-
Welcome to the discussion forums. To get posting, register an account.
Last movie you saw
- Thread starter molloch!
- Start date
Terminator 4 was a better movie than 3. Kristina Loken is cute, but yeah so what? She shows her tits in some terrible Ewe Boll film though. That film, Bloodrayne is quite hilariously bad in parts. Michael Madsen is in it, and doesn't even try to act, or even try to pretend he's happy to be there. He just stands there, says his lines with no emotion or anything. Like he seems actively trying to not act, or seem as if he doesn't want to be there. Then his sword fighting is literally him just standing there waving the sword from side to side. Not one of Ewe Bolls best.
Anyways, t3 for mindless entertainment is good.
I think terminator is just one of those things that people elevate to a level higher than it deserves. and a lot of people have cool memories from their child hood.
It's not a case of the travesty of those Alien vs Predator films, compared to what came before.
I liked the tv series aswell, although haven't seen season two as it's not on bluray yet.
Mud Cake
God
Sunshine
OMFG No wonder this movie was in the bargain bin $6.66 at EzyDVD.....
What a terrible waste of 100 minutes.
Totally silly story..... Totally implausible bad guy. I want those minutes back.
Sorry I did not even give this one a chance because it was just boring and bad.
Plot: Sun is dying, spaceship leaves Earth to go to the Sun. The plan is to drop off a bomb at the Sun which will bore down into the Sun and then restart it. Spaceship goes missing and mission fails. Enter second spaceship which is the one the movie is about. They meet the first ship but somehow someone survived 7 years on the other ship and manages to get onto the new ship. Much mayhem ensues.
Sorry it was bad.
3/10
OMFG No wonder this movie was in the bargain bin $6.66 at EzyDVD.....
What a terrible waste of 100 minutes.
Totally silly story..... Totally implausible bad guy. I want those minutes back.
Sorry I did not even give this one a chance because it was just boring and bad.
Plot: Sun is dying, spaceship leaves Earth to go to the Sun. The plan is to drop off a bomb at the Sun which will bore down into the Sun and then restart it. Spaceship goes missing and mission fails. Enter second spaceship which is the one the movie is about. They meet the first ship but somehow someone survived 7 years on the other ship and manages to get onto the new ship. Much mayhem ensues.
Sorry it was bad.
3/10
Last edited:
J
jase
Guest
I loved Sunshine. I saw it in cinemas and was blown away. It's one of my favourite sci-fi films of the last decade probably. It's very atmospheric and gave me a sense of dread, paranoia and claustrophobia throughout the film which made for compelling viewing. Also, the soundtrack is amaaaazing. I don't get your criticism about a totally implausible bad guy.. it's science fiction, of course it's implausible.
Mud Cake
God
Yeah I know but there's no logic behind how that guy survives 7 years on a cold ship with no lighting, heating, or even food from what we see.
I did love the pananoramic shots of the ship as it sailed past the camera ala 2001 style. Those were good. And atmospheric music during the fly bys.....
The only scene I really got tense over was the one where they had to fix the shield mirrors on the front of the ship. That had me tense on the edge of my seat.
The whole bomb premise is a bit hit and miss, unless they have found a way to create a fusion reaction inside a nuclear explosion.. Unless the bomb is actually a whole network of nuclear bombs then fusion might happen.....
Anyway at the end of the day not everyone is going to like the same things.
I really liked sunshine as well. It is one of the best sci-fi films of recent years, although district 9 has the crown of best.
It did have great atmosphere and was really well made. Visually stunning and thought provoking in many ways.
While Pinbacker was exaggerated for the final act, it was still fine and it's fiction. There's nothing too implausible. You have to just get over the physics of what they were trying to do. I think a lot of people just kind of didn't get what was going on and think the film was just a slasher movie from then on. One thing, on the special features, it's interesting that they did film it where you got a better look at him, and he wasn't as much of a monster type creature, but that ending on the editing room floor to amp up the action.
