Movie Reviews 2.0
- Thread starter Dresden
- Start date
28 Days was quite original and was before all the Zombie cash-in era lately.
Grall it really sounds like you need to go into movies without so many pre-conceived notions and you honestly might enjoy them better. To walk out on Gravity in the cinema because you couldn't get past its stretch of realistic situation is just a travesty, a serious flaw that made you miss out on one of the most amazing space cinematic experiences ever made.
I really do try to let folks have their own opinion on things as movies are very subjective, I just find that one in particular to be too much for me to handle sorry
There has been many zombie movies over the years though, and there was that Will Smith movie too around the same time as 28 months.
I don't have pre-concieved notions about movies. I generally try to know as little as possible about a movie before I go see it. I don't watch trailers for example or read previews (although this is harder when it comes to a movie like The Hobbit for example because I read the book, or Robocop, because well, I watched the original movie only about a million times...
)
Rurouni
Veteran
I think Thor 2 is the best superhero movie this year. Very fun and intense to watch, and Loki makes everything interesting.
Btw, movies that have epilogue should tell the audience at the start. It's a bit annoying to miss it... and if wiki is correct, Thor 2 had 2 epilogue! I know these movie usually have epilogue, but I didn't expect it had 2 of them. I miss the 2nd one.
Btw, movies that have epilogue should tell the audience at the start. It's a bit annoying to miss it... and if wiki is correct, Thor 2 had 2 epilogue! I know these movie usually have epilogue, but I didn't expect it had 2 of them. I miss the 2nd one.
Onkl Bjorni
Newcomer
Could not agree more, very good movie and I think the first movie this year that I enjoyed more then I was expecting to do
(and I was expecting a lot, I'm a huge fan of everything based on Norse mythology, so much so that I think Too Human is one of the most underrated games this gen. Sure it had its flaws, but the universe SK created was one of the more interesting I have ever played, but that's of topic so I'll leave it at that)As for the 2 epilogues, the first one is the moste important as it links in with a future Marvel movie. The second one is similar to the last epilogue from The Avengers movie.
Babel-17
Veteran
Huh, I was googling "Lord of Light" and "movie rights" (I was inspired by the talk of mythology and also by how the movies are placing the Asgardians as being something out of SF) and I stumbled on this.
Made me want to see Argo. http://www.buzzfeed.com/richardrushfield/finding-argo-telling-the-houseguests-story-30-years-later Though I now see that the movie had to skip that backstory.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...elped-American-hostages-escape-Iran-1980.html
I'd like to see someone, maybe JMS, breathe new life into the project.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_of_Light#Film_version
Made me want to see Argo. http://www.buzzfeed.com/richardrushfield/finding-argo-telling-the-houseguests-story-30-years-later Though I now see that the movie had to skip that backstory.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...elped-American-hostages-escape-Iran-1980.html
I'd like to see someone, maybe JMS, breathe new life into the project.
28 Days Later is one of the only "zombie" movies that actually has some plausibility. Specifically sense there are no magical zombies that don't require oxygenated bloodflow. You know if a functioning circulatory system wasn't required to walk around and do stuff, I don't think our bodies would have bothered with it
Sigfried1977
Legend
Completely disgaree. The second one really isn't anymore or any less of a typical zombie flick than the first one is. And as far as cliches go, I thought the oddly tacked-on final act of 28 days later where the hero had to man up and become a murdering monster himself in order to safe the day was hella corny. I loved the movie up to that point, but that's where it kinda lost me. 28 weeks was less adventurous and bold in that regard, but as a result the whole thing felt a lot more cohesive to me. And like you said, 28 Days Later kinda looks like crap thanks to the way it was shot. 28 Weeks Later is a gorgeous movie on the other hand.
EIther way, I think both of them are at the absolute top of the genre food chain and absolutely worth watching. They are the thinking man's zombie movies that work equally well on a surface level as pure white knuckle thrillers and as social commentaries alike.
I thought that Thor 2 was OK, nothing more.
A bit too formulaic and predictable with the 'twists' (such as they were) all too predictable.
A pleasant enough way to spend a couple of hours on a chilly Sunday afternoon, but I thought they could have cut 15 or 20 minutes quite easily without affecting the content of the film at all. Strange to say that a film of just 2 hours seemed to drag a bit at times!
A bit too formulaic and predictable with the 'twists' (such as they were) all too predictable.
