Movies you've just watched

[chempop]

How many actors can successfully wear a embroidered-golden-metallic scorpion jacket?
One, that's how many! Gosling was ace for the roll, and that's that

Watching Rifftrax Cloverfiled... Not sure if this really counts as a movie lol

[GaijinPunch]

Honestly, I think if they had cast somebody else in Gosling's role, I would have enjoyed it more. Guess I found it hard to buy him as a bad ass stomping on peoples faces and shit.

I read they originally tried to cast Hugh Jackman.

[Moniker]

Honestly, I think if they had cast somebody else in Gosling's role, I would have enjoyed it more. Guess I found it hard to buy him as a bad ass stomping on peoples faces and shit.

I read they originally tried to cast Hugh Jackman.

Sadly, there's no vomit emoticon on this forum.

[1up]

The Avengers (3D) - 4/5

A lot of awesome stuff going on in this flick, The Hulk especially really shines.

I watched this yesterday. I agree. The Hulk was really awesome.

[neorichieb1971]

The Avengers (5/5)
Lifeboat (1944) (3/5)
MI4 (4/5) Simon Pegg makes this comical which really surprised me.

[Mortificator]

Apollo 18. Convincing replications of the Apollo program technology, with the associated nostalgia. I like that it didn't fall into the hero worship of other NASA films, it just showed these guys' as hardcore through their actions. On the bad side, there was too much perspective-jumping and filtering for it to be convincing as found footage (the ending seems to make it impossible to be recovered as well). The threat turned out to be almost a cliche; something along the lines of Stephen King's short story "I Am the Doorway" would be more ominous. Overall, I didn't like it as much as Cloverfield or the first Blair Witch, but better than the Paranormal Activities.

[null1024]

Avengers.
Damn fine film. Liked it almost as much as Iron Man 1. Bit iffy on the pacing [near the beginning, it kind of felt like things were just happening with no real connection, which somewhat gets ironed out by the end, but only somewhat], but the performances were stellar, the writing was great, and the massive action scene was awesome as hell.

[njiska]

Avengers
This was a movie worth waiting 5 years for. Beautifully built up and executed. A proper epic. Writting was solid, acting was beyond good, especially from Ruffalo.

Cabin in the Woods
Best horror/comedy since Evil Dead 2. Saying anything more would spoil it.

[Moniker]

Saw the Avengers too. That magnificent bastard Joss Whedon actually pulled it off. I really didn't think it possible, given that only one of its tributary films (Ironman) was actually decent. Bravo, sir. You are on a roll.

[GaijinPunch]

Everyone is saying it's fucking great. Guess I gotta see it.

I just watched Deliverance the other night.
My Take: Holy Fucking Shit. I never knew 1972 could be so intense. Best Burt Reynolds performance ever?

[1up]

Everyone is saying it's fucking great. Guess I gotta see it.

I just watched Deliverance the other night.
My Take: Holy Fucking Shit. I never knew 1972 could be so intense. Best Burt Reynolds performance ever?

Yea, Deliverance is a damn good movie. Starts out real nice, with some rafting with the buddies and everythings peachy. Soon turns real grimm. Hard to believe this movie is from 1972. I think it's the only movie i've seen where Burt Reynolds is a serious character.

[shmuppyLove]

Saw the Avengers too. That magnificent bastard Joss Whedon actually pulled it off. I really didn't think it possible, given that only one of its tributary films (Ironman) was actually decent. Bravo, sir. You are on a roll.

Avengers was great. I thought the SHIELD characters (Fury, Coulson, Hill, Barton, Romanoff) really stood up well against the super powered team.

Although, I don't get how Banner/Hulk all of sudden went from berserk and impossible to control to taking orders and working with the team. That kind of bugged me.

[BIL]

I just watched Deliverance the other night.
My Take: Holy Fucking Shit. I never knew 1972 could be so intense. Best Burt Reynolds performance ever?

Great movie. Great IMDB board too!

v Spoilers and Retardation v


Boards :: Deliverance ::so it was all a dream?
by single_serving_friend (Thu Aug 11 2011 03:48:06)

What a stupid ending. why did they show that geezer with the tache waking from his nightmare at the end of the film. It should of just ended with him driving away from that fat guy who got bummed.

[xbl0x180]

Don't post spoilers, man. Others may want to watch the movie.

[BIL]

Good point! I wish I hadn't known about the surprise bumming before watching.

[emphatic]

Although, I don't get how Banner/Hulk all of sudden went from berserk and impossible to control to taking orders and working with the team. That kind of bugged me.

Sudden Berserk = manipulated by Loki.

[CMoon]

Everyone is saying it's fucking great. Guess I gotta see it.

I just watched Deliverance the other night.
My Take: Holy Fucking Shit. I never knew 1972 could be so intense. Best Burt Reynolds performance ever?

Yea, Deliverance is a damn good movie. Starts out real nice, with some rafting with the buddies and everythings peachy. Soon turns real grimm. Hard to believe this movie is from 1972. I think it's the only movie i've seen where Burt Reynolds is a serious character.

