ZFGC
General => Entertainment => Topic started by: 2awesome4apossum on January 04, 2007, 12:13:02 am
-
It doesn't make sense to me... every time I think Hollywood's having a good year (2005), the box office receipts are down. Every time I think Hollywood's having a bad year (2006), they box office receipts are back up.
But here's my rant on the movies that let us down this year:
1. Eragon - The worst big budget movie I've seen in my life. I've refused to read the book, because I opened it once and saw the map (direct, shameful rip-off of every other fantasy book ever written-- namely LOTR), but I thought with FOUR people working on the script, that the movie might have actually been good. So I saw it on opening day.
Fortunately, I had a date with me, so we were able to take some entertainment value out of it. Unfortunately, the "laugh-a-minute" content found in the movie was all unintentional. Hour and a half that amounted to crap. What a waste of $100 million. Such a pity, I was so looking forward to this movie. The ONLY aspect of this movie that was good were the special effects. But the acting (except Jeremy Irons), music, cinematography-- everything sucked. Namely the dialogue and the story.
2. X-Men 3 - I loved the other two movies. X-Men are my favorite comic heros of all time. But this hour and a half long movie grossed a lot more than it was worth. There just wasn't any substance to this movie. It wasn't even satisfying for an ACTION movie. That's a bonafide failure.
3. The Da Vinci Code - It was fun for a suspense movie. Again, I didn't read the book... but I heard that the book was so well written that the story "isn't real, but could be". But the made-up facts that this movie's story relies on play across as very silly. Nice for a one-time view. Not worth much money. I was dissapointed.
4. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest - Two and a half hours was too long for this movie, in which not a lot really happened. They managed to ruin the ending of Pirates of the Carribean 1 with reintroducing and slaughtering the character of Commador Norrington, and they try to make the story seem more symbolic and deep than it's capable of playing across (this is a silly *pirate* movie for heaven's sake!). A few fun scenes, but ultimately unsatisfying.
5. Cars - Not overall "bad"... but the worst of Pixar's films. Even "A Bug's Life" was better. The problem with this is that they submitted to the formuliac Disney Story, leaving it fairly unoriginal (plus, it looks like they stole the idea from those old Cheveron car commercials).
And that is all for now. I may continue this post, I may not. Depends on if people take me insulting their favorite movie of the year as a personal offense or not.
-
The only of those movies I actually seen were Pirates of the Caribbean and cars. I completely agree with you about cars, and yeah, it was not half bad overall, it was decent. Totally agree with the points you brought up. 1.5/5 for me
Pirates of the caribbean kind of agree with you on. It appeared as if they took themselves a bit too seriously, and the story was severly dragged out and to be honest, not all that interesting. There were some good funny moment, but overall I found myself kind of just sitting there looking at the tv, opposed to being completely in the moment with the first film, and constantly laughing, and being interested with the story and the twists, etc. But I did enjoy the second one never the less, It could have used more witty pirate character, and jack sparrow was much more serious and darker in the second one, completely different from how he seemed in the end of the first one. 3/5
-
I find it funny when people critique movies, because half of the people wish they could do anything near as successful as the 'flops' that they bash. I thought all the movies were listed were good (except Eragon, didn't care to see that), simply because I was entertained. I don't look for too much in a movie...I mean sure, some of them really move me and pull me in (Crash), and that's awesome...but if they're just entertaining, and pretty to look at...that's enough for me. Movies are meant for that: Entertainment. To expect more is to nitpick...and I don't see you out there doing the jobs that the actors do, so you can't say anything about their performances.
-
I find it funny when people critique movies, because half of the people wish they could do anything near as successful as the 'flops' that they bash. I thought all the movies were listed were good (except Eragon, didn't care to see that), simply because I was entertained. I don't look for too much in a movie...I mean sure, some of them really move me and pull me in (Crash), and that's awesome...but if they're just entertaining, and pretty to look at...that's enough for me. Movies are meant for that: Entertainment. To expect more is to nitpick...and I don't see you out there doing the jobs that the actors do, so you can't say anything about their performances.
It's a hobby. Like playing games.
-
maybe 2aforp is an actor and he knows first hand the bad acting skills of these people.
