• Major upgrades completed! Please report any issues you spot in here

The Movies Thread

Air Force One - 7/10

Decent film, the CGI doesn't hold up though.
 
21 Jump Street.

7.5/10, not bad at all, some good funny moments.

Completely forgot about Johnny Depp being in the original TV Series.


FD
 
The Grand Budapest Hotel was outstanding.

I kinda of liked bits of Wes Anderson movies, but this time he outdone himself. I acutally lol'd a couple of times.

Reminds of Tim Burton's Big Fish, not the movie itslef, but the way he got everything good from previous movies into one.
It all went downhill for Tim tho, lets hope Wes can keep this style up.
 
This is the end.

7/10 - Was okay, bit of a weird film, funny at patches.


Non-Stop

7.5/10 - Decent enough film, I like Liam Neeson, did have a Taken feel to it though.


Snow White & The Hunstman

7.5/10 - Good enough film, obviously lot darker feel. Although was slightly confused with Universal filming a Disney Movie.


FD
 
Need for speed Wow, what an awful movie. Story, script, acting all are so awful it hurts. Even the racing is lame. The only thing somewhat interesting was the british accent of the chick.Waste of time. 3/10
 
fd1972uk said:
Non-Stop

7.5/10 - Decent enough film, I like Liam Neeson, did have a Taken feel to it though.
Click to expand...

Watched it the other day too, was a lot better than I expected it to be, the film was pretty decent just a shame it was massively let down by the last 15-20 minutes when it came to the conclusion.

I would probably score it a 5/10.
 
Guardians of the galaxy: Had a lot of fun with the movie, the humor, action and the characters are really good, and it felt fresh and energetic, was like a mixture of Avengers and Firefly. Only downside like always lately is that the opponent remains one-dimensional and is just a destructive force that needs to be stopped and against which the "good" characters can prove themselves. And yes, sometimes it is a little bit childish, but never so much that it would hurt. Recommended. 8.5/10

P.S.: The 3d was like so often superfluous and only made the picture feel more digital as it lost its texture that it would have in 2d. Can't wait for the day that cinemas get rid of the 3d-madness.
 
Amazing Spiderman 2 Great Peter Parker-story with nicely portrayed Harry Osbourne-scenes and a nicely played romance with Gwen Stacy, but when it comes to Spiderman and the villains, the movie is imho severely lacking. When it comes to the latter, the Spiderman-scenes, the Raimi-movies part 1 and 2 were imho much more satisfying. So for me it's a mixed bag. 6.5/10
 
The Equalizer - 7/10

Pretty good film, Denzel is his usual self but overall the film isn't as good as Man on Fire.
 
Last edited:
Edge of tomorrow Was like "Groundhog day" (which was imho better though) mixed with Starship Troopers. Was nice and entertaining but not as good as I wished it to be. I was more engaged and fascinated by "Oblivion". Still, I recommend it, it has good action and some nice humour. 8/10
 
X-men days of future passed It's a mixed bag for me. On the one hand I love the idea of time-travelling, as it opens up some exciting possibilities, and I love seeing Magneto in the 70s and his interaction with Xavier and Raven, and I love seeing Quicksilver in action.

And it's all a dazzling action-movie, if it had been a standalone-movie.

But and here comes the other hand: It is not a standalone-movie, it ties into Xmen1, Xmen2, Xmen3, the wolverine-movies... and here right from the beginning serious questions arised:

1. Why is Xavier alive? In Xmen 3 he was killed by Jean.
2. Why is Kitty able to send someone's mind back in time? Last time I saw her she couldn't do that.
3. Why should the DNA of Raven allow the sentinels to adapt other mutants powers? As far as I remember Raven couldn't adapt other mutant's powers, only other people's look. Much better in that direction would have been Rogue's powers, but since she wasn't born yet in the 70's, they could only use Raven.
4. Why has Wolverine in the future his adamantium claws? In Wolverine 2 his adamantium got extracted.
5. Why is it possible to build hightech flying robots in the 70's?
6. Why could Magneto give orders to the sentinels? Sure he could use his magnetic skills to make them do what he wants, but he went beyond that and actually gave them orders and they obeyed it.
7. At the end Raven saves Wolverine from Stringer's grasp, so he didn't get his adamantium claws, and all that happened in X1, X2 and X3 didn't happen, so that Jean and Scott are alive again. I have the strong feeling that all this incredible time-travel-story had only the goal of getting Jean and Scott back alive. I could understand the desire to undo the awful X3, but the price is high as it means to also eradicate the awesome X1 and X2''s stories.

