WatchmenComicMovie.com Forum

Jeez. It's not like I wanted to dislike it.

I LIKE SUPERHEROES AND STUPID FUN TOO, YOU KNOW!!!!

I second this.

I JUST got back from it,
and maybe my scoring is steeped a couple points high in fanboy adoration, but fuck it. Its the Avengers.

10/10

Edit:

DAT EXPENDABLES 2 TRAILER!

_________________
My Blog of Movie Reviews and Such

I'll be right back. I gotta go see a man about a mule.

Hesher, started of weird, stayed weird for ages, but had a god damned heartwarming pay off, probably not for everyone, but a good cast makes it watchable.

_________________
We're all actors, Laurie. I'm just an actor who read the script.

MEN ARE EVIL: THE MOVIE

7.5/10

No man , they are just mediocre.

_________________

That's not what everyone besides you and Skaoreo says.

_________________
"The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part.

"There's a cello in your house now."

I think this analogy is going to work for a ton of stuff:

Do you enjoy Adam Sandler's movies RJ ?

_________________

I'm talking about critical response, not box office.

_________________
"The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part.

"There's a cello in your house now."

I remember Roger Ebert giving 1/2 stars to Thor, 2 1/2 to The Incredible Hulk and 3 stars to both Iron Man movies as well as Captain America.

That to me, means that the best three out of those are just.............good.

And that's the problem, is the best that can be done with those characters is "good" ?

_________________

But Ebert, like every critic, has hits and misses. For example, The NY Times bashes just about every damn good movie. I don't take a damn thing they say with a pinch of salt (I'm looking at you A.O. Scott). You shouldn't have your opinions swayed by critics, you should have your opinions swayed by what you think about it, that's why it's your opinion.

_________________

My opinion was not swayed by Ebert, we just happen to agree.

_________________

Salt - 3/10

See it again they said...
you'll like it better they said...

I wanna kill somebody now. -_-

_________________
My Blog of Movie Reviews and Such

I'll be right back. I gotta go see a man about a mule.

You know ebert only rates out of 4 stars right? That means 3 stars is like 7-8/10 which isn't bad considering he is a notoriously harsh critic.

_________________
We're all actors, Laurie. I'm just an actor who read the script.

Gotta admire Ska´s endurance. If I was him, I would have ditched the series after IM2, or maybe Thor,but no, the man persevered and saw both Cap and the Avengers before calling it a day. A completionist.


And TIH was the only movie were I tought they could have done more with the material.


The first and worst mistake was the indefinition. They said that TIH was a rebbot, but for the uninformed masses, it sure as shit seemed a sequel. They tried to make it diferent from Lee´s Hulk, but they never really severed ties, and the movie suffered from that.
Letterier was a mistake, and the fact that they gave Norton leeway on the script and shooting, but no word on final cut was stupid mistake, that backfired when he started fighting with the studio before the movie came out.
One thing that was stupid was not using Norton for face and body mo-cap, on top of ditching Ferrigno as the voice. Shit, since LOTR that mo-cap proved extremely useful, why not use it for this?
And finally, my biggest complaint:not being able to give a personality to the Hulk himself, so that against "good" opponents we can look the other way at destruction he leaves behind.

You ruined it man

I don't think Ebert is that harsh, his scores are usually based on a comparison between intent and execution, if a movie wants to be fun, and it succeeds, he acknowledges it, and give it a good score.

Best example I can remember is Predator, Siskel HATED that movie, but Ebert thought it was great because he could see that it wasn't a movie aspiring to be the next Citizen Kane, but a fun, thrilling ride.

_________________

Curi-Okay, answering to your Zodiac review far too late. But that five year lapse you had a problem with, it's more or less fixed in the Director's Cut. Fincher transitioned between years by cutting to a black screen while you hear different songs.

