rate the last movie you saw
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 35762
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
Re: rate the last movie you saw
I saw MAROONED on VHS when I was a kid and hated it. It's almost unbelievably static, not to mention dated beyond belief. It made the dullest sequences of 2001 look like the work of an ADD-riddled editor!
-
Eric Paddon
- Posts: 9037
- Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:49 pm
Re: rate the last movie you saw
I think it's okay but flawed up to the rescue sequence when the wheels really fall off. Personally, I think that Hackman should have been the astronaut to get it!
One clumsy bit of staging was not explaining how Gregory Peck could be in Florida for the rescue launch and then back in Houston at Mission Control in less than an hour!
One clumsy bit of staging was not explaining how Gregory Peck could be in Florida for the rescue launch and then back in Houston at Mission Control in less than an hour!
-
Paul MacLean
- Posts: 7538
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 10:26 pm
- Location: New York
Re: rate the last movie you saw
Wendy Carlos actually wrote a score for this film but it wasn't used. Apparently the filmmakers thought music would make the movie seem "less real" (I'm sure it would have made it less dull as well).AndyDursin wrote:I saw MAROONED on VHS when I was a kid and hated it. It's almost unbelievably static, not to mention dated beyond belief. It made the dullest sequences of 2001 look like the work of an ADD-riddled editor!
-
Monterey Jack
- Posts: 10551
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
- Location: Walpole, MA
Re: rate the last movie you saw
-The Mask Of Zorro (1998): 10/10
-The Legend Of Zorro (2005): 7.5/10
Revisited both of these on Blu-Ray today. The original is still splendid...a swashbuckling rouser that wipes the floor with pretty much every would-be adventure movie released in the last decade (including the POTC films). The sequel has some jarring problems (an abundance of silly, "kid-friendly" humor, the lack of Anthony Hopkins), yet it's rather underrated, with plenty of Saturday matinee fun. I was amused to notice Michael Emmerson as one of the Pinkerton agents who blackmail Catherine Zeta-Jones. The second movie must have come out barely a month before he started appearing on Lost.
And Catherine Zeta-Jones in high-def...
-The Legend Of Zorro (2005): 7.5/10
Revisited both of these on Blu-Ray today. The original is still splendid...a swashbuckling rouser that wipes the floor with pretty much every would-be adventure movie released in the last decade (including the POTC films). The sequel has some jarring problems (an abundance of silly, "kid-friendly" humor, the lack of Anthony Hopkins), yet it's rather underrated, with plenty of Saturday matinee fun. I was amused to notice Michael Emmerson as one of the Pinkerton agents who blackmail Catherine Zeta-Jones. The second movie must have come out barely a month before he started appearing on Lost.
And Catherine Zeta-Jones in high-def...
-
Paul MacLean
- Posts: 7538
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 10:26 pm
- Location: New York
Re: rate the last movie you saw
Kick Ass
There were some things I definitely liked about the movie, namely the protagonist and his having to deal with the pressures of being a loser AND a superhero, and the romantic subplot was overall nicely handled (though at times a little too vulgar for me).
At the outset it gives the sense that it takes place in the "real world" (even with the scene of the guy jumping off the building) and that the protagonist is going to get into trouble trying to imitate the impossible exploits of comic book superheroes. But ultimately Kick Ass is actually much more far-fetched and unbelievable than anything in Spiderman or X-Men.
In some ways the story (and costumes) reminded me of the Spy Kids movies, or Shark Boy & Lava Girl (or was it Lava Boy? Anyway...), and I think it might have worked had it adhered to that same playful sense of fantasy (which at times it did). But the tone of this movie was very inconsistent, like the filmmakers couldn't make-up their mind what sort of film they were making. One minute it felt like My Bodyguard, then Hero At Large, then The Professional, then Fast Times at Ridgemont High, then Spiderman, then Kill Bill, etc.
All of the early scenes between Cage and the girl were comical and unrealistic -- which is fine, but then we suddenly have this serious, "meaningful" moment between Cage and his former partner where the film is trying to make statement about responsible parenting (like this is Kramer Vs. Kramer or something). This and the "touching" farewell between Cage and the kid toward the end were totally unbelievable and had no emotional payoff, because their characters and the scenario weren't believable in the first place.