Verdict: The movie is fun to watch, entertaining and some of the action is nice to look at and Magneto, Raven and Wolverine are interesting characters, but when thinking about the plot, all the gaps start to open up and that reduces the enjoyment the day after. So it's a mixed bag for me. It's still better as X3 of course, but not as good as X1, X2 and X-men First class. 6.5/10
 
henrys hand said:
X-men days of future passed
Click to expand...

1. Why is Xavier alive? In Xmen 3 he was killed by Jean.
Agree. They gave a silly explanation in some interview that he transferred his soul and mind into his twin brother's body (the one we saw in X3).
2. Why is Kitty able to send someone's mind back in time? Last time I saw her she couldn't do that.
It's simply something they haven't shown in the other movies.
3. Why should the DNA of Raven allow the sentinels to adapt other mutants powers? As far as I remember Raven couldn't adapt other mutant's powers, only other people's look. Much better in that direction would have been Rogue's powers, but since she wasn't born yet in the 70's, they could only use Raven.
Agree. But then again, they could have been given rogue's powers in the future, since these Sentinels are Mark 10 (or whatever number) and they were upgraded only in the future.
4. Why has Wolverine in the future his adamantium claws? In Wolverine 2 his adamantium got extracted.
Remember : Magneto can control metals, he might have got them back for him. Showing these details isn't that important.
5. Why is it possible to build hightech flying robots in the 70's?
It's a fantasy science fiction superhero movie.
6. Why could Magneto give orders to the sentinels? Sure he could use his magnetic skills to make them do what he wants, but he went beyond that and actually gave them orders and they obeyed it.
Trask already told the president that the sentinels aren't metal, so Magneto can't move them. Magneto got the plans and studied every wire in those sentinels so he knew exactly how they work, thus, he introduced some metal in them to reprogram them.
7. At the end Raven saves Wolverine from Stringer's grasp, so he didn't get his adamantium claws, and all that happened in X1, X2 and X3 didn't happen, so that Jean and Scott are alive again. I have the strong feeling that all this incredible time-travel-story had only the goal of getting Jean and Scott back alive. I could understand the desire to undo the awful X3, but the price is high as it means to also eradicate the awesome X1 and X2''s stories.
Well. Wolverine can get the Adamantium again.
The movie was made to fix the catastrophic damage done by X3 and some continuity errors in the whole franchise. They clearly want a neat restart and follow Marvel's steps in building a universe.
And you can't say X1 & X2 were eradicated, no matter what, for us the spectators, we have seen the different alternate realities already as a whole entity, it's like back to the future where several timelines have been rewritten in the same movie.
 
Last edited:
Maleficent - 8.5/10

Have to admit, was just going to take the little one to take the movie in as we are off to Disneyland Paris and the theme is towards Maleficent.

Actually found the film really good, and thoroughly enjoyed it. Yeah there wasn't too much in way of action, but it was a good take on the whole Sleeping Beauty story.

Liked the way AJ played the role.


FD
 
22 jump street The first movie was mediocre, this second one is imho even worse. But at least it has one joke in the middle that really made me laugh hard, but a single really good joke doesn't save an otherwise lame movie. 5/10
 
henrys hand said:
22 jump street The first movie was mediocre, this second one is imho even worse. But at least it has one joke in the middle that really made me laugh hard, but a single really good joke doesn't save an otherwise lame movie. 5/10
Click to expand...
It's got rave reviews from rotten tomato and they are super harsh on movies
 
jonneymendoza said:
It's got rave reviews from rotten tomato and they are super harsh on movies
Click to expand...

I tell it like I think about it, I don't care for rotten tomatoes- or for imdb-scores.

But if you liked the first movie, I guess you'll enjoy the second one, it's very similar, only a little bit worse (and the joke in the middle of the movie I referred to, is good).
 
The General's Daughter - 5/10

Stuck in Love - 7.5/10
 
Annabelle = 0 / 10

THE worst horror film I've ever seen and I've sat through some stinkers because my wife's a horror movie addict.

Seriously, don't bother with this trash.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom