What is the latest movie you watched and what did you think of it?

Red - 2010

i liked it a little more than i thought i would. i thought it was entertaining and i never got bored. the weeds chic is mildly cute and i liked karl urban as well. most of the characters he's played i've dug. i think it's prob cuz i'm partial to DOOM! like stated be4 hand it's silly and not professional @ all, but i was ok with that. i was just looking for an easy going movie be4 my siesta kicked in and this was it. minus mr. urban i like malkoviches character the most. wished they would had did a little more with him. spy/comedy with LOTS of bullets and mild humor. telephone calls, a stuffed pig and a screaming time bomb. 7/10

Sherlock Holmes (the new BBC version).Saw the first episode and it was good,so definitely will watch the rest of the season as well (its just 4 episodes including the unaired pilot).I dint get bored and the acting was pretty good as well.(sarcasms are really good :P).Its not easy to recreate a classic into an atmosphere of the modern world with gadgets and stuff and the first episode centers around solving the case by linking with mobile,gps etc and lol at Dr.Watson writing a blog for his cure and Sherlock has a site for himself hehe and

Spoiler: Show

uncertainity surrounding whether sherlock is gay or not lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RuslanI

Shutter Island.
7/10
I liked it a lot but it is not near as good as Inception. I read a lot of reviews where these movies were compared and ranked about the same. In my opinion they are not even close. Shutter island is a good movie with great story, directing, music and acting. But it is just that - a good movie, a good psychological thriller, one in a line of many other good thrillers. Inception on the other hand is pretty much a milestone movie for its genre.

---

I really liked Shutter island so inception must be really good:o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AbyBeats

Spoiler: Show

uncertainity surrounding whether sherlock is gay or not lol.

---

Spoiler: Show

No Holmes is not gay but since most British actors are ,sometimes it's hard to differentiate.

Funny most are Gay but very few are happy .Language irony.

Vampire Suck

Let's just put it this way.....it should be illigal to make your movie even worse then the movie your making fun off!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IdolEyes787

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AbyBeats

Spoiler: Show

uncertainity surrounding whether sherlock is gay or not lol.

---

Spoiler: Show

No Holmes is not gay but since most British actors are ,sometimes it's hard to differentiate.

Funny most are Gay but very few are happy .Language irony.

---

Need to stay away from Brits is the gist of what you are saying right?I dint know you were a racist Idoleyes :shifty:

Saw The prestige,I had the DVD for sooo long and I dint get myself around watching it,dont know why.While organising the CDs and DVDs,I found it there waiting to be seen :P.TBH I really dont have anything particular to say,I mean its a good movie,deserves all the high ratings an all but dunno I dont get excited or amazed anymore by the twists in the end or how the movie supposedly tries to be "clever".Maybe its because after watching lots of TV series/Movies of the same type,stereotypes wont entertain you anymore?

But I really liked leaves of grass.It had no particular direction or plot But Edward Norton's acting was really good,He just acts brilliantly imo.The movie was really enjoyable to watch.

The Social Network 8.5/10

Surprised more people haven't seen/written about it yet. Probably the biggest movie yet barring the over glorified action movie that is Inception.

Really nothing too much to complain initially. Great, fast paced dialog and action reminiscent of Sorkin's work with The West Wring. Clever, witty, entertaining, and a pure joy to watch. "Winklevii" was easily the best line of the entire movie. Sheer brilliance . :lol:

I do have to walk away with one complaint though. The ending didn't really leave me completely satisfied. It was difficult to put my finger on exactly what it was, but I simply was expecting a little more. Maybe I'm a little crazy but the ending just lacked closure. Maybe it was done on purpose (and considering who wrote it it probably was), but I just didn't really like it wrapped things up. It just ended. Just like that.