-
I find it funny when people critique movies, because half of the people wish they could do anything near as successful as the 'flops' that they bash. I thought all the movies were listed were good (except Eragon, didn't care to see that), simply because I was entertained. I don't look for too much in a movie...I mean sure, some of them really move me and pull me in (Crash), and that's awesome...but if they're just entertaining, and pretty to look at...that's enough for me. Movies are meant for that: Entertainment. To expect more is to nitpick...and I don't see you out there doing the jobs that the actors do, so you can't say anything about their performances.
Movies are made for our enjoyment, if they don't live up to said standard then we criticize them. Okay we may not be Directors but still, they are, and they should do good at it. Most do.
-
Eragon- Awesome book, not a bad movie, but not really like the book.
PotC2- Best movie ever. You suck.
X3- Cool. You still suck.
Davinci Code- Never read the book, but it is an insult to my religion, so it sucks, not you.
Cars- Typical Disney. Not bad. I gotta agree with you on this one.
-
Davinci Code- Never read the book, but it is an insult to my religion, so it sucks, not you.
OMFG SOMETHING MAKES AN INTERESTING CRITIQUE AND SLIGHT FICTIONAL "WHAT IF" ABOUT MY RELIGION BASED ON FACTUAL EVIDENCE, AS WELL AS SOCIAL AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT, SO IT MUST THEREFORE SUCK.
Hey, lighten up man. :P
-
it is an insult to my religion
Never read the book
So, how would you know? The Da Vinci Code is not an insult to any religion, it is a fictional story whose character's motivation is related to a religious belief that you do not agree with.
It is simply fiction with religious story elements, as is the generally christian-supported Left Behind.
-
I find it funny when people critique movies, because half of the people wish they could do anything near as successful as the 'flops' that they bash. I thought all the movies were listed were good (except Eragon, didn't care to see that), simply because I was entertained. I don't look for too much in a movie...I mean sure, some of them really move me and pull me in (Crash), and that's awesome...but if they're just entertaining, and pretty to look at...that's enough for me. Movies are meant for that: Entertainment. To expect more is to nitpick...and I don't see you out there doing the jobs that the actors do, so you can't say anything about their performances.
Of course you don't see me acting, because you don't live close enough to see any of the three shows I'm currently in, nor the other two that I recently finished. I also do make short films, so let's not point fingers about who's doing what job. I don't see you doing the jobs I do, so let's not critique me, shall we?
It's a hobby. Like playing games.
Yes. Except you can't make a living playing games :P
maybe 2aforp is an actor and he knows first hand the bad acting skills of these people.
Yes. As I've stated above, I'm currently in three shows, filmed a commercial 2 Saturdays ago, and was even briefly in a made-for-TV movie. Not that I know "first hand" per se, but I do know enough to know what I'm talking about. Thank you :)
Eragon- Awesome book, not a bad movie, but not really like the book.
Well... I *have* seen worse low-budget movies.
PotC2- Best movie ever. You suck.
Best movie ever? lol
X3- Cool. You still suck.
Kid... you're their target audience. Of course *you'd* like it.
Davinci Code- Never read the book, but it is an insult to my religion, so it sucks, not you.
Insult to your religion? No. It's just a fictional story that relies off of some really silly made up facts in order to make a few bucks.
-
Only one for me, and that was The Last Kiss. The trailer really made me think it was like another Garden State, but the actual movie itself is more like a thinking man's date flick. It was a good movie, sure, but far from the brilliant work of art I expected it to be.
-
I'll go in the same order as Mr. Possum there:
Eragon - Never read the book, didn't see the movie, but it seemed like a sort of generic fantasy not worth my time. Beyond that I can't judge it.
X-Men 3 - It sucked. A lot. First off, how long after the second does it take place? Because it really irked me how there was a funeral for Jean only the second time she died, and only along with Scott and Xavier. It makes sense that the funerals only occur at the end of the movie since they were "preoccupied" with the "plot", but what why didn't Jean get her funeral before? It was obvious to the fans that she was coming back so not many people noticed, but in the story, she was dead. Everyone thought so. Apparently no one cared enough to put up a headstone though. Meh... but that's just a personal beef I have. Other than that the movie was still pretty dull. That's pretty bad for an actionmovie about people who have claws coming out of their hands and can fly and stuff...
