Summarize and Rate the Last Movie You Saw

  • Welcome to "The New" Wrestling Smarks Forum!

    I see that you are not currently registered on our forum. It only takes a second, and you can even login with your Facebook! If you would like to register now, pease click here: Register

    Once registered please introduce yourself in our introduction thread which can be found here: Introduction Board


Keith

WCW Halloween Phantom
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
16,898
Reaction score
3,247
Points
113
Never Let Me Go (2011) 8/10
Thought provoking Sci-Fi drama set in an alterlative 60s England. The pacing of the story is great the photogragphy excellent, the atmosphere chilling and the lead performances from Cary Mulligan, Keria Knightly and Andrew Garfield all very engainging. It is an inventive and ultimately sad film, very powerful through. You really beleive in the tension between the characters.
 

Killswitch

Active Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
2,127
Reaction score
21
Points
38
Location
The "Winners" Circle
TED - I laughed allot despite a fairly predictable storyline. But what did you expect? It's a goddamned talking bear. 3/5
 

Pete

Active Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Messages
2,282
Reaction score
24
Points
38
Location
Alton, England
Rumble In Hong Kong 0.5/5
Atrociously poor chop-socky romp, even by considerably lower 70's Hong Kong movie standards. While bad dubbing and sloppy editing is to be expected in this kind of production, there is no excuse for the level of amateurism displayed here. Rock bottom is hit when an exposition scene between two characters is left entirely mute for a good couple of minutes, forcing the viewer to sit there watching two people's mouths move silently, while wondering how something this bad could possibly have been greenlit. Before that point, however, poor unsuspecting martial arts movie fans have already been subject to fight scenes which take place entirely off camera, punches that clearly miss their mark (while still eliciting over-the-top reactions) hilariously bad pseudo-morals (why not have the heroes of your martial arts movie talk about how violent movies are these days?) and Jackie Chan with a huge honking prosthetic mole on his face (think Jillian Hall, except faker).

The Chan connection itself is tenuous at best, preying on less savvy movie buffs who will undoubtedly mistake this for Chan's breakthough Hollywood movie, "Rumble In The Bronx". Do not be fooled; Jackie may be marketed as the lead in this one, but his part is extremely minor - he plays one of the henchmen to a stereotypical drug lord, and gets his rump kicked by several people throughout the movie - including, to his certain embarassment, a woman. There is also none of his trademark comedy-fu to be found here, with the action generally being generic and snore-inducing rather than distinctive or exciting. The story may be cohesive (at least by chop-socky standards) and spliced/stock footage kept to a minimum, but this doesn't make this shoestring-budget turd any better. Between this and the equally appalling "Master With Cracked Fists", I think I may have finally given up on Jackie Chan Hong Kong-era movies.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Across The Tracks 2.5/5
Little-known, early Brad Pitt effort which is so 90s, it hurts (it was filmed in 1989 and released in 1991). Everything you associate with movies of this time period can be found here - cheesy rock soundtracks, montages backed by generic guitar riffs, stereotypical bullies, metalheads depicted as drugged-out slackers, troubled teenagers and, of course, lots and lots of denim. Still, the film's marked time-stamp might not have taken away from this promising story about two mismatched brothers bonding over track athletics...if only it had been told a little better.

The central premise of the film is interesting and rife with potential. Troubled teenager Billy (Rick Schroder) comes back home from a period in reform school actually willing to change his ways. However, he finds it difficult to walk the straight and narrow when he keeps succumbing to peer pressure and being accosted by bullies so one-dimensional, they would make the ones at Daniel LaRusso's school blush. He eventually finds an outlet in track racing, his older brother Joe's (Brad Pitt) main obsession. The two develop a bond, as well as a good-natured rivalry, but things get complicated when Joe begins to lose focus and be outperformed by Billy, who in turn is still being peer-pressured by his drug-dealing headbanger friend into meddling with narcotics...

