WTF Posted June 24, 2013 Report Share Posted June 24, 2013 if you want a good superman villain bring in Brainiac or Darksied. Now that would be epic. Because bringing in darksied would bring in the forever people and the new gods and that would be an awesome film. Also I agree with Goh on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorgiShinobi Posted June 25, 2013 Report Share Posted June 25, 2013 I still haven't seen Monsters University, but I'm not going in expecting it to surpass many of the Pixar films. It's looks like a straight forward comedy perfect for friends and family. We're use to Pixar movies tugging at the entire emotional spectrum that I think it would be hard to admit that any future Pixar movie that doesn't make you laugh and cry is "Pixar" quality. Monsters Inc. had Boo, the pivotal character that made up the entirety of cute and sad moments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrainHurtBoy...2 Posted June 25, 2013 Report Share Posted June 25, 2013 Anyone notice the weird, meritocratic, Randian "play-to-your-biological-strengths" thing in Monsters University? It was in the Incredibles, too. Is one of the Pixar writers a hardcore libertarian, or something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielpholt Posted June 26, 2013 Report Share Posted June 26, 2013 World War Z. After hearing about the films troubles for the last year or so, i went in expecting the worst. However, it was actually quite good. Unlike Man of Steel the week before, i was gripped throughout. The action was tense and to my mind, well shot. The story was okay and it didn't overstay its welcome (unlike Man of Steel). The only problem i had with the film was the lack of blood. For a film featuring millions of undead zombies trying to eat your innards, i'd have expected a bit more blood. All in all, a pretty enjoyable summer 'blockbuster'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldorf and Statler Posted June 26, 2013 Report Share Posted June 26, 2013 You can complain about Man of Steel's plot, but don't you dare imply the action was bad. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielpholt Posted June 27, 2013 Report Share Posted June 27, 2013 You can complain about Man of Steel's plot, but don't you dare imply the action was bad. Not bad, just a little boring at times. I think that might be more a problem with Superman as a superhero than Man of Steel though. Although i still argue some of those scenes go on for a little too long. How many times can you watch 2 almost indestructible men fly through buildings before it becomes tedious? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hot Heart Posted June 30, 2013 Report Share Posted June 30, 2013 Out Of The Past Great film noir. It's got the usual ingredients but features a strong romantic element that elevates it, though I can't say more for fear of spoiling it. Highly recommended. This Is The End Starts off almost a little too self-indulgent, but soon picks up and has quite a few good laughs (with a fair few jumpscares as well). It does rather heavily rely on liking the actors and their respective (or non-respective, in some regards) bag of tricks, since their 'weird personas' aren't actually far off how you're used to seeing them. Just a shame there wasn't more Michael Cera... It's a little aimless for a large part of the running time, but it's still amusing and does well with a fairly outlandish concept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldorf and Statler Posted June 30, 2013 Report Share Posted June 30, 2013 World War Z. Surprisingly good zombie film. But it couldn't have set-up a sequel any harder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Jack Posted June 30, 2013 Report Share Posted June 30, 2013 I haven't seen it so can someone explain to me why this movie is good? The trailers made it look completely stupid and terrible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldorf and Statler Posted July 1, 2013 Report Share Posted July 1, 2013 World War Z? It's just a well-done zombie film. Better than average but not up to the caliber of some of the best. It uses tropes and doesn't break the mold much but hey it was well-done what can I say. They also made it where Brad Pitt wasn't this OP guy but more of a really resourceful guy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted July 4, 2013 Report Share Posted July 4, 2013 World War Z? It's just a well-done zombie film. Better than average but not up to the caliber of some of the best. It uses tropes and doesn't break the mold much but hey it was well-done what can I say. They also made it where Brad Pitt wasn't this OP guy but more of a really resourceful guy. Yup, agreed. Didn't need the "World War Z" moniker. It felt more like a 28 Days Later film. I always preferred the book and original Dawn of the Dead film version of zombies. The idea that the Zombies are unstoppable the way a glacier is, rather than the tidal wave that they are depicted as these days is more appealing somehow. Largely I suppose because the former is more alien a concept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saturnine Tenshi Posted July 4, 2013 Report Share Posted July 4, 2013 The zombies were nothing like that in the book. They were your typical zombies. There were a great deal of changes, actually. Enough that the author walked away from it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Jack Posted July 4, 2013 Report Share Posted July 4, 2013 And yet they still used his title for it. I can't imagine how that must feel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldorf and Statler Posted July 4, 2013 Report Share Posted July 4, 2013 Honestly my friend said this had NOTHING in come on with the book and he still enjoyed it as well. I think a lot of the crap it gets is because of the name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 4, 2013 Report Share Posted July 4, 2013 in common? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hot Heart Posted July 4, 2013 Report Share Posted July 4, 2013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldorf and Statler Posted July 4, 2013 Report Share Posted July 4, 2013 jesus christ i gotta lay off the beer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Jack Posted July 5, 2013 Report Share Posted July 5, 2013 (edited) I'm assuming you haven't read the book, which would explain why all the changes don't bug you. Your friend is right, the movie has literally nothing to do with the book except for the title. I can seriously tell just from the trailer that it doesn't. See, I knew about the movie back when it was announced, and having read the book at the time, I was super excited. The book was...Well, do you remember the first half of District 9 where it's like they're filming a documentary? If the World War Z the movie was faithful to the source material, it would have been something like that, and I was really interested in seeing a zombie movie shot in such a way. It sounded like a fresh, original take on the genre. When it turned out we were getting a cheap Hollywood action flick yet again, I was super disappointed and it embittered me to the movie as a whole. Edited July 5, 2013 by Mister Jack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saturnine Tenshi Posted July 5, 2013 Report Share Posted July 5, 2013 It sounds to me like Brad Pitt wanted to be an action hero. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldorf and Statler Posted July 5, 2013 Report Share Posted July 5, 2013 (edited) I haven't read the book. My friends, including the one that went to watch it with me, have. They were disappointed but they got over it. It's not like this was a genre-changing book that would forever be remembered as the Romero of zombie novels was it? Yeah it's a shame it got changed but they all ended up enjoying it. It's not whether you read the book or not, is whether you care enough to not give the movie a chance because it's associated with the novel. Pretend it has another title and give it a chance. Edit: and the action you're speaking of largely deals with zombies doing the crazy shit they do in the movie. I assure you that the rest of the movie, not counting the few scenes with marines/military people that are relatively short, is basically seeing the state of the world and Brad Pitt investigating. He literall runs and talks more than he does anything else. Edited July 5, 2013 by Waldorf And Statler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Jack Posted July 5, 2013 Report Share Posted July 5, 2013 Well even if I pretend the movie is called something else, it still looks retarded to me. The zombies in the trailer were made with horrible CGI and they were all clumping together and making tidal waves like bees in a Goofy cartoon. I might watch it eventually, but I ain't paying ten bucks to see it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldorf and Statler Posted July 5, 2013 Report Share Posted July 5, 2013 You're already going in with a negative attitude, so maybe it is better if you wait and cool off until you can rent is or it's on dvd. It was a solid film as far as I care with the weird zombie shit where they act like ants/parasites being already shown in the trailers [i don't recall another scene like that]. The rest of the film is basically showing zombies like 28 weeks later. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hot Heart Posted July 5, 2013 Report Share Posted July 5, 2013 The Grey On the surface it seems like a bit of a simple survival horror film, albeit anchored by a great Liam Neeson performance (the whole cast is pretty good really) and some neat directorial touches. As things progress, however, it's clear that the story goes a little deeper than you might expect. Well, even early on there's a moment where a guy's bleeding out and asks what's happening, to which Neeson's character simply replies, "You're dying" before trying to ease him into it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted July 5, 2013 Report Share Posted July 5, 2013 (edited) I read the book. Thought it was genre defining and was hugely excited to see it played out on screen. What I got was a 28 Days Later film that was mostly concerned with action set-pieces and some very good, deeper, talky bits. Edit: That said, it has some gaping plot holes, and I would have preferred a closer adaptation, with shambling zombies instead of fast ones, but setting aside the title, this is a good action-zombie film. Edited July 5, 2013 by Thursday Next Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 5, 2013 Report Share Posted July 5, 2013 Cloud Atlas Probably a film that'll need a few repeat viewings, but yeah was rather well done. I'd say my only major issue with it is it takes about until half way through (hour n half, when most films are starting to wrap up) before it started to pull you in and the stories crossed over. And also that some parts of it the accents were a tad strong or the slang too weird to follow. I'll probably see on hunting down the book though. Hugo Weaving in his various incarnations is fun though, especially in the old folks homes. And in the 70's when he's hunting down Keith David. Aka Agent Smith hunting down Captain Anderson. It's one of those thinking films I guess. Gonna be mulling in the back of my mind for a while. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.