The last movie you saw...

[spudthedestroyer]

Regarding potc3:

saw it today, much better than that second effort but that really wasn't very hard.

Nice set pieces as usual, over the top action sequences as expected from a movie like this. You probably want to wait for a DVDrip, soundtrack is as pompous as ever and the SFX are very heavy.

better than the second one, but that, in itself, says little

Jynks is right about silliness, crab lady buggered off and made it rain? and no big boat battle? damn... lame! and no martial arts from chow yun?

oh and its not children, its a single child in that first scene.

But as people who know me would guess, i like pretty sets with pretty things on them (or rather grim over the top sets ), and there's a lot of them to keep my attention from analysising the plot.

There was one kids advert, an advert for Transformers (the less lame one), the shitty ass silver surfer advert, and an advert for Die Hard 3.0 @ uk cinemas. There was also a graphic drunk driver advert


edit: oh and there was an advert for the new harry potter

[dinky]

oh yeah. forgot that was this summer. do they actually show an clips from the HP movie? don't think I've seen any previews of it at all yet.

edit: wait. no. I'm sure I've seen something. but I'm pretty sure it wasn't a 2min trailer.

[maxpayne2409]

who cares? harry potter is about as much fun as bathing in babboon shit.

It's Die Hard 4.0 i'm waiting for

[Jynks]

i'm sensing you didn't like it then?

It is more than that max.... I am really pissed off with the state of cinima. Not upset or board.. i am ANNOYED.. deeply. There is somthing terribly wrong with film at the moment. Think of the quality of movies you have been watching. how many are good, how manay are destend to be classics... how many are B-grade slush that is so fun to watch?

Movies have been going down and down hill for ages.. I have been hoping that the leaking of technology from the top would mean that as films get cheeper to make the independent directors would start to make more and more films of content.. but this has failed to happen.

[maxpayne2409]

how many are B-grade slush that is so fun to watch?

i love the way you asked *me* that, as everyone knows i love watching crap b-zmovie slush

But yeah i do agree with what your saying about mainstream hollywood blockbusters, they do seem to lack less of a plot then anything starring Don "The Dragon" Wilson
Nowadays it's all about glitzy graphics and hype that will pull in Joe Average because they don't understand.

I remember when House of Wax came out a year or 2 back (the remake with Paris Hilton), and oen of my friends said "let's go pay and see it because i want to see how bad Paris Hilton actually acts" and i couldn't help but think "erm isn't that just gonna say to hollywood "ooh people like this crap, let's make more" and such is the reason idiots rule what hollywood produces.

[dinky]

how many are B-grade slush that is so fun to watch?

i love the way you asked *me* that, as everyone knows i love watching crap b-zmovie slush.

:rofl:
it's funny...

...cuz it's true.
:rofl:

to be fair (prolly gonna raise the anti-argument from spud on this but...), you can't go into a sequel and expect something even remotely original. and if you disliked the original, the sequel is a guarateed turd. :2cents:

I'd say more things are definitely more formulaic. and I do believe that, but the biggest change has been me. I can see</i> tle formula now whereas I couldn't as a kid. I mean...honestly, I can't look back to the 80s or 90s and be like "hey, look at that. remember 10-20 years ago when cinema had integrity?" cuz that's just not valid. yeah, sure, SW is WORLDS better than TPM, but so was LotR and Matrix.

there were some articles about this over the past year. right now, there's pretty much just blockbuster movie costs and indie movies. the medium range movies are getting so expensive that they have to fall back on "formula" to guarantee people will watch it or it will make enough money in action figures and mcdonald's tie-ins or whatever. tv material is getting much better too (HBO & Showtime); I think that's connected to this issue. so yeah, I see the spiral but iunno. atm, I'd say that's more a symptom of other things.

edit; forgot why I came on here... mr. and mrs. smith</i> untouched 1080i HDTV feed.

[dinky]

last hour+ of V</i>.

[MyK]

I don't think there's any degradation in quality of movies produced in general. Might be that Jynks was thinking of the ones that are aggressively advertised but that "I have been hoping that the leaking of technology from the top would mean that as films get cheeper to make the independent directors would start to make more and more films of content.. but this has failed to happen." simply isn't true IMO. There is constant gradual increase in number of quality independent productions and it's only hard to detect that cuz all that over-hyped crap masses like is in the faster lane.

[Jynks]

I do not think so MyK.... while YES there is an improvement in the quality of the film in many independent productions. The gap between the budgets of even a small film are stil so high that there is no way a film maker can just fully let loose on the work as if it is art. They will alway have to make concessions. For independents that is norm to the people that promote, sell the film and show it.

I mean the winner of carn this year, a tiny film, shot with one camera. a SINGLE fuckn boom for godssake.. STILL cost over a million dollars and that is without syndication. I always thought that with the advent of highspeed broadband to avoid syndication and the leak of tech we would see some truly awesome independent films that can simply afford to take BIG HUGE freakn leaps. Films that strain the meaning of the word... proper films, with ideas and thoughs and commentary.. rather than the pap that is coming to our cinimas now.

