time. These movies may invite the viewer to come back to learn something on a second viewing they missed from a first. But it will always be something technical.

sometimes people are nostalgia blind

A lot of people also think nostalgia blinds the people who love certain movies from seeing potential flaws.



And with that, I mention that the last movie I watched/re-watched was in fact a science fiction film:





Now, cute guys and I Love the 80's-nostalgia aside, this is a highly intelligent, brilliantly written, and powerfully acted film that just happens to feature a lot of sci-fi ambitions. Unfortunately, it has a flaw. Often being mistaken (somewhat rightly) for a horror movie, it builds up an overwhelming kind of mysterious but dread-ful tension for an ending it doesn't deliver. There is a high quotient of scenes that suggest a Carrie-like disaster is imminent and yet, it never comes. Rather, instead it's a personal revelation and a quiet tragedy. Which is fine but you know the movie is suggesting something entirely different is going to happen. So they wasted some palpable anti-personal tension. In the meantime, the character work is extraordinary and yet the film also is a fantastic work of pure art (style and substance work together beautifully here). The kind you almost never see anymore. The kind that should have imbued movies like Safe with a sense of purpose but did not. Some scenes here are so good, you could literally have knocked me over with a feather while I was still watching them. Thankfully, the movie also avoids getting stuck in the kind of wacky-adventures feel of an anthology film or a Pulp Fiction interstitial-show. There is passion, imagination, edge with actual thrills, believable characters with real emotions, and it's utterly unique. Mary McDonnell as the mother has become one of my all-time favorite actors and her character now one of my favorite cinematic (including TV) mothers. The high school situations feel real without pandering for cheap laughs or cheap emotional responses, or insulting my intelligence (despite the semi-juvenile implications of the "Smurfs" debate).

[Goliath]

Little Miss Sunshine (2006)

Now *this* was a great film! I just love Steve Carrell in his role of Uncle Frank! I didn't know this serious side of him. I laughed out loud and was touched at the same time watching this movie, and that doesn't happen a lot.

[ajmrowland]

Goliath, I have a strange feeling that if you hate the original Star Wars, you might actually enjoy the *entire* prequel trilogy better. They have tons of character development and even political intrigue.

[Widdi]

Robin Hood (2010)

One word describes this movie: Mediocre. It wasn't bad it was just "meh". I don't know I guess it delivered on it's promises, but it was like who cares?

[Goliath]

Goliath, I have a strange feeling that if you hate the original Star Wars, you might actually enjoy the *entire* prequel trilogy better. They have tons of character development and even political intrigue.

And if that fails to entertain me, there's always Natalie Portman...

I've read the prequels are pretty bad, because Lucas was more concerned with special effects than with the story. Although I fail to see the difference with the original 1977 Star Wars.

[UmbrellaFish]

R&H's Cinderella (195...9??)

A great Julie flick, sort of campy and very much Americana. And you can't go wrong with R&H's great songs!

The Little Mermaid
Watched it on my BD player- awesome!

[Disney's Divinity]

Avatar (2009)

What a disappointment. Of course, going into it, everyone had told me that it was more of a visual experience, but...wow. What a generic story. And characters...what characters? It even made me question Sigourney Weaver. It's probably bad that the only thing it had going for it (its special effects) aren't as spectacular outside the theater.

Anyway, I'm left wondering how they're going to do a sequel. I guess it'll be like the Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy, where the first is completely self-contained and the last two seem tied together. Only difference: Curse of the Black Pearl was good.

But I'm a sell-out, so I'll probably see the sequels anyway (I don't know why--I haven't seen any of the Transformer or Iron Man films yet).

Also, Widdi, I hope I'll like Robin Hood better than you did. Normally, I probably wouldn't bother with it, but it has Cate Blanchett and Russell Crowe. I'll have to see it.

[jpanimation]

The fact is not everyone shares the same taste in movies and not all films are meant to appeal to everyone.

Obviously. And you're also talking about sci-fi here. How do those films usually do, financially, with mainstream audiences? And of course there's that stigma that these movies only appeal to nerds.

Well, I was actually talking about IMDB in general. If we're talking about sci-fi, the dumber the movie (less science and more fiction), the higher the BO gross (look at what Transformers 2 made). Hell, for Star Trek they cut out the technical and political shit of the past and pumped up the action/effects, effectively making it mainstream/profitable.

