[Movies] Last Movie You Saw and What You Would Rate it Out of 10

[Luko]

Yeah "a little over the top" is an understatement haha. Man of Steel was like a live action Dragon Ball Z movie except much much better than that Dragon Ball Evolution garbage. Especially that fight between Superman, the petite brunette and the giant guy. Reminded me of Goku vs Vegeta/Nappa.

That was exactly why I respected the movie. They're super strong/fast/powerful. Every one of their hits is going to cause enormous amounts of pressure and force on the normal, man made surroundings on earth. It was the first superhero movie I've seen that I believe had extremely believable battle sequences. A bunch of incredibly powerful beings learning to control their new found powers in combat for the first time? Of course they're going to be over the top. The combat was what sold that movie to me. The rest was forgettable superhero movie filler shit.

[Markluzz]

It can when it's changed for the movies. AUJ was disappointing for a lot of people because it didn't have the LOTR ring to it. I don't believe making The Hobbit as the book is would have been a successful approach, perhaps except for the "purists" that interprets it the same way.

Personally, I can't think of much I'd have cut from DOS, more like added stuff to Beorn, Mirkwood, spiders and Dol Goldur. Those parts went waaaay too quick.

All of the best scenes (they are pretty much universally agreed on) have been the unaltered scenes right out of the book, or the scenes with the most familiarity to the book, I'm not saying the movie has to be exactly like the book. But when the two scenes closest to the book (the Gollum scene and a good part of the Bilbo-Smaug scene) are the nearly unanimously declared the best by people who have and haven't read the book you can kind of get that Jackson's changes didn't work.

Jackson could have also used the scenes he had (At the same length) but instead of turning each and every one of them into a hack-and-slash, video game, action sequence, actually make the scenes more like they were originally. (More cunningness involved, more clever dialogue and actions, and more focus on Bilbo and less on Tauriel and Legolas)

[Deadhank]

Taxi Driver (1976) - 7,5/10

It's a great piece, really cool story behind him trying to help the girl and all. Besides that, I believe it was incredibly dull and kinda boring for a significant part of the movie. I don't get so much hype on this movie. It's a great movie, no doubt, but seriously, people act like this is a masterpiece! haha

Entertaining and interesting movie, but I expected WAAAY more.

[Deleted]

Rise of the Guardians

Had nothing else to watch. Was entertaining. Liked the sand dude a lot. 6/10

[Arrowstormen]

All of the best scenes (they are pretty much universally agreed on) have been the unaltered scenes right out of the book, or the scenes with the most familiarity to the book, I'm not saying the movie has to be exactly like the book. But when the two scenes closest to the book (the Gollum scene and a good part of the Bilbo-Smaug scene) are the nearly unanimously declared the best by people who have and haven't read the book you can kind of get that Jackson's changes didn't work.

Jackson could have also used the scenes he had (At the same length) but instead of turning each and every one of them into a hack-and-slash, video game, action sequence, actually make the scenes more like they were originally. (More cunningness involved, more clever dialogue and actions, and more focus on Bilbo and less on Tauriel and Legolas)

The Hobbit is a book that doesn't fit with LOTR because it was only a part of the Silmarilion and LOTR lore after it was succesful and he was asked to make a sequel. It's so different and fairy taleish and have shouting purses. It was retconned to fit LOTR, and in a world where LOTR came first, The Hobbit must fit the boot once again instead of the boot fitting The Hobbit.

Most people wanted something more like DoS than AUJ. Action in books are boring, but sneakiness as with the barrels in the book and the dwarves locking themselves inside the mountain/tunnels (Is that even clever?) are less interesting in movies. Would be sad not to have the dwarves taking a shot at the dragon and seeing Erebor like that (and they did plan to attempt to kill Smaug in the book). The scene was amazing.

And the argument that PJ should be more like the books because the two best scenes in the book were the best in the movies is incredibly flawed. Much of the book is written like a summary/not very detailed scenes, the two scenes that are semi detailed and are the best ones you want to copy. Doesn't mean you want to copy the rest as it is.

Seriously, people should try to read the book again and tell me that's how the movies should be.

[Chrysia]

Got to watch 3. (Sorry, I rented 2, we don't get to go to movies much because of the baby)

Frozen: 6/10

Visually stunning. I personally thought there were too many songs in it. Only 1 song was memorable to me, and that was "Let it Go".
Why did I give it a 6? As a parent, I took my oldest daughter to go see this (she's 6). Let's just say I wasn't too happy with the way they were up-bringing their little "ice princess" daughter. You should never teach a child to fear themselves, ever. =P

That's the point of the movie. The parents completely fail to approach the daughter's gift appropriately, and that forces it to spiral out of control. It takes her sister's love and understanding to help her gain that control.
9.5/10 for me on Frozen.

[Deleted]

Hm..pointed that out in the Hobbit thread

First thing that totally took me out (3D HFR) was how the first 10 minutes looked like a cheap TV show.

I don't really know if that is the fault of 3D HFR, because I had the exact same feeling and I watched it in 2D. The first like... 20 min felt horrible for some reason. I described it as cartoon(y).

