Rate the Last Movie You Saw

[Tommy]

I dunno I would argue that The Prestige and Memento aren't action laden movies and are both fantastic. Not that I'm arguing about Interstellar, as I haven't actually seen it yet.

Just to add this, Following and Insomnia aren't really action-packed either but I liked both of them as well

I liked Interstellar but I didn't love it, it definitely has some issues and is not as well-crafted as some of his other films but still worth seeing I think

[srboone]

Well, Insomnia wasn't written by Nolan and Momento was a suspense thriller that didn't depend on emotion for it's intensity. I would rate The Prestige slightly better than Interstellar, but its pace wasn't nearly as slow. I never saw Following.

[srboone]

Dumb and Dumber To: I remember the orginal quite vividly. It was the first time I'd been able to see an "audience reaction" screening--all the footage shot for the film was shown; the color was off and the soundtrack wasn't completely synced with the film, but that version of the film was 140 minutes long. It was quite good (if unredeemibly silly and stupid). The producers were testing what worked for audiences and what didn't. The final cut was somewhat disappointing, but very good as well. So I couldn't resist the sequel. And I liked it better than the theatrical cut of the first one (though not quite as much as test version of the the original). It's silly, stupid, politically incorrect (whatever THAT means these days), just not as edgy as it was in 1994. But I laughed myself giddy through this film and I don't care who knows it. If you didn't like the first one, stay away. If you liked the first one, but feel you have matured beyond the point of Farrelly Brothers humor, stay away. But if you liked the first one, or haven't seen it, and want to see some silly people doing silly, stupid and disgusting things, enjoy. Just don't expect to see a resurgence of Jim Carey's career from this one.

I loved the D&D-mobile back then, I still do!

3/5

[Tommy]

Birdman: Michael Keaton stars as a movie star whose career crashed when he gave up the role of Birdman, a winged superhero. Currently he is getting ready to make his Broadway debut in an adaptation of Raymond Carver's "What People Talk about when They Talk about Love" that he wrote, directs and stars in. Delightfully profane, foul-mouthed and vulgar; splendidly acted; and directed with a virtuosity that most directors can only dream of achieving, this movie is also a very stagy and pretentious pitch-black comedy that is full of magical realism, inside jokes that you may not get, and insightfully painful jabs at Hollywood and the celebrity lifestyle. This backstage comedy is a marvel of acting (Keaton, Edward Norton and Emma Stone should all get noms out of this) and storytelling (screenplay and directing noms also) that simply won't appeal to everybody; but it appealed to me. This is one of the very best films of the year.

5/5

Completely Agree, this one will only get better as it ages in my mind, loved it!

[silverdroger]

The Movie i watch yesterday was Interstellar and was good enough...that i am now waiting for the DVD release.

[srboone]

I couldn't very well not see it (after having devoted 6 hours to the darn thing already), so

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies: At less that 2 1/2 hours, it feels like Jackson himself is getting tired of his Middle-Earth efforts. His protraction of Tolkien's delightfully concise, yet humorously dark tale of the halfling busybody Bilbo Baggins has stretched my patience, my pocketbook and my bladder with each outing. And TH:TBotFA demonstrates both Jackson's genius and folly in making three movies out of a short novel. His "Battle" is brilliantly paced with great effects (except for Bilbo's feet, which look like fat socks--with no hair?), but there is just not enough Bilbo. In the book, Bilbo was always present, wondering how in the world he got involved in this adventure--just wanting to get back to his home, a good pipe and a cozy fire. Indeed, the best parts of the movie deal with Bilbo and Thorin's friendship, Thorin's dragon-sickness, and Bilbo's final goodbye to the dwarves and then Gandalf; there just aren't enough of them. The rest (including am interesting, yet baffling, scene with Galadriel, Celebron and Sauroman doing battle with the Ringwraiths) is all sound and fury signifying...very little. Is this the best of the three films? Maybe, but I don't think it really matters.

Here's hoping Jackson has gotten the Middle-Earth bug out of his bowels. I'd like to see him do something else. he's been stuck in ME for more than a decade now.

2.5/5

[bugen]

The Interview

After a disastrous trip to Hollywood and its overcrowded and sold out Arclight Theater we ended up back at my place to rent this movie, and there were a few reservations.

Many find Seth Rogen’s style a bit stale, as he always plays himself. This movie is no different but it works. Again.

Franco is more interesting, and hams it up nicely here, but doesn’t deserve a whole lot more credit than Rogen as they both do just fine. It’s ridiculous, but the buddy system works out well as these two idiots bumble their way through a mess of a story. But that works too, because the film employs the art of making fun of everything and everyone.

