Rate the Last Movie You Saw

[Dan Hocker]

Oh man, everything about Mad Max: Fury Road was amazing. Possibly the best movie this year so far, it'll be hard to top it honestly. It's a shame that it probably won't do huge numbers in the box office.

[srboone]

But it beat Age of Ultron (in it's third week, granted. And it did loose to Pitch Perfect 2, but still...)! And I think you're right about being it the best of 2015, so far, Dan. But a low box office is sometimes what you pay for keeping to your rated-R vision.

[Dan Hocker]

But it beat Age of Ultron (in it's third week, granted. And it did loose to Pitch Perfect 2, but still...)! And I think you're right about being it the best of 2015, so far, Dan. But a low box office is sometimes what you pay for keeping to your rated-R vision.

Oh yea I'd say it's low box office numbers were expected, no matter how good of a movie it is. The R rating is definitely a big factor in that, as well as it's proximity to Age of Ultron. All that said I'm looking forward to seeing how it will do in the coming weeks, and seeing how it compares to the other R rated sleeper hit this year Kingsman: The Secret Service, which was also a great movie.

I mean it was soo good I almost turned around and bought another ticket after walking out of the theater.

[Sock Monkey]

I'm hoping that Mad Max will have some legs in the theaters. It really does deserve to be a MASSIVE hit. Good news is that it did well internationally taking in an additional $64 million over the weekend (in contrast, Pitch Perfect 2 only took in a little over $27 million internationally) This might just be one of those movies that just does better internationally than it does domestically. Here's to hoping that word of mouth and a well-deserved 98% on Rotten Tomatoes will keep people buying tickets.

[Dan Hocker]

I'm hoping that Mad Max will have some legs in the theaters. It really does deserve to be a MASSIVE hit. Good news is that it did well internationally taking in an additional $64 million over the weekend (in contrast, Pitch Perfect 2 only took in a little over $27 million internationally) This might just be one of those movies that just does better internationally than it does domestically. Here's to hoping that word of mouth and a well-deserved 98% on Rotten Tomatoes will keep people buying tickets.

Oh I totally agree. I think it will have some legs at least for another weekend or two. I think that's how Kingsmen did so well, Mad Max has already had a larger opening weekend than Kingsmen, so things are looking good on that front.

[TJCams]

It's weird sometimes how movies do the opposite and perform poorly at the theatre, then retrospect says that it was a really good movie. I find this happens mostly in the sci-fi genre it seems. Prometheus is one example. I have a feeling Ex Machina will be the same - I heard great reviews on it, and really wanted to see it, but I fear it's not longer at the show. Maybe it's just me, but cerebral sci-fi doesn't draw a big crowd?

Mad Max does look like a good one - Does one to need re-familiarize themselves with the previous movies to enjoy this?

[Dan Hocker]

It's weird sometimes how movies do the opposite and perform poorly at the theatre, then retrospect says that it was a really good movie. I find this happens mostly in the sci-fi genre it seems. Prometheus is one example. I have a feeling Ex Machina will be the same - I heard great reviews on it, and really wanted to see it, but I fear it's not longer at the show. Maybe it's just me, but cerebral sci-fi doesn't draw a big crowd?

Mad Max does look like a good one - Does one to need re-familiarize themselves with the previous movies to enjoy this?

I feel like Prometheus was actually the opposite effect, as it actually did pretty well at the box office, but was actually pretty harshly reviewed by both fans of the Alien franchise and critics. I really think the big problem with Prometheus is that it was that it is a completely different movie from what they marketed it as.

As far as Ex Machina goes, I feel like that movie suffered from two things. The first being the fact that it opened the weekend before Avengers, so any 2nd weekend showings it might have gotten were probably lack luster. The second being marketing. I don't think that movie had a very big marketing budget. I don't think most people had even heard of it by the time it came out. I know I hadn't heard anything about it had been mentioned on here.

All that said though I think your right about the whole cerebral sci-fi thing. Honestly Sci-Fi as a whole doesn't really have mass appeal unless it has Star Wars or Star Trek in the name. Just looking back over even the past 10 years I find it hard it pretty hard to find a both critically and financially successful Sci-Fi movie that wasn't either a Star Wars or Star Trek movie.

I think probably a perfect example would be Edge of Tomorrow. This movie did pretty terribly at the box office, but was reviewed really well, and most people who saw the movie really like it a lot. It's since made up for it with better marketing and DVD sales, but overall did pretty poorly while it was in theaters.

Nope. Honestly I don't think you need to see any of the Mad Max movies to watch any of them. They all pretty much stand on their own.

