[Movies]: Watch the Final Cut version. Paddington still better.

12122242627101

Posts

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    TOGSolid wrote: »
    Doodmann wrote: »
    While I didn't like a lot about the recent musketeers movie, watching Orlando Bloom chew scenery and steal the show from Christoph Waltz was pleasantly surprising.

    Wait, it's a steampunkish Three Musketeers where everyone involved knows it's silly as shit, chews the scenery, AND it has Christoph Waltz in it? How the actual fuck did this not get on my radar?

    It's utterly amazing.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPbhCbraf24

    Unfortunately I couldn't find a version in English.

  • JazzJazz Registered User regular
    edited August 2017
    Dunkirk has been done to death here, and you guys pretty much nailed it. Great flick.

    But that sound mix, dear God. There was more unintelligible dialogue than intelligible. The score was great, very unsettling, but it wasn't even just that it drowned out what was being said.

    It's going to be one to revisit with subtitles one day.

    But still, excellent movie otherwise. Made me want to throw a couple of hundred million at Nolan and tell him to go and make a Battle of Britain movie.

    Actually it makes me think, it's been a while since we've had a "proper" WWII movie prior to this one.

    Jazz on
  • TexiKenTexiKen Dammit! That fish really got me!Registered User regular
    I would love to see a Chosin Reservoir movie (which in elevator pitch terms comprises bits of Dunkirk, 300, Alamo, and SPR), but it would never get made in any big budget capacity because China.

  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    TexiKen wrote: »
    I would love to see a Chosin Reservoir movie (which in elevator pitch terms comprises bits of Dunkirk, 300, Alamo, and SPR), but it would never get made in any big budget capacity because China.

    *reads up on that*
    Fascinating story, and you're probably right.
    Also, I submit that the true victor of that battle was "Siberian winter". :/

  • wanderingwandering Russia state-affiliated media Registered User regular
    Nobeard wrote: »
    What do you fine folks say is Tim Curry's best villain?
    cC2NgMC.jpg?1

  • Atlas in ChainsAtlas in Chains Registered User regular
    I have trouble calling what Serkis does with motion capture amazing because...well, where are all the terrible performances? We're told over and over that he's a pioneer, this is very difficult, and yet, everybody that puts on the dots just happens to turn in an excellent performance. We raved about Zoe Saldana as a blue cat lady, we raved about Kebbell as the next stand out ape after Serkis, we loved Nyong'o as the wise old lady yoda, absolutely every opportunity in this field turns out just fine. If Serkis is going to start getting Oscars for this, somebody, somewhere, needs to fail. I have no doubt that the process is taxing and not terribly enjoyable, even difficult in the sense that it is a thing to be endured, but as an inhibitor to turning in a good performance, well, that just hasn't been shown to be the case. Hell, for all the shit Avatar gets for being a boring, rote story, marvel at this: Sam Worthington in his Sam Worthington form was just as boring and uninspiring as he always is, and yet, in his blue catman form, he carries his end of the bargain easily, I've never once heard a complaint about him on that end of the movie.


  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    I'm pretty sure I said that Sam Worthington was boring and dull and terrible the whole way through the film.

    I'm also pretty sure I said that he really needs to pick an accent and stick with it.

  • TexiKenTexiKen Dammit! That fish really got me!Registered User regular
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaEoVnVxvGs

    I'm expecting more Indy 4 and less Star Wars 7.

    But seriously JV move not even getting ratings right for your movies, Sony. Keep hitting those fucking home runs.

  • TenzytileTenzytile Registered User regular
    TexiKen wrote: »
    I would love to see a Chosin Reservoir movie (which in elevator pitch terms comprises bits of Dunkirk, 300, Alamo, and SPR), but it would never get made in any big budget capacity because China.

    As a Canadian I feel similarly about Ortona.

  • TexiKenTexiKen Dammit! That fish really got me!Registered User regular
    The Adriatic stuff is largely ignored in modern WWII films and would be ripe for exploration. Captain Corelli's Mandolin does not count.

  • wanderingwandering Russia state-affiliated media Registered User regular
    This talk about CG characters got me looking at behind the scenes photos of the Star Wars prequels and, man, look at this image:

    9puYYZP.jpg

    This is more evocative than any finished frame from the movies! It's beautiful! Like something out of Lion King on Broadway:

    FIrhLFO.jpg

    Anyway someone should make a blue screen sci-fi movie where they don't replace the blue screen.

