Zookeeper: 3/5. Not original, not particularly clever, but competently directed and acted. It's hard not to like a film where the matchmaker monkey's best idea on how to win the girl is to throw poo at her.
Zookeeper: 3/5. Not original, not particularly clever, but competently directed and acted. It's hard not to like a film where the matchmaker monkey's best idea on how to win the girl is to throw poo at her.
Just finished watching Fido. My wife and I both really enjoyed it. It was actually a very clever movie under the surface of it. Placing it in 1950s America was a genius stroke which added to that satirical edge. And what's not to like about... the outcast boy searching for a friend, the sexually repressed homemaker searching for a companion, the provider spineless husband, and the near perfect idealistic town as a backcloth to the tongue in cheek suburbia haven for zombie harmony - yes, perfect. Two things my wife did during the film was comment, "This is stupid", then let out a huge laugh. The second was sound genuinely upset when she assumed Tammy the erotic zombie girlfriend of one of the neighbours was shot in the head and would die.
Yes, wonderful film and right up both our street.
Going to sleep now.
4/5
Craig
I agree about Fido.
funny as hell and interesting in its own weird way.
Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Harry Potter VII, Part 2 (HP8?): 3.5/5. Good movie, especially after the near snoozefest of Part1; but seriously, enough already. Some things crucial to the resolution I couldn't recall, but I just went with it. Holocruxes, Deathly Hallows and really big honkin' snakes, oh my!! I wanted Voldy to say to HP "I'm pasty-skinned, I bald, I'm schnozz-less, and I'm your father. Deal with it!" Would have been worth another 1/2 point at least.
Can we change the result range? I assumed it was up to 5. Are you messing with me, Ken. I know I'm British/English and you guys have that habit of putting the month before the day, when here we put the day before the month, so if i read 3/25, i think, "Holy shit, when did we add 13 months to the year?!"
So you're saying you would rate it 5 out of 11, right, which would be something like, 2.2/4?
Can we change the result range? I assumed it was up to 5. Are you messing with me, Ken. I know I'm British/English and you guys have that habit of putting the month before the day, when here we put the day before the month, so if i read 3/25, i think, "Holy shit, when did we add 13 months to the year?!"
So you're saying you would rate it 5 out of 11, right, which would be something like, 2.2/4?
Sorry, Craig. My bad. I made a crack about a movie rating scale going to 11 ("We're Spinal Tap of the U.K., you must be the U.S.A.!) and Ken grabbed on it.
I just saw the new Harry Potter, too. Loved it. Very satisfying ending to the series. Of course, the books were much better, but given the job of adapting such huge books, they got more right than they got wrong. I had one quibble with the direction of one scene, but otherwise, I thought it was great.
Spoiler!
The showdown between Molly and Belatrix had no dramatic buildup as it did in the book. Molly's line should have made you want to cheer, but the way the scene was edited, it almost got lost in everything that was going on. And while Fred's death was a big part of the book, I didn't mind the less-is-more approach they took.
The showdown between Molly and Belatrix had no dramatic buildup as it did in the book. Molly's line should have made you want to cheer, but the way the scene was edited, it almost got lost in everything that was going on. And while Fred's death was a big part of the book, I didn't mind the less-is-more approach they took.
Hunter
So true.
Spoiler!
The other thing they left out that I thought it would've been easy for them to keep in was when the stuff in the vault was multiplying. In the book it was also burning them.
Comment