[Sock Monkey]

I feel like Prometheus was actually the opposite effect, as it actually did pretty well at the box office, but was actually pretty harshly reviewed by both fans of the Alien franchise and critics. I really think the big problem with Prometheus is that it was that it is a completely different movie from what they marketed it as.

As far as Ex Machina goes, I feel like that movie suffered from two things. The first being the fact that it opened the weekend before Avengers, so any 2nd weekend showings it might have gotten were probably lack luster. The second being marketing. I don't think that movie had a very big marketing budget. I don't think most people had even heard of it by the time it came out. I know I hadn't heard anything about it had been mentioned on here.

All that said though I think your right about the whole cerebral sci-fi thing. Honestly Sci-Fi as a whole doesn't really have mass appeal unless it has Star Wars or Star Trek in the name. Just looking back over even the past 10 years I find it hard it pretty hard to find a both critically and financially successful Sci-Fi movie that wasn't either a Star Wars or Star Trek movie.

I think probably a perfect example would be Edge of Tomorrow. This movie did pretty terribly at the box office, but was reviewed really well, and most people who saw the movie really like it a lot. It's since made up for it with better marketing and DVD sales, but overall did pretty poorly while it was in theaters.

Nope. Honestly I don't think you need to see any of the Mad Max movies to watch any of them. They all pretty much stand on their own.

I agree with a lot of that. I think that with Prometheus there was a disconnect between the movie that Ridley Scott wanted to make and the movie that audiences wanted to see. I didn't go into it expecting an Alien movie, so I enjoyed it for what it was. Edge of Tomorrow was sunk in the theaters due to poor marketing. The studio still couldn't make up its mind what to do with it when it was released on DVD, emphasizing the tagline of the film, "Live. Die. Repeat.", over the movie's title (coincidentally that was the original name of the film before it was changed to the very bland "Edge of Tomorrow"). The movie itself is a blast and really deserves to find its audience. Even Tom Cruise haters can enjoy the numerous ways the film has fun with killing off its star.

I agree with the statement about cerebral sci-fi having a hard time finding an audience in the theaters. I think there's two possible issues at play here. The first being the trend of audiences gravitating towards known brands (Star Trek, Star Wars, etc). The complaint is always made that more originality is needed from Hollywood, yet the box office numbers don't lie. People flock to reboots, remakes, and sequels in droves and most cerebral sci-fi films are none of those. The second is the possible tendency for audiences to choose the movie that plays better on the big screen to see in the theater, while saving the small scale films for home viewing. Mad Max will definitely be on my must-buy list for Blu-Ray upon release, but I would urge everyone to see it in the theater to be able to enjoy its scale. I don't think that cerebral sci-fi films suffer from home viewing and might actually play better without the distractions of the theater (talking, cell phones, etc).

[Sock Monkey]

I'm also going to have to check out Kingsman when it comes out on DVD. Looks like fun!

[Dan Hocker]

Yea I think you're probably right there. It also probably doesn't help that the cerebral Sci-Fi stuff typically has a lower budget than just regular Sci-Fi, which means less of a marketing budget. Granted there are always exceptions to the rule. Interstellar being one of them, which completely slipped my mind while trying to think of successful Sci-Fi movies recently. Back to Edge of Tomorrow, I feel like that movie would have done even better if they had just given it the name it's source material had, "All You Need Is Kill", but I'm guessing they where trying to distance themselves (maybe a little too much) from the Manga / Anime (I'm assuming there was an anime) that the movie was adapted from.

[Dan Hocker]

I'm also going to have to check out Kingsman when it comes out on DVD. Looks like fun!

It was a pretty fantastic movie. It felt a lot like everything James Bond used to be, except with an R rating.

[Sock Monkey]

Yea I think you're probably right there. It also probably doesn't help that the cerebral Sci-Fi stuff typically has a lower budget than just regular Sci-Fi, which means less of a marketing budget. Granted there are always exceptions to the rule. Interstellar being one of them, which completely slipped my mind while trying to think of successful Sci-Fi movies recently. Back to Edge of Tomorrow, I feel like that movie would have done even better if they had just given it the name it's source material had, "All You Need Is Kill", but I'm guessing they where trying to distance themselves (maybe a little too much) from the Manga / Anime (I'm assuming there was an anime) that the movie was adapted from.

Yeah, "All You Need is Kill" is heckuva a lot better name. I forgot about that title. Upon further investigation, I was wrong in my previous post about "Live. Die. Repeat." being the original title. It was supposed to be "All You Need is Kill". Either which way, I think both are better than "Edge of Tomorrow" (which really sounds like a James Bond title).