A pleasant enough way to spend a couple of hours on a chilly Sunday afternoon, but I thought they could have cut 15 or 20 minutes quite easily without affecting the content of the film at all. Strange to say that a film of just 2 hours seemed to drag a bit at times!
theyve both good, not great
heres a few better ones (zombie/infected etc)
Let sleeping corpses lie (1974) // prolly the benchmark for a zombie film
Braindead (1992)
I Bury the Living (1958)
Dellamorte Dellamore (1994)
The Return of the Living Dead (1985)
Slither (2006)
Dawn of the Dead (1978)
Day of the Dead (1985)
Re-Animator (1985)
Dead of Night (1972)
Shivers (1975)
Psychomania (1973) // if you ignore the songs
Dead & Buried (1981)
Rec 2 (2009) // better than part 1
Messiah of Evil (1973) // cross vampire
Pontypool (2008)
I enjoyed it, but I'm a sap for all this whole Marvel series arc. What I think Thor 2 was most effective at, though, was expanding the horizons of the movie going audience more into the outer reaches of the Marvel Universe and its clearly laying the groundwork for the expansion to other realms.
They've started doing that since Avengers.
BTW - Apparently there is an "Agents of SHEILD" crossover episode soon, which is supposed to be picking up from the end of Thor 2. My guess is its related to the very end of credits epilogue.
Watched Thor2 today. Tried to write a review earlier, but IE went bonkers flipping backwards and forwards and whatnot by itself and ate the post, so there that went to shit... This will be more condensed than what I'd intended to write.
Nice (action) movie.
Like that they brought back the character of Darcy. Love her, I was hoping she'd come back. As I wrote in the original Thor review, you don't see fem comic relief very often. Her character's developed a bit, gotten experienced, learned some science and so on, but is still pretty much a easily distracted airhead.
Tom Hiddleston. What a guy. Wow. Awesome on so many levels in this role. Sinister, guileful, treacherous... He pushes all the buttons, and looks sooo good doing it too. He's got that regal posture down pat for sure. An ultimate badguy of the kind you as a viewer just love to hate; you don't want a guy like that to get killed at the end of a movie, because he's so good you want him to return in the next movie so you can hate him some more!
Chris Hemsworth's looking just as crazy buffed as ever. Jesus. How many hours in the gym it took to build that bod I just don't want to know! I'd get one hell of an inferiority complex if I wasn't immune to that sort of thing. He certainly looks the part of a superhero, just like in the original movie. This is what I like about this latest round of hero flicks by the way, in the past we had to put up with Christopher Reeves as Superman, and no ill words said about the man's acting (not that those movies required that much of that), but he looked like just some regular dude in red and blue pyjamas. And any old James Bond movie where Shean Connary - or hell, Roger Moore - performs "martial arts" shall forever remain unmentioned...
Plot? What's that? Don't need it! Well, it was decent enough for an action movie - IE, I didn't get bored, annoyed or just plain angered. The comic book science is what it is (fake); you just gotta roll with it, and the Asgardian stuff is supposed to be magic anyway, so... *shrug* Why get hung up on it? The macguffin of the movie was rather nebulous and fuzzy though admittedly (literally!), and the badguy was one-dimensional and not very interesting (again, "I want to destroooy eeeevvverythiiing!" Why? No reason.) Anyway, just like in IM4 he got very little screen time so it didn't matter that much.
Lots of digital actor/character action scenes, which can become really fake and annoying to look at, but it was handled rather well most of the time. The CGI shone through sometimes, but with the budget these flicks have these days it wasn't often. Music score - not as epic as the first Thor, but served its purpose. The biggest payout you get from this movie is not really the action, it's the interaction, between the characters. I thought that was well done, and the pacing was good. This movie did not feel slow to me, I'm not certain when that's supposed to be.
The final epilogue was good.
Nice (action) movie.
Like that they brought back the character of Darcy. Love her, I was hoping she'd come back. As I wrote in the original Thor review, you don't see fem comic relief very often. Her character's developed a bit, gotten experienced, learned some science and so on, but is still pretty much a easily distracted airhead.
Tom Hiddleston. What a guy. Wow. Awesome on so many levels in this role. Sinister, guileful, treacherous... He pushes all the buttons, and looks sooo good doing it too. He's got that regal posture down pat for sure. An ultimate badguy of the kind you as a viewer just love to hate; you don't want a guy like that to get killed at the end of a movie, because he's so good you want him to return in the next movie so you can hate him some more!
Chris Hemsworth's looking just as crazy buffed as ever. Jesus. How many hours in the gym it took to build that bod I just don't want to know! I'd get one hell of an inferiority complex if I wasn't immune to that sort of thing. He certainly looks the part of a superhero, just like in the original movie. This is what I like about this latest round of hero flicks by the way, in the past we had to put up with Christopher Reeves as Superman, and no ill words said about the man's acting (not that those movies required that much of that), but he looked like just some regular dude in red and blue pyjamas. And any old James Bond movie where Shean Connary - or hell, Roger Moore - performs "martial arts" shall forever remain unmentioned...
