Official Movie Discussion

[DollarAndADream 3,357]

Interstellar was awesome but towards the end it got really weird by when he was like inside the walls and was pushing the books out of the bookshel. 

Yeah. I watched the DVD screener and for a movie like that I just want to see it in theaters now. It did get a little odd after with that 4th dimension thing or whatever.

 

Hell, the whole movie every time Matthew McConaughey talked all I could think of was Rusty Cohle from True Detective.

[Sandro 251]

I never read any of the Hobbit books. The only book I've actually read of Tolkien's is The Two Towers. No idea why that's the only one.

 

The lovey dovey crap was pretty awful but for entertainment value I found the 3rd Hobbit the best.

 

My dad read The Hobbit (and the LOTR) to me when I was a little kid, so they've got a special place in my heart. The Hobbit as a trilogy was just so disappointing for me.

[DollarAndADream 3,357]

My dad read The Hobbit (and the LOTR) to me when I was a little kid, so they've got a special place in my heart. The Hobbit as a trilogy was just so disappointing for me.

Yeah, I can understand how the LOTR and Hobbit book fanbase will be butthurt about the Hobbit movies. I've read a lot about the differences and many complaints, a lot of which on Reddit. If I read the books and took them to heart I'd probably hate it as well, but I just watch them for entertainment value so all I really know of is the movies.

 

Like the addition of Tauriel I don't mind because it's Evangeline Lilly and I love her as an actress. But story-wise she wasn't even there so it doesn't make sense. She's only there for the love triangle.

[Sandro 251]

Yeah, I can understand how the LOTR and Hobbit book fanbase will be butthurt about the Hobbit movies. I've read a lot about the differences and many complaints, a lot of which on Reddit. If I read the books and took them to heart I'd probably hate it as well, but I just watch them for entertainment value so all I really know of is the movies.

 

Like the addition of Tauriel I don't mind because it's Evangeline Lilly and I love her as an actress. But story-wise she wasn't even there so it doesn't make sense. She's only there for the love triangle.

 

I'm not super-lore-nerd-crazy like a lot of the guys on Reddit, but The Hobbit just frustrated me because it lost so much of the magic and became so damn bloated. I was of the same mindset originally with Tauriel, but with the fact she just disappears at the end... Completely pointless. They argued her purpose was to add a strong female character in an all-male cast but like you said, in the end she was only there for a love triangle.

[DollarAndADream 3,357]

I'm not super-lore-nerd-crazy like a lot of the guys on Reddit, but The Hobbit just frustrated me because it lost so much of the magic and became so damn bloated. I was of the same mindset originally with Tauriel, but with the fact she just disappears at the end... Completely pointless. They argued her purpose was to add a strong female character in an all-male cast but like you said, in the end she was only there for a love triangle.

I more just liked the addition of Tauriel because it gave Evangeline Lilly a big role for her career. Lol. Always liked her since LOST.

[Sandro 251]

SPIDEY IS COMING HOME MOTHER FUCKERS

 

http://marvel.com/news/movies/24062/sony_pictures_entertainment_brings_marvel_studios_into_the_amazing_world_of_spider-man

 

 

 

Under the deal, the new Spider-Man will first appear in a Marvel film from Marvel's Cinematic Universe (MCU). Sony Pictures will thereafter release the next installment of its $4 billion Spider-Man franchise, on July 28, 2017, in a film that will be co-produced by Kevin Feige and his expert team at Marvel and Amy Pascal, who oversaw the franchise launch for the studio 13 years ago. Together, they will collaborate on a new creative direction for the web slinger.

 

[AIM-11 134]

What am I missing here?  Why are people excited about yet another version of Spiderman?  I thought that horse was beat to death a long time ago, but people are flipping out over this.  I'm not in the know with comic book stuff so obviously there is something exciting about Spiderman version 11 that is different from the first 10?

 

EDIT:  Just to be clear, I'm not being sarcastic.  I'm genuinely curious what's different this time around.

