I sit here and sort of watch Batman Begins on DVD...

Sazar said:
Well, the script and director hardly helped :)

That's true, but the acting wasn't that great either.

The track for Resident Evil - which I made the mistake of buying because of the shiny disc cover, idiot that I am - I couldn't listen to because Milla Jovovich and that other Vasquez ripoff female character actress whatshername giggled and laughed like they were drunk AND high on pot, it was impossible to listen to. The director did actually try to talk about the movie, but he kept getting drowned out by vacuous and inane noise coming out of the mouths of the two women. Obviously, neither of them are in possession of a brain, judging from the way they behaved. I don't think Milla works much these days... No coincidence, I would think.

The best acting in that movie came from Milla Jovovich and Eric Mabius. MJ did a fantastic job with what she was given IMO.
 
Guden Oden said:
I don't think Milla works much these days... No coincidence, I would think. ;)

She is in a about a half dozen movies coming out or starting production in the next 12-18 months.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Guden Oden said:
BB is OK as an action flick. I just wish they hadn't used the desperate microwave generator as a plot device tho, that sounds like something out of a bad Star Trek episode.

For starters, there's lots of water in people too, not just in water mains. Second, rather than pouring poison into the water to vaporize it later with a super microwave oven (that the badguys knew existed how exactly???), why not just get some planes or freakish inflatable balloons to distribute it with?

I think of the best attributes of Batman Begins is that it actually stays true to the comic. The entire story was already laid out, they just brought it to life.
 
They captured the essence of Batman in Batman Begins and at the same time it was a decent action flick, the rest absolutely sucked at this. Could have been a good action flick if the fight scenes were better.

The world is really a plot device to show the internal struggle within Bruce, appropriately he came out being the star and it was about him, what he did, and why he did it. You could see him evolve. Not to mention they did a good job with having numerous themes and doing justice to all of them.

Far superior to a remotely well played but beneath the surface completely hollow joker character which ended up being a really poor focus of the first film. The second with Pengiun was much better, in the sense that the Pengiun had more depth, but the flow of the movie was all off. The third again got taken away by powerhouse actors playing the villans such as Carrey and Jones. The last movie, well that was just stupid, I couldn't even sit through it.
 
I saw this in the theater and enjoyed it. I thought it was the best of the batman movies I've seen (and based on most people's comments, the ones I haven't seen are not really worthwhile). Batman is an action hero, and this is a great action movie. One of the best Hollywood has put out this year. I'm trying not to be too optimistic for the sequels, however, as we all know how disappointing those can be.
 
radeonic2 said:
Saying it's one of the greatest movies from hollywood this year isn't saying much.
It's been a fairly terrible movie year hasn't it. I can't think of a single slam dunk classic action flick released this whole year. The poorly scripted and woodenly acted SWIII - apart from Ewan McGregor and Ian McDiarmid who were awesome methinks (is it because of the Mc in their names they rule so much? ;)) - only really stands out for the special effects, and that it's Star Wars.

Maybe Sin City is good enough, I'm not sure. I haven't watched it yet, just started a little on the DVD. Gonna check it out after I have set up my x360.
 
Man, I think Sin City was the best pure action flick I've seen in a long, long time, if ever. The pure visceral beauty of the movie just cried out to me.
 
Sin city wasn't a movie , it was a work of art.


Other than that movies have sucked. I did like harry potter though
 
jvd said:
Sin city wasn't a movie , it was a work of art.

Other than that movies have sucked. I did like harry potter though

Funny you brought this up because I normally don't even give kids movies a chance because I normally don't like them very much. When I was a member of Columbia House DVD club, they would automatically send me the Directors Selection of the month if I do not tell them I don't want it beforehand. Well one particular month the 2nd Harry Potter movie was sent to me because I had forgetten to notify them that I didn't want it. However when I received it I was like what the heck it's only one movie anyway so I opened up the package and watched it knowing that I would not be able to return it. Needless to say I was glad I watched it because it's a very fun movie to watch even for a person like me much better than Disney cartoons IMO.
 
Yea i read the books to my younger cousin when he was little and now we read them together (he is 10 now ) and he just lvoes them .

The moves are alot of fun . They aren't great if your expecting the second comming but if you go there knowing what they are they are very fun .

The great thing is the books are now much darker .

It started with the chamber of secrets . But by book 6 things are really dark.


SPolier warning
In the 6th book harry and dumbledore are in a cave and dumbledore makes harry force feed him a potion that slowly kills him and makes him reliive his fears . Highlight to see
 
Back
Top