Plot? What's that? Don't need it! Well, it was decent enough for an action movie - IE, I didn't get bored, annoyed or just plain angered. The comic book science is what it is (fake); you just gotta roll with it, and the Asgardian stuff is supposed to be magic anyway, so... *shrug* Why get hung up on it? The macguffin of the movie was rather nebulous and fuzzy though admittedly (literally!), and the badguy was one-dimensional and not very interesting (again, "I want to destroooy eeeevvverythiiing!" Why? No reason.) Anyway, just like in IM4 he got very little screen time so it didn't matter that much.
Lots of digital actor/character action scenes, which can become really fake and annoying to look at, but it was handled rather well most of the time. The CGI shone through sometimes, but with the budget these flicks have these days it wasn't often. Music score - not as epic as the first Thor, but served its purpose. The biggest payout you get from this movie is not really the action, it's the interaction, between the characters. I thought that was well done, and the pacing was good. This movie did not feel slow to me, I'm not certain when that's supposed to be.
The final epilogue was good.
When I saw the two fighter jets re-emerge before the end credits I was wondering what happened to the dog, and yeah. There he was, chasing doves.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think that last bit deserves some spoiler tags!
Off topic stuff...
Well, the thing is that it's actually not that hard to do in itself, IMHO. The problem is that we regular guys have a lot of other things to do in life like work or a household, and it's hard to find the energy to do something else that feels like chores. Also, it seems that the importance of a trainer and/or a competitive group is underestimated.
I've been visiting our company gym 2 times a week for a year since last September, except for the summer when the Danube flooded our island and the facilities. Made some progress but not much.
Then from this September on I've joined the evening kettlebell group as the coworkers who started last year have more or less catched up to my level. Also started to go a 3rd time to continue with barbell exercise I've been doing once a week in the past year. Oh and started to focus more on my eating too. Results are already very, very good, I'm getting much stronger. And we've only been doing metabolic stuff these past two months, the strength training is only starting now
So the point is: movie stars today get a personal trainer to put together their schedules and keep them working, a cook to prepare meals, and enough time and energy to focus properly on the job. If any of us had that kind of support, it'd be much easier to catch up to them.
You should perhaps take another look He had a quite impressive physique IMHO. However our standards have been messed up by body builders going to crazy extremes with steroids and growth factor and whatever. Even Arnold was using, to get a more realistic perspective you should look at old time strongman pictures...
Oh and even the so called natural bodybuilders of today are making use of a lot of new scientific research and statistics and new approaches. Back in the late '70s, Reeve did not have access to this data, or modern food supplements...
And aesthetics were also different, today it's all about pecs and arms, whereas real strength needs a strong torso mostly. The difference between standing up and using free weights for strength training vs. isolation exercises done sitting/lying on a bench. Again, look at guys like Eugene Sandow.
Well, the thing is that it's actually not that hard to do in itself, IMHO. The problem is that we regular guys have a lot of other things to do in life like work or a household, and it's hard to find the energy to do something else that feels like chores. Also, it seems that the importance of a trainer and/or a competitive group is underestimated.
I've been visiting our company gym 2 times a week for a year since last September, except for the summer when the Danube flooded our island and the facilities. Made some progress but not much.
Then from this September on I've joined the evening kettlebell group as the coworkers who started last year have more or less catched up to my level. Also started to go a 3rd time to continue with barbell exercise I've been doing once a week in the past year. Oh and started to focus more on my eating too. Results are already very, very good, I'm getting much stronger. And we've only been doing metabolic stuff these past two months, the strength training is only starting now
So the point is: movie stars today get a personal trainer to put together their schedules and keep them working, a cook to prepare meals, and enough time and energy to focus properly on the job. If any of us had that kind of support, it'd be much easier to catch up to them.
You should perhaps take another look
He had a quite impressive physique IMHO. However our standards have been messed up by body builders going to crazy extremes with steroids and growth factor and whatever. Even Arnold was using, to get a more realistic perspective you should look at old time strongman pictures... Oh and even the so called natural bodybuilders of today are making use of a lot of new scientific research and statistics and new approaches. Back in the late '70s, Reeve did not have access to this data, or modern food supplements...
And aesthetics were also different, today it's all about pecs and arms, whereas real strength needs a strong torso mostly. The difference between standing up and using free weights for strength training vs. isolation exercises done sitting/lying on a bench. Again, look at guys like Eugene Sandow.
To be honest i'm happy to go through less than stellar Thor/CA/IM movies until we get to the big ones, i.e. the Infinity Stones big bangs
Quite the opposite for me. I've been unfortunate enough to have been forced to see a couple of episodes of "Two Broke Girls" and the persona of Dennings' character in that is pretty much the same as that in the Thor films. i.e. enormously irritating.
I was sort of hoping for a large piece of masonry to fall on her from the instant she appeared in the film. No such luck.
Similar threads