Franco is a popular TV host, like a Ryan Seacrest, and his show is one of dictator Kim Jong Un’s favorites. Franco and his producer, Rogen, are invited to travel to N. Korea and interview the man for broadcast and the CIA intercedes to convince the two they need to assassinate him instead. Franco is wooed by the dictator upon arrival and his loyalties shift as he decides what he’s going to do.

I’ve seen differing opinions about this film’s place in society today considering the unprecedented Sony hack, including some that believe seeing this movie supports the regime. Those voicing that watching it is only giving importance to the dictator might not have seen the film. He really doesn’t come off too well, which was his whole point in trying to suppress it.

I'm on the side that this film should be seen on the sole basis it was damn near successfully suppressed and people probably shouldn't hold well with that. It’s on YouTube for $6, and full disclosure is it took me multiple tries to get through. The inner conspiracy theorist notes a few things: First, PlayStation network was (knocked) down, which was my initial choice in order to try and support Sony as much as I could. Second, I’ve never paid YouTube for anything, but they would not allow a PayPal transaction to go through and I just got error messages. Third, entering my credit card, I bought the HD package but was only able to stream SD at 480p. Not exactly a smooth experience overall.

Whatever. Six of us sat here and laughed for two hours on Christmas while possibly supporting free expression, depending on who you’re arguing with. It’s funny, it’s stupid, and pretty much all of the characters involved are grossly incompetent, which means it works pretty well for a modern Hollywood comedy.

3 stars

[srboone]

Unbroken: Terrific acting, a great script by the Cohen brothers and some really well-staged action sequences by director Jolie are nearly over-shadowed by the fact that this film looks TOO beautiful. There's no sense of gritty realism here; clouds are placed for dramatic impact, the blood on the foreheads of the actors can't disguise the fact that they are actors; The cinematography is the real villain here--a shame, because Roger Deakins in one of the best in the business. But the film is inspirational and very watchable thanks to a capable cast . If Jack O'Connell doesn't become one of the next big things in a very short time, he's being mismanaged.

3/5

[Theli]

I also watched The Interview recently, and loved it. Exactly what I expected and hoped for, an over the top silly buddy comedy, just like Franco and Rogen's previous team ups. However I'm not gonna really review it, I prefer to review classics.

I watched Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978) a couple nights ago. First time viewing it. It's a surprisingly eerie movie with some great cinematography to compliment the atmosphere. It even has a bit of a Night of the Living Dead feel mixed in with the sci-fi horror, as our heroes are often trying to evade hordes of pod people. The special fx are top notch. The man faced dog was a huge wtf moment, very well done. That'll haunt my dreams for years to come. Top it off with a solid cast, Jeff Goldblum, Donald Sutherland etc., and a great freaked out soundtrack, and we have a wholly satisfying film.

[Dan Hocker]

I couldn't very well not see it (after having devoted 6 hours to the darn thing already), so

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies: At less that 2 1/2 hours, it feels like Jackson himself is getting tired of his Middle-Earth efforts. His protraction of Tolkien's delightfully concise, yet humorously dark tale of the halfling busybody Bilbo Baggins has stretched my patience, my pocketbook and my bladder with each outing. And TH:TBotFA demonstrates both Jackson's genius and folly in making three movies out of a short novel. His "Battle" is brilliantly paced with great effects (except for Bilbo's feet, which look like fat socks--with no hair?), but there is just not enough Bilbo. In the book, Bilbo was always present, wondering how in the world he got involved in this adventure--just wanting to get back to his home, a good pipe and a cozy fire. Indeed, the best parts of the movie deal with Bilbo and Thorin's friendship, Thorin's dragon-sickness, and Bilbo's final goodbye to the dwarves and then Gandalf; there just aren't enough of them. The rest (including am interesting, yet baffling, scene with Galadriel, Celebron and Sauroman doing battle with the Ringwraiths) is all sound and fury signifying...very little. Is this the best of the three films? Maybe, but I don't think it really matters.

Here's hoping Jackson has gotten the Middle-Earth bug out of his bowels. I'd like to see him do something else. he's been stuck in ME for more than a decade now.

2.5/5

Fully agree, though the animals in the battle scene where just ridiculous. Though I would say this was probably the weakest of the three movies in my opinion. Also this should have been the movie poster...



because how the hell does unibrow get more screen time then Bilbo?

[srboone]

HAHAHAHAHA!!! Love the poster, I hadn't seen that one.

The Theory of Everything: What an amazing performance by Eddie Redmayne as Stephen Hawking in this movie! Was this the year's best performance (the Foreign Hollywood Press seems to think so)? I'm not sure, but it's definitely ONE of the best of the year. Beautiful cinematopraphy, costumes, locations and general production values as well. Too bad the movie itself is simply average. A great biopic is one that gives us the flawed behavior and traits of a person as it relates to the subject's treatment of others; but here, we get none of that. The script has a too stiff upper lip for the behind the scenes film this is supposed to be. As a result, we get all the gloss and none of the warts. Am I to believe that Hawking and his first wife never fought at all? All their arguments got sucked into a black hole before they materialized, I guess.