There are some exceptions, like District 9, which made a pretty decent profit while staying smart. Of course that isn't normal and you're right, sci-fi is a genre that is usually aimed towards a limited audience. Take a smart sci-fi movie from last year like Moon, and you won't see any records being broke.

sometimes people just don't understand a movie

That's always been one of the key things that turns me off about sci-fi. All the technical terms of inventions and concepts they came up with especially-for the movie of space and time travel, etc. And the fact that a lot of experts (nerds) actually debate these details with each other. It's not that I can't understand it. It's more that I don't care to watch a movie that is basically fantasy-routed try to bring the audience back to school. Grab your paper and pencils, kids: 'cause it's note-taking time. These movies may invite the viewer to come back to learn something on a second viewing they missed from a first. But it will always be something technical.

Once again, I wasn't talking about sci-fi. I was actually referring to Kubrick films and many art-house films where that [not understanding the movie] is a common argument against liking the film or it's a common argument for disregarding someone's opinion.

If we're talking about sci-fi, then I agree, I hate movies that explain too much. Not only do they feel less real but they also bore me. For me, I don't like explanations with my time travel. Give me a Terminator time traveling without explanation or a time traveling DeLorean, make it a joke. Start getting serious about it and telling us that going around a planet at a certain speed will send us through time (as in the Star Trek series/movies), giving us the numbers and science behind it, and you've lost me.

I don't mind a little science, like in Jurassic Park, as that can be quite effective.

sometimes people are nostalgia blind

A lot of people also think nostalgia blinds the people who love certain movies from seeing potential flaws.

I thought that was pretty much what nostalgia blind meant, which is why I was using it as an argument against the rating system.

anyways...

Up in the Air (2009) 7.5/10 - pretty good. I'll keep it short. Nice acting, nice story, and entertaining movie. It was a breath of fresh air but not perfect.

[pap64]

Avatar (2009)

What a disappointment. Of course, going into it, everyone had told me that it was more of a visual experience, but...wow. What a generic story. And characters...what characters? It even made me question Sigourney Weaver. It's probably bad that the only thing it had going for it (its special effects) aren't as spectacular outside the theater.

Anyway, I'm left wondering how they're going to do a sequel. I guess it'll be like the Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy, where the first is completely self-contained and the last two seem tied together. Only difference: Curse of the Black Pearl was good.

But I'm a sell-out, so I'll probably see the sequels anyway (I don't know why--I haven't seen any of the Transformer or Iron Man films yet).

Also, Widdi, I hope I'll like Robin Hood better than you did. Normally, I probably wouldn't bother with it, but it has Cate Blanchett and Russell Crowe. I'll have to see it.

See, this is why I am avoiding Avatar until all the hype dies down and I can watch it neutrally.

As for the Star Wars debate, I remember seeing the original version way back after the second prequel came out, and thought it was good but I too wondered what the hype was all about.

Going back to Avatar... The biggest reason everyone went to see it and "loved it" was because of the technology they used. The simplistic story helped audiences understand it (I am talking about the average movie goer, aka "the sheep") and the 3D technology drove them to theaters.

You could say that the same thing happened to Star Wars. It was a very unique film at the time of its released, and was mostly enjoyed by children and teens who were captivated by its world and characters. Those same kids and adults grow up to become hardcore fans and now see the movies as relics of their childhood, and declare it the best film ever made.

I'm a semi casual fan of the series and appreciate its universe, so I tend to never get into heated arguments about it since people like stuff I could care less for, while I like stuff they don't care for.

Regarding The Dark Knight, it's definitely one of MY all time favorite films in the Batman franchise.

[milojthatch]

I just watched "A Bug's Life" with "Toy Story 2" up next. I'm doing my Pixar/ Disney marathon, so that will be my movies for a bit.

[SmartAleck25]

Forrest Gump (1994)- 8.5/10
Impeccable performance by Tom Hanks as Forrest. It was a very sad movie though, but Jenny's actions sorta made me feel angry. And of course, the best scenes are those of Forrest running away from cars, bicycles, and football stars.

