planetf1.com

mac_d wrote:I have greatly differing views about LotR to some. Dislike the books for being... so.... damned.... slow... Liked the movies, though much preferred the extended editions.
And I am so glad they got rid of Tom Bombadil. That was some goofy sh*t even in a book about wizards and midgets fighting orcs and goblins.

mac_d wrote:Spectre. Spoilers below

Spoiler (click to show)

Pretty underwhelmed. Firstly, they Star Trek 2'd us with the guy who would obviously be Blofeld being Blofeld. Not a twist to anyone who knows the Bond mythos really. And wouldn't work for someone who didn't anyway. Interesting they gave him that scar though.

The romance plot advanced way too fast. Comically so.

C's death was weak.

The DB11 isn't that nice looking. I preferred the DB9. Okay, that didn't really matter to the film, I just thought I'd mention it.

I felt like they had 50 little bits of plot. Films generally go for 1 or 2 plots for a reason. It just felt disjointed.

If this is Daniel Craig's Bond films done then that's fine. If they do another the ending is a complete waste of time. I didn't care for it, unless they are treating it as these 4 films we are seeing the whole career of 007 then I rather like it. It would be short and brutal. And I guess for a character like Bond it has to kill him or he has to get out. So yeah, my overall opinion is somewhat based on what the next Bond film is.

Was the alcohol consumption to prove a point about Bond being in love or am I reading too much into it? I felt like he drank more in this film than usual, and turned down the champagne when he is worrying about the woman more (I can't recall her name which says a lot about the plot). Bond is a junkie for a rush. Be it alcohol, driving a fast car or putting himself in the way of a terrorist threat etc.

As I complained about in Skyfall, I don't think they should swear at all. Minor gripe, and a bit of an odd thing for me, the sweariest man in most rooms, to dislike.

Title song was awful. That dude sings way too high pitched. One of my least favourite Bond themes.

Don't get me wrong, this isn't an awful film. It's a decent film. I'd rate it 2.5 or 3 stars if you want a metric. Not as enjoyable as some of the better Bond films, not a train wreck either.

huggybear wrote:Watched two films today (so far):

Inside Out, which is Pixar's film about emotions. It's absolutely superb. Oddly sad for a Disney film (think a feature length version of the beginning of UP). I definitely recommend checking it out.

I also watched The Village. Now, when I saw this at the cinema in 2004, I thought it was a bit meh. Given that I was only 17 then, I figured 28 year old me might have a different opinion so I watched it again. While, the traditional M Night twist is kinda weak, the rest of the film is very nicely done (there is a particular scene in the woods where people wearing yellow and red are beautifully contrast against the grey scenery which is superb). Honestly think if M Night wasn't so obsessed with having a twist ending he'd be far more respected as an artist.

Colesy917 wrote:Watched the release of Spectre in Australia last night, really enjoyed it. I know its subjective, but I really Craig as Bond. Casino Royale, Skyfall and Spectre have all hit the mark for me.

specdecible wrote:

Colesy917 wrote:Watched the release of Spectre in Australia last night, really enjoyed it. I know its subjective, but I really Craig as Bond. Casino Royale, Skyfall and Spectre have all hit the mark for me.

So we are all going to forget that Quantum of Solace never happened? Ok.

mac_d wrote:Spectre. Spoilers below

Spoiler (click to show)

Pretty underwhelmed. Firstly, they Star Trek 2'd us with the guy who would obviously be Blofeld being Blofeld. Not a twist to anyone who knows the Bond mythos really. And wouldn't work for someone who didn't anyway. Interesting they gave him that scar though.

The romance plot advanced way too fast. Comically so.

C's death was weak.

The DB11 isn't that nice looking. I preferred the DB9. Okay, that didn't really matter to the film, I just thought I'd mention it.

I felt like they had 50 little bits of plot. Films generally go for 1 or 2 plots for a reason. It just felt disjointed.