Boorman is actually a rather amazing director. Most of his films from this period are well known, and range from a little to very weird. Point Blank and Excalibur should be seen by everyone, but Zardoz is an acquired taste. Written off as a joke, it is still an amazingly made film with no budget and a plot that requires multiple viewings to understand. Deliverance may be the least weird of this bunch, but it is the most disturbing. Fantastic camera work!

[GaijinPunch]

Thanks for the heads up on those others. Will check them out. I've been on a 70's kick since even though I was brought into this world in that fantastic decade, I know little about it pop-culture wise, until the last 2-3 years.

[CMoon]

I really love the 60's - early 80's and think for the US it is one of the best periods of film. Not so much by the mid 80's. Boorman manages to capture several different styles in the small handful of films he made. They're all interesting and worth watching (even the stinker Exorcist 2 is an intriguing failure.)

[Jason X]

Don't post spoilers, man. Others may want to watch the movie.

Not sure that spoiler-free expectations can apply after 40 years. People should be able to talk freely about something after that much time. Hell, I really think that even three years is all anything should get.

[drauch]

Eh...I don't know about that. There is too much shit out there to read/watch/play/whatever, so it's easy to get distracted or not have appropriate time to experience it all when it's really prevalent and new. Too much stuff to do, mang.

[xbl0x180]

Don't post spoilers, man. Others may want to watch the movie.

Not sure that spoiler-free expectations can apply after 40 years. People should be able to talk freely about something after that much time. Hell, I really think that even three years is all anything should get.

A spoiler is a spoiler is a spoiler, no matter how much time has transpired. Not everyone is omniscient and is aware of every movie up to the last three years. For example, someone posted in this thread they just saw the movie

[GaijinPunch]

I really love the 60's - early 80's and think for the US it is one of the best periods of film. Not so much by the mid 80's. Boorman manages to capture several different styles in the small handful of films he made. They're all interesting and worth watching (even the stinker Exorcist 2 is an intriguing failure.)

For some reason I was reading up on The Exorcist & Exorcist II recently. I saw the original once, and generally such things just don't appeal to me. Interesting story, but I'm not really into scary as fuck movies.

[emphatic]

For some reason I was reading up on The Exorcist & Exorcist II recently. I saw the original once, and generally such things just don't appeal to me. Interesting story, but I'm not really into scary as fuck movies.

Skip the awful second part and see the wonderful third instead. Or better still, read the books. Legion is the followup to The Exorcist upon which the third film is based.

[drunkninja24]

Another one for Avengers here. Pretty much blew away every expectation I had for it, also loved how it was a better Hulk movie than any of the movies dedicated to the character

[Daigohji]

Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol. This was the first time one of these movies almost felt like Mission Impossible. It was still pretty Cruise-centric, but the dynamics between the characters felt more like a team rather than the previous Tom Cruise & Friends outings. The film rarely has a dull moment, moving from one big team-based set piece to another. The stunt work and photography were good too. That said, it's not a movie I could imagine watching repeatedly. The script is perfunctuory inbetween major set pieces, such as the awkwardly handled moment when Haunted-by-his-Past Guy leans against a wall, shot of whiskey in hand, and tells us his war story. Simon Pegg helps boost the cast, but the character interactions don't consistently hit the level of tension or camaraderie that would have pushed this from a solid 7/10 to an 8.

[CMoon]

Wow, Taskashi Miike has remade Kobayashi's Harakiri. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5I14qkywyQ

I'd definitely like to see it, but have already heard it is not as good as the original; but that's hardly surprising. Kobayashi was so fucking good, and Harakiri is one of his best films. When a movie is remade, I'd rather they take a film that was flawed and try to fix it or reinvent the film. Imagine trying to remake Kubrick's 2001...like really, is there a point?

[xbl0x180]

Invasion of the Body Snatchers has been remade at least twice - and they're all good

[Jason X]

Don't post spoilers, man. Others may want to watch the movie.

Not sure that spoiler-free expectations can apply after 40 years. People should be able to talk freely about something after that much time. Hell, I really think that even three years is all anything should get.

A spoiler is a spoiler is a spoiler, no matter how much time has transpired. Not everyone is omniscient and is aware of every movie up to the last three years. For example, someone posted in this thread they just saw the movie

Absolutely true, but I'm saying that society as a whole can't be expected to not openly talk about things that are in the past, after a certain amount of time. 40 years is definitely long enough. If you haven't seen Deliverance before, that's understandable. Like someone else said, too much to do, too little time. That doesn't mean people should act like a 40 year old movie just came out yesterday, though. It's asking too much.

Man. Now I feel like watching Chinatown again.

[BIL]

I do think a certain act associated with Deliverance is well within the "is Luke's father," "was actually Earth all along" and "IS PEOPLE!" sphere of pop culture common knowledge - I watched it for the first time a few months ago too, and for as long as I can remember the movie's title and even "Duelling Banjos" have been synonymous with redneck assrape. I didn't even know it starred Burt Reynolds or Jon Voight.

But since this is a thread specifically about movies we've just watched, and a good recommendation resource, it is better to not "spoil" stuff with abandon regardless of age. And I did post about the ending too, even if it was filtered through IMDB retard-speak.