And then there's all the factual inaccuracies and exaggerations made in order to spice up the movie (the fact that I was actually motivated enough to do some serious digging up on what actually happened speaks leaps and bounds about how engaged I was with the movie), but that's Hollywood eh?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr. nails

Piranha - 2010

lol, i thought this was a lot better than expected. so much blood and bones! i loved that part of the film and of course there wasn't much else to this but the gore factor which was fine by me. this in fact was a worthy remake imo. nothing like seeing a human being torn apart in seconds by flesh craved "extinct" fish. they left the ending open for a sequel. i'll definitely be checking that out too. if u wanna see countless bodies torn apart limb by limb this is ur movie! red water, wet tits and great scotts! 7.5/10

---

Purina Piranha

OK I know that it's suppose to be camp not Cocteau and even if I didn't realize that going in that I think the fish burping up the penis would have pretty much given it away but seriously Purina Piranha is underwhelming in a truly overwhelming sort of way.

Given the majority of "characters" in something like this are meant to be little more than comic relief or fodder but even the alleged main characters were so pencil -thin not for a moment can you tell me that you actually cared about any of them?

I mean the teen-age boy( see I can't even remember his name a day later) what did you know about him other than had a crush on some girl that had been presumably "away" and the sheriff/mom ,would it have killed someone to write in 30 seconds of back story for her?

OK right you disagree and don't care it isn't that "kind" of movie but weren't the touted "set pieces " like the big massacre and the sinking yacht ,to quote a notably better writer " full of sound and fury,signifying nothing".

Lots of extras ( in the case of the massacre) flapping their arms and screaming but besides for a couple of ludicrous "kills" - note to director if your hair is caught in a propeller your face doesn't get pulled off you head gets sucked into the blades :mellow: you can't actually sit their and tell me that much actually happened.
Did you see anyone get eaten by a fish ..uhh no .I think in a movie about people -eating fishes that would have been high on the FXs guys list of priorities but I guess not.
Also the gore :mellow: frankly I've seen more gruesome things after running a couple miles in ill-fitting shoes.

Also the "torn apart" bit how come fishes can ( as with the case of the topless para-sailor) chew through bone?

In a nut-shell for a gory, sexy,campy movie surprising goreless ( apparently no one has internal organs), non -sexy ( a younger Kelly Brock was far sexier in a notably worse movie -Three) but it was campy but then again so was Plan 9 from Outer Space.

Really and I sound like a broken record here but I don't know what is wrong with these people that they are seemingly unable to adhere to the slimmest principles of movies- you know characterization , plot ,that sort of foolishness.
Even lacking that at least have something actually ...happen or maybe a real ending would be nice .

How to train your dragon 9/10
my fav 3 animated: toy story 3, up, and ^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LtAda

How to train your dragon 9/10
my fav 3 animated: toy story 3, up, and ^

---

I feel honoured that this humble section merited consideration in your spam posting quest for a BMTV invite.
............................................................
Open Range (2003)

Kevin Costner,Robert Duvall ,Annette Benning ,an angry Irish guy( aren't they all) and the fat guy from ER.
A group/team/fellowship? of "free-grazing" cattlemen come up against a greedy land-baron and after much ado a whole lot of whop-ass.

Anyway surprising to see it rated so highly on IMDB since both all of Costner's strengths and weaknesses as a director are evident here - the languid pacing, the almost over-attention to detail , the desire to make the "heroes" so sympathetic that all reality is thrown out the window. There is also though his incredible outdoor shots and his eerily spot- on casting . Not to mention his ( and Duval's) inherent likability.

I said that it was surprising to see it so highly rated but I totally understand the reasoning though ,I feel somewhat so inclined myself .Values are simple here and the "good" guys have rarely been so deserving of emulation .A man's got to do what's right and if that gets him killed then so be it - all he asks for is a bit of chocolate and a good cigar to make the prospect go down a little easier first.

Anyway I really ,really like this movie but it's still not that great 7.1 maybe.
It( and Costner ) desires to be epic but it's much to slow moving and stilted to truly measure up.
Nonetheless if you like either Westerns ( there is a pretty good and unconventional shootout near the end ) or simple virtues still definitely worth a watch not to mention that it's 50 times better than the recent 3:10 to Yuma which inexplicably rates even higher.
And it's all done without a mean bone in it's body.