Last movie you have seen + rating

Click here and disable ads!

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=signs

 

Crash (2004) 3/10
Dumb, blunt, inconsistent, manipulative, formulaic, pretentious garbage. Movie just shits out cheesy scenes accompanied by "emotional" music. On the bright side I wasn't bored during watching it and the pacing was good. It's also an easy film to follow, I didn't memorize any names. Gave it a 3 to match its Oscar wins.

Rosemary's Baby (1968) 6.5/10
Cool psychological thriller. Liked the atmosphere and the weird acting.

Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler

I think the mystery/psychological aspect wasn't balanced well, movie ends up being predictable.

The Past (2013) 6.5/10
Relationships and stuff.

 

Just fuck my shit

I can't remember much about this movie other than a white cop raping an educated niggarette lol Jewllywood at its finest. I remember this being an eye-opener to me at the time at how fucked up things were over there with Cultural Marxism.

 

The Revenant (2015)



Really well-made movie. Cinematography is top-notch, lots of really well-done shots, and a sparing use of a score to help set a tone of isolation in the wilderness. I don't really hate Leonardo Dicaprio as an actor, but I do think he's pretty much utterly incapable of emoting with any form of subtlety. Luckily, since all the film requires is for him to scream, moan, cry, and act like a batshit insane maniac, it plays to all of his strengths. Also a lot of great acting all around from the rest of the cast, though I do think Tom Hardy still has a bit of an issue with doing non-British accents.

I'd say the only major weakness is with the tacked on native american subplots, which just feels like it exists so that the filmmakers can avoid being accused of racism when they depict the natives as being whooping and hollering savages who murder white men by the dozens.

 

Hateful 8



its a Tarrantino flick.
nuff said
ok, endless semi deepish dialogues that nowadays look like a cheap and bad Coen copy. very reduced story.
and of course a good dose of brutality and overboarding violence.

its a Tarrantino flick.
if you really like those, this might be for you.

 

Just watched Deadpool.

/ would laugh my ass off again.

 

I also just saw Deadpool.

/ :5/5

Way better than I expected for a comic book movie put out in February, and, surprisingly, doesn't completely shit all over the source material.
TJ Miller steals the movie.

 

John Carter of Mars



Just watched half of it last night, but I already feel it made science fiction great again. Best one I've seen in the last 25 years.

 

Yes, I also thought it was great. Great visuals, and great atmosphere. Acting was good enough that it didn't draw me out. Honestly I think it flopped because of a shit marketing campaign (I only heard of it when people started saying how it bombed) and they spent too much on it; they should have found ways to cut costs. It looks great, but certainly not as expensive as it turned out; maybe someone quietly pocketed a lot of the money.

 

I think th movie failed because it made it hard as fuck for the audience to connect with the setting of a Mars inhabited by humans flying around with swords, magic dogs and generic aliens... Also the half assed super powers of the protagonist.

 

I could connect better with Mars inhabited by humans flying around with swords, magic dogs and awesome aliens than whatever science fiction movies have done in the last 25 years, including Matrix and whatever.

I'm having a hard time remembering any good science fiction movie in the last 25 years. Edge of Tomorrow? It has swords, magic and aliens. Only thing missing is dogs.

 

The book is better than the movie and was supposedly the first sci fi book ever written back around 1900. Superman was based in part on John Carter. His super strength due to a weaker gravity etc. It was definitely interesting, but imo they changed a bit too much from the book that they didn't need to. Maybe people couldn't relate to it because today we know Mars is a dead planet and there is no breathable atmosphere, but 100 years they didn't know and the author had some interesting science fiction ideas.

 

Looper, gravity, Mad max, interstellar, Moon, ex machina, planet of the apes, sunshine, minority report, inception, District 9, children of men.

Those are some of those I can remember, all vastly superior to John Carter, but as with most things, I guess it's down to taste.

 

Most of those are boring and pozzed... I liked District 9, but in John Carter there's no niggers, so the victory goes to it.

Of course it's down to taste, but even my sister liked John Carter for some reason.

 

Been on nice western-binge lately...

3:10 to Yuma (1957)

Much better than the remake from 2007, Glenn Ford and Van Heflin are very good in their roles - especially Ford as the charming criminal Wade. Rest of the cast are pretty good, but as the film concentrates on the two main characters they get over-shadowed a bit. Visually stunning film, the black and white cinematography adds a lot to the film. I couldn't imagine the film shot in color, which would IMO cheapen the film noiry mood and setting.

Glenn Ford is starting to become one of my favourite actors from that era, he was also in The Big Heat. He has that great effortless charisma which is nowdays greatly lacking from the modern actors. The bluray released by The Criterion Colleciton looks amazing and either the film has gone through extensive restoration or then negatives were in great shape. Unfortunately the extras are not great, just two about 15 minutes interviews, I would've loved commentary tracks and what not.

