Automotive Deals Best Books of the Month Amazon Fashion Learn more nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Songs of Summer Fire TV Stick Health, Household and Grocery Back to School Ruby jewelry Amazon Cash Back Offer TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Introducing new colors All-New Kindle Oasis AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Water Sports STEM
Customer Discussions > Movie forum

Rate The Last Movie You Watched

This discussion has reached the maximum length permitted, and cannot accept new replies. Start a new discussion

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 226-250 of 1000 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 6:46:18 AM PDT
It's essentially Rocky but set in ancient Rome.

Posted on Jul 13, 2012 7:42:33 AM PDT
PoM: I don't hate Gladiator--but it's a bit of a tired retread of The Fall Of The Roman Empire cum Spartacus. Crouching Tiger was a far more interesting film--particularly visually. I suppose either you like that Hong Kong wire work, or you don't.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 7:45:01 AM PDT
bella7 says:

I watched Machine Gun Preacher about 2 weeks ago and enjoyed it. It was heartbreaking to see what those Sudanese children have been through. I shed a few tears in this movie. I hope you watched while the credits rolled...footage of the "real" machine gun preacher was shown.

I also recommend this documentary on the same topic: Invisible Children, Discover the Unseen Dvd!

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 8:09:46 AM PDT
stevign says:
Rocky's family were murdered? Who knew? Technically, both movies (Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and Gladiator contain some common elements used many times by Hollywood.

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon: Unrealized love, revenge and a fighter who wants to retire but gets pulled back in. (It would have been really cool if after the death of his master that he feels he must avenge, he would have said "Just when I thought I was out... they pull me back in."

Gladiator: Revenge, Honor.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 8:16:29 AM PDT
stevign says:
re: "I suppose either you like that Hong Kong wire work, or you don't."

This is true. Personally I find the wire-work in martial art films to be over-the-top and way too silly. I'll take Kurosawa any day. It was visually stunning though.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 8:32:55 AM PDT
WAS: Visually and artistically, Crouching Tiger is a way superior film. There are some films in the Asian martial arts and swords films that I'm not particularly a big fan of, but I did love this film by Ang Lee. Much better acting than that of Gladiator.

Posted on Jul 13, 2012 8:34:27 AM PDT
stevign: A matter of taste. The world of Hong Kong wire work and the visual excesses of Tsui Hark are most enjoyable things--and quite a different aesthetic than Kurosawa's Japanese aesthetic. No reason not to enjoy them both.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 1:20:29 PM PDT
stevign says:
Pastor & William:

re: "No reason not to enjoy them both."

There is for me, of course others can enjoy it if they wish. I just don't see how one can say Gladiator wasn't as well acted as Crouching Tiger, what's the criteria?

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 13, 2012 1:24:13 PM PDT
stevign: Honestly, I thought the screenplay and cast were both better in the latter, but like I said, I'm no Russell Crowe fan.

Posted on Jul 14, 2012 6:32:40 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 14, 2012 6:34:36 PM PDT
Dreams by Akira Kurosawa

Being my first Kurosawa adventure, I put it on with great enthusiasm. Honestly, I found it to be quite a disappointment. Don't get me wrong, it's not bad, but as a whole, it's nothing truly remarkable. I did admire much of the photography in the film and many of the images, but some of the sequences seemed confused and undeveloped. I admired the peach blossom sequence and the blizzard sequence very much, but overall, I wonder why I didn't start off with another film by Kurosawa.


In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 6:49:56 PM PDT
stevign says:
I'm a huge Kurosawa fan but I too was disappointed. It's absolutely gorgeous to watch but that's about it.

Posted on Jul 14, 2012 7:05:12 PM PDT
stevign says:
Friends with Money: Jennifer Aniston, Joan Cusack, Catherine Keener, Frances McDormand, Jason Isaacs, Scott Caan.

Hey kids, wanna see a boring-ass film? Well this is your luck day! I wouldn't call it a "Jennifer Aniston movie" because it's an ensemble cast and they all participate in this useless piece of tripe. I didn't care about one single character on screen and gave up after the 1st half hour.......yer gonna LOVE IT!