Edited February 10, 2015 by AIM-11

[Devise 4,475]

What am I missing here?  Why are people excited about yet another version of Spiderman?  I thought that horse was beat to death a long time ago, but people are flipping out over this.  I'm not in the know with comic book stuff so obviously there is something exciting about Spiderman version 11 that is different from the first 10?

 

EDIT:  Just to be clear, I'm not being sarcastic.  I'm genuinely curious what's different this time around.

 

People aren't excited about another version of Spiderman. Most are actually bummed if we get another "re-boot." But the X-Men, Spider-Man, and Fantastic Four licenses for films were owned by a studio that is not Marvel studios. Ergo things like Avengers, Guardians of the Galaxy and Iron Man, which all operate in the same film universe, was not shared with popular other marvel characters, such as Spider Man and X-Men.

 

While we still need to wait on X-Men, all this news means to fans getting exited is that Spider-Man will make appearances in Avengers, Captain America Civil War (probably) and that has people hyped. I'm in the camp that while I think Spider Man is a fucking awful lame character, if you are going to do a marvel cinematic universe to replicate the comics, you kind of need to have all the staple characters. Spider-Man is one of them. 

[Fire Tortorella 2,653]

Saw The Butler a couple nights ago. Thought it was a very well done movie. 8.5/10

[Sandro 251]

http://www.slashfilm.com/neill-blomkamp-alien-movie/

 

FUCKING DO IT, BLOMKAMP.

 

People aren't excited about another version of Spiderman. Most are actually bummed if we get another "re-boot." But the X-Men, Spider-Man, and Fantastic Four licenses for films were owned by a studio that is not Marvel studios. Ergo things like Avengers, Guardians of the Galaxy and Iron Man, which all operate in the same film universe, was not shared with popular other marvel characters, such as Spider Man and X-Men.

 

While we still need to wait on X-Men, all this news means to fans getting exited is that Spider-Man will make appearances in Avengers, Captain America Civil War (probably) and that has people hyped. I'm in the camp that while I think Spider Man is a fucking awful lame character, if you are going to do a marvel cinematic universe to replicate the comics, you kind of need to have all the staple characters. Spider-Man is one of them. 

 

Yes and no to your points about Spider-Man. People weren't excited about the rumours of Sony rebooting Spider-Man again on their own. Rebooting the character -- soft reboot or otherwise -- to bring him into the MCU is a whole other matter. The fans are pretty divided over Andrew Garfield being out, but it's an acceptable casualty to get Spidey into the MCU. Additionally, Marvel has said now that they aren't concerned about origin stories, many of the characters are going to debut in other movies and then carry over to their own individual flicks. For example, Black Panther is appearing in Civil War before he goes off to do his own movie.

 

The key here is that Spidey and his rogues gallery are now available to crossover into other MCU films, and vice versa. Spidey plays a big role in the comic Civil War, but I expect it to be much smaller if he is in the film. He also has some villain crossover with Doctor Strange, so he could appear there. Overall, it's much better than Sony's plans of trying to squeeze a massive cinematic universe out of the Spider-Man property alone.

 

As for X-Men... Keep it separate IMO. You'd need a total reboot as Fox's universe is incredibly different tonally, and Marvel is trying to pull back on the presence of that group in their overall universe. Fox isn't really willing to play ball either, and the wheels are already turning on the Inhumans effectively replacing them in the MCU. I'd rather get Fantastic Four back from them because of Galactus, Silver Surfer, and Doctor god damn Doom. The villains attached to the F4 license are way more important than the group itself.

Edited February 10, 2015 by Sandro

[Devise 4,475]

http://www.slashfilm.com/neill-blomkamp-alien-movie/

 

FUCKING DO IT, BLOMKAMP.

 

 

Yes and no to your points about Spider-Man. People weren't excited about the rumours of Sony rebooting Spider-Man again on their own. Rebooting the character -- soft reboot or otherwise -- to bring him into the MCU is a whole other matter. The fans are pretty divided over Andrew Garfield being out, but it's an acceptable casualty to get Spidey into the MCU. Additionally, Marvel has said now that they aren't concerned about origin stories, many of the characters are going to debut in other movies and then carry over to their own individual flicks. For example, Black Panther is appearing in Civil War before he goes off to do his own movie.