If this is Daniel Craig's Bond films done then that's fine. If they do another the ending is a complete waste of time. I didn't care for it, unless they are treating it as these 4 films we are seeing the whole career of 007 then I rather like it. It would be short and brutal. And I guess for a character like Bond it has to kill him or he has to get out. So yeah, my overall opinion is somewhat based on what the next Bond film is.

Was the alcohol consumption to prove a point about Bond being in love or am I reading too much into it? I felt like he drank more in this film than usual, and turned down the champagne when he is worrying about the woman more (I can't recall her name which says a lot about the plot). Bond is a junkie for a rush. Be it alcohol, driving a fast car or putting himself in the way of a terrorist threat etc.

As I complained about in Skyfall, I don't think they should swear at all. Minor gripe, and a bit of an odd thing for me, the sweariest man in most rooms, to dislike.

Title song was awful. That dude sings way too high pitched. One of my least favourite Bond themes.

Don't get me wrong, this isn't an awful film. It's a decent film. I'd rate it 2.5 or 3 stars if you want a metric. Not as enjoyable as some of the better Bond films, not a train wreck either.

minchy wrote:Just seen The Man From U.N.C.L.E. and thoroughly enjoyed it. Nice that it was set back when the original was, good cast and along with Kingsman, good to get a bit of light relief in a spy film from all the gritty espionage thrillers we've been getting over the past 15 years of so.

Colesy917 wrote:Creed, really enjoyed it. Thought it was going to be awful when I first heard about it but I was pleasantly suprised.

huggybear wrote:

Colesy917 wrote:Creed, really enjoyed it. Thought it was going to be awful when I first heard about it but I was pleasantly suprised.

I really hoped this would be good, because the director Ryan Coogler, screenwriter Aaron Covington, and star Michael B Jordan were all involved in the excellent Fruitvale Station. They're all in their late 20s and represent part of the new generation of Hollywood coming through.

flyboy10 wrote:So, can somebody tell me whether Jaina Solo is going to be in any of the next Star Wars films or if she only exists in comic book stores?

SnakeSVT2003 wrote:Don't really get why the critics hate Batman v. Superman. I actually had 2nd thoughts about seeing it, but I gave it a shot last night, and it was very good. I won't spoil anything, but the one thing that bugged me, that is not a spoiler, is that Metropolis and Gotham City are neighboring cities, just across a bay from each other. I do have other issues with the film, but generally speaking, I'm happy I gave it a chance. Ben Affleck is a much better Batman than I thought he would be, especially after remembering how Matt Damon blew the role off as "easy" and "it's just Batman", which left me wondering if his best buddy Ben felt the same way. Thankfully, Ben clearly brought it, so a very happy Batman fan here.

Covalent wrote:

SnakeSVT2003 wrote:Don't really get why the critics hate Batman v. Superman. I actually had 2nd thoughts about seeing it, but I gave it a shot last night, and it was very good. I won't spoil anything, but the one thing that bugged me, that is not a spoiler, is that Metropolis and Gotham City are neighboring cities, just across a bay from each other. I do have other issues with the film, but generally speaking, I'm happy I gave it a chance. Ben Affleck is a much better Batman than I thought he would be, especially after remembering how Matt Damon blew the role off as "easy" and "it's just Batman", which left me wondering if his best buddy Ben felt the same way. Thankfully, Ben clearly brought it, so a very happy Batman fan here.

I liked it as well and thought Affleck was a decent Batman. For some reason I really like Cavill as Superman and thought Man of Steel was a superb superhero film, certainly better than most of the Marvel films. I realize I'm somewhat of a minority in my views but I left the theatre with a smile on my face after Batman v Superman.

huggybear wrote:

Covalent wrote:

SnakeSVT2003 wrote:Don't really get why the critics hate Batman v. Superman. I actually had 2nd thoughts about seeing it, but I gave it a shot last night, and it was very good. I won't spoil anything, but the one thing that bugged me, that is not a spoiler, is that Metropolis and Gotham City are neighboring cities, just across a bay from each other. I do have other issues with the film, but generally speaking, I'm happy I gave it a chance. Ben Affleck is a much better Batman than I thought he would be, especially after remembering how Matt Damon blew the role off as "easy" and "it's just Batman", which left me wondering if his best buddy Ben felt the same way. Thankfully, Ben clearly brought it, so a very happy Batman fan here.