I also felt that it was in extremely bad taste to make an 11-year-old actress speak a lot of gutter talk dialog (including the "c" word). And I just plain got tired of all the tedious violence and machine guns and bazookas toward the climax.
It's an awful-looking film as well, clearly shot on HD and not film, with high contrast and too much use of "gain" (which creates that grainy look). The CGI work is good, but overused (was it too much to ask the kids to get-up early to shoot their farewell on the rooftop during a real sunrise?).
Like I said, there were things I liked about this film -- it was funny (Cage's Adam West impression was hysterical), and it was certainly entertaining and held my interest much of the time, but it was also uneven and coarse and unsure of what it was trying to be, so it ultimately left a bad taste in my mouth.
But at least it didn't have Natalie Portman and wasn't scored by Hans Zimmer.
There were some things I definitely liked about the movie, namely the protagonist and his having to deal with the pressures of being a loser AND a superhero, and the romantic subplot was overall nicely handled (though at times a little too vulgar for me).
At the outset it gives the sense that it takes place in the "real world" (even with the scene of the guy jumping off the building) and that the protagonist is going to get into trouble trying to imitate the impossible exploits of comic book superheroes. But ultimately Kick Ass is actually much more far-fetched and unbelievable than anything in Spiderman or X-Men.
In some ways the story (and costumes) reminded me of the Spy Kids movies, or Shark Boy & Lava Girl (or was it Lava Boy? Anyway...), and I think it might have worked had it adhered to that same playful sense of fantasy (which at times it did). But the tone of this movie was very inconsistent, like the filmmakers couldn't make-up their mind what sort of film they were making. One minute it felt like My Bodyguard, then Hero At Large, then The Professional, then Fast Times at Ridgemont High, then Spiderman, then Kill Bill, etc.
All of the early scenes between Cage and the girl were comical and unrealistic -- which is fine, but then we suddenly have this serious, "meaningful" moment between Cage and his former partner where the film is trying to make statement about responsible parenting (like this is Kramer Vs. Kramer or something). This and the "touching" farewell between Cage and the kid toward the end were totally unbelievable and had no emotional payoff, because their characters and the scenario weren't believable in the first place.
I also felt that it was in extremely bad taste to make an 11-year-old actress speak a lot of gutter talk dialog (including the "c" word). And I just plain got tired of all the tedious violence and machine guns and bazookas toward the climax.
It's an awful-looking film as well, clearly shot on HD and not film, with high contrast and too much use of "gain" (which creates that grainy look). The CGI work is good, but overused (was it too much to ask the kids to get-up early to shoot their farewell on the rooftop during a real sunrise?).
Like I said, there were things I liked about this film -- it was funny (Cage's Adam West impression was hysterical), and it was certainly entertaining and held my interest much of the time, but it was also uneven and coarse and unsure of what it was trying to be, so it ultimately left a bad taste in my mouth.
But at least it didn't have Natalie Portman and wasn't scored by Hans Zimmer.
Last edited by Paul MacLean on Sun May 22, 2011 11:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Eric Paddon
- Posts: 9037
- Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:49 pm
Re: rate the last movie you saw
The Kremlin Letter (1970) 4 of 10
-I had to watch this twice because the first time I alas was half out of it and dozing off. Big mistake obviously for a film like this, but rewatching it alert, and able to "get" it now, it's not much better. I really, and I mean *really* am so annoyed with how critics will rate so highly espionage films that take the supposedly "deep" view of all sides terrible and not presenting a "simplistic" picture of good vs. evil. This, I think accounts for the real reason why other films of this era that didn't take this approach wholly and still at least kept a sense of perspective on which side was the one to root for, like "Topaz" and "The Tamarind Seed" don't get a fair shake from the same critics (and both of those films I'd note don't present the people on the "right" side in the most noble fashion, so they can't be accused of being overly simplistic). With this film, what it comes down to is a self-indulgent rant by John Huston on the evil of intelligence agencies (which he does in his cameo appearance) that then gets beaten to death endlessly throughout the film while some simple coherence in the plot is ignored altogether. The thing is, in the post-9/11 period, Huston's comment on the evil of intelligence agencies never rang more hollow because this attitude about how evil the game of espionage was, and how we needed to do things only in the purest of fashion is precisely the reason we didn't get access to information that could have prevented 9/11 from happening.
