• rate the last movie you saw

Posted: **Tue Jan 06, 2009 7:53 am**

JSWalsh wrote:Was SPEED RACER really that bad?

Yes.

Oh GOD, yes.

Posted: **Tue Jan 06, 2009 12:29 pm**

Awful indeed!

Posted: **Tue Jan 06, 2009 1:28 pm**

Both Narnia films. 5/5 stars for me.

Posted: **Wed Jan 07, 2009 12:53 am**

Saw WANTED; absolute triumph of form over substance and the body count is a bit high for me (innocent civilians on a train)-4/10

Posted: **Wed Jan 07, 2009 7:58 pm**

DEFIANCE --- 7/10

GRAN TORINO -- 8/10

THE GOLDEN COMPASS -- 5/10

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:35 am**

MEDIUM COOL (now an OOP DVD from Paramount) 6/10 for being a bit dated but some of Wexler's images are just mind-blowing.

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:29 am**

Edmund Kattak wrote:DEFIANCE --- 7/10

GRAN TORINO -- 8/10

THE GOLDEN COMPASS -- 5/10

For whatever reason I'm interested in checking out GRAN TORINO once it goes wide and opens here this weekend. I haven't even been a huge fan of Eastwood's recent works, either, despite their mass critical acclaim, but this one seems a bit more in tune with some of his earlier films. Or is it?

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 1:27 pm**

GRAN TORINO looks to me too much like A PERFECT WORLD, one of the most boring moviegoing experiences I've survived.

The Film Crew on GIANT OF MARATHON

The Film Crew was a short-lived MST3K ripoff by the last three hosts of MST, and I have to say, the movies they "Crewed" are a lot like MST for me--the first time I see them, I think they're OK, but when I REwatch them, I find them hilarious.

The chick in this one is uberhot.

Best line:

(Over a shot of Greek warriors swimming in the ocean during a battle)

"I haven't seen this many half-naked men swimming since Barry Diller's last pool party."

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 8:49 pm**

AndyDursin wrote:
Edmund Kattak wrote:DEFIANCE --- 7/10

GRAN TORINO -- 8/10

THE GOLDEN COMPASS -- 5/10
For whatever reason I'm interested in checking out GRAN TORINO once it goes wide and opens here this weekend. I haven't even been a huge fan of Eastwood's recent works, either, despite their mass critical acclaim, but this one seems a bit more in tune with some of his earlier films. Or is it?

I am interested in the new Eastwood movie as well...I have yet to see BENJAMIN BUTTON though, so who knows? Maybe I'll wait for DVD.

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 10:34 pm**

88 Minutes: 1/10

You're better than this crap, Al.

Posted: **Thu Jan 08, 2009 10:47 pm**

Monterey Jack wrote:88 Minutes: 1/10

You're better than this crap, Al.

Damn.

Posted: **Fri Jan 09, 2009 12:05 am**

That movie had Leelee Sobieski AND Alicia Witt AND it still sucked.

Posted: **Fri Jan 09, 2009 12:17 am**

Leelee's "mad" scene at the end was pretty funny, though.

Posted: **Fri Jan 09, 2009 7:21 pm**

THE ILLUSTRATED MAN - 8/10. I liked it, though it is really creepy and weird. Steiger is over the top but effectively creepy and it's perspective of the future was so incredibly bleak. I did not read the Bradbury short stories. Very dated in its look but worth watching.

Posted: **Fri Jan 09, 2009 7:39 pm**

mkaroly wrote:THE ILLUSTRATED MAN - 8/10. I liked it, though it is really creepy and weird. Steiger is over the top but effectively creepy and it's perspective of the future was so incredibly bleak. I did not read the Bradbury short stories. Very dated in its look but worth watching.

I'm probably preaching to the converted but I love Goldsmith's score for this. The mood it sets is perfect for the movie--it's bleak but it's not depressing, if you catch my drift.

You need to read Bradbury's short stories. Wonderful stuff.