The last movie you saw

[Ryoki]

Mazerunner 5/10
A sort of hunger games but with a maze. Slow cookie cutter stuff, mostly boring, mediocre acting... it's entirely not awful but there's no need at all to watch this one.

Divergence 6.5/10
Very much the same type of film, but a lot better. I would actually sort of reccomend this one, has some nice ideas in it. Again nothing special though.


I also tried to watch Fury but the first 20 minutes were so utterly confusing i kind of gave up. Is it a comedy? Maybe, it's really hard to take Brad Pitt seriously when he plays a character called Wardaddy. Or perhaps it about the grim blackness that is war and the terrible things it does to men? Possibly... i have no clue seeing as i missed something like 40% of the dialogue because of the weird ass fucking accents they put on.

In hindsight i might have just been too tired to make sense of it, will try again later.

[feedback]

It's one of the best movies of 2014, you should watch it with subtitles if you need to.

[Ryoki]

High praise! Will be giving it another shot soon... will report back

[phantasmagoria]

Don't. It's awful. I struggled all the way to the end and whether it's a commentary on the brutality of war or a comedy still isn't resolved. It's basically a film where Brad Pitt continues his character in Inglorious but without the wit or intellect of Tarantino.

[phantasmagoria]

Birdman, however, is a real breath of fresh air amongst the torrent of mediocre Marvel franchises and I thoroughly enjoyed it. 8/10

[phantasmagoria]

Oh and the Hobbit was tripe. Utter tripe. Peter Jackson gone done a George Lucas.

[seremtan]

me's-a must have the precious!

[Ryoki]

Don't. It's awful. I struggled all the way to the end and whether it's a commentary on the brutality of war or a comedy still isn't resolved. It's basically a film where Brad Pitt continues his character in Inglorious but without the wit or intellect of Tarantino.

Hah, I was afraid of exactly that. I wasn't exactly a fan of Inglorious either actually - thought it was a typical Tarantino flick... marvelous scenes interchanged with scenes that are just fucking terrible, the man always gets on my tits immensely :/

I shall still see Fury though - because now i've already downloaded it. And i'm waiting for a proper release of Birdman, heard good things about it from several folks now

[Pext]

American Psycho - 8/10

[seremtan]

Hah, I was afraid of exactly that. I wasn't exactly a fan of Inglorious either actually - thought it was a typical Tarantino flick... marvelous scenes interchanged with scenes that are just fucking terrible, the man always gets on my tits immensely :/

you'll want to avoid Django Unchained then

[Captain]

wit or intellect of Tarantino.

[Ryoki]

you'll want to avoid Django Unchained then

Too late

Django Unchained 7/10

A frustrating watch.

It’s a typical Tarantino movie, like almost every other movie he’s done over the last years it manages to both captivate me and annoy the shit out of me at the same time. The scenes with dialogue between the doc, Django and Leo for instance are all very good, very solid stuff. Loved all that.

But i think Tarantino has a major problem with killing his darlings. He seems incapable of making tough creative choices at times, to the detriment of the film. Some scenes really suffer from this… The decision for instance to show Django popping mad caps in cowboys accompanied by wildly out of place rap music makes the whole goddamn scene into a painful parody of itself. Whenever he does something like that i keep thinking jesus, what a waste man, why??. This scene could have been so much better if only A or B. And don’t tell me it’s his style, weaving between 3+ styles is not a style of itself – it’s a director who can’t make a clear choice.

But yeah, i always have that feeling with his movies. Some people say he’s an overrated hack, i don’t agree with that per se… but i do think he would benefit from being a lot stricter with his material.

[losCHUNK]

Didnt like Fury either :/, thought it was a pretty shallow movie

[Pext]

[...] but i do think he would benefit from being a lot stricter with his material.

That's BS. The material is by itself not worth anything. All stories have been told. Click here.

[feedback]

Really not a fan of tarintino post jackie brown

[feedback]

into the woods - entirely unenjoyable/10

[Ryoki]

Fury 4/10

More like Infuriating. Afraid i fully agree with mr. Phant on this - i too struggled till the end and kept wondering whether it was a comedy or a serious attempt at a war movie. Doesn't succeed in being either in any case.

Read an article on how Fury supposedly is very accurate on tactics and stuff but jesus, just no. You don't send tanks ahead of infantry, that's just dumb. You don't shoot at tanks with machine guns, that's just dumb. A tank is a magnet for enemy fire, so as infantry you keep a respectable distance and what you don’t do is walk right behind it in a tight formation because it would only take one german mortar to ruin your day. An 88 (the best anti tank gun of the war) pointed at a sherman (possibly the worst main battle tank of the war) at close range does not miss - and a hit kills it for sure. A tiger would have picked off any shermans at great distance because it had something like twice the range - but a tiger sitting uncamouflaged in a field would have made an excellent target for allied close air support (which we did not see at all), so that whole setup didn't make any sense. A fully armed SS batallion would probably not have existed at that stage in the war and if it had, it would have been marching east – the whole final scene is ridiculous in several ways. But i disgress.

