Jump to content

2012 Films Thread


knightni

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 2, 2012 -> 11:26 AM)
I got an A in basketball at Manchester with Steve Alford.

 

Ah, the good old days.

 

 

F--- Alford.

 

He only won a single NCAA tourney game at Iowa, but he's actually had two good years at UNM.

 

The one year he has a good season, they go out in the first round in 2006 as a #3 seed to one of those directional Louisiana schools.

 

 

A's for racquetball and field hockey at Iowa.

Edited by caulfield12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Mar 2, 2012 -> 11:40 AM)
I liked Batman Forever, so there.

 

I did as well. "Batman and Robin" is in a class by itself and virtually unwatchable.

 

DK is the only Batman sequel that didn't seriously disappoint in relation to the respective director's first. I understand those who prefer Nolan's BB to DK (I disagree), but both were really good movies. Tim Burton and Joel Schumacher's movies all got progressively worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Mar 2, 2012 -> 01:16 PM)
F--- Alford.

 

He only won a single NCAA tourney game at Iowa, but he's actually had two good years at UNM.

 

The one year he has a good season, they go out in the first round in 2006 as a #3 seed to one of those directional Louisiana schools.

 

 

A's for racquetball and field hockey at Iowa.

 

Heh. I got to go to a Final Four with his team. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked Carrey playing the Riddler, but I thought Tommy Lee Jones was just a waste as two face, he basically wasnt in the movie but for a few lines. I didnt like the glam look of the movie either, especially the end in the Riddlers little island.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 2, 2012 -> 02:49 PM)
Heh. I got to go to a Final Four with his team. :)

 

 

If Alford was attempting to run in the 2012 Republican Presidential primary, Herman Cain could still show up today and beat him 90%+ to whatever abysmal single digit number Alford would poll in the Hawkeye State.

 

Michele Bachmann would crush him, too.

 

Huntsman might actually be able to beat Alford. Well, maybe not.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I finally watched MoneyBall last week. I tried to get into it, but I couldn't get past the way they made it seem like Scott Hatteberg was the key to winning baseball games, ignoring the fact that Oakland had the MVP & Cy Young award winner in 2002, along with two other "ace" type pitchers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Mar 5, 2012 -> 09:30 AM)
I finally watched MoneyBall last week. I tried to get into it, but I couldn't get past the way they made it seem like Scott Hatteberg was the key to winning baseball games, ignoring the fact that Oakland had the MVP & Cy Young award winner in 2002, along with two other "ace" type pitchers.

Yeah I think at least a reference of the big 3 pitchers was warranted. That bugged me too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone seen PROJECT X yet?

 

Saw THE IRON LADY this weekend, thought it was quite overrated, although Streep was very good. Just not sure it was Academy-Award winning stuff. Ebert really disliked this movie, usually his reviews are pretty positive, all things considered.

 

 

 

http://popwatch.ew.com/2012/03/05/avengers...tlanteans-kree/

Clues as to the other villains from Avengers....based on upcoming LEGO characters?

Edited by caulfield12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Mar 5, 2012 -> 09:30 AM)
I finally watched MoneyBall last week. I tried to get into it, but I couldn't get past the way they made it seem like Scott Hatteberg was the key to winning baseball games, ignoring the fact that Oakland had the MVP & Cy Young award winner in 2002, along with two other "ace" type pitchers.

 

 

It's like doing a film review of the 2005 White Sox season featuring Geoff Blum and forgetting about Crede, Rowand and Everett, for example.

 

Chavez and Tejada were so important to those teams, but nobody moreso than their three starters and "rent a closers."

 

 

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/7007945/...ft-class-review

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writ...pact/index.html

The most interesting breakdown of "Moneyball" in reality that I've read in a while.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Mar 6, 2012 -> 02:51 AM)
Was able to catch a few older movies I haven't seen before this weekend. The Bone Collector and Se7en. Really enjoyed both of them. I liked Se7en a lot.

 

What took you so long to view Se7en? One of the best 3rd acts in a movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Mar 7, 2012 -> 03:55 PM)
John Carter is apparently awful.

 

25 positive reviews and 17 negative ones so far at rottentomatoes.

 

You can also look at metacritic.