Unfortunately, this promising plot is told in somewhat haphazard fashion, with the story bobbing and weaving while seldom finding itself. Characters have too-sudden changes of heart, born more out of plot convenience than actual character development, and points are often hammered home in less than subtle fashion (don't do druuuugs, mkaaaay? 'Cause drugs are baaaaad, mkaaaaay? And by the way, so is alcohol, mkaaaaay?). The whole thing feels as though it was written by an angsty (and probably straight-edge) teenager, for their high-school creative writing class. There is also at least one instance of hilarious overacting, by Mr. Pitt himself, who is still far from his 'credible actor' phase and firmly stuck in 'vaguely talented heartthrob' mode. Overall, a movie which could have been much more entertaining, but falls prey to the movie-makers' lack of storytelling prowess. A shame.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ned Kelly 3/5
Chock-full of glorious Australian scenery and hinged around a suitably surly, powerful performance from Heath Ledger, it is hard to pinpoint exactly why this historical drama never clicks - but the truth is, there is definitely something missing to make this one anything more than middle-of-the road. Based around the true story of the Kelly Gang (a band of Irish expats which ended up becoming Australia's most wanted criminals) and boasting committed performances by both Ledger and Orlando Bloom (seeking to shake his post-Lord Of The Rings image as a pretty-boy with no tangible talent), this movie is sadly unengaging and hard to get into, even when it is trying its hardest to be exciting. Watch it for the beautiful cinematography and for another reminder of how tragically premature Heath Ledger's demise was - but don't expect anything spectacular.
 
Last edited:

Keith

WCW Halloween Phantom
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
16,898
Reaction score
3,247
Points
113
Rumble In Hong Kong 0.5/5
Atrociously poor chop-socky romp, even by considerably lower 70's Hong Kong movie standards. While bad dubbing and sloppy editing is to be expected in this kind of production, there is no excuse for the level of amateurism displayed here. Rock bottom is hit when an exposition scene between two characters is left entirely mute for a good couple of minutes, forcing the viewer to sit there watching two people's mouths move silently, while wondering how something this bad could possibly have been greenlit. Before that point, however, poor unsuspecting martial arts movie fans have already been subject to fight scenes which take place entirely off camera, punches that clearly miss their mark (while still eliciting over-the-top reactions) hilariously bad pseudo-morals (why not have the heroes of your martial arts movie talk about how violent movies are these days?) and Jackie Chan with a huge honking prosthetic mole on his face (think Jillian Hall, except faker).

The Chan connection itself is tenuous at best, preying on less savvy movie buffs who will undoubtedly mistake this for Chan's breakthough Hollywood movie, "Rumble In The Bronx". Do not be fooled; Jackie may be marketed as the lead in this one, but his part is extremely minor - he plays one of the henchmen to a stereotypical drug lord, and gets his rump kicked by several people throughout the movie - including, to his certain embarassment, a woman. There is also none of his trademark comedy-fu to be found here, with the action generally being generic and snore-inducing rather than distinctive or exciting. The story may be cohesive (at least by chop-socky standards) and spliced/stock footage kept to a minimum, but this doesn't make this shoestring-budget turd any better. Between this and the equally appalling "Master With Cracked Fists", I think I may have finally given up on Jackie Chan Hong Kong-era movies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Across The Tracks 2.5/5
Little-known, early Brad Pitt effort which is so 90s, it hurts (it was filmed in 1989 and released in 1991). Everything you associate with movies of this time period can be found here - cheesy rock soundtracks, montages backed by generic guitar riffs, stereotypical bullies, metalheads depicted as drugged-out slackers, troubled teenagers and, of course, lots and lots of denim. Still, the film's marked time-stamp might not have taken away from this promising story about two mismatched brothers bonding over track athletics...if only it had been told a little better.

The central premise of the film is interesting and rife with potential. Troubled teenager Billy (Rick Schroder) comes back home from a period in reform school actually willing to change his ways. However, he finds it difficult to walk the straight and narrow when he keeps succumbing to peer pressure and being accosted by bullies so one-dimensional, they would make the ones at Daniel LaRusso's school blush. He eventually finds an outlet in track racing, his older brother Joe's (Brad Pitt) main obsession. The two develop a bond, as well as a good-natured rivalry, but things get complicated when Joe begins to lose focus and be outperformed by Billy, who in turn is still being peer-pressured by his drug-dealing headbanger friend into meddling with narcotics...

Unfortunately, this promising plot is told in somewhat haphazard fashion, with the story bobbing and weaving while seldom finding itself. Characters have too-sudden changes of heart, born more out of plot convenience than actual character development, and points are often hammered home in less than subtle fashion (don't do druuuugs, mkaaaay? 'Cause drugs are baaaaad, mkaaaaay? And by the way, so is alcohol, mkaaaaay?). The whole thing feels as though it was written by an angsty (and probably straight-edge) teenager, for their high-school creative writing class. There is also at least one instance of hilarious overacting, by Mr. Pitt himself, who is still far from his 'credible actor' phase and firmly stuck in 'vaguely talented heartthrob' mode. Overall, a movie which could have been much more entertaining, but falls prey to the movie-makers' lack of storytelling prowess. A shame.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ned Kelly 3/5
Chock-full of glorious Australian scenery and hinged around a suitably surly, powerful performance from Heath Ledger, it is hard to pinpoint exactly why this historical drama never clicks - but the truth is, there is definitely something missing to make this one anything more than middle-of-the road. Based around the true story of the Kelly Gang (a band of Irish expats which ended up becoming Australia's most wanted criminals) and boasting committed performances by both Ledger and Orlando Bloom (seeking to shake his post-Lord Of The Rings image as a pretty-boy with no tangible talent), this movie is sadly unengaging and hard to get into, even when it is trying its hardest to be exciting. Watch it for the beautiful cinematography and for another reminder of how tragically premature Heath Ledger's demise was - but don't expect anything spectacular.