The DaVinci Code - I read the book and saw the movie, so this time I can make a fair judgment. The thing that was interesting about the book was the way it took actual objects and managed to find insane links in them. Yeah, some of the facts are made up and the theories are all bull, but it's a fictional work so it's not supposed to be real anyways. What I don't get is why people like Dan Brown. He's a bad author. He has great and complex ideas, but he can't actually write. He is untalented as an author. Really,he's just not good. But, people seem to fall for the buzz. As far as the movie was concerned, my main opinion on it is that it was all rushed. I liked the visual representations it had for the different puzzles, but when you have something as complex as the trail of clues that they follow, it just needs more. Also, a lot was changed/removed from the book. The most obvious example is that Langdon is supposed to have been woken up in the middle of the night, not signing books. That's minor though, if you take the movie as its own entity. For me, it could have been good, but the fact that all they did was zip from place to place left no room for any suspense or, for that matter, any sort of character development. If you can stand the writing, you're better off with the book. If you won't read the book because the church banned it, then... well you're not missing much ;)
Pirates of the Caribbean - I liked it a lot. Orlando Bloom is a bit... shall we say... annoying when he talks, but if you replace him with circus music in your head (you know, doo doo doodle-oo doo doo doo doooo doo), then everything else is great. I like how humour and action are able to mix so well. The example of that which stands out for me is when everyone is on the island fighting. You've got the girl fending off the two pirates and the three men fighting it out on a wheel. Then, the wheel rolls by and the girl and two pirates just stop and stare. You don't notice until then how ridiculous it is to have them fighting on a rolling wheel and to point it out by just stopping everything makes it all the funnier. Overall I enjoyed it greatly.
Cars - Didn't see it, but it doesn't look all too enticing. There hasn't actually been an animated movie that piqued my insterest in a long time. The only one to do it so far is "Flushed Away", which looks like it might be decent.
Now then, why are we limiting ourselves to these? There were plenty other movies
My favourite this year: Bon Cop, Bad Cop.
"Bon Cop, Bad Cop" is supposedly the world's first truly bilingual movie. Plenty of movies have had multiple languages, but this one interchanges English and French constantly and uses both at different times as the primary language. Luckily for those who speak only one language, "seeing in one language" added subtitles whenever the other language was spoken. Although I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, I doubt if most people outside of Canada would appreciate it properly, and even then only those who are bilingual would truly get it. You could probably enjoy it well enough by throwing on the subtitles since it's still a good movie, but a lot of the humour is lost in translation. I don't doubt that same would happen to a francophone reading the English subtitles.
Runners-up:
Superman Returns - Superman is awesome, and I'm really glad they didn't botch the movie. One of my favourite aspects of it was how they kept the continuity with the first two Christopher Reeves movies. Even small things like the Kent's truck were kept the same. The only thing I have against it is the ending. If you saw it, odds are you know what I'm talking about. If you didn't see it I won't spoil it.
Also, V for Vendetta, Mission Impossible III, The Sentinel
My least favourite movie: Underworld: Evolution.
Seriously, the first one was bad enough. I don't know why I subjected myself to that again.
-
You don't need to make movies to review them...that's pathetic. You have an opinion and you state it. If you think the acting is convincing, say so. If the effects looked fake, it doesn't matter if you can do better or not, they looked fake. Sheesh.
Anyway, I'm far too nice to movies to list any major disappointments, but there was a lot of crappy horror this year.
Oh and not to draw away posters, but I did make a "best of 2006" topic a few days ago... :P
-
I liked X-3 and Pirates, but all the other...Thumbs Down! I didn't see eragon, but It looked horrible.
-
I find it funny when people critique movies, because half of the people wish they could do anything near as successful as the 'flops' that they bash. I thought all the movies were listed were good (except Eragon, didn't care to see that), simply because I was entertained. I don't look for too much in a movie...I mean sure, some of them really move me and pull me in (Crash), and that's awesome...but if they're just entertaining, and pretty to look at...that's enough for me. Movies are meant for that: Entertainment. To expect more is to nitpick...and I don't see you out there doing the jobs that the actors do, so you can't say anything about their performances.
Of course you don't see me acting, because you don't live close enough to see any of the three shows I'm currently in, nor the other two that I recently finished. I also do make short films, so let's not point fingers about who's doing what job. I don't see you doing the jobs I do, so let's not critique me, shall we?
