|
|
Post by slayrrr666 on Mar 7, 2008 11:03:38 GMT -5
A friend put it up on YouTube. Here's the link for it: youtube.com/watch?v=qrTWNraPMEoIt's part 1, you can find the others fairly easily if you know how to work YouTube. The Simpsons Movie-See thoughts in Movie Genre thread.` |
|
|
|
Post by Pulpmariachi on Mar 7, 2008 22:27:08 GMT -5
South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut (Trey Parker) -- Name one more musical that's as vulgar, violent, hilarious, and more entertaining than this. That's right; you can't. A.
|
|
|
|
Post by slayrrr666 on Mar 8, 2008 11:37:23 GMT -5
Two films for the first time uncensored:
The Feeding-Incredibly cheesy werewolf film, still hated the technical flaws the second time around (the shadowy effect whenever the werewolf shows up on screen and the way that it drains the color during it's attacks) but it's still gory, cheesy, and features a lot more nudity than expected. Still only for those who enjoy those kinds of films.
8.25/10
The Satanic Rites of Dracula-Classic, classic Hammer. A bunch of fun, with a great story, fun pace and some really stand-out sequences towards the end. The tunnel sequences are still really fun, and the first encounter is a lot better than I remembered, and it even comes complete with the fun finale where the entire house goes up in flames like so many of the earlier Gothic classics. Still thought the same flaws were apparent, namely the placing of items around the house that can be dealt a fatal blow to vampires in the right hands. Still, a lot better than expected.
9/10
|
|
|
|
Post by Pulpmariachi on Mar 8, 2008 19:56:19 GMT -5
The Simpsons Movie (David Silverman) -- Best TV adaptation I've ever seen! Best TV adaptation you've seen so far. A+.
|
|
|
|
Post by ZapRowsdower on Mar 9, 2008 3:36:25 GMT -5
The Simpsons Movie (David Silverman) -- Best TV adaptation I've ever seen! Best TV adaptation you've seen so far. A+. Eh... I liked the South Park movie better. Simpsons was hilarious, but it wasn't up to par with its better seasons (although it was better than recent episodes of the series). |
|
|
|
Post by Heineken Skywalker on Mar 9, 2008 11:25:08 GMT -5
Here we go again...
What is it about The Simpsons that every time it's mentioned, whether it be the series or the movie, someone else has to chime in with an opposing point of view? Let's all let it go, okay?
Sorry, but I just wanted to nip this one in the bud before it got out of hand. Again.
Anyway, watched last Friday:
THE IRON GIANT (1999)
My comments in the "Movie Genre of the Month" thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pulpmariachi on Mar 9, 2008 14:18:18 GMT -5
Here we go again... What is it about The Simpsons that every time it's mentioned, whether it be the series or the movie, someone else has to chime in with an opposing point of view? Let's all let it go, okay? Sorry, but I just wanted to nip this one in the bud before it got out of hand. Again. Oh Heiny, I wasn't going to go after this one. Besides, it was an obvious line from the movie! Why are jokes so hard on the Internet? |
|
|
|
Post by Heineken Skywalker on Mar 9, 2008 16:27:28 GMT -5
Oh Heiny, I wasn't going to go after this one. Besides, it was an obvious line from the movie! Why are jokes so hard on the Internet? It was obvious to you and me, but... To be honest, if I hadn't just watched it again recently, it would've gone over my head too. |
|
|
|
Post by Pulpmariachi on Mar 9, 2008 20:41:26 GMT -5
Ratatouille (Brad Bird) -- as much as I respect "No Country for Old Men" and "There Will Be Blood", re-watching this I find more enjoyment, more thrills, more morality, and more quality than any of them. Yes, they're dramas, yes they look at the underside of life; but this might have been the best movie of 2007. A.