Well I just have to seek that one out now since you gave it such a glowing recommedtion! lol.
 

Pete

Active Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Messages
2,282
Reaction score
24
Points
38
Location
Alton, England
^are you implying our tastes don't match? LOL

But seriously, the movie's REALLY bad, you can't even laugh at it because you're wincing too hard.
 

Keith

WCW Halloween Phantom
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
16,898
Reaction score
3,247
Points
113
^ No I was just joking because you gave it such a slateing. Also when someone gives a film such a bad review it actually makes you want to see it just to see if it is really that bad, plus I believe watching bad movies make the good ones you see even better.
 

Pete

Active Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Messages
2,282
Reaction score
24
Points
38
Location
Alton, England
Attack The Block 4/5
Action flows thick and fast in this British horror/sci-fi comedy, reminiscent of a more grown-up version of Gremlins or the more recent Aliens In The Attic. When an alien crashes into a South London housing estate, a group of local teenage hoodlums see it fit to hunt it down and give it a good beating, to show they are "well 'ard". The plan backfires when, all of a sudden, dozens of much larger, much hairier and more more dangerous creatures ("big alien-gorilla-wolf motherfuckers", as one character puts it) begin to, well, Attack The Block. Now, it's up to Moses, his "crew", the local drug dealers, and an innocent mugging victim caught in the middle of it to repel the invasion and keep their housing projects safe.

Much has been made of this movie's connection to Shaun of The Dead and Hot Fuzz, due to the involvement of Edgar Wright and Nick Frost. However, one gets the sense those names are there simply to add star power to what is a very engaging movie in its own right. Attack The Block did not need Frost; it survives perfectly well on the back of its teen leads, who look, feel, act and talk like what they are - real housing-projects kids, most making their film debut. Their rapid-fire street slang and mannerisms will no doubt alienate foreign viewers, but anyone who has had a modicum of contact with British culture will be laughing their arses off at all the "innits" and "merc'ings" and "fams" being thrown around. Character development is kept to a minimum, with only the odd hint being dropped here and there, but that fits in with the context - these kids are supposed to be anonymous, the type you would meet should you walk into a less savoury British inner-city area at night. Besides, there's no time to be all deep when you're running away from big hairy aliens with glow-in-the-dark teeth. The movie understands this, and consciously eschews well-drawn-out characters in favour of a nonstop action-fest which is, in turn, exciting, scary, and laugh-out-loud funny.

With the Wright/Frost connection, humour was to be expected, of course, and the film does not disappoint - even though it never goes for cheap laughs, a few witty one-liners and instances of situational humour clearly hit their mark, and will have viewers chuckling even as they anticipate the next scare. What is more surprising is that there are quite a few of these, too - more, in fact, than you would expect from this kind of production. Furthermore, each and every one of them is better and less predictable than what you would find in your average Hollywood shlock-fest - and all the better because of it. Even though gore is kept to a minimum (proof positive that you do not need buckets of tomato sauce to make a good horror movie), there are also some instances of Joe Dante-like gross-out, which will have youths and teenagers squirming in delight, while not spoiling the experience for older viewers.

All in all, then, Attack The Block is a success. It may not be the deepest, most meaningful of productions, but neither does it aim to be it. It understands that, sometimes, all you want out of a film is a rollicking good time - and, on that front, it delivers in spades. It strikes the perfect balance between B-movie cheesefest and big-budget Hollywood cheesefest, then strips away some of the cheese, adds a sprinkle of social commentary, and just enough characterization to effectively turn a bunch of no-future hoodlums into sympathetic anti-heroes. Couple that with creative creature designs, smart one-liners, stoner humour, genre-bending, and hilarious housing-projects dialects, and you got yourself a mandatory viewing for fans of sci-fi horror comedies of all ages.
 
Last edited:

Keith

WCW Halloween Phantom
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
16,898
Reaction score
3,247
Points
113
^ Well that is one we agree on for a debut film it was very assured and you could tell it was made by a fan of the genure. It was very entertaining, but also different from a film like Shaun of the Dead thought it was bit more polictical. The young leads were good too.
 