/




Red River (1948)

Howard Hawks western about the cattle-drive, starring John Wayne and Montgomery Clift. John Wayne is lot better actor than what people gives him credit for nowdays, especially on later times he became prisoner of his own stardom. Having watched two John Ford westerns couple months ago, and now comparing to Hawks' Red River, the difference in styles is pretty intersting - Hawks rarely shot visually stunning "landscape" shots and he used close-ups sparingly, he used them to give the scenes effectivity, which both Ford used more.

One of the big/main parts was gonna be John Ireland's Cherry Valance who would've been rival to Clift's Matt Garth, but unfortunately he was unprofessional, drank too much and smoked too much weed. Hawks didn't like it so he cut his part smaller, so their rivalry was left "half-done" and would've given the film interesting dynamic. Unfortunate as I like John Ireland and played his role well in the scenes he was in.

I watched the theaterical cut which is shorter than the usually seen preview cut, but theaterical cut was the one Hawks preferred, so I'd recommend to see it. The Criterion Collection set is excellent, it has both cuts plus the book which the film is based on. There's also region b bluray by Eureka's label Masters of Cinema but it has only preview cut.

Can't decide if Red River is ½ or /

Pic of the set in spoiler tags.

Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler

Day of the Outlaw (1959)

André de Toth's western set in thes snowy mountain town, group of the ex-soldiers and their captain takes over the town. Robert Ryan and Burl Ives takes over the film as the two leads, especially Ives who's very effective as the ex-captain who needs to keep his men under control. Ryan is his usual very good in the role as the harsh and tough homesteader.

The film tries to be maybe a bit too big compared to the small budget it had at the time, just 400k dollars but it is still quite effective and does best with what it had. With larger budget Day of the Outlaw could've been masterpiece, and without the production troubles it had (For example, Ryan was struck down with sickness for a bit) they could've used the money a bit more effectively. With larger budget and longer shooting schedule they could've taken bigger advantage of the landscape and the setting, which could've given better sense of the isolation and the cold/snowy surroundings.

Couple shots/scenes were clearly shot against the rear projection, which removes a bit of effectiveness from the film as it tends to break the continuity. I haven't seen Hateful Eight, but Tarantino is apparently big fan of de Toth and Day of the Outlaw, so I wouldn't be surprised if it has a lot of similarities.

Eureka put out bluray using their Masters of Cinema-label, which has great picture quality but low on extras, just one interview and isolated music/sound effect-track, it does have nice bookle though.

/


Every one of these three films alone had more testosterone than modern films combined.


edit: derp derp, not The Big Sleep, Glenn Ford was in The Big Heat.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/André_de_Toth

Maybe a little too much testosterone.

 

My quest to clear my ~300 backlog of "movies to watch" is almost complete!

Iron Sky (2012)

Nazis in space!

Pros:
- CGI, mood, cinematography.
- Acting is surprisingly decent, maybe except the black guy.
- Julia Dietze is hot as hell.
- Earth vs. Nazi Moon final battle turning into a clusterfuck was p. funny.

Cons:
- Writing and script are way too amateurish to be enjoyable - constant "fan-project" feel.
- Negro-stuff was plentiful and pointless.
- Watch Danger 5 instead.

Hesher (2010)

A boy overcomes his family troubles with help from a violent metalhead.

Pros:
- Acting is good, esp. the boy, JGL and Piper Laurie.
- Some really funny scenes, esp. Hesher being violent and vulgar.
- Mixes a lot of genres (family drama, comedy) in an interesting way.

Cons:
- Hesher ultimately turns into something less interesting that I initially hoped for (TJ's guardian angel).
- TJ-Nicole relation feels kinda artificial and pointless (too asexual).
- Turns into family drama in the end, which wasn't the best idea, as the grandma-angle doesn't quite work.

99 homes (2015)

Decent drama about US' housing market collapse, from the "micro" perspective this time (guy looses his house and makes a deal with the devil to get it back).

Pros:
- Cinematography, acting, no forced "akshun".
- Another great role of Michael Shannon.

Cons:
- Goes a little bit too far with making the evil guy sympathetic (evil gubmint made him do it), which doesn't quite work and make the ending weak (Dennis leaves the Dark Side out of the blue).
- Dennis' family is too bland.
- No females except Mom (Laura Dern). Throwing some love interest in would be nice...

Eagle Eye (2008)

Evil omnipotent AI forces Shia LaBeouf and Michelle Monaghan to do as ITZ pleases. US President may be in danger...