Some of your other points are actually as they are described in the book (the dwarves, the spider scene and to some extend Smaug) as such, so I don't know if we can fault the movie for that.

I don't understand the reasons for having a love triangle in every movie either.

[hellhamster]

The Family (2013): 4/10

Pretty bad especially for a Besson movie, only thing that kept me mildly interested was the chick...

[Statix]

I kind of get tired when people tell me to look past the flaws/my complaints in a movie and just enjoy it for what it is, and that it's somehow unfair to be critical. The entire movie was just action and it's a disgrace to the Tolkien and Middle Earth name, that's my opinion, but there is a reason the Tolkien estate hates these new Hobbit movies and won't let Jackson adapt anything else past this.

They're expecting another Lord of the Rings trilogy, but that's simply not possible. A very good example is the tv show Lost. It's one of the best out there, if not the best, despite the ending (which a lot of people hate; I think it's the perfect ending, anyway). Whenever a tv show is advertised as "the new Lost" or compared to Lost in any way, it's already doomed. People's expectations become so high that it just doesn't stand a chance from the start. Take FlashForward. If you stop looking at it as the new Lost, it's actually a great tv show. When I do look at it as the new Lost, I can see why this was cancelled after one season.

Peter Jackson is trying to give fans another epic trilogy of movies and yes, money plays a hugh role in all this. Recession, anyone? But I'm not complaining. So it's not as good as LOTR, who dafuq cares? It's amazing just to be able to return to the world of Middle-earth. We actually get to see Gandalf use magic, one thing I thought was weird in LOTR; a wizard who uses his sword instead of magic. Martin Freeman is amazing as Bilbo. This might be the best cast for any character in any movie ever. All the dwarves are awesome. Their loyalty to eachother and dedication to achieving their goal is shown perfectly. The disappointment on their faces when they realised they couldn't open the door on time was done masterfully.

Do you really think they could have put the ~9 hours were getting now into one 3 hour movie? I don't. Sure, The Desolation of Smaug might be a bit lenghty, but the first one certaintly doesn't. The addition of the made up character Tauriel was one of the best parts of the movie. Evangeline Lily is just perfect for the role. People are just too harsh on these movies.

Lovable characters, good story, beautiful music and scenery, insane CGI, attractive actors for both sexes, funny moments, sad moments, epic moments, a fucking Dragon, Gandalf using magic, Martin Freeman as Bilbo, Benedict Cumberbatch as Smaug, the return of awesome characters (Legolas, Lord Elrond, Galadriel - dat voice!), what's not to like?

[Deleted]

homefront 6/10

statham is awesome and really needs to pick better films.

[Toffie]

We're the Millers 2013
(7.5/10)

"Had me laughing out loud lots of times."

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug 2013
(10/10)

"The movie with the most entertaining action scenes ever made, acting was great. Tauriel, Thranduil & Smaug made the movie."

Insidious 2010
(7/10)

"Goosebumps shivering through my body watching this at 2 AM by myself. Ending had me wanting to see part 2."

Insidious: Part 2 2013
(7.5/10)
"Saw it right after the first and was surprised by the movie, usually a sequel to a horror movie doesn't end well, It did however. "

[hellhamster]

Don Jon (2013): 7.5/10

+ Finally a movie that depicts the superficial nature of modern relationships. Dude wants chick for bragging rights and to show her off, chick wants dude so she can control him without really caring about him.
+ Porn. Lots of porn.
+ Scarlett Johansson. There is no way in hell JGL wasn't rocking at least a semi-chubby throughout half the movie, especially with all the dry-humping. Just doesn't seem possible.

- New Jersey accents.
- Church subplot that didn't really get anywhere.
- Awkward as hell watching it with your conservative dad. Your mom may be alright, but your dad is gonna be like wtf is this shit throughout the whole movie.

[Deadhank]

The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (2013) - 6,5/10

Fun movie, nice plot and with the right amount of comedy. It's more of an interesting story of a simple guy that doesn't value his own work as much as he deserves and doesn't travel or really LIVE his life that much. It's more of a go-watch-it-with-a-girl-movie, but it's really great (watched it with my brother) and WAY more than I expected.

And if you may, hellhamster, I'd like to do the same as you did and give some positive and negative points from the movie, haha:
+ Great plot, more serious than expected;
+ Not too much jokey and stupid, has the certain amount of jokes in it;
+ Really involving movie, Walter's story makes you think about your life a little bit.

- A little cheesy (bad word to choose, but I can't express it very well, it's just a little romantic, but not that much);
- Actually looks like a self-help movie, but that can be great if you like that stuff or even need it.

Overall it's really good, and I loved the ending with Sean's photo being Walter working and the little homage they gave him on the cover of the last LIFE issue.

Recommend it!

[VanillaO]

I'll give Hobbit 2 a 9/10. I really like how a lot of the dwarves characters were fleshed out a bit in it, and overall I felt the pace was actually quite enjoyable compared to the first 1/3 or so of the first film. Also I had forgotten how beautiful Evangeline Lilly is!