Joined
Dec 3, 2010
Messages
482
Reaction score
2
Points
18
Age
38
Location
Sydney
Ted

Starring: Mark Wahlberg; Mila Kunis; Seth MacFarlane

Basically a young kid who is a loner wishes his teddy bear became real to become his best friend, and low and behold it does. Flash (aaahhhhhh) forward to when the guy is 35 and he's still hanging with his teddy whilst smoking pot and getting drunk, and balancing a life with Ted alongside a life with Lori, his smokin' missus. I liked the crude humour, I loved the cult references, I loved the cameos of Flash Gordon, Ryan Reynolds & Jeff Warburton, and the jokes were pretty good, but it seemed to fall pretty flat at times throughout the story and didn't really keep me captivated for the duration of the film. Also, the storyline was predictable as all hell. That said, it was still piss funny, and well worth a watch.

Rating: 8.5/10

---------------------------

The Amazing Spiderman

We all know the story - loveable high school loser Peter Parker gets bitten by a weird spider and it turns him into spiderman. I really dug the backstory and origin to Peter in this flick, and I really enjoyed the way he discovered the new 'powers' in this film. The development of the villain transformation was great, and the CGI use was visually orgasmic, especially in 3D. Emma Stone as a blonde was fucking gorgeous. As with Ted, it kinda stalled in sections of the movie, but maintained a consistency to keep interest throughout. I also loved the setup for a sequel at the end of the flick, so make sure you stick around through the end credits or you'll miss it

Rating: 9/10
 

Rated R Superstar

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
7,202
Reaction score
84
Points
48
Location
Ottawa Canada
Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance 4.5/10

Movie sucked in my opinion, I had no idea wtf was going on. This could be because I haven't read the comics, but at least in the first movie you knew what was going on. This one, they don't really hint at anything. Some kid is like the son of the Devil or some shit. I don't know. It was watchable for me, as I generally enjoy almost any movie I see. Nicholas Cage kind of lacked in this film however, not his best work. DO NOT BUY THIS MOVIE! I made that mistake, can't return it because of Wal-Mart's shit return policy, at least the one in my town. I'd rent it, at least then you'll only have wasted about 5 bucks...
 

Pete

Active Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Messages
2,282
Reaction score
24
Points
38
Location
Alton, England
^eBay.

Also, the first Ghost Rider sucked sweaty crabby monkey balls, so I didn't even bother with that one.
 

Pete

Active Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Messages
2,282
Reaction score
24
Points
38
Location
Alton, England
Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire 3.5/5
Harry Potter movies will never be as good as the books. That is something fans of the franchise have come to accept (however begrudgingly), along with the fact that their favourite sections in any given book stand about a 1/10 chance of making it to the big screen. The Potter series (of films) has always been about condensing J. K. Rowling's sprawling universe into a cohesive two-hour narrative - and that inevitably involves eschewing the most delicious details from each of the novels. Some of the films manage to do so without losing too much of the narrative flow (Prisoner of Azkaban), while others make a right mess of it (Half-Blood Prince). Others still opt for a compromise.

Such is the case with Goblet of Fire, a film where, more than ever, the editing is understandable. After all, volume four of the boy wizard's adventures is one of the most packed entries in the series, plot-wise. There is a lot to go over and a lot to dwell on, and there is no time to lose with silly stuff, no matter how much fun it is. A movie is not a book - neither the viewer nor the film-maker have unlimited time or space to go over the story. Director Mike Newell understands this, and goes over as much of the plot as the running time allows him to, without ever rushing. The result still clocks in at two and a half hours, but the flipside is that this is probably the most enjoyable Potter movie outside of Azkaban.

Style-wise, Goblet is an encapsulation of what came before. Where Columbus's movies dripped with sugary whimsy and Cuaron's entry took a turn for the grim, Newell's movie balances the two perfectly, with laugh-out-loud moments sitting side by side with exciting or even scary ones. That the director decided to leave the Yule Ball in (possibly the highlight of the fourth book) is a testament to his compromise to Potter fans; sadly, this comes at the expense of most of the Triwizard Tournament and the entirety of the Quidditch World Cup, two events which would probably have made for spectacular movie magic. One should, however, take what one can get, and what one can get in this instance is nowhere near the levels of disappointment brought about by something like Half-Blood Prince.

