-
This is a reminder of 3 IMPORTANT RULES:
1- External self-promotion websites or apps are NOT allowed here, like Discord/Twitter/Patreon/etc.
2- Do NOT post in other languages. English-only.
3- Crack/Warez/Piracy talk is NOT allowed.
Breaking any of the above rules will result in your messages being deleted and you will be banned upon repetition.
Please, stop by this thread SoccerGaming Forum Rules And Guidelines and make sure you read and understand our policies.
Thank you!
Last movie you watched
- Thread starter Hakeem
- Start date
King;2489782 said:
That does sound boring.
Jaboldinho
Fan Favourite
National Treasure 2 - The Book of Secrets
Surprisingly good, and I really recommend it for everyone interested in good entertainment movies.
Surprisingly good, and I really recommend it for everyone interested in good entertainment movies.
goal_machine84
Senior Squad
Untraceable - 7/10
Descent but i think there was more potential to it...could have been a tight thriller, great suspense or more action imo...watch it if you dont have anything else to do
Descent but i think there was more potential to it...could have been a tight thriller, great suspense or more action imo...watch it if you dont have anything else to do
Wilson, Schwartzman and specially Brody are great 
ShiftyPowers
Make America Great Again
The Shawshank Redemption.
For the first time
For the first time
ShiftyPowers
Make America Great Again
That's a good movie. I actually need suggestions on what to see next because I'm in a big movie mode right now. Making my way through the AA winning best pictures, but not many look that interesting. Think The French Connection will be next.
ShiftyPowers;2491295 said:
LOTR Trilogy, The Shawshank Redemption, Godfather, Goodfellas, Lucky Number Slevin, American History X, Se7en, The Bourne Trilogy, Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, Cidade de Deus, Casablanca, The Usual Suspects, The Departed, To Kill a Mockingbird, A Clockwork Orange, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, Saving Private Ryan, Grindhouse, The Sixth Sense, Crash, Magnolia, Finding Neverland, American Gangster, No Country For Old Men, Sweeney Todd-The Demon Barber of Fleet Street, The good, the bad and the ugly, Fistful Dollars, Few Dollars More and The Butterfly Effect. I am sure you have seen most of them.
You're so wrong Hanek. Anyway:
Rambo
Oooh, not good i'm afraid. However, as with Star Wars, or even something like the Matrix, i'm judging a film on the basis of those which have come before it. It's forever the problem of a stellar first film, or first album when it comes to music. It's the benchmark that everything else is set against. First Blood is a brilliant film, it's engaging, it's action-packed and the story actually makes some sort of sense. It's one of my favourite ever films, an example of an action movie that has brains, it also produces one of the best performances ever seen in the genre itself by Stallone. If anything, i prefer it to Rocky.
Now, many will probably disagree with me, but i'll bet many of you who disagree have either only ever seen the new Rambo, or have only seen the later ones. Watching the original in all it's glory as a child was an amazing experience. Frankly, it's a great movie.
That's why, however bad i feel Rambo is as a movie, it is only so very bad for myself due to my love for the original, my rose-tinted glasses preventing me from enjoying what would otherwise be a basic and slightly enjoyable action movie. However, for me, Rambo was poor. The story is the real problem with the film, it just makes no sense and it's very very annoyingly sociological. Stallone must have sat down at some point and thought, what can i make a film about that will win me over critics and make me look like a really nice guy?
He picked Burma, bloody hell, he picked Burma. It's real slap-in-the-face stuff here, army that kills people, and a church sends a load of volunteers to give people antidotes and the sort, it's utter ****e. Rambo as a character isn't yet dead though, the most enjoyable part of the film is a flashback to earlier films, giving SOME form of depth to the character.
But this is the real problem with the film, for new viewers will look apon it as utter garbage with no character development. To them Rambo is some "army guy" as my friend put it, who just wants to kill people. Gone is his back story, his history, what he's been through.
Past the story, the film descends into complete action usually reserved for low budget action movies from the 80's starring either Seagal or Van Damme. However, it's enjoyable in places. Stallone said in a recent interview that the team didn't have money to plow into CGI, so they just made all the explosions real. It works in dramatic style, people are thrown into the air, limbs fly from bodies and dirt covers the set, and regularly the camera.
It would be no overstatement to say it's easily the most violent film i've ever seen. Sure, most of it is a comedically-bad violence so you don't really "feel" it. But in terms of real, bloody gut-wrenching destruction, this film will beat all your expectations. Limbs really are separated from bodies with alarming regularity, it's good - despite the fact you don't feel the violence as the film has never bothered introducing us to the characters, the actual killing is horrifyingly real. This is what mines do to people, what guns do to people, even what knives do to people.
Rambo isn't a very good film because of the fact we don't know the people. It's one thing making an action film, it's another thing making one that makes us feel sad, or happy, or relieved. Rambo does none of the latter. This kind of thing flew in the 80's, hundreds being killed my a massive and incomprhensible arsenal of weapons, but in todays Bourne obsessed world, where we learn to love and understand our leads, it's unbelievebly ironic that Rambo's first outing nearly thirty years ago, if re-released, would get a far better reacton than his new outing. It's strange, movies have moved on so much in twenty five years, but sometimes, less is more.