 

The key here is that Spidey and his rogues gallery are now available to crossover into other MCU films, and vice versa. Spidey plays a big role in the comic Civil War, but I expect it to be much smaller if he is in the film. He also has some villain crossover with Doctor Strange, so he could appear there. Overall, it's much better than Sony's plans of trying to squeeze a massive cinematic universe out of the Spider-Man property alone.

 

As for X-Men... Keep it separate IMO. You'd need a total reboot as Fox's universe is incredibly different tonally, and Marvel is trying to pull back on the presence of that group in their overall universe. Fox isn't really willing to play ball either, and the wheels are already turning on the Inhumans effectively replacing them in the MCU. I'd rather get Fantastic Four back from them because of Galactus, Silver Surfer, and Doctor god damn Doom. The villains attached to the F4 license are way more important than the group itself.

 

Yeah regarding Spidey. They need to play on the audiences expectations imo. If he is introduced in another movie in the MCU, which I think he will be. Don't go into heavy detail on his origin story. We all know it. His uncle died blah blah. Even the casuals know it by now. 

 

In regards to X-Men I don't know. Some of the crossover X-Men and Avengers stuff has been awesome. I always felt Civil War was just as good in regards to the X-Men stuff as it was to the others, because for the first time so many heroes had to learn to be hated by the public/government, just like the X-Men storyline. Plus I'm a huge fan of the Bendis New Avenger stuff (which Wolverine is apart of) and I always felt the dynamic between kill and don't kill was a great line that was walked between Captain America and Wolverine. That realization that there are horrors dark enough that you need someone on the team willing to go just as dark for Cap was chilling, even if he fought it the entire way. I really find those type of storylines compelling.

 

In regards to Fantastic Four I one hundred percent agree with you. Doom is arguably one of the best all around Marvel villains. Any of the "larger" story arcs often feature him as just a villain to the entire MCU. But I do think there was always a charm to having all the "smart" heroes work together to do crazy shit (Negative Zone, stopping Galactuc etc etc.) was cool. Sadly Mr. Fantastic is apart of that. A world in which Doctor Strange, Bruce Banner, Mr Fantastic Ant Man and Tony Stark could get together in movie form would be pretty great tbh

[AIM-11 134]

So long story short, Spidey gets to hang out with his buddies in films and that's the draw?  I guess that makes some sense for Superhero fans for sure.

[Merica 69]

All I gotta say is.....STAR WARS IS BACK

[Sandro 251]

Birdman was weird. But I liked it. The cinematography was fantastic, the music was cool, and Keaton + Norton + Stone gave great performances.

[AIM-11 134]

I've heard nothing but good things about Birdman but even the trailer had me scratching my head. 

[CoachReilly 688]

Birdman is definitely odd, but it's by far the best movie I've seen this year. 

 

*Disclaimer: I have not seen Boyhood*

[Phil 5,129]

It's a Mini Series.. but those into sci-fi WATCH ASCENSION!!! It was fucking unreal! 

 

 

*edit

It was fucking unreal! 

 

 

lol that's an unintentional semi-pun... sci-fi ftw.

Edited February 11, 2015 by Phil

[Sandro 251]

Birdman is definitely odd, but it's by far the best movie I've seen this year. 

 

*Disclaimer: I have not seen Boyhood*

 

I can't really decide between it and Whiplash right now. Birdman is so unique to anything I've ever watched, but Whiplash was just really really fucking good. Also: J.K. Simmons.

[CoachReilly 688]

Whiplash was also outstanding. Miles Teller has a really bright future ahead of him... The Grand Budapest Hotel was also great.  I thought Grand Budapest was better than Royal Tenebaums actually.