Performance-wise, the movie is solid. The adults are competent as usual, and the young leads are really coming into their roles, particularly Rupert Grint as Ron Weasley. His goofiness, like Emma Watson's stuck-up "sensible" demeanour, ring less like cliches and more like actual teenage character traits this time around, and the script even gives the duo a risque double entendre which most parents and teenagers in the theatre ARE bound to get. The show is stolen, however, by Miranda Richardson's turn as deliciously catty spinster journalist Rita Skeeter. Richardson makes the most of the couple of scenes she's in, all condescending smiles and polite eyebrow raisings, and makes the movie hers in a way no-one since Jennifer Saunders on Shrek 2 has been capable of doing.

In amidst all this, the weakest link is still Daniel Radcliffe's Harry Potter - not because Radcliffe is a bad actor, but because the character, like most heroes, is a cypher. The movie's frantic pace gives him precious little time to develop the way he does in the books, and as a result his portrayal suffers next to those of Ron or Hermione. Even worse, however, is Michael Gambon's Dumbledore - where Richard Harris was all paternally husked words of wisdom, Gambon shrieks and yells his way through the role in a way the "real" Dumbledore would never have *dreamed* of doing. In fact, Albus would be perfectly APPALLED at such shocking behaviour, and probably throw one of his cryptic sarcasms Gambon's way in response.

None of this, however, detracts from what is possibly the strongest Potter movie. Goblet is, in turn, laugh-out-loud funny and suitably exciting. The humour is often a little too broad, but that is just a reflection of the movie's effort to connect with its target audience - people the characters' own age. And those will no doubt find the jokes about girls travelling in packs and someone being "a physical person" suitably hilarious. Character development for ancillary protagonists such as Viktor Krum or Fleur Delacour is also sadly thrown out the window (unlike what their prominence in the poster would have us believe) but, again, that is fine - there's a lot of ground to cover here, and sometimes you have to leave stuff behind to reach your goal on time. Newell's stab at the Potter mythos is not perfect - it drags in places, and is arguably not as adult-friendly as Azkaban - but, as a movie experience, it tops even Cuaron's effort, if only slightly. If Prince had you swearing off the Potter movies, and the two halves of Hallows left you dazed and confused, be warned - there is worth in the franchise still. You just have to retrace your steps a little to find it.
 
Last edited:

Keith

WCW Halloween Phantom
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
16,898
Reaction score
3,247
Points
113
The Angel's Share (2012) 7/10
The latest from Ken Loach is a change from his normal gritty, social realism style to a more up lifting comedy, but still with some darker serious moments thrown in. The script is very convincing in the way it follows a ex-criminal and his new obsession with wine tasting/selling and the scheme him and his friends look to pull of in order for him to start over with his girlfriend and baby. I really
believed in the characters and wanted them to succeed by the end, also there is tense moments which kept me guessing. Its not perfect, but I was very entertained and intrigued in the story and characters throughout.

Housekeeping (1987) 8/10
From the director of Gregory's Girl and Local Hero but very different to those films in tone and design. It follows the story of sisters who after their mum commits sucide start living with a old friend of
hers who has a very old fashioned almost hipy life style which not only impacts on the girls lives, but also causes friction in the town. One of the sisters really forms a bound with the woman whereas the other one is more desprate to move out and live a modern life. It is a deeply effecting, odd film which at first has a lot of off kilter comedy moments, but there are certainly darker elements
under the selface which carefully creep up through the characters as things develop. It has a unique sense of location, colour scheme and the performances are superb. A true gem.

Ohayo (Good Morning) (1959) 8/10
The novel idea of parents refusing to buy a television out of the concern that it will corupt their children's social skills and education (this is when TV's had just been introduced in Japan) is clever device
for the drama to explore a broad range of aspects of commsumisms. It has the normal beauty and attention to detail of Oziu's work, but is also a very balenced look at the subject matter
with interesting characters and in the end is actually very funny and charming.

Margaret (2011) 7.5/10
This stars True Blood's Anna Paquin as a teenager who is deeply effected after she is partly responsible for a bus accident which leads to a woman dieing. She has a very frosty relationship with her
mother who is a stage actress and her dead lives in another in another state. At first reacts to the inccident in the normal upset teenage way, partying, getting high, boys etc.. but then she decides
to change her origanal police statement to the complete truth which brings the driver of the bus into question and also leads to a big legal battle over damages. First thing to say Paquin is outstanding giving the most convincing and powerful performance I have ever seen from her, she has to carry the film emotionally and does so brilliant, you totally believe that she has gone from a nervoius wreck
living a pretty typical teenage life to over bearing monster later on. It is a very ambituous films with lots of interesting and complex ideas, some of the subplots don't work, and certain scenes
maybe should have been cut down, but it is a truly scary and very true to life film which really drains you by the end but was very compelling also.