Post the last movie you've seen and how you rate it
-
Shazam (2019) - 7/10
A brilliant cocktail of coming-of-age story, superhero origin, Christmas movie, and hilarious comedy with a lifetime-casting in Zachary Levi, dark villain in Dr. Silvana, & nostalgic Reeve-like heart expertly handling the Seven Deadly Sins-comics mythos.
-
I watched Detective Pikachu as well (But I'm a fan of this franchise - not a big fan, but a fan nonetheless)
It was very cute and I liked it. But I didn't love it. What rating would you give it, out of ten?
I think I would give it a 6 or something like this. Simply because I agree with the things you mentioned in your comment.
I watched a few more movies lately:
Avengers: Endgame 10/10 - no explanation needed. I love the MCU franchise.
Million Dollar Baby: 10/10 - I like Hilary Swank and the story was good without getting overly-dramatic
Mary Poppins returns: 9/10 - I like the songs and Emily Blunt but the story was lacking occasionally. -
I usually avoid trying to give something that looks objective over something that is so subjective.
I think Detective Pikachu was competently made, so objectively just on that basis 8/10.
I love classic mysteries. I figured out who did it, why they did it, and where the father was without much thought. 6/10
I can't judge who good they dealt with the original material since I don't know the original. But nothing struck me as particularly clever. (While Into the Spiderverse had character shifts that made my squeal. One of the villains is the best version I've ever seen of that character.)I'm planing on seeing Shazam! and Rocketman in the next couple of weeks.
-
I liked this film and without giving out much spoilers to those who still haven't watched this film, It has an apt ending (never mind the reasonable flaws for explanation) for Captain America. And Captain America has the best climax scene because he is WORTHY (to those who have watched the film, they will know what I am referring to).
8.5/10
-
I finally saw Rocketman.
I rarely give movies ratings since they're so subjective - fuck that!
5 Stars.
They don't try to be realistic. It's not a documentary or an attempt to be a realistic telling of Elton John's life. It's a memoir about how he remembers the events and persons in his life. It's a musical where the songs depict character moments.
It compares very well to Bohemian Rhapsody. Elton is fabulous and messy; a person who put on a major concert two days after a suicide attempt. It doesn't sugar coat his addictions or sexuality - or make them points of loathing.
My one disappointment, with Taron and Jamie playing Elton and Bernie couldn't they at least have fantasized a gay sex scene even though that never happened in real life?
And the costuming is great - at the end they compare the original costumes with the movie's versions.
-
Agatha Christie's Poirot - Cards on the Table
This chronicles the cases of Agatha Christie's famous Belgian Detective, Hercule Poirot that ran for 25 years. What interest me the most in this particular episode is that, the murderer is a closeted gay and the reason for murder, is his imminent exposure by the wife of his male lover.
This is not the case, in the novel of which it is based upon.
5/10
-
Recently watched Hotel Mumbai. Difficult movie to recommend as it deals with the terrorist attacks on Mumbai in 2008. I had to remind myself at times to breathe.
-
I just saw MIB International.
I think it deserves a B. It's very well done and internally consistent. There are some interesting characters who are well-rounded. But the big twist was easy to figure out.
! They don't mention it directly in the movie but there's an organic reason why Chris' character changed so drastically. Even with his memory erased part of his subconscious was aware that the story didn't fit together and set up an internal conflict. There were plenty of references to him not being the person who had defeated the Hive - he honestly wasn't.
-
Lion, it was a great move and super sad
-
You're Next. (2011)
An indie slasher/horror. Haven't looked up much about it but I'm assuming it had a small budget. For what the movie was it was a great watch. Quite refreshing to see some horror tropes that usually plague most horror movies left out. Some solid humour and one of the best kills I've seen to date in a horror movie.
If I were to give it a rating out of 5 it scores a solid 3.5 with me. Would be interested in hearing what others that have seen this movie thought about it.
Edit: Just saw that the preferred rating is out of 10. Sorry my bad. With that said it's a solid 7/10.
-
Spiderman: Far from Home
a 4 out of 5
but the big bangers come at last, so stay in your seats
-
This list has been pretty dead.
I just saw "Ready or Not." To my tastes a 9/10.
Isn't it a bummer when you find out on your wedding night that your in-laws a members of a murderous Satanic cult who plan to sacrifice you between midnight and sunrise.
It's well-written and well-acted. The suspense parts are tense and the funny parts were amusing. There were only two notable jump scares which is allowable.
Mark O'Brien was good, he should be cast as romantic leads more often. Adam Brody stole every scene he was in.I recommend this for anyone who enjoys horror/comedy.
–----------------
as an aside - 4 movies I was looking forward to this year have been delayed/canceled: Chaos Walking starring Tom Holland, The New Mutants, Artemis Fowl and The Hunt -
Maurice. It's an oldie but a goodie. Finally a gay movie with a happy and beautiful ending! I recommend it.
-
Makoto Shinkai's Weathering With You.
4/5
Not as emotionally charged as his previous Your Name, but the production values went up another level. Worth a cinema experience.
(I would have rated Your Name 5/5, for comparison). -
The Conclusion of It.
Heavy Spoilers of course
The movie starts with a gay-bashing murder told from the POV of the gay couple. One of the main characters is revealed to be gay. That's it for content.
I enjoyed the first part more. The kids felt better written and better developed than the adults. Which is strange since I love some of the adult actors in other roles.
Bill played by Jamie MacAvoy - he's the main character but even though the actor pulled out all the stops his character fell flar.