[MyK]

Oh you were thinking of movies we're able to see in cinemas Well most of the independent production doesn't even come that far so we're stuck at digging for them some other way. And we can forget about hearing/reading of them in high-volume media. I rub my nose in low-volume but highly absorbent independent & specialized newspapers/blogs now and then and dig-up some true gems occasionally. Sure they are not big money productions so they lag behind their big brethren in some aspects but give you a whole new experience all together. We have a small cinema specializing in independent/non-commercial productions in my town and that helps too

[spudthedestroyer]

yes, it was a harry potter clip trailer, trailer length and was made of clips from the film.

Die Hard 4.0 looked extremely, extremely worrying.... came off as very tacky... jerry bruckheimer presents a michael bay film kind of tacky. It looked stupidly over the top action sequences and the fact the director has nothing to his name is extremely worrying. From the advert there's a high chance that it could be extremely tacky and shit, lets hope its better than Die Hard 2 at least... why they let that nonce direct the second i'll never understand, he is almost completely void of talent.

Anyway, the trailer was all silly "bus flies into a helicopter as a guy jumps out onto the top of a car in slow motion" type sequences, and i pray they don't go into the "computer hacker" side of things because hollywood has a piss poor record on that front.

you can't go into a sequel and expect something even remotely original.

Well that's not entirely true, there's a respectably long list of unique sequels, and when you add into the mix the list of sequels that are superior to the first its very respectable the amount of titles that make such statements fall over.

Yes, there's a huge trend when they don't invest the time or creativity (and its solely this point that is the failing in hollywood); is it a rule or something to guide your expectations by in every case? no, i've had it proven to me other wise watching many sequels. Would i expect something like spiderman to be like your statement? Yes, I'd expect a narrow analysis of purely these kinds of films to adhere to your view.



Next cinema outing for me will probably be 28 weeks later, maybe this week or next, i don't expect it to be like the original to any overwhelming degree, given that its a different staff. I expect it to be more action orientated.

[maxpayne2409]

i quite liked die hard 2, but it still was pretty much a carbon copy of die hard 1, jsut moving locale to an airport rather then a high rise.

Anyway i've got a film to watch tonight i expect will be utterly cheesey, a mayan curse causes snakes to hatch ina womans stomach (dont ask me how) and they eat their way out from inside, to get it lifted she has to travel to LA.... on a train......... 3 guesses what the films called.........

Snakes on a train.............

which prompted us at work to start thinking of other rip offs featuring animals on a mode of transport that rhymes in the title, they could make to cash in, i came up with a good one Crab in a cab - the story of a woman in a short skirt who sits on the back seat of a taxi cab and gets crabs... or Hooters on Scooters - a flock of genetically engineered flesh eating owls get loose at a mods scooter club, tripe ensues

[spudthedestroyer]

watch die hard 2 again, its a real tacky piece of shit and has the tone and script of a real dud, i'm surprised it came out so well and ended up being okay... i suspect it was on the back of the first one. Renny Harlin is was shitty director, Long Kiss Goodnight is a fucking terrible film, cliffhanger is dreadful, exorcist the beginning was one of the worst films of that year, cutthroat island was a collosal fuckup, die hard 2 was pretty shitty... god only knows how it survived being okay. His most suprising film is actually probably Deep Blue Sea imo, its not terrible and poorly divised on the same level as his others, its failure are of a different degree so to speak


I'm just about to power down and watch Lifeforce myself

[maxpayne2409]

oh god i saw long kiss goodnight and it really was fucking dreadful, even by my standards, cliffhanger i never got round to watching simply because it sounded shit, exorcist is shit whichever way you look at it, cutthroat island we shall pretend for the sake of humanity doesn't exist, havent seen deep blue sea either as it just sounds like a jaws rip off but shit.

[maxpayne2409]

Got sent this earlier

Who really set fire to the Cutty Sark

[spudthedestroyer]

lmao, nice.... chinese jack sparrow did!

[dinky]

I actually liked cutthroat (a little) and cliffhanger. I liked die hard 2 too. but I've kinda been swayed by the spud. it initially feels like the first one with that change of locale, but it doesn't stand up to repeat viewings at all. disliked long kiss goodnight's execution, but the concept I thought was really cool. and samuel l. made up for a lot too. deep blue sea was a retarded concept but I actually thought it performed well in the disposable monster/survivor genre that it's clearly a part of (subgenre of horror or action?).

anyway...watched the incredibles tonight.

[maxpayne2409]

how can you say samuel l jackson saved anything? he's shit and a one character actor

[dinky]

that's like saying jack nicholson is shit and a one character actor.

I would throw that accusation at a lot of other "top flight actors" before the bad muthafucker. namely brad pitt, george clooney, morgan freeman, and al pacino only has two characters, ffs.

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

[maxpayne2409]

i really hate sam l jacko, i can't stand him