[Raymond Luxury Yacht]

District 9 might be the best sci/fi movie ever made. Way better than Star Trek, which I absolutely loved. This was so much more intelligent and less hollywood summer blockbuster. Cloverfield, which I really enjoyed, is not even in the same league as this movie. If they can somehow continue making sequels as well, this is THE next big franchise, up with Star Wars and Star Trek. This movie is so good, it's one of those where if I hear someone I know say they did not like it, it will literally change my opinion of them as a person forever. Pure epic win. Wow, go see it RIGHT NOW!

[HoosierDaddy]

Raymond Luxury Yacht, on Aug 18 2009, 12:40 AM, said:

District 9 might be the best sci/fi movie ever made. Way better than Star Trek, which I absolutely loved. This was so much more intelligent and less hollywood summer blockbuster. Cloverfield, which I really enjoyed, is not even in the same league as this movie. If they can somehow continue making sequels as well, this is THE next big franchise, up with Star Wars and Star Trek. This movie is so good, it's one of those where if I hear someone I know say they did not like it, it will literally change my opinion of them as a person forever. Pure epic win. Wow, go see it RIGHT NOW!

So you are saying it sucks? Lol. I can't wait to see this.

[Tiste Simeon]

Doesn't come out until september, I was told at the cinema yesterday... Curses...

Went to see The Time Travellers Wife with my gf, and I was surprised how little it actually sucked. It was a very clever concept and the acting was all pretty good. I guess that's what happens when you go in expecting nothing... Also, Rachel McAdams is hawt!

This post has been edited by Tiste Simeon: 19 August 2009 - 03:42 PM

[lokiman]

Saw Distrect 9-Pure awesome!

Saw G. I. Joe....uhh...-didn't really like it. Sure the action was kinda cool, the acting was horrible.

[drinksinbars]

watched dod sno (or dead snow) and it was awesome

[masan's saddle]

Holy fucking shit !

I've just found out about the alledged remake of Bad Lieutenant, how could they !

Harvey Keitel at his absolute best and they remake with...... Nicolas fucking Cage !

This is unacceptable, the cocksucker needs to die.

Shame on you Hollywood for another cinematic raping of the past.

Bahh !

[Aptorian]

Watched Operation: Valkyrie and Underworld: Rise of the Lycans over the weekend.

Valkyrie was surprisingly dull. Maybe it was the fact that I knew the outcome, but I really couldn't get myself to care. Cruise was passable. The role of the german officer fitted well with his stiff acting.

Underworld 3 was surprisingly good. It was well made, and at least as good as the first one, if not better. The woman playing Sonja was delicious. It took me until the end to understand that Sonja wasn't actually the same actor as the one from 1 and 2.

[HoosierDaddy]

Saw Duplicity the weekend before last. Funny corporate espionage movie, perhaps a little more disjointed than they aimed for with the time leaps, but it was a good watch. 6 of 10.

The newest Rambo. 2 of 10, and that 2 comes from sheer butchery that is pretty funny.

[Mezla PigDog]

HoosierDaddy, on 08 September 2009 - 07:43 PM, said:

The newest Rambo. 2 of 10, and that 2 comes from sheer butchery that is pretty funny.

People being blown apart like bags of soup surely takes it to at least a 3! Think of the special effects involved!

[HoosierDaddy]

It was a 3, but Sly's script was so horrendous it got a minus 8.

[Aptorian]

I actually really liked John Rambo. I watched it again recently, and it was still good. It's a relatively simple war film that was extremely brutal. First Blood is still me favorite, but this one was a lot better than Rambo 2 and 3.

I was a bit annoyed to discover, when I watched it again, that most of the flames and some of the explosions are computer generated and very cheap looking.

[masan's saddle]

Aptorian, on 08 September 2009 - 07:38 PM, said:

Watched Operation: Valkyrie and Underworld: Rise of the Lycans over the weekend.

Valkyrie was surprisingly dull. Maybe it was the fact that I knew the outcome, but I really couldn't get myself to care. Cruise was passable. The role of the german officer fitted well with his stiff acting.

Underworld 3 was surprisingly good. It was well made, and at least as good as the first one, if not better. The woman playing Sonja was delicious. It took me until the end to understand that Sonja wasn't actually the same actor as the one from 1 and 2.

Her name is Rhona Mitra and she is lovely.

She appears to be getting quite a lot of decent action roles at the moment, I saw her a while a go in the British made post apocalypse/ virus movie Doomsday and she wasn't bad at all, pretty believable as an ass kicking babe type.

[Sixty]

Saw Year One a couple days ago and was sorely disappointed. I expected more from Michael Cera in particular--how could he have fallen so far from Arrested Development? I'm hoping to see Extract, soon...maybe Jason Bateman didn't suffer similarly.

In short, Year One felt extremely...juvenile. As if its target audience was a 13-year old who just discovered the concept of sex. A lot of it felt plain retarded, and the plot was appalling.
A couple laughs here and there, at least. I suppose.

[Tiste Simeon]

Sixty, on 08 September 2009 - 11:21 PM, said:

Saw Year One a couple days ago and was sorely disappointed. I expected more from Michael Cera in particular--how could he have fallen so far from Arrested Development? I'm hoping to see Extract, soon...maybe Jason Bateman didn't suffer similarly.