 

60% overall approval puts it in red tomato and not rotten tomato territory, but right on the borderline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (The Baconator @ Mar 8, 2012 -> 12:35 AM)
The extended previews look so much like Star Wars: Episode II. The whole "in a coliseum of death with an alien race cheering against you" thing seemed to be directly lifted.

 

Reviewed by Owen Gleiberman | Mar 07, 2012

http://www.ew.com

 

With occasional exceptions, like Michael Keaton's Batman, we want and expect our superheroes to be classically handsome. But the sprawling interplanetary sci-fi bash John Carter proves it's possible for a superhero to be incredibly good-looking…in the wrong way. Taylor Kitsch, who stars as the messianic pulp space warrior created a hundred years ago by Edgar Rice Burroughs, has soft bedroom eyes, a pinup's pout, and straight long hair that makes him look like an easy-listening star from 1974. On Friday Night Lights, Kitsch had a pleasingly direct, loose-limbed charisma, but within the stoic, arid, and often wordless fantasy universe of John Carter, he's clad in a breastplate and loincloth, and he comes off more like the Abercrombie & Fitch model he once was. It's as if he were out to save an entire planet by lapsing into Derek Zoolander's poses. Kitsch looks marvelous, but that's the problem: He looks a little too marvelous. He's all sexed up with little to do.

 

None of this is really the actor's fault. As a character, John Carter has appeared in countless iterations over the past century (novels and serials; comics from Dell, DC, Marvel, and Dark Horse; graphic novels like The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen). His fusion of valor and mystic ability casts a shadow over the whole superhero genre — and also movies like Star Wars. Yet when seen through the lens of all that has come afterward, what was once original and visionary just seems wanly plodding and routine. A hero of the Virginia Confederate Army teleported through space and time! Futuristic combat on Mars! Big whoop. John Carter, a $250 million spectacle based on the very first Carter novel, marks the live-action directorial debut of Andrew Stanton, one of the wizards of Pixar (he directed WALL•E and Finding Nemo). But Stanton's visual brilliance, as well as his storytelling wit, gets lost amid all the blah hardware and monochromatic dust. There is hardly a moment in John Carter that isn't stamped by the generic spirit of franchise filmmaking.

 

A lengthy prologue, set in New York and Arizona in the mid-1800s, has a wax-museum deadliness about it. Then Carter is transported to Barsoom (Burroughs' fictional name for Mars). He wakes up in a desert that looks like a bombed-out Monument Valley and soon discovers his one effective superpower: With the gravity so much less forceful than it is on Earth, he can take flying leaps, like a long jumper. This must have seemed pretty damn exciting in 1912. Now, frankly, it's more than a little dorky. Carter's ability to bound has a ''Gee, is that it?'' quality.

 

Carter doesn't know that he's left Earth until set upon by the Tharks, a tribe of übertall green warriors who look like skeletal versions of E.T., with twin sets of arms and horns jutting out of their cheeks. They're cool to look at, for about five minutes, but though played via motion capture by Willem Dafoe, Thomas Haden Church, and Samantha Morton, they're less differentiated from each other than, say, the Na'vi of Avatar, and their scenes grow dull.

 

There are also humans on Mars, but the moment we meet them, we too seem to have been transported — to a bad sci-fi movie from the '50s. Ciarán Hinds, in the kind of thatchy wig no actor can triumph over, sulks and frets as Tardos Mors, leader of the red-tattooed Heliumites, and Lynn Collins, as his princess daughter Dejah Thoris, bats her eyes at the camera like a Gossip Girl version of Elizabeth Taylor in Cleopatra. Meanwhile, Dominic West smirks as Sab Than, leader of the dastardly Zodangans. He's Carter's rival for Dejah's affections, but it's a Flash Gordon love triangle, cheesy and predictable.

 

The Heliumites fly around in contraptions that look like aerial pirate ships ringed with feathers from a giant badminton birdie. Stanton keeps cutting back and forth between visually sleek shots of them and the clunky action taking place on board. He seems to have forgotten the first rule of digital effects: They don't work unless they're fully integrated. But then, nothing in John Carter really works, since everything in the movie has been done so many times before, and so much better. D

Edited by caulfield12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (knightni @ Mar 7, 2012 -> 08:25 PM)
Se7en is in my top 25 of modern thriller movies.

 

The scene with the bed and the air fresheners scared the s*** out of me.

 

I've said it before in this thread, but David Fincher just rocks. So much so that I can forgive him for Benjamin Button.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...