An average movie elevated by a magnetic central perfomance and great production values.

3/5

[srboone]

American Sniper: Eastwood is still obsessed with the lone gunman facing down his enemy on the dusty street in a showdown, this time on the streets Iraq. Not the best of Eastwoods career (I don't think he was snubbed for best director--there were better nominees). Nothing really new is presented here, these could be outakes from a hundred different war movies. But Cooper's performance is the real draw here. He's scored 3 acting nominations in 3 years. This performance is different, tho. Here, he's not mugging for the camera. Cooper does real acting in AS and this just might be a watershed moment in his career. Very deserving of a nomination.

4/5

Whiplash: Intense, electric and very entertaining examination of what it takes to be great. A music school teacher who strives to create the next great jazz muscian takes on a student who just might be that person. His methods are brutal and exacting (not to mention law-suit inspiring), but are effective. Of course, the absence of a metronome when learning timing is curious and the movie doesn't show us any methods used by other teachers at this school; nor does it discuss any of Andrew's other classes--all of which would have been nice to have, but that's quibbling, I suppose. J.K. Simmons has always been good in every role he's taken on, but as the instructor Fletcher he's great, well-deserving of the accolades his performance has garnered.

4.5/5

Selma: Relating the events from King's Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech to his speech on the capitol steps in Montgomery, AL after a historic march for voting rights, Selma entertains without scratching below the surface of the characters to understand their relationships to the events at hand. Director Ava DuVernay's repeated use of slo-mo beatings borders on being too much, but the weight of the events is not matched by gravitas of her characters. Emotions are stated instead of being shown and the film doesn't have the urgency and optimism needed to pull it out of it's own doldrums. The supporting cast is much more effective than the main characters.
Still, all the history and inside information is enough to make it worthwhile viewing.

3/5

[TJCams]

Lucy: Well - 2 Scarlett Johansson sci-fi movies in a row (Under The Skin being the other) which I would classify as weird. The more I watched Lucy, the better it was, although it's still certainly a movie that I'd have to watch more than once to really "get it". It is a little over the top at some times, but actually pretty good. Unlike Under The Skin....which I did not enjoy much at all.....didn't really get the point of it.

[Dan Hocker]

Lucy: Well - 2 Scarlett Johansson sci-fi movies in a row (Under The Skin being the other) which I would classify as weird. The more I watched Lucy, the better it was, although it's still certainly a movie that I'd have to watch more than once to really "get it". It is a little over the top at some times, but actually pretty good. Unlike Under The Skin....which I did not enjoy much at all.....didn't really get the point of it.

Yea I liked Lucy, even though it got a lot of flak in the reviews. I thought it was entertaining enough to forgive the weak plot and the fact that it perpetuated the bad science that is "we only use a small portion of our brain".

[bugen]

Wonder Boys

Of course this movie isn't even close to new (2000), but I hadn't seen it in years and threw it in again last night. And again tonight, which is why I'm writing this.

I couldn't pinpoint what exactly it is about this movie that makes it so spectacular - too many things are done well. The writing is superb, as is the acting. The direction is artful and the soundtrack is headlined by Bob Dylan. It's well shot and has a great cast. And all of this adds up to a critical success and a massive commercial failure.

Michael Douglas, Tobey Maguire, Francis McDormand, Katie Holmes, Rip Torn and Robert Downey Jr. are all stellar, but the star of the film is the writing of one Michael Chabon, with Steve Kloves adapting for the screen. It's catchy like Aaron Sorkin but calmed down from the amphetamine-heavy dialogue Mr. Sorkin applies. And like Grady Trip (Douglas) refers to the novel by James Leer (Maguire), it's true.

English professor Grady Trip, a successful novelist from years ago but with nothing recent to his name, is buried under his next book which is killing him at over 2000 pages long. His most promising student, James Leer, meets up with Grady and his editor Terry Crabtree (Robert Downey Jr.) to attend WordFest, a celebration of writers hosted at the Chancellor's house (McDormand), whom Grady is having an affair with. After the party and over the next couple of days we're dealt a hand of human relationships as prized memorabilia is stolen, the Chancellor's dog is killed, pot is smoked, books are lost, books are published, and lives are lived.

It sounds too simple, meandering, and generally too plotless to be a winner, which is maybe why nobody could figure out how to market it properly, but for my two cents this movie is as good as it gets.

If you love writing and haven't seen this, you owe it to yourself. I'm going to scan back to where I decided I needed to write this and watch it again.

5 stars