|
|
|
|
Post by Heineken Skywalker on Mar 10, 2008 7:59:34 GMT -5
RATATOUILLE (2007)
My comments in the "Movie Genre of the Month" thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by slayrrr666 on Mar 10, 2008 10:09:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Heineken Skywalker on Mar 12, 2008 9:34:44 GMT -5
THE HITCHER (2007) Remake of the '86 cult thriller. Except for Rutger Hauer's very creepy performance, I'm not a huge fan of the original. But Hauer puts that version a notch above this one. Pretty much everything else is about the same in quality. Though the kid who plays Jim Halsey in this version, Zachary Knighton, does a better job than C. Thomas Howell in the original. Just a time waster if you have nothing else to watch. 5.5/10 MACBETH (1948) Orson Welles' adaptation of Shakespeare's tale about the prophecy of three witches that drive a Scottish nobleman (Welles) to betrayal and eventually the king's crown. Low budget and surreal, but still pretty effective. Pretty ass-backwards, but now that I've seen the Kurosawa version (Throne of Blood) and this more traditional version, I should probably read the actual play.  6/10 THE PROPHECY (1995) Christopher Walken as the angel Gabriel, has come to earth to find a dark human soul that can help him turn the tide of the war in heaven. Eric Stoltz plays another angel, Simon, and Viggo Mortensen steals the show in his brief appearance as Lucifer. Fighting the good fight for us humans is Elias Koteas as a cop who was once almost a priest. Actually better than I remembered as I hadn't seen it since it was first in theaters back in '95. Treats the material fairly seriously with only a few moments of humor. 7/10
|
|
|
|
Post by Pulpmariachi on Mar 12, 2008 12:29:46 GMT -5
MACBETH (1948) Orson Welles' adaptation of Shakespeare's tale about the prophecy of three witches that drive a Scottish nobleman (Welles) to betrayal and eventually the king's crown. Low budget and surreal, but still pretty effective. Pretty ass-backwards, but now that I've seen the Kurosawa version (Throne of Blood) and this more traditional version, I should probably read the actual play. 6/10 You haven't read "Macbeth"? Dude! "Throne of Blood", though, I have to say is the best adaptation of that movie. It's just so well executed, though I hate hate hate hate hate the Polanski version. He took every bit of humanity out of the story but whatever. The Wells version didn't really ring with me much either.... But come on, man, the play is magnificant. And I think it's the shortest of his tragedies.... |
|
|
|
Post by Heineken Skywalker on Mar 13, 2008 9:43:00 GMT -5
You haven't read "Macbeth"? Dude! Haven't read much Shakespeare, actually. Romeo & Juliet, Othello, Hamlet and The Tempest. That's it. I will try to get around to some others though. ALL THAT JAZZ (1979) Roy Scheider is a showstopper as Joe Gideon, a smoking, womanizing, pill-popping, choreographer/director, based on Bob Fosse, who wrote & directed the film. I don't love the film, but Scheider is amazing. "It's showtime, folks!" R.I.P. Mr. Scheider 6.5/10 THE HILLS HAVE EYES II (2007) Below average sequel to the slightly above average original, which was actually a remake. This time instead of a family who find themselves in mutant territory, it's a group of National Guardsmen, who get slaughtered one-by-one, just about as easily. By-the-numbers exploitation-horror with no surprises. You would think with their weapons and training the soldiers would put up much more of a fight. I think next time I feel like watching a horror sequel about soldiers getting picked off one-by-one, I'll watch the vastly superior ALIENS. 3.5/10 |
|
|
|
Post by slayrrr666 on Mar 13, 2008 10:08:02 GMT -5
See Jane Run-Super-slow going thriller, mistakenly marketed as a horror film on TV, about a family who let their dark secrets of the past come out to haunt them while dealing with a group of lost tourists out to see a famous nearby landmark. Absolutely no horror at all, not even a nifty sequence where a victim is killed off while stuck inside a cat door after hearing one calling for help, with the attack happening off-screen. The first hour is devoted to them giving the backstory, and I couldn't care less about it, even with that one sequence there. Really terrible.
3/10
The Gates of Hell Part 2: Dead Awakening-OH.....MY.....GOD!!!!! This is the absolute, hands-down, no-questions-asked worst movie I have ever seen. I can't find a single, solitary thing about it that can be praised. The plot is a joke, the action is non-existent, the pace is torturous, there's no nudity or sleaze, the few times it bothered to go into a supposedly suspenseful scene where telegraphed 50 yards away and it looks like a film completed for about $1.50, which covered paying off everybody and everything involved in the film. Complete, utter and absolute crap. Even worse, this is dedicated to Lucio Fulci!!!!!!!!!! No way did he deserve this, and they should rot for saying such blasphemy.
- points/10
|
|
