Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Recently Seen Films

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wrathborne
    replied
    Originally posted by Xander Ashford View Post
    The 60's seems like a fairly decent era to live in granted you were living in one of the major cities like New York or Los Angeles. Plus the show has January Jones in it (Emma Frost from X-Men First Class); I quite like this actress.
    I did too..until I found out she's been eating her babies placenta...And no I'm not kidding about this :/.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wrathborne
    replied
    Originally posted by BBboy20 View Post
    30 Minutes or Less.
    Because nothing says a good time than a comedy based on a true story of a very unlucky man(Who was also part of the attempted bank heist it seems) who was murdered...And the film was a waste of Aziz Ansari.

    Last film I saw was 'The Castle Of Cagliostro', I always cry at the end of that film. It's just so well done, even if its still a silly anime flick.
    Last edited by Wrathborne; 03-28-2012, 11:39 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • BBboy20
    replied
    30 Minutes or Less.

    Leave a comment:


  • Darkmoon
    replied
    'OMG why make rue blak purson!!! U hav ruined teh movies!!!'

    ...Because the character is described, several times, as being black?

    My favourite is the idiot who says that a scene looses it's impact because of the girls skin colour.

    Haven't seen the movies or read the books, yet, but I probably will. Has the potential to still be around when my kids are old enough to join in the latest silly craze. I haven't heard any Twilight level dumb from this (just racist people screaming, and I like that sound) so it might be OK.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wrathborne
    replied
    The hunger games..bringing out the inner racist of every idiot who cant read a book.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pikminister
    replied
    I was invited to see THG this weekend... not sure. Never read the books. Nor did I had any issues with the race of the protagonists, like this bigot here:


    BTW, the book describes the Rue character this way:

    "Most hauntingly, a twelve year old girl from District 11. She has dark brown skin and eyes, but other than that she’s very like Prim in size and demeanor." - Page 45
    They tell me that the Hunger Games are like "The Running man" and Battle Royale. But then I read that it's the next Twilight... so, I'll Pasadena on seeing it if that's the case.
    Last edited by Pikminister; 03-28-2012, 01:54 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • rehunk88
    replied
    Finally got to see 2012.. great movie good solid acting and incredible special effects.

    Leave a comment:


  • BBboy20
    replied
    Hesher

    Yes, watch it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pikminister
    replied
    Originally posted by Mr. Spencer View Post
    See, Splitface made no sense. Based on what we know about the thing's behavioural patterns, there's no reason whatsoever for it to do that. Would be far more efficient to break a piece off and assimilate a target with that, as it did with that bloke who looks like Barry Burton. It was bizarre, seeing this thing casually wander up and snuggle with the guy. There was a warped romantic feel about that scene, like it was being intimate. Completely unnecessary. No sense whatsoever.

    Would have made more sense for it to have been caused by a thing being caught mid-way through assimilating someone, then killed and thus 'Splitface'.
    About that scene... I remember thinking that if Paul Verhoeven (Total Recall, Robocop) had made that film, he would've made it work. It didn't made sense for the Thing to do that, but if they just HAD to add that scene... then someone like Paul would've made it memorable. Like the Thing could've tore into that guy with glee... maybe with blood and guts flying all over the place. But more importantly, with a weird-ass assimilation sequence that would make you go WTF!? instead of "That's so silly! Why?". Something that people would upload to Youtube to freak people out. That kind of thing.

    Again, Universal should've handed the project to someone better.
    Last edited by Pikminister; 02-25-2012, 05:52 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr. Spencer
    replied
    Originally posted by Pikminister View Post
    I posted my impressions of that film somewhere here... but I agree.

    The main element that made the original so endearing though, was the cast of characters. Every single one of them was portrayed as having unique personalities. So you actually worried about them getting killed. There was none of that in the prequel. Except for the female lead, you didn't give a fuck about anyone else. Especially when they were being killed/assimilated by incredibly fake cgi monsters.

    Its a shame because reading articles with interviews done with the ppl behind the prequel, they were like trying to do the right thing. But I guess they just weren't right for the project.

    Why didn't Universal give this one to Guillermo del Toro? (to direct not produce).... he prob would've used practical effects. With very little cgi.
    See, Splitface made no sense. Based on what we know about the thing's behavioural patterns, there's no reason whatsoever for it to do that. Would be far more efficient to break a piece off and assimilate a target with that, as it did with that bloke who looks like Barry Burton. It was bizarre, seeing this thing casually wander up and snuggle with the guy. There was a warped romantic feel about that scene, like it was being intimate. Completely unnecessary. No sense whatsoever.

    Would have made more sense for it to have been caused by a thing being caught mid-way through assimilating someone, then killed and thus 'Splitface'.

    Leave a comment:


  • rehunk88
    replied
    Last movie i saw was goon !!!! FREAKING FUNNY movie !!!! hahah

    Leave a comment:


  • Pikminister
    replied
    Originally posted by Mr. Spencer View Post
    Well, the Thing prequel proves that once again CGI is inferior to animatronics in almost every way. Finished watching it just now. There were a few parts that made me smile, namely the ending sequence where you see the two Norweigans from the beginning of the original. As for the origin of the "Splitface" thing, that was retarded and made no sense. Why would it do that? Why it want to do that?

    Which leads me to my next point, the Thing itself seemed to rely less on disguise and more on open aggression. As a consequence, the element of paranoia that made the original so endearing is completely lost. Sure, there were scenes of mistrust but they didn't last long enough and the suspense was soon broken by needless bouts of CGI gore.
    I posted my impressions of that film somewhere here... but I agree.

    The main element that made the original so endearing though, was the cast of characters. Every single one of them was portrayed as having unique personalities. So you actually worried about them getting killed. There was none of that in the prequel. Except for the female lead, you didn't give a fuck about anyone else. Especially when they were being killed/assimilated by incredibly fake cgi monsters.

    Its a shame because reading articles with interviews done with the ppl behind the prequel, they were like trying to do the right thing. But I guess they just weren't right for the project.

    Why didn't Universal give this one to Guillermo del Toro? (to direct not produce).... he prob would've used practical effects. With very little cgi.
    Last edited by Pikminister; 02-25-2012, 03:12 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr. Spencer
    replied
    Well, the Thing prequel proves that once again CGI is inferior to animatronics in almost every way. Finished watching it just now. There were a few parts that made me smile, namely the ending sequence where you see the two Norweigans from the beginning of the original. As for the origin of the "Splitface" thing, that was retarded and made no sense. Why would it do that? Why it want to do that?

    Which leads me to my next point, the Thing itself seemed to rely less on disguise and more on open aggression. As a consequence, the element of paranoia that made the original so endearing is completely lost. Sure, there were scenes of mistrust but they didn't last long enough and the suspense was soon broken by needless bouts of CGI gore.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gambit
    replied
    Underworld: Awakening. I must say, I enjoyed it more than Revolution and Rise of Lycans.

    Spoiler:

    Leave a comment:


  • BBboy20
    replied
    Originally posted by Trent View Post
    Watched it at the cinema yesterday and I concur!
    Thrice in agreement.
    Last edited by BBboy20; 01-05-2012, 02:54 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X