The opening had me fooled too.
The opening had me fooled too.
As a family, we are watching Super Size Me.
I find myself disturbed that my daughter loves McDonalds..not the food, but Playland. She saw McDonald's and instantly thought Playland. Hmm..that better way to attract the next generation of obesity.
No more fast food for either kiddie. No fries, no burgers, no Happy Meals. They can get used to eating carrots with fat-free ranch dip. They will get salads (they get that now), broiled chicken and grilled beef.
The whole movie was so disturbing. I will go to yard sales and pick up Happy Meal toys and make up my own "Happy Meal" and we can go to the park.
The Devil's Rejects
Synopsis - Rob Zombie gets a second chance.
Review - Not very good, didn't really enjoy most of it. The complaints about computer gore are not unfounded, it can be quite jarring since there is so much old fashioned gore in contrast. Based on the casting I could tell Zombie was going for the horror 'homage' feel to this one with Ken Foree (Dawn of the Dead) Michael Berryman (The Hills Have Eyes) Leslie Easterbrook (Police Academy movies *shudder*) you get the idea. I liked William Forsythe's peformance, as always, he was the right amount of over the top psycho cop hunting down crooks necessary for a movie like this. I think the problem with the movie is that the concept just didn't sell for me, I never bought into it and so everything seemed stupid, and there were the usual problems with lack of suspense, uninteresting deaths, or stupid give me a break deaths (straight outta TCM as you might expect)
I'm ready to give up on Zombie, not original, not interesting, he was lucky to even get a second chance after that last hunk o' **** but this movie isn't THAT bad, he was just already in the dog house after making one of the worst movies ever and I may have over scrutinized to an extent.
Of Human Bondage (1934)
Good movie, I can see why Bette Davis' performance kickstarted her career, apart from the accent (I think in 30s movies one has to forgive such things) it was very impressive.
Speaking of shuddering, I think Transformers has opened. I almost can't wait to see it. I'm confronting a lifestyle choice, am I prepared to pay for a cinema ticket to see what I know will be a profoundly awful movie? Seems a step beyond merely hiring it. I suppose I did go to see 300 at the cinemas.
Wait Until Dark...1967 version
This movie shows that you don't need gore and nudity to make a good horror/suspense movie.
Basic plot...Bad girl has heroin filled doll. Bad girl gives to to man. Other bad men want the doll that is in possession of a blind woman.
Darn near perfect movie.
Yeah, Michael Bay films are usually a guilty pleasure. I just didn't expect the Europe release to be at the same day as the US. Finally justice has been served on this issue in any case
I think I'm going to watch it. I even heard Die Hard 4.0 was very good looking-straigt forward-action packed movie. Though I'll buy that one instead of buying a movie ticket.
Let me open up a can of Harry Potter. I think most people here will think of it as a terrible acted, heavily CGI'd children movie and I would have to agree. The boy is a TERRIBLE actor and the others aren't quite ready also. Yet I still am a big fan of the series and I'm actually looking forward to the new release, the 17th iirc. An even bigger guilty pleasure then Michael Bay, though it tilts more to the guilty side than the pleasure.
And last but not least I'd like to add the movie 'Memoirs of a Geisha'. Very intriguing movie, made with a lot of love and knowledge. It has a very good setting as well: 8,5/10
The Harry Potter movies are terrible, but not because of the acting, most of the cast is actually very good. It's just a really lousy adaptation.
No, I disagree. The acting overall isn't great and the guy playing Potter is really really terrible. This is one of the major flaws of the movie. It's just that the books are too long to completely shot in a movie (like most books). Some directors cut it just about right and some pick the wrong scenes. I still give credits for the results though. It gives a similar feeling to LotR; if you read the books and then the movie you'll be disappointed in some occasions for not incorporating some major important or thrilling scenes (Bombadil for instance). But if you see the movie first and read the book afterwards the movie fills in the blanks of people characterization. I don't know how this express this correctly, but a books major advantage is that a large part still is dependant on your imagination. Watching the on screen version first really takes some of the fantasy away.
For this reason I've read the HP books first and then hope for a good on screen interpertation. But find the movies still very exciting and for the biggest part pretty good adapted.