  • RamiRami Registered User regular
    They didn't replace the blue screen in the finale of Star Trek Insurrection.

    gWxHVwG.jpg

  • AistanAistan Tiny Bat Registered User regular
    For Dunkirk, was there a different sound mix for different theater setups? I saw it on a normal-ass theater screen and while the music was everpresent and unrelenting as intended, I could also hear what everyone was saying perfectly fine.

  • Hahnsoo1Hahnsoo1 Make Ready. We Hunt.Registered User, Moderator mod
    Aistan wrote: »
    For Dunkirk, was there a different sound mix for different theater setups? I saw it on a normal-ass theater screen and while the music was everpresent and unrelenting as intended, I could also hear what everyone was saying perfectly fine.
    Yeah, I was like "You know, compared to other Nolan movies, the sound mixing in this wasn't so bad." I may have to see it again in a different theater.

    8i1dt37buh2m.png
  • TexiKenTexiKen Dammit! That fish really got me!Registered User regular
    Glen Campbell died, RIP.

    We must all watch Rock-A-Doodle this week.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOkITpj6cH4

  • HobnailHobnail Registered User regular
    Jesus Christ that movie is real?! I thought it was one of them childhood fragmentary gestalt memories, like that episode of Sesame Street where Big Bird has a knife

  • TexiKenTexiKen Dammit! That fish really got me!Registered User regular
    Hey, the Beastie Boys got their big break doing the soundtrack for Follow That Bird. Anything is possible.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNomhZFaWWI

  • DanHibikiDanHibiki Registered User regular
    Hobnail wrote: »
    Jesus Christ that movie is real?! I thought it was one of them childhood fragmentary gestalt memories, like that episode of Sesame Street where Big Bird has a knife

    that reminds me, I gotta watch Rock & Rule.

  • Dark Raven XDark Raven X Laugh hard, run fast, be kindRegistered User regular
    edited August 2017
    Dark Raven X on
    Oh brilliant
  • Ninja Snarl PNinja Snarl P My helmet is my burden. Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered User regular
    Barring anything else, I'm bewildered as to how the new film has visual effects that are awful in comparison to anything, much less the original that came out in freaking 1984.

  • DanHibikiDanHibiki Registered User regular
    Barring anything else, I'm bewildered as to how the new film has visual effects that are awful in comparison to anything, much less the original that came out in freaking 1984.

    might have something to do with the fact that the movie was many millions over budget because the director refused to shoot scenes that were in the script costing the studio a fortune in re-shoots.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    DanHibiki wrote: »
    Barring anything else, I'm bewildered as to how the new film has visual effects that are awful in comparison to anything, much less the original that came out in freaking 1984.

    might have something to do with the fact that the movie was many millions over budget because the director refused to shoot scenes that were in the script costing the studio a fortune in re-shoots.

    lolwhat?

  • TexiKenTexiKen Dammit! That fish really got me!Registered User regular
    it's about 7 minutes into the Plinkett review, Akroyd is participating in an interview and straight up says Fieg didn't shoot scenes in the script Akroyd knew was funny and then when the movie wasn't testing well they went back and spent 30-40 million to reshoot the scenes Feig scoffed at originally.

  • GvzbgulGvzbgul Registered User regular
    It's Akroyd though, so take it with a pinch of salt.

  • HobnailHobnail Registered User regular
    Gvzbgul wrote: »
    It's Akroyd though, so take it with a pinch of salt snorted up your nose straight to your brain.

  • JibbaJibba Registered User regular
    edited August 2017
    Saw Dunkirk on IMAX (not 70mm though.) Awe inspiring movie that I never want to see again. There were so many small, brilliant details scattered throughout every scene
    like for instance when the pilot with the broken fuel gauge knows he's low on fuel but decides to go after the German fighter anyways, I guarantee 9/10 directors would've shown the time on his watch so that the audience knows how much time is left vs what he wrote down on the dashboard. By not doing that (he does it the first time so that the pilot can estimate the time, but not a second time so the pilot can check the time), Nolan keeps you in suspense of it happening the entire time.

    I think about halfway through is when I decided I didn't want to watch it anymore.
    Strangely not during the war scenes but when the boy falls and hits his head on the boat, and is whimpering while bleeding. I realize that's pretty illogical, compared to everything else that goes on in the movie but that's when I decided "this is all dumb".