Minus 5 Stars. (I would have given it minus 4 stars but Jennifer kept her clothes on)

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 15, 2012 2:02:41 AM PDT
Jason Isaacs, and Scott Caan, two lovely actors with double aa's !! :)))

Purr, I have got to watch it for these gorgeous blokes!!

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 15, 2012 5:18:00 AM PDT
stevign says:
Scott Caan is barely an actor though. He plays on the new Hawaii Five-0 tv series and it's just strange to watch. I don't know if he's putting it on or if it's authentic but he mimics every gesture of his father (James Caan).

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 15, 2012 5:55:21 AM PDT
Hikari says:
I blame the genetics for that. I'm sure young Caan is familiar with his father's movies but it hardly seems possible that every gesture would be so calculated as that. Just a chip off the old block, is Scott. It's spooky, I know, but I think it's inborn. Or a combo of nature/nurture, not acting method.

Posted on Jul 15, 2012 7:47:13 AM PDT
Unmistaken Child

Rating: 4.5 out of 5
or 9 out of 10 (Pick your preferred scale)

Fleshed out review is in another thread. I loved this movie!

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 15, 2012 8:13:39 AM PDT
stevign says:
re: "but it hardly seems possible that every gesture would be so calculated as that."

I'm sure some of children's body language is learned behavior from their parent(s) but I think he also practiced some of it in the mirror. The reason I say that is I've seen the children of other actors on screen and it's never than dead on.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 15, 2012 8:28:13 AM PDT
stevign: I think it's fair to say that Gladiator is overacted. Lots of scenery chewing. Not quite at the Sean Penn or DDL level, but close. Not at all a subtle film.

Gladiator was a very peculiar choice for Best Picture. Among those nominated, I would have gone with Crouching Tiger; widening the search to other films nominated for anything that year--not best picture--I would have gone with Almost Famous.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 15, 2012 10:14:52 AM PDT
stevign says:

re: "I think it's fair to say that Gladiator is overacted"

Really? Like who and when? As for the Academy Awards....I've never cared.

Posted on Jul 15, 2012 12:37:35 PM PDT
stevign: If you can't see that Crowe and Phoenix are chewing on the scenery--then you can't recognize overacting.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 15, 2012 12:43:25 PM PDT
WAS: Oh my word, Phoenix was just awful in it. And although he compensated for that with his astounding performance in Walk The Line, I would have chosen Heath Ledger for Best Actor that year.

Posted on Jul 16, 2012 6:47:14 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 16, 2012 3:43:02 PM PDT
I Love You Phillip Morris

True story about con artist Steven Russell. Good performances by Ewan McGregor and Leslie Mann. Normally I'm not a fan of Jim Carrey, but he did make me laugh out loud a couple of times. The film had a Catch Me If You Can (Full Screen Two-Disc Special Edition) feel to it... only campier. Overall it was mildly entertaining and worth watching once.


In reply to an earlier post on Jul 16, 2012 8:04:49 AM PDT
stevign says:
As far as Crowe over-acting; I can't thank you enough William, all these years of watching good, bad and mediocre actors on screen I thought I knew what "in character" and "genuine" looked like. Apparently me and many others were blind, we are forever in your debt. I hate to intrude further on your time and expertise but is it possible you can spend a few minutes telling us how to see spirits as well?

Posted on Jul 16, 2012 8:31:24 AM PDT
stevign: All I can say that it's matter of taste and artistic discernment.

Posted on Jul 16, 2012 11:07:08 AM PDT
GarionOrb says:
John Carter - While overall I felt the movie was good, I'm not at all surprised that it turned out to be a theatrical flop. Most of the blame goes to the director. The pacing was extremely clumsy. Also, the budget was extremely high ($250 million), but it didn't look like that expensive a movie. The CGI was just okay, but nothing spectacular. As a story, I thought it was really good. Lots of sci-fi cliches, but this is because all the stories inspired by John Carter came out first.
‹ Previous 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 400 Next ›
Discussion locked

Recent discussions in the Movie forum


This discussion

Discussion in:  Movie forum
Participants:  201
Total posts:  10000
Initial post:  Jun 15, 2012
Latest post:  Nov 3, 2014

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 12 customers

Search Customer Discussions