[Disney's Divinity]

Regarding The Dark Knight, it's definitely one of MY all time favorite films in the Batman franchise.

TDK is, personally, the only Batman film I've watched more than once (and not because it was re-run on TV years later and there was nothing else on to watch). Batman Begins itself was heads above any other Batman film I'd watched, but I found it just a bit boring. (Also, I haven't watched any of the Star Wars films all the way through--but I used to love watching the scenes with Jabba the Hut when I was younger. )

And I would say I watched Avatar from a neutral perspective. True, I might not have watched it if people hadn't gone crazy over it, but the only expectations I took in with me were not high ones (again, I expected: "nice visuals, bad everything else"). Which is what I got, except a little more underwhelming. I thought it was bad for its own sake, not because it didn't live up to the hype.

I consciously try to keep from having high expectations. That's the quickest way to ruin an experience.

[Lazario]

Tim Burton's Batman movies = only Batman movies that matter.







Subversive satire of existential journey movies and idiotic couch potatoes? That's what Siskel and Ebert thought. But there's a lot they've failed to understand about mainstream movies. This movie is not a clever satire. It's overlong and stuffed with an endless barrage of puerile observational humor - some of it downright pandering - and all anyone can say in the movie's defense is that most of it is surprisingly funny. Usually when dealing with violent situations and mayhem - the Hoover dam incident, the car collision disaster, the plane scene. And of course Beavis confronting the image of Nixon with, "are you threatening me?" Great soundtrack (disappointingly, I didn't catch No Doubt's rocking "Snakes" in the movie; though it's on the soundtrack CD). And overall, this is a far superior alternative to rotten drek like Tommy Boy. With the exception of the very middle which devolved completely into typical 90's gross-out gags and really bad hippie jokes (Engelbert Humperdinck's rendition of "Lesbian Seagull" on the soundtrack is a lot funnier and... even... sweet / pretty). Also, Robert Stack becomes tired fast.

[jpanimation]

Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs (2009) 6/10 - wholly underwhelming. I don't think Sony Pictures Animation has made a single good movie, Surf's Up was decent but they're such an underachieving studio. They have the tech, they have the talent, and they have the animators, just not the right environment to put the necessary effort into their animated features. Everyone there is shared with Imageworks, which does the visual effects for Sony's live action films, so they don't really have a dedicated animation studio. I think this is their main problem (although, I hear they pay the best, which is how they get the talent). So this is why they have different producers, directors, writers, storyboard artists and animators on every production, as they just use whoever is available, and not working on a live action film at the time (causing the films to be very uneven and with no "Brain Trust" in their production house, the quality of the movie almost entirely dependent on the capabilities of the director). The animated feature just seems like a side project that Sony feels obligated to put out every couple of years.

Anyways, it has your typical celebrity voices, typical TERRIBLE CalArts generic character designs (actually, these are probably the most generic I've every seen), some weird obsession with the 80's that I really didn't expect, and your typical flat story made out of a 10 page book. The source material (book) is soo thin that they didn't know what else to do but take a cookie-cutter plot and shove in a bunch of stereotypes to fill in the gaps (this is why they need a "Brain Trust" to oversee development). The animation ranges from good, with some funny poses/facial expressions with snappy timing, to bad. The only thing that stood out was Bruce Campbell's character as the Mayor. He was voiced great, animated great, and pretty funny. Too bad Bruce Campbell gets shafted in the extras. The movie is mediocre and underwhelming, and I really don't expect to ever watch it again (this probably should've been a 2D cartoon show or a theatrical short, as there just wasn't enough depth for a movie).

[UmbrellaFish]

The Sound of Music- Absolutely stunning on my BD player. I'm usually pretty harsh on this movie, but I let loose and thoroughly enjoyed it.

Gone With the Wind- I fell asleep while I was watching this, but I still adore this flick.

[Margos]

The Princess and the Frog - I love this movie. I gotta say, though, it strikes me every time that Facilier's death is pretty epic. And the first scene with Ray and Tiana in the cemetery always makes my eyes a little watery. I also love the ending credits, with all of the references to to TLM and Aladdin. Really cute.

[UmbrellaFish]

I watched Chicago! I love the music, the characters, everything! I'd buy the BD if it wasn't so expensive!