    The whole thing is an extremely impressive movie, and I can totally understand someone not liking it.

    Jibba on
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    I actually re-watched the 2016 Ghostbusters last week, because my sister hadn't seen it yet.

    It suffers from a weaker script, flimsy antagonist, bad improv scenes, and special effects that underwhelm rather than impress, but there are parts of the film that are still quite good, and if they had stuck to the strengths of what was on display, it could have been a very good film. I am firmly in the camp of blaming the director over any of the cast for the missteps that occurred.

  • JibbaJibba Registered User regular
    edited August 2017
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    bad improv scenes

    This is one of my least favorite developments over the last decade (I had to look it up and holy shit Superbad and Knocked Up came out in 2007!)

    Some comedies have great improv scenes but I'd argue most (including ones with standout improv people like UCB actors) do not. Like every single Jason Bateman movie. It ends up in a bunch of directionless filler jokes. If you watch interviews with the writers and cast of Parks and Rec which is loaded with UCB and Second City actors, they consistently say very little improv actually goes on. Chris Pratt has some gems, but for the most part they go with the written jokes that have been hashed out in the writers' room.

    Jibba on
  • TychoCelchuuuTychoCelchuuu PIGEON Registered User regular
    Jibba wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    bad improv scenes

    This is one of my least favorite developments over the last decade (I had to look it up and holy shit Superbad and Knocked Up came out in 2007!)

    Some comedies have great improv scenes but I'd argue most (including ones with standout improv people like UCB actors) do not. Like every single Jason Bateman movie.
    Actors have been improvising lines in comedy for much longer than a decade. Murphy improvised much of his dialogue in Beverly Hills Cop, for instance, which is the main reason that movie is any good.

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Jibba wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    bad improv scenes

    This is one of my least favorite developments over the last decade (I had to look it up and holy shit Superbad and Knocked Up came out in 2007!)

    Some comedies have great improv scenes but I'd argue most (including ones with standout improv people like UCB actors) do not. Like every single Jason Bateman movie.
    Actors have been improvising lines in comedy for much longer than a decade. Murphy improvised much of his dialogue in Beverly Hills Cop, for instance, which is the main reason that movie is any good.

    From what I understand, many of the movies starring Robin Williams would leave segments in the script for him to ad-lib.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • JibbaJibba Registered User regular
    edited August 2017
    Jibba wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    bad improv scenes

    This is one of my least favorite developments over the last decade (I had to look it up and holy shit Superbad and Knocked Up came out in 2007!)

    Some comedies have great improv scenes but I'd argue most (including ones with standout improv people like UCB actors) do not. Like every single Jason Bateman movie.
    Actors have been improvising lines in comedy for much longer than a decade. Murphy improvised much of his dialogue in Beverly Hills Cop, for instance, which is the main reason that movie is any good.

    Of course it's been happening, but it hasn't been happening so liberally for every scene until it took off with Judd Apatow's movies (which do it better than most). Now they shoot the script version, a few improv versions and then go with what screen-tests the highest. The result is a bunch of jokes that only work independently.

    Jibba on
  • Ninja Snarl PNinja Snarl P My helmet is my burden. Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered User regular
    It's an entirely different situation when a particular actor has a talent for ad-libbing and is given the room to exercise that talent. Murphy and Williams were both doing stand-up before they were actors, so they were used to having to respond on-the-fly within a framework of some kind.

    That doesn't even remotely compare to just throwing a shitload of ad-lib on something because a director is too lazy to bother trying to make something good. It's the movie equivalent of replacing everything with reality shows; why bother expending any real effort or thought when throwing a bunch of shit at the wall makes just as much money for a lot less effort?

  • ArchangleArchangle Registered User regular
    Hobnail wrote: »
    Gvzbgul
    It's Akroyd though, so take it with a large glass of Crystal Head Vodka.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKqjIv91Zx8

  • ArchangleArchangle Registered User regular
    Jibba wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    bad improv scenes

    This is one of my least favorite developments over the last decade (I had to look it up and holy shit Superbad and Knocked Up came out in 2007!)