[TJCams]

Edge of Tomorrow was one I actually enjoyed - saw it at the theatre - great visuals especially with the "mimics". To me that is more of a shoot 'em up type of sci-fi - fun one though.

I was really anticipating Interstellar.... seemed like my type of story. Lots of real science behind it - lots of "Wow - that could really happen" - yet, when I finally did watch it on ppv - I was disappointed in a way. Didn't live up to the hype for me.

re: Prometheus again - I don't think it was really tied to Alien franchise other than some subtleties - the name on the ship being a big one. And maybe that is what the audiences wanted. It's a great stand alone movie, and I am curious how the sequel will build off of it. Lots of interest in Prometheus for me, as I find space exploration, and especially the search for "How did we get here" a very tantalizing prospect of our future. I am also a fan of the Ancient Aliens show - although some times it gets sidetracked with some pretty whacky topics. I am kind of ticked off at myself for not experiencing this on the big screen! Seemed to me that it wasn't in theatre very long. Where as Ex Machina is a movie that probably doesn't suffer from not being on the big screen as opposed to watching on BluRay (HD).

[Dan Hocker]

Edge of Tomorrow was one I actually enjoyed - saw it at the theatre - great visuals especially with the "mimics". To me that is more of a shoot 'em up type of sci-fi - fun one though.

I was really anticipating Interstellar.... seemed like my type of story. Lots of real science behind it - lots of "Wow - that could really happen" - yet, when I finally did watch it on ppv - I was disappointed in a way. Didn't live up to the hype for me.

re: Prometheus again - I don't think it was really tied to Alien franchise other than some subtleties - the name on the ship being a big one. And maybe that is what the audiences wanted. It's a great stand alone movie, and I am curious how the sequel will build off of it. Lots of interest in Prometheus for me, as I find space exploration, and especially the search for "How did we get here" a very tantalizing prospect of our future. I am also a fan of the Ancient Aliens show - although some times it gets sidetracked with some pretty whacky topics. I am kind of ticked off at myself for not experiencing this on the big screen! Seemed to me that it wasn't in theatre very long. Where as Ex Machina is a movie that probably doesn't suffer from not being on the big screen as opposed to watching on BluRay (HD).

Interstellar is one of those movies I feel has audiences split down the middle. I feel like it's pretty 50 / 50 with either loved it or hated it with people that saw it. I saw it in 3D IMAX and it was just a beautiful movie, which may shade my personal opinion of it, though the people I went with didn't really care for it.

With Prometheus I think that's probably the thing that ruined the movie as far as critics / fans where concerned. It was marketed as a Alien prequel (which it is, if only barely), but the movie was really only tangently related to the Alien movies. So it was a major letdown to most people who saw it. I think if Ridley Scott had done it under a pseudonym and they hadn't marketed it as a Alien prequel, people wouldn't have been nearly has harsh on the movie, though at the same time it probably wouldn't have done nearly as well as it did in the box office.

[Theli]

Interstellar is one of those movies I feel has audiences split down the middle. I feel like it's pretty 50 / 50 with either loved it or hated it with people that saw it. I saw it in 3D IMAX and it was just a beautiful movie, which may shade my personal opinion of it, though the people I went with didn't really care for it.

With Prometheus I think that's probably the thing that ruined the movie as far as critics / fans where concerned. It was marketed as a Alien prequel (which it is, if only barely), but the movie was really only tangently related to the Alien movies. So it was a major letdown to most people who saw it. I think if Ridley Scott had done it under a pseudonym and they hadn't marketed it as a Alien prequel, people wouldn't have been nearly has harsh on the movie, though at the same time it probably wouldn't have done nearly as well as it did in the box office.

My big beef with Prometheus was the completely unbelievable and unrelatable characters. The story had some interesting concepts, but also felt a bit lacking. With that said I thought it worked well enough as an Alien prequel and/or a stand alone, and it looked pretty. I'm just not much for action packed, story-light films most of the time. I like a film to make me think after the viewing. And a film can be cerebral with little dialogue or plot too, but the cinematography, score and other aspects needs to represent the film well. An example of this would be 2001: A Space Odyssey. I also dislike the over use of CG, but find it much more forgiveable in a space opera-style sci fi movie. In too many films I feel it replaces the natural or human elements of a film (model making, ingenuitive effects, costumes and make-up, even acting suffers greatly from it). But in a cold environment, like space, it can work well.

Interstellar I still need to watch. I have it on blu-ray, just need to get around to it.