I liked it as well and thought Affleck was a decent Batman. For some reason I really like Cavill as Superman and thought Man of Steel was a superb superhero film, certainly better than most of the Marvel films. I realize I'm somewhat of a minority in my views but I left the theatre with a smile on my face after Batman v Superman.

Batman vs Superman and Man of Steel were both heavily criticised for being too dark and brooding compared to the Marvel films, which I always find an odd complaint as comic book stories are generally a bit dark.
I liked Man of Steel for making Superman far more interesting because the character is inherently flawed for making films about.
He's an alien with all the powers, who could defeat any threat in seconds, so the comic book writers and script writers have to keep thinking up ex machinas to stop him punching a hole in the soul of the bad guy in about 3 seconds. In MoS, they made him inherit some of the less desirable traits of the humans he's been living with for 20 years, like being petty.
I find it interesting that all of the post Iron Man 2 films (except Captain America films) are so highly rated, because they are all basically the same film, and they try to shoehorn in Black Widow and Hawkeye, and Falcon into the plot for no damn reason.

mac_d wrote:Pretty boring Sunday evening so I decided to see what Netflix had to offer. Ended up watching Scream. I think last time I saw it it might have been on VHS so it's been a while.

I forgot just how damned good a film this is. It's probably the best horror/slasher type movie I've seen (I also loved Scream 4 which was basically as good but updated to a more modern setting). So many great things in this film. The plot is solid, the ability to have characters deconstruct certain aspects of horror movies then to throw those back at the audience but still have them work is great. The casting of the big Hollywood name for the start, the many, many false leads planted. The black comedy meets meta humour meets good slasher film makes for a real good experience. I really enjoyed watching this film again. I might have to check out the Netflix Scream TV series now.

I know it's not really horror. Slasher films are generally considered a separate genre I think. But if you do lump them together, this is close to being my favourite of the group. The first half of the Stephen King's It TV movie is probably my favourite horror film, and I still find that utterly creepy (I felt someone walk over my grave as I thought about it just now). The second half of the TV movie ruins the whole thing so there is that caveat.

Siao7 wrote:Watched the Suicide Squad. Meeeeh. The characters were ok, but the storyline was almost non-existent. A witch and her brother with tentacles? Just didn't hit the sweet spot. I had the same feeling with Deadpool, great character but the villain let the movie down somehow. Oh well, maybe it's just me

huggybear wrote:
The Scream TV show is fun, but a little silly because they've updated it for a younger generation. They've also tweaked it a bit to be a bit more like Halloween, and added a mythical Mike Myers type killer from the past that the killer impersonates rather than just a random ghostface killer. Sort of if Billy Loomis was some kind of celebrity murderer (it's not him though).
They've also got rid of the mask from the films after Scary Movie kinda killed their effect, and have a new scarier mask that's more in line with proper horror masks like Vorhees and Myers.

mac_d wrote:

Siao7 wrote:Watched the Suicide Squad. Meeeeh. The characters were ok, but the storyline was almost non-existent. A witch and her brother with tentacles? Just didn't hit the sweet spot. I had the same feeling with Deadpool, great character but the villain let the movie down somehow. Oh well, maybe it's just me

Deadpool was a bit odd I thought. I really enjoyed the film. I agree though, Ajax wasn't the strongest villain. Sure, they made sure we knew he was a dick, but they didn't really make him a threat. I did enjoy the film a lot, but I thought a little more about Ajax's powers would have helped. I feel like in the movie they only tell us he can't feel pain. As superpowers go, that doesn't really seem that useful compared to turning to metal or being able to heal from just about anything.

SnakeSVT2003 wrote:Just saw the Robocop remake. It's ok, and I liked Joel Kinnaman as Alex Murphy, but I just couldn't help but wonder what this movie could've been if they had gone for an R rating, which the original had (after many edits to get rid of the initial X rating it received!), instead of PG-13.