-Some of the acting is fine, but Patrick O'Neal doesn't make for a believable lead. James Coburn, the first choice, would have been better because at least it would have given us the novelty of seeing him play a spy representing the flip side of Derek Flint.
I'll be rewatching "Tarmarind Seed" tomorrow. That film at least is one I can enjoy a lot more than this one because it managed to make many of the same points about how dirty the spy game can be, but ultimately we still knew which side came out better in the nature of the competition.
-I had to watch this twice because the first time I alas was half out of it and dozing off. Big mistake obviously for a film like this, but rewatching it alert, and able to "get" it now, it's not much better. I really, and I mean *really* am so annoyed with how critics will rate so highly espionage films that take the supposedly "deep" view of all sides terrible and not presenting a "simplistic" picture of good vs. evil. This, I think accounts for the real reason why other films of this era that didn't take this approach wholly and still at least kept a sense of perspective on which side was the one to root for, like "Topaz" and "The Tamarind Seed" don't get a fair shake from the same critics (and both of those films I'd note don't present the people on the "right" side in the most noble fashion, so they can't be accused of being overly simplistic). With this film, what it comes down to is a self-indulgent rant by John Huston on the evil of intelligence agencies (which he does in his cameo appearance) that then gets beaten to death endlessly throughout the film while some simple coherence in the plot is ignored altogether. The thing is, in the post-9/11 period, Huston's comment on the evil of intelligence agencies never rang more hollow because this attitude about how evil the game of espionage was, and how we needed to do things only in the purest of fashion is precisely the reason we didn't get access to information that could have prevented 9/11 from happening.
-Some of the acting is fine, but Patrick O'Neal doesn't make for a believable lead. James Coburn, the first choice, would have been better because at least it would have given us the novelty of seeing him play a spy representing the flip side of Derek Flint.
I'll be rewatching "Tarmarind Seed" tomorrow. That film at least is one I can enjoy a lot more than this one because it managed to make many of the same points about how dirty the spy game can be, but ultimately we still knew which side came out better in the nature of the competition.
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 35762
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
Re: rate the last movie you saw
I didn't care for THE KREMLIN LETTER either. I reviewed it in my column a couple of weeks ago and could easily understand why the reaction was mostly negative from most critics (audiences hated it too) -- there's nobody to root for, the characters are all completely unlikeable, the story is a jumbled mess and just because you have a convoluted plot doesn't mean it's intricate or interesting. A really sour, downbeat type of experience that felt "anti-audience" in nature.
I was never a fan of TOPAZ and TAMARIND SEED either, but KREMLIN LETTER does not compare favorably to those, I agree with you there Eric.
I was never a fan of TOPAZ and TAMARIND SEED either, but KREMLIN LETTER does not compare favorably to those, I agree with you there Eric.
Re: rate the last movie you saw
I've been sick with a sinus infection so I watched five films the other day:
FANTASTIC FOUR - 3/10. Banal dialogue, one-dimensional characters, very little set-up and too jumpy plot-wise, I found this film to be short on everything. Even the special effects were kind of dull. The music was unmemorable, and I just wasn't into it. I was never a big fan of the FF in the first place, but I hardly knew who THOR was and felt that film had a lot more heart and depth to it than this dud.
TOKYO SONATA - 5/10. Usually I like Japanese dramas along this line but the story about a family falling apart got a little too weird and unbelieveable for me. I even found it hard to accept that the younger son was somehow a child prodigy on the piano. It failed to strike a chord (pun intended) until the very end. I'll give Kurosawa a lot of credit for painting a beautiful picture and expressing more emotion with some nice cuts and a beautiful piece of piano music than words could ever do at the end of the film. It was worth sitting through 110 minutes of the film to get to the final moments.
THE PURPLE ROSE OF CAIRO - 8/10. I still enjoy this film and love Jeff Daniels' double performance in it. He really exuded a lot of charisma, and the premise was interesting and unique (to me at least). I'm still not sure I am sold on Mia Farrow as a romantic lead; she can get a bit whiney. I did really like the end though as Allen focused both on Daniels' and Farrow's characters in the face of their decisions/realities. It's sad in a way but still a decent film.