In short, Year One felt extremely...juvenile. As if its target audience was a 13-year old who just discovered the concept of sex. A lot of it felt plain retarded, and the plot was appalling.
A couple laughs here and there, at least. I suppose.

That annoys me. Arrested Development is one of my all time favourite shows and I thought that a teaming up of Michael Cera and Jack Black would work well... Probably won't see it now...

I saw District 9. I still wish I had an electricity gun cos that was sweeeeeet!!!

The gf wants to go and see 500 Days of Summer. I said we would go at some point, but was wondering if anyone has seen it and can tell me if my fears of it sucking are well founded or not?

[Sixty]

Tiste Simeon, on 09 September 2009 - 10:49 AM, said:

Sixty, on 08 September 2009 - 11:21 PM, said:

Saw Year One a couple days ago and was sorely disappointed. I expected more from Michael Cera in particular--how could he have fallen so far from Arrested Development? I'm hoping to see Extract, soon...maybe Jason Bateman didn't suffer similarly.

In short, Year One felt extremely...juvenile. As if its target audience was a 13-year old who just discovered the concept of sex. A lot of it felt plain retarded, and the plot was appalling.
A couple laughs here and there, at least. I suppose.

That annoys me. Arrested Development is one of my all time favourite shows and I thought that a teaming up of Michael Cera and Jack Black would work well... Probably won't see it now...

I saw District 9. I still wish I had an electricity gun cos that was sweeeeeet!!!

The gf wants to go and see 500 Days of Summer. I said we would go at some point, but was wondering if anyone has seen it and can tell me if my fears of it sucking are well founded or not?

If you can rent Year One (netflix or some such) it's one of those mindless simplistic films that's good for a couple laughs here and there. Otherwise it's not worth it...but at least it wasn't as bad (for me) as Funny People. I walked out on that once it became more Mhybe-like whining than jokes--not that the jokes were very good, given that 90% were a rehash of the same dick joke.

[drinksinbars]

district 9 was awesome

saw the damned united as well. was funny and enjoyable

[Obdigore]

Extract:

Pretty good moments, although it seems to try to turn rather serious at the end, there is still some comedy there. Although it isn't really anything like office space, if you enjoyed office space you will enjoy this movie. Could I be more unclear? Probably.

Gamer:

Meh. Certainly not as good as star trek or district 9, but a pretty well-made summer 'blockbuster' american (thanks mez!) movie. Pretty cool overarching story and some technology, but basicly just a shoot-em-up. I would say if you liked Crank, you will like this movie. If you play FPS games, they threw in some things like bunny hopping and teabagging.

Adventureland:

Could have been a very good movie. Mediocre at best. Ending was obvious from about 1/3rd of the way into the movie... no real twists or anything you couldn't see happening. Can't turn your brain off and just enjoy because there is no action at all.

[Sixty]

Obdigore, on 10 September 2009 - 02:28 PM, said:

Gamer:

Meh. Certainly not as good as star trek or district 9, but a pretty well-made summer 'blockbuster' american (thanks mez!) movie. Pretty cool overarching story and some technology, but basicly just a shoot-em-up. I would say if you liked Crank, you will like this movie. If you play FPS games, they threw in some things like bunny hopping and teabagging.

Were Ludacris and Michael C. Hall any good acting-wise? I was thinking about going to see this.

[Thelomen Toblerone]

DO NOT WATCH FUNNY PEOPLE.

Awful, awful film. Storyline is shit. It's not very funny. It's actually quite depressing. Nothing really happens. No lessons learned, no progress made.

Plot rundown -

Spoiler

Famous comedian who is miserable and lonely get terminal illness. Shit comedian gets hired to be his PA. Famous comedian suffers depressingly through illness, then pulls through and recovers. Decides to use new chance to get back with ex. Tries, fails. Goes back to being miserable. All through, the PA bloke has gradually improved his comedy, suffers trying to help the famous one and gets under appreciated, then gets fired and goes back to working in sandwich shop. Remians unsuccessful.

So, let's analyse that - one starts famous, depressed and alone. Ends famous, depressed and alone. The other starts poor and unfamous. Ends poor and unfamous.

Not good. A couple of laughs, but nothing major. Not worth the admission, possibly worth watching once if it's free and on TV and there's nothing else on and you have absolutely f*ck all else to do.

[Sixty]

Thelomen Toblerone, on 10 September 2009 - 10:18 PM, said:

DO NOT WATCH FUNNY PEOPLE.

Awful, awful film. Storyline is shit. It's not very funny. It's actually quite depressing. Nothing really happens. No lessons learned, no progress made.

Plot rundown -

Spoiler

Famous comedian who is miserable and lonely get terminal illness. Shit comedian gets hired to be his PA. Famous comedian suffers depressingly through illness, then pulls through and recovers. Decides to use new chance to get back with ex. Tries, fails. Goes back to being miserable. All through, the PA bloke has gradually improved his comedy, suffers trying to help the famous one and gets under appreciated, then gets fired and goes back to working in sandwich shop. Remians unsuccessful.

So, let's analyse that - one starts famous, depressed and alone. Ends famous, depressed and alone. The other starts poor and unfamous. Ends poor and unfamous.

Not good. A couple of laughs, but nothing major. Not worth the admission, possibly worth watching once if it's free and on TV and there's nothing else on and you have absolutely f*ck all else to do.

+1 Exactly my opinion.

Like I said, my friends and I walked out an hour and a half in.