I loved the whole religious undertones to the film with the Sun. The sun is the bringer of all live, and who are they to defy the will of god if it wants to take away it's life giving rays from the earth. Just that slipping into that mind set while reflecting on the mission the closer they get to such a beautiful and massive object over many years. So Pinbacker snapped, went too far, and it was happening to the NZ guy on Icarus 2 as well. So it was all set up. Pinbacker went nuts, sabotaged the mission and killed the crew because they wanted to defy god.
His surviving is fine. There were more than enough supplies with out his crew members and he had the greenhouse. So all the air and water and food he could need, to sit in the sun room basking in the heat of the sun. He wasn't sitting in an empty cold space ship. He simply just parked it in closer orbit to the sun. Or he sabotaged it to stay there when he killed the crew. Hence why he was all burnt. It's like with the guy on Icarus 2, he was spending more and more time in there, dialling down the filter and was starting to show signs of being burnt.
Obviously most of the criticism is the turn the film took, but heys It was great, and I think the film changing tones worked really well for amp up the drama.
It did have great atmosphere and was really well made. Visually stunning and thought provoking in many ways.
While Pinbacker was exaggerated for the final act, it was still fine and it's fiction. There's nothing too implausible. You have to just get over the physics of what they were trying to do. I think a lot of people just kind of didn't get what was going on and think the film was just a slasher movie from then on. One thing, on the special features, it's interesting that they did film it where you got a better look at him, and he wasn't as much of a monster type creature, but that ending on the editing room floor to amp up the action.
I loved the whole religious undertones to the film with the Sun. The sun is the bringer of all live, and who are they to defy the will of god if it wants to take away it's life giving rays from the earth. Just that slipping into that mind set while reflecting on the mission the closer they get to such a beautiful and massive object over many years. So Pinbacker snapped, went too far, and it was happening to the NZ guy on Icarus 2 as well. So it was all set up. Pinbacker went nuts, sabotaged the mission and killed the crew because they wanted to defy god.
His surviving is fine. There were more than enough supplies with out his crew members and he had the greenhouse. So all the air and water and food he could need, to sit in the sun room basking in the heat of the sun. He wasn't sitting in an empty cold space ship. He simply just parked it in closer orbit to the sun. Or he sabotaged it to stay there when he killed the crew. Hence why he was all burnt. It's like with the guy on Icarus 2, he was spending more and more time in there, dialling down the filter and was starting to show signs of being burnt.
Obviously most of the criticism is the turn the film took, but heys It was great, and I think the film changing tones worked really well for amp up the drama.
Last edited:
kxk
SAPIOSEXUAL
Saw Taking Woodstock friday, I enjoyed it but it has some problems - the mother, she's way too much/too hammy or something ( and physically, there is a problem with a part of her anatomy).
Young lead dude is lovely, so is his Dad, I got quite few good laughs, and it's a generally warm feel good movie - I love Ang Lee but this isn't his best work. Some great photography and effects.
Young lead dude is lovely, so is his Dad, I got quite few good laughs, and it's a generally warm feel good movie - I love Ang Lee but this isn't his best work. Some great photography and effects.
District 9
I was in a pleasant, open mood prior to entering the cinema. When I walked out two thirds of the way into the film, I was left feeling ripped off, sour, and infected by the creative aesthetic of someone with taste opposite to my own.
The story and plot seemed inspired by third rate first person shooter games. The aliens were absurdly anthromorphised. The protagonist entirely unsympathetic. There was zero female eye candy to get me through - something you can at least rely upon with lame Hollywood fodder.
The name of Neill Blomkamp is burned into my memory, so that I can safely avoid all his future films.
I was in a pleasant, open mood prior to entering the cinema. When I walked out two thirds of the way into the film, I was left feeling ripped off, sour, and infected by the creative aesthetic of someone with taste opposite to my own.
The story and plot seemed inspired by third rate first person shooter games. The aliens were absurdly anthromorphised. The protagonist entirely unsympathetic. There was zero female eye candy to get me through - something you can at least rely upon with lame Hollywood fodder.
The name of Neill Blomkamp is burned into my memory, so that I can safely avoid all his future films.
Mud Cake
God
shame on you LOL
You didn't like District 9.