Pros:
- Action scenes are nice.
- So is acting.
- Great at showing how constant surveillance can be used against every citizen.

Cons:
- Script turns into shit later on. Billy Bob Thornton suddenly gets his "god mode" turned off. Evil AI turns from superefficient genius to helpless retard (biatch has like 0 defence systems), finale is 100% retarded (Shia survives multiple shots from Secret Service and wins the MILT) /spoilar
- Gail and Falcon are just there.

Mud (2012)

Two country boys meet a mysterious stranger on the lone island. Problems ensue.

Pros:
- Fantastic scenery, good cinematography,
- Good acting, from young actors too.
- Fantastic small roles from Ray McKinnon, Michael Shannon and Paul Sparks.
- Entertaining despite its flaws.

Cons:
- Script isn't that great. Feels like a literal adaptation of a book, which it isn't. Some things are not fleshed-out enough (Ellis' family), some are cringe-worthy (Ellis' love life), some feel out of place (final shootout).
- Way too much disbelief suspension required (boys helping some "hobo with high Speech", one of the most incompetent mobsters ever, Juniper being rather a concept than a fully developed character).
- Ending.
- Reese Witherspoon's MILTness not fully utilized.

 

The thing
I really enjoyed the movie , this is a very good example of how a horror movie should be done . It's violent , intriguing and tense . Although ending kinda spoiled the rest of the film , 4/5 for that . The monster was very original and memorable , open the spoiler if you want an example .

Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler

 

CRIMSON PEAK (2015)



For the first half-hour to forty-five minutes, I was watching this and thinking "Man, the critics were way overharsh on this film. Okay, maybe it's a bit more Jane Austin-ish than I would have liked, but this is pretty damn enjoyable."

Then the second half of the movie came. And things went to crap. Click on the spoiler tag for why.

Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler

I was really disappointed that the ghosts were just sad and not malevolent. And why do ghosts in these movies always seem to be haunting the wrong people? Shouldn't they have been tormenting their murderers instead of scaring the daylights out of the helpless girl? And, if the ghosts were going to torment the girl, why not tell her something useful like "Don't marry Baronet Sharpe because he and his sister are incestuous, murdering psychopaths" instead of just saying "Beware Crimson Peak!". And, Jesus, if you *are* just going to say something like "Beware Crimson Peak" say "Beware Allerdale Hall" so that the person you're trying to warn knows what the fuck you're talking about before they get there?

I was also annoyed that the supernatural activity almost completely disappeared after a while so that the film could focus on the human monsters. Maybe I was just mislead by the advertising, but I was expecting more Legend of Hell House than Fall of the House of Usher.

Also, I thought that the script could have played up the mystery a bit more. It was obvious from far too early on that (1) Lucille was mad as a hatter and (2) Thomas was already married (although, I gave it a 50/50 chance after the confrontation with Edith's father that Lucille was either Thomas' first wife posing as his sister or Thomas' actual sister in an incestuous relationship with him).

Visually, the film does look stunning, though, with some fantastic sets and a wonderful sense of the wrongness of the house. Also, Hiddleston, Chastain, and Wasilkowska are all quite good in their roles, even if none of them are given much to stretch their talents.


It's really probably more of a 2 1/2 star movie, but I love Gothic haunted house flicks, so that gets it an extra 1/2 star.

 

Just watched the jew version of Guardians of the Galaxy, wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. Black Gamora is a shit. I liked the talking guaxinim, the happy blue flute player and Drax was amusing. Thanos was used wrong, as most things Marvel. Nice cameo by ((Stanley Lieber)) in the beginning.



I'd rather I had seen this, tho:

 

Deadpool



Funny, mostly. Some of the humor was a bit derp, but not bad. Pretty entertaining for a comic book flick. The two X-Men shit was ridiculous, they could have done without the overextended flashback too. The girlfriend/wife I had problems with. I mean, one minute she is a dirty hooker and the next she is a waifu that goes to the market to buy vegetables.

Also saw the preview for the Batman vs. Superman flick. Looked lame. Suicide Squad looks interesting, but it has Will Smith in it.

 

Sounds like a typical woman to me.

 

Deadpool



Fun movie. Loved how the jokes poked fun at everything, including its own franchise. The fourth wall breaking stuff was great too.

Origin flashback went on for far too long though. And the cliché plot towards the end lacked self-awareness, becoming what it should have parodied.

 

The Revenant (2015)



Pretty decent film, good acting from Caprio and Hardy. Abit too long near the end, but very impressive camera work and shots.

 

I don't know if I would rate Man from UNCLE quite so high, but I will say that I saw it and SPECTRE this weekend and UNCLE was, by far, the more enjoyable of the two.