Edited February 11, 2015 by CoachReilly

[AIM-11 134]

I think the comments about Birdman being weird are the kicker for me.  I typically don't enjoy movies that people love that are also weird.  Stuff like Amelie, Being John Malkovich, or The Royal Tenenbaums come to mind.  It's why I have not bothered with The Grand Budapest Hotel either as I'm fairly certain I'll just end up turning it off halfway through.

 

It's why I appreciate threads like this though. Good feedback to let me know what to avoid OR watch.

[CoachReilly 688]

Birdman's not as weird as the trailer is.  It's not some super hero silly movie.  It's really a great story.  Great dark comedy.

 

The weird part about Birdman is the fact that it looks like it's shot in one continuous take. The editing is unbelievable. I highly recommend giving it a go. 

 

Grand Budapest I thought was much, much better than Royal Tenebaums. No weird brother-adopted sister relationship.  It's a fairly light-hearted movie and Ralph Fiennes is great.

[AIM-11 134]

Yeah I've heard really good things about both of them, but I'm at the point in my life where I can generally get a feel for whether I'll like a movie or not based on what people say about it, and I'm fairly certain I wouldn't like those ones.  Just not my type of film is all.

 

The last movie that fooled me with how good it was is Silver Linings Playbook, but I've been burned way more often than pleasantly surprised and my queue is too long as it is.

 

Waiting for a DVD quality stream of Interstellar to come out on Kodi (as well as the third Hobbit, which will be bad, but in a way that I can still enjoy it, as well as the third Hunger Games movie, and Into The Woods).

 

Then there's Boyhood, maybe Foxcatcher, American Sniper, Fury, The Theory of Everything.  Those are just the more recent ones.  I really love Sci-Fi movies (I Origins is waiting to be watched still!) and Classics (still never seen It's a Wonderful Life after all this time) so I rotate some of those into my movie watching from time to time as well.

 

XBMC (now known as Kodi) has made watching movies from home such an easy thing these days and typically my wife and I watch one every Friday night and I'll sometimes watch a second one after.  I also watch something while working out or running during the week, so that's at least another movie a week (though I watch the odd TV show during that time as well).  The last film I saw in the theatre was Gravity (and I'm REALLY glad I did), but the local cinema only shows 1 movie a week here in my city, and it also really sucks as a place to watch movies, so unless I am somewhere else visiting I can't justify the money and uncomfortableness to watch a movie in the theatre any more.  A comfy couch, drinks that my wife and I made, home made popcorn, and the ability to pause it to go to the washroom - it's a no brainer for us.  Long story short - very little time to watch movies that I'm fairly certain I won't like, even if they are good movies in and of themselves for most other people.

[CoachReilly 688]

I would try out Birdman. It's not boring, it's not super geeky. It's just plain good.

 

If I steer you wrong you can tell me to fuck off and never listen to me again. 

[DollarAndADream 3,357]

It's a Mini Series.. but those into sci-fi WATCH ASCENSION!!! It was fucking unreal! 

 

 

*edit

 

lol that's an unintentional semi-pun... sci-fi ftw.

I watched Ascension the 3 nights that it premiered. I loved that mini-series and I hope it gets made into a show like what people are talking about happening. They were testing the waters on the success of the show. It's an awesome show, especially for what SyFy usually delivers in quality.

 

 

Regarding Spider-Man, yeah, people aren't hyped about a new Spider-Man. Everyone is just excited because now he will be appearing with the other super heroes, finally. I actually liked Andrew Garfield as Spider-Man, but I suppose having another one isn't too bad. There's been many revolving doors of actors/actresses in the super hero universe. It's not surprising.

 

As for X-Men, I don't really care about them being a part of it. All I really want is Wolverine with the Avengers.

[Phil 5,129]

I watched Ascension the 3 nights that it premiered. I loved that mini-series and I hope it gets made into a show like what people are talking about happening. They were testing the waters on the success of the show. It's an awesome show, especially for what SyFy usually delivers in quality.

 

Problem is that it only got 1.8 Million views... probably not enough to get picked up. But it's airing in Canada soon and I'm doing some MAD spreading of the good word.

 

BSG, for example got something like 4.8 Million views and was picked up after a year. So fingers crossed