The Professional
Outstanding movie !!
Outstanding movie !!
What is the latest good film you watched ?
- Thread starter bobblez
- Start date
member006
Closed Account
LadyLove said:Just watched "The Hills Have Eyes" :eek: and I'm still trying to figure how to get revenge on my "friends" who recommended it. I'll have you know I stuck it out till the end though.
I only got sick once and two times a little gag moment and trust me baby I don't have much of a gag reflex. :rofl: It takes a WHOLE lot. That movie has what it takes though.
Let me add that the revenge is not because its a bad flick. It was a good story and the special effects outstanding. Really outstanding *shivers*
Having seen the original I hadn't expected the realism that this one offers.
LadyLove said:
I HATED the remake - thought it totally sucked - yes, a few interesting ideas of how to differ it from the original, but they took those ideas NOWHERE. I felt it was a totally worthless way to cash in on a known title. Yes, special effects have improved in thirty years, but apparently the ability to tell a coherent, well-crafted story has flown by the way-side. One of the ways in which the original was so powerful was in how it juxtapozed the two families, yet in the remake, I don't think the director even allowed a moment to learn which character was which or to give the audience any way to identify one from the other. The "normal" characters were shallow and too quickly dispatched, while the "evil" characters were nothing more than interesting make-up jobs. I was suprised when the credits rolled that they bothered to pretend that any of them had names - you certainly can't tell from watching the movie who was supposed to be who.
Having gotten that off my chest - I saw the IMax/3-D screening of "Superman Returns" today and really enjoyed it - I hope they have others in the works.
Last good one in a theatre was United 93. On dvd, Crimson Tide. But shit, I've watched that movie about 30 times.
HeartBroker said:
Actually I found it to be silly and not believable, a lot of mistakes. In the early part of the introduction Natale Portman is sitting at the top of the stairs talking to Jean Reno and smoking a cigarette she just lit. Moments later the cigarette is almost gone, and again a moment later it's almost whole again. A bad idea to light it. Natalie Portman walking past all her dead family members in an unemotional state, was also a really bad piece of writing. The scene when they shoot the guy in the park with a paintball or fake gun from some incredible distance was also impossible without a real target gun.
That movie got very good reviews, but I found myself very disappointed with it. Sorry, it's not on my favorites list.
Last edited:
I recently saw the 2006 remake of The Omen (original from 1976). Horror fans may expect a bit more shocking moments and more blood, but I think the amount was just right. There are some scenes that make you jump out of your seat, even if you know seconds before that something is going to happen.
And I loved the special effects near the end with the photographer on the stairs (no, I won't spoil the scene and tell you what happened to him).
A thrilling movie and a nice remake. Good entertainment, I'd say!
:hatsoff: Jackson
And I loved the special effects near the end with the photographer on the stairs (no, I won't spoil the scene and tell you what happened to him).
A thrilling movie and a nice remake. Good entertainment, I'd say!
:hatsoff: Jackson
I forgot to add the trailer: http://youtube.com/watch?v=cJvelUq75MkJacksson_77 said:
:hatsoff: Jackson
AFA said:
Yes, but that was just a continuity error, not a result of bad acting or plotting. Almost every film has minor details that go unnoticed (look at the level of liquid in peoples glasses at the next extended meal scene you watch - chances are they go up & down almost at random). Hell, Citizen-freakin'Kane is built around an opening scene and conceit that has one of the biggest continuity blunders in film history - doesn't stop it from being an important film.
AFA said:
Actually, I thought this was a very well-written moment - it establishes that Portman's character is not a typical child - she almost immediately grasps the idea that she cannot scream or cry or react in front of the people who have just murdered her entire family. She doesn't respond at all until she's at Jean Reno's door & then she ONLY responds in a way that he will see, she doesn't tip her hand to the killers. And, she does later mention that it's only her younger brother who she ever really cared about - so her lack of emotion in regards to what she does see is not at all untypical from someone raised in what is basically a sociopathic family.
AFA said:
Given, it is a ridiculous conceit, but I found it tollerable in the context of the film.
The early continuity errors were just a part of it, the film didn't make my hit list at all. A 13 year old girl walking past dead family without emotion is as improbable as is the credibility of the film as a whole. Many, many events in the film were equally unlikely, and I thought just showed bad judgement on the part of the director.
As I said, very disappointing to me despite it's fairly high rating of popular opinion. A lot of people liked it but not me.
Just my :2 cents:
As I said, very disappointing to me despite it's fairly high rating of popular opinion. A lot of people liked it but not me.
Just my :2 cents:
CRASH! One of the best film of the year...or even last year
Frame313 said:Good thing you didn't see King Kong - that giant ape would've ruined it for you
:jester:
I was watching Last Samauri today. Typically, like many movies, every time someone drew a sword, it made that "ka-ching" sound of metal against metal. They do it again and again and again, because the sound is supposed to impress you and create a mood. But the scabbards were not made of metal, leather usually and couldn't possibly make that sound. Guns with no recoil interest me. On TV especially it always impress me that the star can get off 3 shots in the exact same spot and the gun doesn't move. Cop goes into the building, and sees the bad guy, then cocks the gun's hammer that would already be back if he had racked the slide for the first round in the first place. Good idea! In another, I saw a detective run down the street with the slide on her automatic locked back after shooting the last shot I suppose. Not a good idea. One film I liked, had a lotto winner die of a heart attack while in the bathtub. Would you check your lotto ticket with wet hands in the tub? Car chases on dirt with tires squeeling is an equally impressive failure.
On TV, you do an ad for the show, with all the stars staring into the camera with solemn looks on their faces, while the camera pans around them. So much of it is cliche'. If you have a boring show, you play low head banging music, so the soundtrack is the focus. Or spice up a comedy, with a laugh track. "In vogue, twisting the camera off horizontal, back and forth just tries to hide bad photograpy. Uh uh, not very impressive.
I probably go more for story then action especially when the sound men can't get the sounds right. The directors just think no one will notice or they can't themselves. I can overlook some, but usually think those oversights just diminish the overall quality of the direction, for something not that great anyway. Maybe the film already bores me, and I just start noticing everything then?
I can only take so much each film!
(Didn't like King Kong, liked the Jeff Bridges version better)
Last edited:
I saw that Superman man flick today. It was pretty damn good. But I still gotta say that United 93 was the best and most intense theatre going experience for me this year so far.