Anyway, I've been watching a bunch of stuff lately, given I'm almost in total freedom:

8/10
I liked it more in first viewing. I now see glaring technical problems with it, as well as Eimbcke trying too hard at times. Yes, I know the long pauses and cuts to black are like a trademark of him, but they feel unnecessary here. And I think that maybe too much is left to viewer's interpretation. Still a good flick, though.


7/10
An okay movie from a great book. Really, the novel is an anthology of sorts and this movie only covers the first and last stories. So instead of only titling it after the first story ("Low men in yellow coats") they opt to give it the entire name of the novel (and of the second short story) and try to make it make sense with a pretty um, ambiguous and pointliness of dialogue that's scrapped from one of the later passages of the book. It didn't quite work.

It's beautifully shot and Hopkins' performance is great, but unlike the book where you could see the relationships grow, the movie was lacking in that. When Bobby says "Ted opened my eyes to let the future in", what does that even mean? In the book, it's more than clear, in the movie it doesn't make sense. Enough of the story makes its way to make sense and to show the quality of it, but none of King's knack for relationships and detail comes through, making it fail as an adaptation and as a movie, it feels pointless ultimately.



8/10
You know it doesn't bode well for a flick when you've seen it recently and upon rewatching, you realize you don't remember a lot of it! Why? I guess there's too much of "Wonderland" that tries to play it close to the ground. Coriat's script and Winterbottom's direction try to keep it as real as possible, so for a while, we are pretty much left watching a bunch of normal, sad people leading their normal, sad lives. Thankfully, the story picks up and there is a lot about the movie that works. The performances are great, there are some fantastic, emotional scenes. The gritty cinematography is beautiful in spots. Unfortunately, the narrative never quite comes together, again, for realism sake, it seems.


10/10

So I was a little weary because I wasn't exactly having the geekasm everyone was talking about. I could blame it on the fact that I disliked the whole strategy behind building the franchise and the fact that most of the Marvel flicks haven't been up to snuff. So it seemed like The Avengers was going to be an entertaining but short of great. Well, as it went on, I found myself very impressed. Joss Whedon still has too much of a TV director in him, but his strength in understanding relationships comes through, as well as making some killer action sequences. He makes them very intense and even though you are watching superheroes, there is a weight to these scenes. Yes, it's fantasy violence but it feels real. A lot of hilarious scenes, a lot of poignant moments. Through and through, this movie works very well. Everyone gets their due. A great time at the movies.

_________________
My unofficial and offical work-> http://www.youtube.com/movieboyandco

I've only seen some of it on television. I didn't like the kid who played Bobby, and that was enough to make me not want to watch it. The problem is that story is tied to the Dark Tower series, in a kind of crucial way, and when you decide to cut that out, that probably is felt in the movie. Incidentally, I don't suppose you have read any of the DT stories, have you? Ted makes an appearance in the final book, and we get a much clearer picture as to who he is and what he does.

_________________


"Heard them Walthers like to jump some" "As will you, with one in your elbow."

I didn't like Bobby very much in the film either. Or any of the kids. I blame it on the writing and the acting. King is great at writing kids and what Goldman and Hicks gave is in return was the Hollywood version of a kid. Not very beliveable. I haven't yet read "The Dark Tower" series, but I might begin with "The Gunslinger" very soon. But yeah, even as someone who hasn't read "The Dark Tower" stories, it's obvious that taking it away from those mythos and exchanging it for...something doesn't quite work.

_________________
My unofficial and offical work-> http://www.youtube.com/movieboyandco

The funny thing is, I knew of the movie before reading the book, so I imagined Ted as looking like Hopkins.

The Dark Tower series is good, but only until the last two books. Ted at least plays a significant role in the final volume, so it isn't just a cameo. Although it makes me wonder what people make of Ted's predicament if they haven't read any of the DT books.

_________________


"Heard them Walthers like to jump some" "As will you, with one in your elbow."

Are you planning on reading The Wind Through the Keyhole?

That thing just reminds me I need to hurry up and finish that series.

_________________
"The world is a fine place and worth fighting for." I agree with the second part.

"There's a cello in your house now."