However while for the most part I did like it I too thought some of the characters flat and lifeless. Though it did stire echoes of what the old South Africa was like under De Klerk only with aliens.... Aparthied and all that.
What I have watched over the last week or two.
Babylon AD – Did not live up to the hype. A poo man's Children Of Men with a very abrupt mangled ending.
Wanted – This could have been so much more... Sure it's got Angelina but again a half assed film adaptation.
Jumper – I had hopes for the idea but the movie was stupid. Just felt too damn rushed. Jumper would have been good had they done 2 movies the first one giving some background on where the first jumpers came from and where the Paladins also came from, and why they felt so threatened about the Jumpers. Then they should have put the story we saw as the second movie. It felt very, very rushed as if it had all been hacked together to just get it done and over with.
Up!
I always enjoy the Disney Pixar films and this film once again re-affirmed just how good they constantly are. I think what sets Pixar apart is how they work on their films for a long time and are concerned with quality. It's not like Dreamworks that rushes out focused grouped comedies with big stars to do the publicity. Pixar is about quality entertainment. It's still all more and more worrying, how and when will they trip up?
You constantly see people referring to this as with all Pixar films as "kids" films. I don't think that label applies at all. After seeing this some guy leaving the cinema said, "that was alright, pretty good for a kids film."
Kids film? A kids film is a film only made for kids. This is more a fun adventure for adults that kids can enjoy. Just because it's animated doesn't mean it's necessary for kids. Its like how people complain south park isn't for kids. The medium shouldn't dictate the audience. With this and Pixars other films, they're just good films for a very wide audience and to be honest something like this story and themes wise isn't very kiddy. It's a fun adventure, with humour through out, but it's never kiddy humour. Nothings there just for the kids, no compromises, no fart humour or anything. Also the story and the themes are never compromised for kids. It treats the viewer as an intelligent person who can handle concepts most "kids" films wouldn't go near. It's actually quite a sad and touching films at time with some serious themes. It still amazes me how some of these films can show more emotion and convey it to the viewer more than most live action films.
I think this is because it's animation done right. It's about using the medium effectively and understanding it doesn't have to try and be completely realistic, or completely cartooney. It's right in the exact place. It's a mainstream but mature use of animation. Pixar knows what the advantages are of story telling and character development animation has that live action does. It knows when it can be a cartoon, and not be realistic. They truly are masters at this.
Definitely one of the best films of the year, and one of the best Pixar films, mainly because it's heartwarming, it's sad, it's funny, it's fun and it never treats you like a kid or is patronising. It's pretty much perfectly fine tuned and is why pixar puts all other animation, including disneys non pixar offerings to shame, and as well at most live action film makers to shame. They're a class act all the way.
I always enjoy the Disney Pixar films and this film once again re-affirmed just how good they constantly are. I think what sets Pixar apart is how they work on their films for a long time and are concerned with quality. It's not like Dreamworks that rushes out focused grouped comedies with big stars to do the publicity. Pixar is about quality entertainment. It's still all more and more worrying, how and when will they trip up?
You constantly see people referring to this as with all Pixar films as "kids" films. I don't think that label applies at all. After seeing this some guy leaving the cinema said, "that was alright, pretty good for a kids film."
Kids film? A kids film is a film only made for kids. This is more a fun adventure for adults that kids can enjoy. Just because it's animated doesn't mean it's necessary for kids. Its like how people complain south park isn't for kids. The medium shouldn't dictate the audience. With this and Pixars other films, they're just good films for a very wide audience and to be honest something like this story and themes wise isn't very kiddy. It's a fun adventure, with humour through out, but it's never kiddy humour. Nothings there just for the kids, no compromises, no fart humour or anything. Also the story and the themes are never compromised for kids. It treats the viewer as an intelligent person who can handle concepts most "kids" films wouldn't go near. It's actually quite a sad and touching films at time with some serious themes. It still amazes me how some of these films can show more emotion and convey it to the viewer more than most live action films.
I think this is because it's animation done right. It's about using the medium effectively and understanding it doesn't have to try and be completely realistic, or completely cartooney. It's right in the exact place. It's a mainstream but mature use of animation. Pixar knows what the advantages are of story telling and character development animation has that live action does. It knows when it can be a cartoon, and not be realistic. They truly are masters at this.