[PBitt]

Hobbit Part 2 9.5/10

Will probably be a full 10/10 once the extended edition is out. I don't give it a full ten as a couple important scenes felt a bit shorter than they should have been, particularly in a movie this length, but I think they'll be expanded upon. Overall, though, it was a fun experience and Smaug was a badass, they pulled that off better than I had dared hoped for. The scenery is gorgeous and I thought the CGI was great (also saw it in IMax 3D, so maybe that helps?)

I think most complaints about the movie are absolutely silly. No it's not quite faithful to the book as it could be. But I think one key thing people are overlooking is that they spent million of dollars and thousands and thousands of man-hour bringing such places as Laketown to life, if they followed the book exactly they'd spend about five minutes of the movie there and be done with it. The book is extremely fast-paced, they are never anywhere for very long and really, not a hell of a lot happens in any particular place. That doesn't really quite work out when you have a fantasy movie that requires a lot of finesse to bring the scenes to the screen. I will digress, it probably could have been done in two films, but this is the last time we'll probably ever be in Middle-Earth in such great films, (at least until someone else does a reboot in the future which will undoubtedly happen with how huge LoTR is). No, they aren't quite as good as the LoTR trilogy but the LoTR books had a lot more depth and adult themes to work from.

[Markluzz]

They're expecting another Lord of the Rings trilogy, but that's simply not possible. A very good example is the tv show Lost. It's one of the best out there, if not the best, despite the ending (which a lot of people hate; I think it's the perfect ending, anyway). Whenever a tv show is advertised as "the new Lost" or compared to Lost in any way, it's already doomed. People's expectations become so high that it just doesn't stand a chance from the start. Take FlashForward. If you stop looking at it as the new Lost, it's actually a great tv show. When I do look at it as the new Lost, I can see why this was cancelled after one season.

Peter Jackson is trying to give fans another epic trilogy of movies and yes, money plays a hugh role in all this. Recession, anyone? But I'm not complaining. So it's not as good as LOTR, who dafuq cares? It's amazing just to be able to return to the world of Middle-earth. We actually get to see Gandalf use magic, one thing I thought was weird in LOTR; a wizard who uses his sword instead of magic. Martin Freeman is amazing as Bilbo. This might be the best cast for any character in any movie ever. All the dwarves are awesome. Their loyalty to eachother and dedication to achieving their goal is shown perfectly. The disappointment on their faces when they realised they couldn't open the door on time was done masterfully.

Do you really think they could have put the ~9 hours were getting now into one 3 hour movie? I don't. Sure, The Desolation of Smaug might be a bit lenghty, but the first one certaintly doesn't. The addition of the made up character Tauriel was one of the best parts of the movie. Evangeline Lily is just perfect for the role. People are just too harsh on these movies.

Lovable characters, good story, beautiful music and scenery, insane CGI, attractive actors for both sexes, funny moments, sad moments, epic moments, a fucking Dragon, Gandalf using magic, Martin Freeman as Bilbo, Benedict Cumberbatch as Smaug, the return of awesome characters (Legolas, Lord Elrond, Galadriel - dat voice!), what's not to like?

Just read this because I don't feel like re-iterating why pretty much the entire movie is a disaster.
http://thepandaflicksreviews.blogspo...view.html#more

and if that's not enough this review does a good job explaining why the movie is a catastrophe as well
http://badassdigest.com/2013/12/09/t...ie-review-ugh/

Plus, the entire film is riddled with plot holes and inconsistencies, and the majority of the action isn't even close to being in the realm of plausibility.

[VanillaO]

Why would you go see a fantasy movie with hobbits and dragons and guys who change into bears and also expect plausible action?

[Toffie]

Just read this because I don't feel like re-iterating why pretty much the entire movie is a disaster.
http://thepandaflicksreviews.blogspo...view.html#more

and if that's not enough this review does a good job explaining why the movie is a catastrophe as well
http://badassdigest.com/2013/12/09/t...ie-review-ugh/

Plus, the entire film is riddled with plot holes and inconsistencies, and the majority of the action isn't even close to being in the realm of plausibility.

I don't care about your review or what paid reviewers has to say, the movie was amazing.

[Mister K]

Runner Runner 6.9/10
Don Jon 7.2/10
Life of Pi 7.8/10

[kendro1200]

Desolation of Smaug
8/10
The last Hobbit film at least made an effort to make the reason for splitting it into 3 films make sense and give some form of a story limited to that particular film that has a beginning and some closure at the end. Desolation of Smaug on the other hand just acts like the middle of a story that was cut out of a script and then filmed and released. The ending in particular was almost like a big middle finger that said, "See you next year". The only reason I give the film above a 5 is because the actors did very well, the music was as always for these recent Tolkien based films, fantastic, and the cinematography was really good. The story was piss poor, they could have at least tried to make it so it wasn't left on an awfully placed cliff hanger, a worse cliff hanger than the quite literal cliff hanger of the last film.