It's a hobby. Like playing games.
Yes. Except you can't make a living playing games :P
maybe 2aforp is an actor and he knows first hand the bad acting skills of these people.
Yes. As I've stated above, I'm currently in three shows, filmed a commercial 2 Saturdays ago, and was even briefly in a made-for-TV movie. Not that I know "first hand" per se, but I do know enough to know what I'm talking about. Thank you :)
Eragon- Awesome book, not a bad movie, but not really like the book.
Well... I *have* seen worse low-budget movies.
PotC2- Best movie ever. You suck.
Best movie ever? lol
X3- Cool. You still suck.
Kid... you're their target audience. Of course *you'd* like it.
Davinci Code- Never read the book, but it is an insult to my religion, so it sucks, not you.
Insult to your religion? No. It's just a fictional story that relies off of some really silly made up facts in order to make a few bucks.
Well kudos to you on the whole acting thing...I am quite envious. I mean I'm an actor too, but mostly a stage one. I was in a few holiday commercials for KOMU (local news station...Choir sang Christmas songs for it) and I've been in many theater productions (Cinderella, Heaven Can Wait, Mame, etc., and currently Oklahoma), but to actually be on tv for real stuff that people actually see...that's really cool. I wouldn't necessarily say I don't do the jobs you do though...I've written a play that I'm going to be directing in a few months as well.
I only say that people shouldn't critique movies because even the CRITICS never know what they're talking about, and they're paid to bash the movies. I mean a lot of the times the user reviews are better than the critic reviews...I don't get it when people pay to go to a movie, just to find all the flaws in it that they can. I can understand if a movie is inherently bad, but these are the blockbusters that a lot of people love (V for Vendetta was crappy? Come on now, it was effing genius!), and to nitpick about them because they either didn't fit your idea of what they thought they should be, or to complain because they weren't faithful to the book/comic that they were derived from is silly. If movies were meant to be the same as books, there'd be no point in watching them...I mean you already read the book, why watch something that you already know? What happened to just sitting down and enjoying a movie?
-
v for vendetta? any movie that has a guy so brilliant that he can set bombs in a way that he *directs* them in music is awesome. i love how they used the bethoven song that has morse code for v in it. and the monologue with 60 something v words. and him blatantly telling them he's going to bomb that building and they can't do anything about it. anyone up for a subway bomb?
-
I know! That's what I'm saying. Genius.
-
Zelda TP of course.
Terrible.
-
I find it funny when people critique movies, because half of the people wish they could do anything near as successful as the 'flops' that they bash. I thought all the movies were listed were good (except Eragon, didn't care to see that), simply because I was entertained. I don't look for too much in a movie...I mean sure, some of them really move me and pull me in (Crash), and that's awesome...but if they're just entertaining, and pretty to look at...that's enough for me. Movies are meant for that: Entertainment. To expect more is to nitpick...and I don't see you out there doing the jobs that the actors do, so you can't say anything about their performances.
Of course you don't see me acting, because you don't live close enough to see any of the three shows I'm currently in, nor the other two that I recently finished. I also do make short films, so let's not point fingers about who's doing what job. I don't see you doing the jobs I do, so let's not critique me, shall we?
It's a hobby. Like playing games.
Yes. Except you can't make a living playing games :P
maybe 2aforp is an actor and he knows first hand the bad acting skills of these people.
Yes. As I've stated above, I'm currently in three shows, filmed a commercial 2 Saturdays ago, and was even briefly in a made-for-TV movie. Not that I know "first hand" per se, but I do know enough to know what I'm talking about. Thank you :)
Eragon- Awesome book, not a bad movie, but not really like the book.
Well... I *have* seen worse low-budget movies.
PotC2- Best movie ever. You suck.
Best movie ever? lol
X3- Cool. You still suck.
Kid... you're their target audience. Of course *you'd* like it.
Davinci Code- Never read the book, but it is an insult to my religion, so it sucks, not you.
Insult to your religion? No. It's just a fictional story that relies off of some really silly made up facts in order to make a few bucks.
I'm an actor, too, so I know what to look for. Don't think I said what I just said without knowing. And don't EVER, EVER call me a kid. I know what I'm talking about. I don't even like X-Men comics. In fact, I don't really like comics in general. It was good acting, and it had a good story, as far as I'm concerned.