HANNAH AND HER SISTERS - 9/10. This film holds up and is not dated (unlike some of his other films); for the first time I saw Michael Caine's character as disturbingly selfish and predatory. And I never notcied before but Sam Waterston and Carrie Fisher kind of drop out of the movie...their story didn't get wrapped up very well, but it doesn't matter. Allen's search for the meaning of life was hilarious but Wiest stole the movie for me. I think the ending wraps things up a bit too nicely but I don't care. Perhaps my favorite scene was where the three sisters are at lunch and the camera moves around the table. Woody Allen definitely delivered with this one!
THE RIVER - 7/10. Mark Rydell's film output continues to impress me. While I thought some of the movie was a bit unrealistic, it is a quietly powerful story with a solid score by John Williams. The film never got melodramatic; for example, when Gibson's character returns home after working as a scrub and Beth asks her brother if it's okay for daddys to cry, Rydell could have shown Gibson releasing his emotions to his wife. I'm glad he didn't. The visual metaphors were interesting (for example the trapped deer urinating while Gibson and the mob look on) but didn't always connect with me. At any rate, the acting was good all around and the cinematography was good as well.
FANTASTIC FOUR - 3/10. Banal dialogue, one-dimensional characters, very little set-up and too jumpy plot-wise, I found this film to be short on everything. Even the special effects were kind of dull. The music was unmemorable, and I just wasn't into it. I was never a big fan of the FF in the first place, but I hardly knew who THOR was and felt that film had a lot more heart and depth to it than this dud.
TOKYO SONATA - 5/10. Usually I like Japanese dramas along this line but the story about a family falling apart got a little too weird and unbelieveable for me. I even found it hard to accept that the younger son was somehow a child prodigy on the piano. It failed to strike a chord (pun intended) until the very end. I'll give Kurosawa a lot of credit for painting a beautiful picture and expressing more emotion with some nice cuts and a beautiful piece of piano music than words could ever do at the end of the film. It was worth sitting through 110 minutes of the film to get to the final moments.
THE PURPLE ROSE OF CAIRO - 8/10. I still enjoy this film and love Jeff Daniels' double performance in it. He really exuded a lot of charisma, and the premise was interesting and unique (to me at least). I'm still not sure I am sold on Mia Farrow as a romantic lead; she can get a bit whiney. I did really like the end though as Allen focused both on Daniels' and Farrow's characters in the face of their decisions/realities. It's sad in a way but still a decent film.
HANNAH AND HER SISTERS - 9/10. This film holds up and is not dated (unlike some of his other films); for the first time I saw Michael Caine's character as disturbingly selfish and predatory. And I never notcied before but Sam Waterston and Carrie Fisher kind of drop out of the movie...their story didn't get wrapped up very well, but it doesn't matter. Allen's search for the meaning of life was hilarious but Wiest stole the movie for me. I think the ending wraps things up a bit too nicely but I don't care. Perhaps my favorite scene was where the three sisters are at lunch and the camera moves around the table. Woody Allen definitely delivered with this one!
THE RIVER - 7/10. Mark Rydell's film output continues to impress me. While I thought some of the movie was a bit unrealistic, it is a quietly powerful story with a solid score by John Williams. The film never got melodramatic; for example, when Gibson's character returns home after working as a scrub and Beth asks her brother if it's okay for daddys to cry, Rydell could have shown Gibson releasing his emotions to his wife. I'm glad he didn't. The visual metaphors were interesting (for example the trapped deer urinating while Gibson and the mob look on) but didn't always connect with me. At any rate, the acting was good all around and the cinematography was good as well.
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 35762
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
Re: rate the last movie you saw
You and me both Michael. I've been battling either a cold, allergy attack or sinus infection for over a week as well. I typically don't get allergies but I was so run over last Friday I had to postpone the column for a week, which meant trying to play catch up over the last few days.
THE RIVER is a film that grows on me, in some ways I felt Gibson's performance, coming early in his career somewhat, didn't feel authentic, but the cinematography, scoring, and earnest aspects of the story captivated me. It's not on Blu-Ray but the HD-DVD looks really good.
I'm not the biggest Woody Allen fan as I've mentioned before but I liked PURPLE ROSE OF CAIRO -- until the end, which I really found downbeat and turned me off from ever wanting to see it again. HANNAH AND HER SISTERS though is a superb film. That period there in the '80s had some of Allen's better films in retrospect; as I've said before I've always loved RADIO DAYS.
THE RIVER is a film that grows on me, in some ways I felt Gibson's performance, coming early in his career somewhat, didn't feel authentic, but the cinematography, scoring, and earnest aspects of the story captivated me. It's not on Blu-Ray but the HD-DVD looks really good.