Beverly played by Jessica Chastain - she anchored the best scene in the movie. Her character was hampered by being far too much of the cliche called "Smurfette". While the male characters achieved success in their respective fields she got married. Her plot in the movie consisted of which guy she would have a relationship with.
Ben played by Jay Ryan - he was the adult character I liked the best. I guess because he was two-dimensional rather than one-dimensional. He was the fat kid who grew into a hunky successful architect. He managed to hold on to his feelings for the past while the majority of the other characters had lost themselves. His part of the BIG ROMANCE worked since he was more than just the romantic interest.
Andy Bean as Stanley - his character took himself out of the story at the beginning. Which created a plot hole that was never plugged.
James Ransome as Eddie - the actor was given contradictory character tics that didn't add up to a personality. He didn't manage to sell the character.
Bill Hader as Richie - a comedian who is funny played a comedian who wasn't funny. Seriously, couldn't someone have punched at least a couple of his lines? He plays a gay man deeply in denial. I can handwave that but the story should have, could have, but didn't explain why a forty year old successful comedian would still be unaware of his own sexuality. His character development was the strongest written that didn't take the last few details needed for it to have worked.
And finally Isaiah Mustapha as Mike - he was the exposition guy who never left town. (First plot hole is that he was the Town Librarian which requires a Master degree and the town is too small to have a university.) He had a good resolution.What struck me the most while watching the movie was the absence of other people. There are several scenes where the main characters are walking down the main street of the town in the middle of day without a single background extra. There's zero follow up with the other survivors. Even Eddie's wife who intrusively calls him while he's driving doesn't try to call him once.
So, this was a B-list horror movie that had the budgeting and marketing of an A-list movie. It's not as if they didn't change (and improve) upon the book in matters of plot - the three killing set pieces were excellent - but that they left the characters as horror movie cliches. I've seen some really good horror this year, It Part 2 was good as a horror fan movie but it missed the opportunity of being a great movie that just a bit more character development could have given the movie.
I can actually give this movie a rating.
This movie is rated 3 P.
That's how many times I had to get up to pee. -
It's me again!
Every year or so there is a science fiction movie that mainstream critics love and scifi fans don't. Ad Astra is that movie in 2019.
From the point of view of a science fiction fan: I want good world building. If it's trying to be realistic about space travel the physics have to make sense. The friend I saw it with is more of a fan of social science fiction and she remarked on the main character being a functioning sociopath.
Reading the mainstream reviewers - it has an 80% approval rate on Rotten Tomatoes with most mainstream reviewers giving it a 4 or 5 star rating out of 5 - they like the thoughtful nature of it's contemplation of the role of man in the universe. What would it mean to an individual if we are alone in the universe.
So, your reaction to this movie will vary a lot depending on what types of story telling you like. It's an art movie rather than a Blockbuster. For myself, I still feel starved for intelligent explorations of the effects of technology or social change on our lives and world.
-
God’s Own Country. About a gay farm boy who falls in love with a Romanian immigrant who comes to work on his farm, and teaches his how to love.
A perfect movie, in my opinion. It blew me away.
-
Joaquin Phoenix in JOKER
Enjoyable movie. A dive into the psychosis of the main character (though not as deep a dive as The Woodsman, an unrelated movie which also explored mental states). I liked how the JOKER was both the victim and perpetrator of the unfolding events. Poignant, tragic, sad and uplifting all at the same time. Great performance from Joaquin Phoenix. Not sure if it's Oscar worthy, but definitely commendable work.
-
It pt. 2
It was passable, it indeed feels like a contemporary take on the classic, and the final battle really improved, but remains kind of empty. Oh, and I hated the guy who makes fun of the little twerp is actually in love with him trope.
-
WELL, in about a month I'll do my review of all the movies I saw this year. Hopefully more people will be active.
Last week I saw Doctor Sleep, I think it's one of the best movies of a not very good year.
The best things and the worst things about the movie come directly out of its two source materials: Kubrick's version of The Shining and Stephen Kind's novel Doctor Sleep.
The acting, particularly of the three main characters Ewen McGregor, Rebecca Ferguson, and Kylie Curran was very good. But this was one of the flaws I found in the movie, there were three overlapping plots that came together in the end. Unlike The Last Jedi the plot was coherent but like the Last Jedi it was both too long for audience comfort and too short to develop many of the characters and relationships. The story may have been better off as a Network mini-series. I would have gladly watched two hours of just Ewen McGregor's story.
The good things: this was one of the best versions of vampires I've ever seen, they were creepy BECAUSE they were so prosaic; one controversial scene is pure nightmare fodder; the world that The Shining happened in is expanded upon beautifully; Danny has a great redemption arc where he faces the legacy from his father; the scenes with Doctor Sleep are exquisite.
The bad things: Mr. King does not write queer people well; two of the plot lines were unified under one POV each (Danny's story and Abra's story) while the third had 4 POVs that I recall - they didn't work together, as such, none of the villains were fleshed out enough; I wanted to see a lot more of Danny's social life - especially Bruce Greenwood's character; and the resolution was not good.
I tend not to give ratings as such since I think it's so subjective. If you do not like supernatural horror it doesn't matter how well done it is you will not like it. If you like supernatural horror that is very well-done (with no jump-scares) you'll like this a lot. This definitely stands up to the classic movie by Kubrick.
For those who like ratings, I give it a 9.5/10. It's a very good thing for a two and a half hour long movie to leave you wanting more.