And, obviously you aren't of the same religion as I am, or, if you are, you don't care as much as me. Anything, and I mean ANYTHING that says that Jesus Christ did not die, whether or not it states it as fact or fiction, is an insult.
And this whole 'generic fantasy' thing is so stupid. What's to say that 'generic fantasy' can't be good? Look at pretty much all fantasy movies recently released. Most of them have been 'generic' or too storylined, that didn't leave room for any good acting.
And, as far as the Zelda TP comment goes. How stupid! TP is awesome, best Zelda I've ever played. I beat Ocarine of time, and it was too easy. TP is difficult which makes it worth my while. Too many Action Rpg's have become so easy, there's no reason to buy them. Unless you're craving that feeling you get when you use Flurry and smash through twelve Roman juggernauts.
-
you people can say the davinci code is fiction all you want, and it is, but that doesn't change the fact that he based the book on "real" facts. he presents everything in that book as a fact. to him, the only reason it's fiction is because the people that do things in it aren't real and the events that they do never happened. but i don't think about it very much. he's just one of the millions out there that don't believe in God.
-
And, obviously you aren't of the same religion as I am, or, if you are, you don't care as much as me. Anything, and I mean ANYTHING that says that Jesus Christ did not die, whether or not it states it as fact or fiction, is an insult.
You mean they overreact, seriously, if its fiction is obvious its gonna be !@#$%, so then theres no reason to be offended by it.
-
And, obviously you aren't of the same religion as I am, or, if you are, you don't care as much as me. Anything, and I mean ANYTHING that says that Jesus Christ did not die, whether or not it states it as fact or fiction, is an insult.
Where does the Da Vinci Code say that Jesus didn't die? Of course he died, he was born over 2000 years ago. Crucifiction or not, no-one lives that long.
-
And, obviously you aren't of the same religion as I am, or, if you are, you don't care as much as me. Anything, and I mean ANYTHING that says that Jesus Christ did not die, whether or not it states it as fact or fiction, is an insult.
Where does the Da Vinci Code say that Jesus didn't die? Of course he died, he was born over 2000 years ago. Crucifiction or not, no-one lives that long.
But Jesus was God's nephew, so he's obviously gonna live that long, right?
-
But Jesus was God's nephew, so he's obviously gonna live that long, right?
You get bonus points for that one XD.
-
And, obviously you aren't of the same religion as I am, or, if you are, you don't care as much as me. Anything, and I mean ANYTHING that says that Jesus Christ did not die, whether or not it states it as fact or fiction, is an insult.
Where does the Da Vinci Code say that Jesus didn't die? Of course he died, he was born over 2000 years ago. Crucifiction or not, no-one lives that long.
But Jesus was God's nephew, so he's obviously gonna live that long, right?
Am I missing some kind of sarcasm or is that a serious comment? lol
-
And, obviously you aren't of the same religion as I am, or, if you are, you don't care as much as me. Anything, and I mean ANYTHING that says that Jesus Christ did not die, whether or not it states it as fact or fiction, is an insult.
Where does the Da Vinci Code say that Jesus didn't die? Of course he died, he was born over 2000 years ago. Crucifiction or not, no-one lives that long.
But Jesus was God's nephew, so he's obviously gonna live that long, right?
Am I missing some kind of sarcasm or is that a serious comment? lol
You're missing the sarcasm. Totally. Cb's comment was frikkin' hilarious. :P
-
you people can say the davinci code is fiction all you want, and it is, but that doesn't change the fact that he based the book on "real" facts. he presents everything in that book as a fact. to him, the only reason it's fiction is because the people that do things in it aren't real and the events that they do never happened. but i don't think about it very much. he's just one of the millions out there that don't believe in God.
Um...where does it say that he presents everything as fact? Actually...he states that it's a fiction, with some scientific backing. He found this evidence that people actually believe, and put it in there as the plot for his FICTION book. That doesn't mean that he believes it, or that we should all be offended because he's dissing our beliefs, or whatever. I mean all sorts of books have done that...Jurassic Park is fiction with scientific backing...you don't see anyone believing they can grow dinosaurs. People just have to get offended because it deals with religion, and religion is a sore subject.
-
Zelda TP of course.
Terrible.
I love you.