I'm not the biggest Woody Allen fan as I've mentioned before but I liked PURPLE ROSE OF CAIRO -- until the end, which I really found downbeat and turned me off from ever wanting to see it again. HANNAH AND HER SISTERS though is a superb film. That period there in the '80s had some of Allen's better films in retrospect; as I've said before I've always loved RADIO DAYS.
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 35762
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
Re: rate the last movie you saw
TRUE GRIT (2010) 8/10
I liked this film and wanted to love it -- but some aspects of it didn't quite work for me. In addition to feeling like it was uneven and cut oddly, I found Bridges' performance to be a letdown. Most of the time he mumbled his way through the character like he was doing "Sling Blade," and I nearly reached for the subtitles because I couldnt understand what he was saying. The faithfulness to the original novel also meant retaining an epilogue which added nothing to the film at all, while robbing the principal actors of an emotional conclusion to their roles.
That said, Hailee Steinfeld was absolutely great, the score by Carter Burwell was one of his best, and the cinematography was excellent...I guess I was just expecting total greatness from the Coens and while the film is certainly quite good and well worth seeing, I felt ultimately it fell short of that mark.
I liked this film and wanted to love it -- but some aspects of it didn't quite work for me. In addition to feeling like it was uneven and cut oddly, I found Bridges' performance to be a letdown. Most of the time he mumbled his way through the character like he was doing "Sling Blade," and I nearly reached for the subtitles because I couldnt understand what he was saying. The faithfulness to the original novel also meant retaining an epilogue which added nothing to the film at all, while robbing the principal actors of an emotional conclusion to their roles.
That said, Hailee Steinfeld was absolutely great, the score by Carter Burwell was one of his best, and the cinematography was excellent...I guess I was just expecting total greatness from the Coens and while the film is certainly quite good and well worth seeing, I felt ultimately it fell short of that mark.
-
Eric Paddon
- Posts: 9037
- Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:49 pm
Re: rate the last movie you saw
The Tamarind Seed (1974) 8 of 10
Coming soon after "The Kremlin Letter" left me irritated, this film offered a nice reminder again of what a good spy movie in the 70s could be like. Like all the other "complex" films that became so faddish in this era, this shows both sides engaged in dirty aspects of the whole spy business but ultimately we still get a stark reminder of the difference between the two systems, because Omar Sharif discovers that if you run afoul of the higher-ups, you end up in a prison camp and likely executed which is why he knows that his self-interest dictates defecting. Great performances as well from Julie Andrews and Anthony Quayle too.
There are also certain other things about this film that would not pass muster with the politically correct today, which I suppose also accounts for why no one wants to revisit the same way they were so willing to revisit a poor film like "Kremlin Letter".
Coming soon after "The Kremlin Letter" left me irritated, this film offered a nice reminder again of what a good spy movie in the 70s could be like. Like all the other "complex" films that became so faddish in this era, this shows both sides engaged in dirty aspects of the whole spy business but ultimately we still get a stark reminder of the difference between the two systems, because Omar Sharif discovers that if you run afoul of the higher-ups, you end up in a prison camp and likely executed which is why he knows that his self-interest dictates defecting. Great performances as well from Julie Andrews and Anthony Quayle too.
There are also certain other things about this film that would not pass muster with the politically correct today, which I suppose also accounts for why no one wants to revisit the same way they were so willing to revisit a poor film like "Kremlin Letter".
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 35762
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
Re: rate the last movie you saw
THE BIG COUNTRY (9) and QUIGLEY DOWN UNDER (8) - Blu-Ray
These are both Walmart exclusives for the time being and I've only glimpsed the transfers, but they both look EXCELLENT. Absolute steal for HD westerns, $10 a piece.
These are both Walmart exclusives for the time being and I've only glimpsed the transfers, but they both look EXCELLENT. Absolute steal for HD westerns, $10 a piece.
Re: rate the last movie you saw
PIRATES 4 - 6/10. I'll try to make this brief. The good: the story made sense, it was easy to follow, acting was decent, it had its moments, music was decent, and for the most part the Christian missionary wasn't portrayed as some out-of-control idiot. The bad: the schtick is getting old and worn-out, some of the action scenes seemed too "staged" and unnecessary and a bit out of place. The ugly: I still think Penelope Cruz is overrated as an actress...she was awful. And I was confused as to what exactly the Christian missionary and the mermaid did at the end. It seemed like he abandoned his faith in some way to be "saved" by a mermaid....huh???? Maybe I was missing something but that really rubbed me the wrong way. If someone can explain that I'd appreciate it.