It’s damn gory though, giving it a whole extra point for that.

[losCHUNK]

I didn't actually make it to the end, I was gonna watch it again even though I didn't think much of it.

Pretty much what you said is spot on though, there's no way the allies would have sent those tanks without any support, they would have had atleast infantry for spotters which would've just called in artillery or an airstrike rendering the whole scene non existant and if the scenario did occur, I doubt very much the Shermans would have engaged on an open field. The Tiger would have picked them off with ease whilst reversing and would traverse in the same direction as the last remaining Sherman to keep the front face on. With that said, the tactics employed were genuine I believe, sending a decoy whilst trying to take up flanking positions, but surviving a direct hit from an 88 ?, I don't think I've ever read anything like that. I also think the tactic used was wrong, with it being a completely open field, imo the likely thing would have been to keep a Sherman behind to keep the Tiger blind with smoke, I know that was a tactic used in Africa, where they could get into the 500m effective firing range.

The M4 was knicknamed the 'Ronson' - a lighter brand from back then that had the slogan 'lights 1st time'. To give you some idea of the mismatch, the Tiger's 88 has the same penetrating power at 2000m as the Shermans smaller (75mm) gun at 500m, this was the standard gun, some were upgraded with a 76mm gun that could bring that number upto 1000m but they were rare.

They weren't a bad tank though, they were just ill equipped to fight anti tank battles. They were meant for infantry support and leaving things like tank destroyers, infantry, artillery or air strikes to take care of the bigger threats. A Sherman going against a Tiger would be like a lightweight VS a heavyweight, a Tiger was designed to take out tanks which is another reason why the entire scene would not have taken place in the 1st place. A Jumbo Sherman would be a good match, they could survive 88 hits and frequently did.

[feedback]

I don't know anything about WW2 tactics so I didn't find anything like that distracting.

It turns out that Michael Mann's latest movie Blackhat is a pandering pile of shit. Which is a fucking shame, because Collateral is one of my favourite movies of all time.

[shaft]

You don't have to know anything about WW2 tactics when they show a shot of an entire SS battalion holding panzerfausts at the end and yet somehow only one gets fired at the tank while they're throwing away their lives running headlong into tank fire.

[feedback]

I thought the final act was the weakest part, but I thought the rest of it was quite strong and well-acted.

[Tsakali]

Boyhood. Go Fuck yourself /10 seriously, I get the novelty of the filling process, but that doesn't warrant a 98/100 score

So fucking pointless.

[MKJ]

A New Hope Revisited

Basically a fan made edit of the original Star Wars movie, though the term "fan made" undersells it quite a bit.
This guy went through great lengths to restore the movie to its original version (Han shoots first!) but with the image and sound fidelity we've come to accept in today's movies. Furthermore he corrects a bunch of continuity errors and actually redid some of the special effects and matte paintings. It took him several years, and ESB is getting the same treatment.
The end result is awesome, though I don't like the Death Star explosion shot at the end. One of the few things I liked about the SE version were the new effects used in that shot.
https://swrevisited.wordpress.com/anhr-change-list/

Bonus points 'cause I watched it with my son for the first time who is about to turn 5. I skipped over the more intense parts of the movie as he's used to watching cartoons and those do not feature people getting shot in the face with lasers.
Nonetheless he loved it. He's in the whole spaceship and cops-n-robbers thing now so this was perfect.
His favorite was the trench run, and Mos Eisley. Also, Artoo is "the smartest robot ever".

[Ryoki]

American Sniper 4 / 10

It's unfortunate because it could have possibly been good; Kyle was a very controversial charachter and i’m honestly a bit dumbfounded they made him so one dimensional. How uninteresting!

They also made up a bunch of stuff and i don't know why - the man won 2 silver stars and 5 bronze stars and a shitload of other medals; they don't give those away for nothing and as far as i know his exploits were uncontested and well known. Was there honestly no story worth telling there? Why the kid in that first scene when really it was just a woman with a granade, is it to make her extra evil? Why the nemesis in the form of another sniper? We’ve seen all that before… and why make up that silly scene at the end? Questions questions.

That this film – which was not terrible by any means but jesus was it mediocre – was nominated for several Oscars is a joke.

[MKJ]

American Sniper 4 / 10
[..]
..nominated for several Oscars is a joke.

the answer is in the title.