Because Clint Eastwood is such a loser.
Because Clint Eastwood is such a loser.
Finally saw the Hobbit, and it was good! Haven't seen or read LotR yet, but I have read the Hobbit, and for obvious reasons I was expecting it to be full of fluffy filler. It was full of filler but the filler was mostly either great action scenes tied into the story well, stuff that's leading up to LotR, or stuff about the Necromancer, who was mentioned only in passing in the book and, I'm assuming, has some larger role in LotR. Also, I absolutely love the guy who plays Bilbo. And Gandalf.
I finished watching 'Dredd' last night, having started it the night before. I dug it, but the whole thing felt very "cheap" overall. The sets, the effects, the actors that weren't "names". It seemed like a low budget affair from the '80s with a modern spit-shine. This is fine with me, but I just don't think they used their money effectively if it cost between forty-five and fifty million to make.
'Dredd' has been compared to 'The Raid', and for obvious reasons. The basic plot is the same, cops need to get to the top of a run down apartment building to kill a gang leader. There's even a big fight in a drug lab towards the end of both flicks. It just so happens that in one movie our lead cop is Judge Dredd, while in the other it's a relatively unknown martial artist. The point is, the movies really had the same scale, but 'Dredd' was had a few "names" and layer upon layer of CGI and pointless 3D stacked on top. Not to mention the "slo-mo" drug plot device which comes across as a gimmick made just to further enable the 3D gimmick. So the flick without all the gaudy "enhancements" ended up costing well below two million and to me was the better, and more entertaining, movie.
I'm not shitting on 'Dredd', not really. I liked the movie, honest! I like Carl Urban. I just think that for all of it's attempts to feel big, it came across as cheap compared to the smaller film that knew exactly what it was.
Again, I like 'em both, but 'Dredd' felt like the lesser movie.
What did you watch it on ZP? DVD?
Watched the Exam last night. Was ok, bit frustrating though and I'm not sure if it pulled off being as smart as it wanted too.
Watched Rubber, and it's exactly as insane as you'd expect from a movie about a telekinetic tire that goes on a murder spree.
I can't believe how pretentious a film about a murderous tyre, was.
If I hadn't gone to film school, I probably would have thought it was the bees knees, but you see so much of this shit in uni that it was another one for the slush pile. Seriously, when the time came, I had to sit through a dozen of these movies a day and couldn't leave because my overwrought emo movie was usually last on the list.
I didn't go to film school, and I knew I didn't like it. I loved the opening monologue, but I was not a fan of the rest of the flick.
Yeah, it felt like a 15 minute short that outstayed its welcome after the second killing. It's not even good at being a horror movie, either. There's zero tension in every scene.
I hated the audience part, too. I got the irony (we're watching them as they watch the movie), but it was so unsubtle compared something like Lady Vengeance (the parents = the movie's audience) that I finally switched off when they woke out of their sleeping bags.
I went back to it, months later, and skipped to the end. I don't think I missed much.
I did kinda like when they poisoned the audience, but that was too little too late. The movie as a whole just didn't work.
Rewatched Tremors 1 & 2. (10/10)
Love the casts and scripts because they feel like real people, creature effects and that open country landscape.
Just can't rewatch the other two movies and series.
The Hunger Games (8/10)
More emotion concentrated than I expected in a battle royal between kids. Feels like a solid execution because I liked it visually and it progressed at a balanced pace. Nice introduction to the world it is set in. Feels like it represented the book well enough for me not to read it. Weird seeing Hutcherson, but everyone else is welcome. Nice seeing Woody Harrelson and Elizabeth Banks (did not recognize right away). Not a waste of time, but it's a one time viewing for me. I started losing interest in the content/story after a certain point.
Also, The Cabin in the Woods (9/10).
It's my kind of casual fun "kind of" scare flick. It made me crack a handful of smiles here and there. Thought it was done really well because it managed to stretch beyond my expectations. I was unsure about the cast at first, but they grew on me. Just wish there was a bit more. I could watch it again, definitely more likely than I would Evil Dead 1 & 2 (I just thought they were loud films is all and not scary). Felt like a more modern drive-in movie, weirder than previous stuff, but has more fun than most I've seen lately.
Studying film is a sure way to ruin films for yourself forever.