RADIO DAYS (1987) - 10/10. I'm ready to put this on my top tier of Woody Allen movies...watching this again was a blast and I have to include it among his best films. The story is light and very entertaining; even the sadder moments don't bring down the overall film. I think the kid who played Joe was outstanding and I loved the nostalgic look back at youth, old time radio (which I really enjoy, especially Jack Benny), and the romanticization (lol...is that a word??) of the significance of childhood events. The acting from everyone was solid and this film is just great fun.
RADIO DAYS (1987) - 10/10. I'm ready to put this on my top tier of Woody Allen movies...watching this again was a blast and I have to include it among his best films. The story is light and very entertaining; even the sadder moments don't bring down the overall film. I think the kid who played Joe was outstanding and I loved the nostalgic look back at youth, old time radio (which I really enjoy, especially Jack Benny), and the romanticization (lol...is that a word??) of the significance of childhood events. The acting from everyone was solid and this film is just great fun.
-
Eric Paddon
- Posts: 9037
- Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:49 pm
Re: rate the last movie you saw
The Hindenburg (1975) 6.5 of 10
I always saw this as a more lower-tiered entry in the 70s disaster genre but revisiting it last night, it actually was a bit better than I remembered. I can look past the plotline because the mostly discredited sabotage theory I'll admit was probably the only way to wring any kind of cinematic storyline out of the event. The recreation of the Hindenburg's interior is quite impressive and Whitlock's matte paintings also help sell the movie a good deal and make it interesting to look at, even if the characters and subplots have more of the air of a Universal TV-movie of the era than a big budget effort. Big mistake on Wise's part IMO to not have any of the German characters even attempt a trace of accent. It comes off even worse than the Japanese not speaking Japanese in "Midway" a year later.
Shire's score is terrific, easily the best I've heard of his along with "Taking Of Pelham One Two Three".
I always saw this as a more lower-tiered entry in the 70s disaster genre but revisiting it last night, it actually was a bit better than I remembered. I can look past the plotline because the mostly discredited sabotage theory I'll admit was probably the only way to wring any kind of cinematic storyline out of the event. The recreation of the Hindenburg's interior is quite impressive and Whitlock's matte paintings also help sell the movie a good deal and make it interesting to look at, even if the characters and subplots have more of the air of a Universal TV-movie of the era than a big budget effort. Big mistake on Wise's part IMO to not have any of the German characters even attempt a trace of accent. It comes off even worse than the Japanese not speaking Japanese in "Midway" a year later.
Shire's score is terrific, easily the best I've heard of his along with "Taking Of Pelham One Two Three".
Re: rate the last movie you saw
SEPTEMBER (1987) - 1.5/10. Garbage....I really disliked this movie. The dialogue seemed so sterile and cliche...as did the performances. All people did was wallow in self-pity and whine and complain; the character of Peter was so predatory and just offensive in so many ways- it's like everyone was trying to justify themselves when in reality they are all selfish, self-absorbed losers who can't admit it (and if they do it's always to get sympathy from someone). These films are practically unwatchable since I felt sympathy for no one. Horrid film.
IRON MAN 2 - 5.5/10. I was much less impressed with this film than with the original...it reminded me a lot of SPIDER-MAN 2 (which was the weakest of the three Spidey films to me). I just watched it but don't really know what to say about it as I just felt like it brought nothing new to the table. And I didn't know what it was about- was it about Starks growing up and maturing, or was it about Iron Man coming into his own as a super-hero and defender of the world (whatever)? It just didn't have "it", though I don't know what "it" really is.
IRON MAN 2 - 5.5/10. I was much less impressed with this film than with the original...it reminded me a lot of SPIDER-MAN 2 (which was the weakest of the three Spidey films to me). I just watched it but don't really know what to say about it as I just felt like it brought nothing new to the table. And I didn't know what it was about- was it about Starks growing up and maturing, or was it about Iron Man coming into his own as a super-hero and defender of the world (whatever)? It just didn't have "it", though I don't know what "it" really is.