Definitely one of the best films of the year, and one of the best Pixar films, mainly because it's heartwarming, it's sad, it's funny, it's fun and it never treats you like a kid or is patronising. It's pretty much perfectly fine tuned and is why pixar puts all other animation, including disneys non pixar offerings to shame, and as well at most live action film makers to shame. They're a class act all the way.
Well Angelina's signed on and doing the sequel! So more wanted for you! I actually found her quite unappealing in this film.
I enjoyed wanted though, just a big over the top fun film. Although utterly silly if you look at the plot. How ever with elements such as curving bullets, it's not meant to take place in a realistic world anyways.
Babylon AD, i thought was ok... like decent and entertaining. Definitely a children of men dumbed down type film. Apparently though the studio fought the director at every step as he wanted it to be more in the style of children of men and they wanted it more dumbed down and mainstream. Children of Men is such a great film btw.
Jumper is a guilty pleasure of mine. It is rushed, i hope the sequel.. if they make it.. will be better. Its fascinating though, it's based on a series of books, but somewhat re-imagined and apparently they spend ages working out the world of the jumpers, the back story, the rules and so forth. So they knew all this and just didn't get it in the film. I think they planed to just do it as a fast introductory film and then get into all of that in sequels.
It's a shame you walked out, you missed the character turns and story directions. The main character was meant to be unsympathetic, it's all about the statements the film was making.
It is the sort of film though I did get the feeling would be unable to reach some people, who didn't quite get what it was trying to say, and didn't buy into the situations of the film.
It is an original and intelligent film. One of the best of the year. Absolutely loved it!
Mud Cake
God
Well I hope the sequel is better.... I too found her not very appealing in Wanted and I'm an Angelina fan.
Well the film was supposed to be longer. Some 70 minutes had been cut from the film which explains why it is so disjointed.
Or maybe the sequels will actually be prequels showing the origins of the Jumpers and the Paladins.
Big deal so people can jump..... Some religious nuts get all angsty and aggro about that.
I get the message, but yeah, I just couldn't get over the plot holes, and couldn't enjoy it as mere satire.
I could predict where the film was going, so felt no compulsion or curiosity to remain to the end.
I'd much rather watch the theme expressed in the excellent Hell in the Pacific with Lee Marvin, or even Enemy Mine, which may have been mentioned previously.
Well in the sequel to Jumper, look in the books the rachel bilson character learns how to jump. It's sort of hinted she can in the film. It's actually may have been her that causes the big jump towards the end when hayden is struggling. Some of the idea's are pretty out there, jumping through time and space, capacity for espionage ect. It'll be interesting to see what they come up with.
what plot holes you referring to?
Mud Cake
God
Jumpers would make great action heros.... If only they could get rid of the paladins?
That these super advanced beings capable of interstellar travel, somehow had their ship break down at planet Earth, without any regard for the impact their presence would cause, and with a seemingly ignorant appraisal of human psychology and greed.
That they allowed themselves to be imprisoned in a ghetto when they had weaponry and numbers to wipe out the human race.
That they bartered their weaponry for cat food...
That humans and the aliens could communicate with ease, yet there hadn't been any kind of sophisticated cultural intercourse.
That they had immunity to all our nasty microbes, and we to theirs.
It was just too ridiculous to think humans would realistically treat an alien race so badly, when the possibility of ten thousand motherships appearing some time in the future was entirely possible.
That the protagonist somehow become infected with a compound that transformed him into one of the aliens.
That the evil scientists didn't treat the protagonist more humanely, alienating him to the point of his escape.
The entire scenario was absurd.
Last edited:
I always thought and before the film, if I could have a super power teleporting would be one of my first choices.
The could get rid of them easily.
Mud Cake
God
They could but they seem like some sort of nutty religious order..... If you got rid of them others might take their place.
Yet within the world of the film no one knows about the Jumpers or the Paladins because I don't think the authorities would be too thrilled with murderers running about the place like that.