2/5
Rambo
Oooh, not good i'm afraid. However, as with Star Wars, or even something like the Matrix, i'm judging a film on the basis of those which have come before it. It's forever the problem of a stellar first film, or first album when it comes to music. It's the benchmark that everything else is set against. First Blood is a brilliant film, it's engaging, it's action-packed and the story actually makes some sort of sense. It's one of my favourite ever films, an example of an action movie that has brains, it also produces one of the best performances ever seen in the genre itself by Stallone. If anything, i prefer it to Rocky.
Now, many will probably disagree with me, but i'll bet many of you who disagree have either only ever seen the new Rambo, or have only seen the later ones. Watching the original in all it's glory as a child was an amazing experience. Frankly, it's a great movie.
That's why, however bad i feel Rambo is as a movie, it is only so very bad for myself due to my love for the original, my rose-tinted glasses preventing me from enjoying what would otherwise be a basic and slightly enjoyable action movie. However, for me, Rambo was poor. The story is the real problem with the film, it just makes no sense and it's very very annoyingly sociological. Stallone must have sat down at some point and thought, what can i make a film about that will win me over critics and make me look like a really nice guy?
He picked Burma, bloody hell, he picked Burma. It's real slap-in-the-face stuff here, army that kills people, and a church sends a load of volunteers to give people antidotes and the sort, it's utter ****e. Rambo as a character isn't yet dead though, the most enjoyable part of the film is a flashback to earlier films, giving SOME form of depth to the character.
But this is the real problem with the film, for new viewers will look apon it as utter garbage with no character development. To them Rambo is some "army guy" as my friend put it, who just wants to kill people. Gone is his back story, his history, what he's been through.
Past the story, the film descends into complete action usually reserved for low budget action movies from the 80's starring either Seagal or Van Damme. However, it's enjoyable in places. Stallone said in a recent interview that the team didn't have money to plow into CGI, so they just made all the explosions real. It works in dramatic style, people are thrown into the air, limbs fly from bodies and dirt covers the set, and regularly the camera.
It would be no overstatement to say it's easily the most violent film i've ever seen. Sure, most of it is a comedically-bad violence so you don't really "feel" it. But in terms of real, bloody gut-wrenching destruction, this film will beat all your expectations. Limbs really are separated from bodies with alarming regularity, it's good - despite the fact you don't feel the violence as the film has never bothered introducing us to the characters, the actual killing is horrifyingly real. This is what mines do to people, what guns do to people, even what knives do to people.
Rambo isn't a very good film because of the fact we don't know the people. It's one thing making an action film, it's another thing making one that makes us feel sad, or happy, or relieved. Rambo does none of the latter. This kind of thing flew in the 80's, hundreds being killed my a massive and incomprhensible arsenal of weapons, but in todays Bourne obsessed world, where we learn to love and understand our leads, it's unbelievebly ironic that Rambo's first outing nearly thirty years ago, if re-released, would get a far better reacton than his new outing. It's strange, movies have moved on so much in twenty five years, but sometimes, less is more.
2/5
I just got back from the cinema. I watched Apocalypse Now. Redux. I haven't seen such a ******* screwed up movie in a looong time. When I saw the list of actor who play there I thought it's going to be top class movie. Unfortunately it wasn't.
Maybe I didn't like it because through sitting on my bottom part of body over 3 hours I felt that my ass is taking control over me. There was too much of showing the lands and other ****. But I have to admit that Brando did his job perfectly. The way he played his role and his voice made the last couple of minutes less painful.
I think it would be much more interesting if we cut some scenes.
Maybe I didn't like it because through sitting on my bottom part of body over 3 hours I felt that my ass is taking control over me. There was too much of showing the lands and other ****. But I have to admit that Brando did his job perfectly. The way he played his role and his voice made the last couple of minutes less painful.
I think it would be much more interesting if we cut some scenes.
MaestroZidane
YELLOW CARD: Untrustworthy
$teauA;2491293 said:
Still doesn't beat me watching Star wars:Return of the Jedi, for the first time Last year.....
Áļéאָ
Fan Favourite
No country for old men
Good, tho not as good as I was initially led to believe. (publicity, media etc)
Typical highbrow/arty Hollywood movie styling "I'm even more sophisticated than you can even dare to think"
if that makes any sense.. :P
!!
!!
Good, tho not as good as I was initially led to believe. (publicity, media etc)
Typical highbrow/arty Hollywood movie styling "I'm even more sophisticated than you can even dare to think"
if that makes any sense.. :P
!!
!!Áļéאָ
Fan Favourite
I would really like to see a sequel
Snakes on a boat
oh wait, that was Anaconda..
Snakes on a boat
oh wait, that was Anaconda..
Anthony;2491726 said:
I feel for you man, I really do. Apocalypse Now is a masterpiece in every way and I find it sad that the length of the movie took away from your experience. I remember not wanting the movie to end when I saw it for the first time.
MaestroZidane, I didn't see ANY of the Star Wars movies until last year
.Tom, I read your review of Rambo. To be honest I enjoyed the movie and thought it was great but as soon as I left the theater I forgot everything about it. Stallone didn't go for a cinematic work of art, he basically went for the popcorn flick with one of the most bad ass characters in the history of film and from that perspective it really delivered. I went into the theater with the expectations of seeing lots of violence and lots of ass kicking and not a lot of dialogue (all three very common things in Rambo movies) and that's exactly what I got so I was satisfied with it but it wasn't a great movie by any stretch. By the way, there's no point in going to see this movie if you haven't seen the older ones, makes absolutely zero sense and I find it hard that somebody would enjoy the new one if they hadn't seen the older ones.
I still haven't seen any Star Wars movies. Or plan to watch them, for that matter.