For example, Alex Murphy gets wounded. In the remake, he's hurt by a car bomb. In the original, he's blasted apart by psychopaths with shotguns, who at one point start playing games while shooting him!

Another gripe is how the ending battle is EXTREMELY underwhelming, and how I think the director missed a trick here. Earlier in the film, Robocop is training in a giant warehouse loaded with robots and the military expert in charge of them, who is equipped with a .50 caliber assault rifle, the only caliber that can penetrate Robocop's armor. The whole exercise is Robocop dealing with the robots while avoiding getting shot by the expert, whose negative attitude towards the cyborg project, and thus Robocop, let's you know that there will be a point later in the film where Robocop and this guy fight. They do eventually meet with the intent to fight, when Robocop goes after the Omnicorp CEO in their headquarters. The expert is there and, of course, Robocop can't shoot him because of the Omnicorp programming. Robocop just tries to run away, and the expert eventually gets shot from behind by Alex Murphy's former partner. Needless to say, that is a TOTAL letdown.

Right before that, however, was a battle between Robocop and three huge ED-209 drones. It was nicely done but it lacked something. That something IMO was the military expert. It would've been better to have Robocop fight the 3 drones while avoiding being shot by the expert and his .50 cal assault rifle, just like the training session from earlier in the film, and have one huge fight than to have one pretty good fight and one really pointless fight.

There were things I loved about the movie as well, such as the news segments with Samuel L. Jackson, Gary Oldman as the naive scientist, and how the filmmakers adjusted the plot to account for how outdated the concept of a cyborg is in the era of drones, but this movie could have been a lot more.

Hopefully the next one is rated R. At the moment, the two worst films of the Robocop franchises are the two that were not rated R (the other being Robocop 3).

Siao7 wrote:

SnakeSVT2003 wrote:Just saw the Robocop remake. It's ok, and I liked Joel Kinnaman as Alex Murphy, but I just couldn't help but wonder what this movie could've been if they had gone for an R rating, which the original had (after many edits to get rid of the initial X rating it received!), instead of PG-13.

For example, Alex Murphy gets wounded. In the remake, he's hurt by a car bomb. In the original, he's blasted apart by psychopaths with shotguns, who at one point start playing games while shooting him!

Another gripe is how the ending battle is EXTREMELY underwhelming, and how I think the director missed a trick here. Earlier in the film, Robocop is training in a giant warehouse loaded with robots and the military expert in charge of them, who is equipped with a .50 caliber assault rifle, the only caliber that can penetrate Robocop's armor. The whole exercise is Robocop dealing with the robots while avoiding getting shot by the expert, whose negative attitude towards the cyborg project, and thus Robocop, let's you know that there will be a point later in the film where Robocop and this guy fight. They do eventually meet with the intent to fight, when Robocop goes after the Omnicorp CEO in their headquarters. The expert is there and, of course, Robocop can't shoot him because of the Omnicorp programming. Robocop just tries to run away, and the expert eventually gets shot from behind by Alex Murphy's former partner. Needless to say, that is a TOTAL letdown.

Right before that, however, was a battle between Robocop and three huge ED-209 drones. It was nicely done but it lacked something. That something IMO was the military expert. It would've been better to have Robocop fight the 3 drones while avoiding being shot by the expert and his .50 cal assault rifle, just like the training session from earlier in the film, and have one huge fight than to have one pretty good fight and one really pointless fight.

There were things I loved about the movie as well, such as the news segments with Samuel L. Jackson, Gary Oldman as the naive scientist, and how the filmmakers adjusted the plot to account for how outdated the concept of a cyborg is in the era of drones, but this movie could have been a lot more.

Hopefully the next one is rated R. At the moment, the two worst films of the Robocop franchises are the two that were not rated R (the other being Robocop 3).

I found it so funny; he goes to his little kid, knees in front of him and says: "do you want to touch it?"...

Hmmmmmm...

I didn't like it as much as the original. I need to watch it again I suppose. But the first couple of Robocop movies were far better in my opinion