    Some comedies have great improv scenes but I'd argue most (including ones with standout improv people like UCB actors) do not. Like every single Jason Bateman movie.
    Actors have been improvising lines in comedy for much longer than a decade. Murphy improvised much of his dialogue in Beverly Hills Cop, for instance, which is the main reason that movie is any good.
    One of the earliest examples is Harpo Marx:
    Official Harpo Website
    Groucho was a great writer and honed his characterization over years. But he had writers who really helped him. (Writers he ALWAYS gave credit to.) Groucho's ear was very keenly attuned to what was appropriate for his character to say and he certainly ad-libbed and wrote some of the funniest lines in the Marx Brothers canon.

    But writers didn't really work very well with Dad. Lots of times Dad would be handed a script that said, "Harpo walks in and does something funny." More often than not, it was up to Dad to figure out what the "funny" was. And he must have done a pretty good job of it - when the Brothers first appeared on Broadway, it was Harpo they singled out in their rave reviews for special attention.

  • chrisnlchrisnl Registered User regular
    So there are tons of movies that have become engrained into our culture in one way or another. People reference these movies all the time. I haven't seen all of the various movies that lots of people reference, so I figured I would see about correcting that a bit. And this is how I started watching The Big Lebowski.

    So it starts out with this narration over a scene of a tumbleweed. Uhm, OK? I guess that's fine. There's lots of bowling. I've gotten about 35 minutes into the movie and it's just . . . boring. The characters aren't very interesting. Does it get better? Because really I have very little interest in watching the rest of it because the setup has completely missed me.

    steam_sig.png
  • KetarKetar Come on upstairs we're having a partyRegistered User regular
    I see this before every single movie at my favorite local theater:

    https://youtu.be/zneFfXchrss

    Does that seem like an untrustworthy...... don't answer that thought. The theater actually rocks though - decent food brought to you by servers, good drink prices, and some truly great decor in each theater. It's like going to an Alamo Drafthouse with better decorations but less unique programming.

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    I don't know what's going on, and I'm not that invested to find out.

    http://www.empireonline.com/movies/news/james-cameron-reveals-avatar-villain-details/
    "The interesting conceit of the Avatar sequels is it’s pretty much the same characters. There are new characters and a lot of new settings and creatures, so I’m taking characters you know and putting them in unfamiliar places and moving them on this greater journey. But it’s not a whole bunch of new characters every time. There’s not a new villain every time, which is interesting. Same guy. Same motherfucker through all four movies. He is so good and he just gets better. I know Stephen Lang is gonna knock this out of the park."

    Avatar-001.jpg?w=300&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=b4c6864442ba95084fa8d3628c015c63

  • MulletudeMulletude Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    I actually re-watched the 2016 Ghostbusters last week, because my sister hadn't seen it yet.

    It suffers from a weaker script, flimsy antagonist, bad improv scenes, and special effects that underwhelm rather than impress, but there are parts of the film that are still quite good, and if they had stuck to the strengths of what was on display, it could have been a very good film. I am firmly in the camp of blaming the director over any of the cast for the missteps that occurred.

    That movie started out enjoyable. And then the generic action movie started and it ended up being a big disappointment.

    I liked the characters but the director stuck them in the back seat for his boring action sequences.

    XBL-Dug Danger WiiU-DugDanger Steam-http://steamcommunity.com/id/DugDanger/
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    Jibba wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    bad improv scenes

    This is one of my least favorite developments over the last decade (I had to look it up and holy shit Superbad and Knocked Up came out in 2007!)

    Some comedies have great improv scenes but I'd argue most (including ones with standout improv people like UCB actors) do not. Like every single Jason Bateman movie.
    Actors have been improvising lines in comedy for much longer than a decade. Murphy improvised much of his dialogue in Beverly Hills Cop, for instance, which is the main reason that movie is any good.

    From what I understand, many of the movies starring Robin Williams would leave segments in the script for him to ad-lib.

    Theres a reason every Robin Williams performance feels very similar

  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    chrisnl wrote: »
    So there are tons of movies that have become engrained into our culture in one way or another. People reference these movies all the time. I haven't seen all of the various movies that lots of people reference, so I figured I would see about correcting that a bit. And this is how I started watching The Big Lebowski.

    So it starts out with this narration over a scene of a tumbleweed. Uhm, OK? I guess that's fine. There's lots of bowling. I've gotten about 35 minutes into the movie and it's just . . . boring. The characters aren't very interesting. Does it get better? Because really I have very little interest in watching the rest of it because the setup has completely missed me.

    Honestly it keeps a pretty similar style of humor and tone throughout. If you don't like the start it's not going to change.

This discussion has been closed.