rate the last movie you saw

[Paul MacLean]

Too bad the film was RUINED by that oh-so-trendy shakey-cam nonsense.

I didn't really mind it except when they were doing it with telephoto lenses. Hand-held camera work can be very effective, but in IMO you should rarely (if ever) shoot hand-held with anything longer than a 50mm lens.

[Paul MacLean]

Snow White and the Huntsman.

Very rarely is a movie so surpassingly awful I'm actually ANGRY at having wasted my time watching it. But this is truly one of the most unenjoyable, tedious, derivative films I've seen in years.

From the outset, this film offers nothing visually interesting or original. The battle scenes are all photographed and staged like the one in Gladiator. The climactic battle takes place on a beach just like the one in Ridley Scott's Robin Hood (in fact I'm pretty sure it is the same Welsh beach). Snow White flees from the castle pursued by mounted knights who look exactly like LOTR's black riders (and the sequence is even shot the same way, with several of the same camera angles). Snow White escapes into the dark forest where she is menaced by one of Harry Potter's dementors. Virtually all the shots of the castle are arial "orbital" shots -- exactly like the ones of Hogwarts in the Potter films. Once she is in the "fairy forest" Snow White is greeted by the large stag from Princess Mononoke.

The "Huntsman", the male lead of the film, looks just like Aragorn in LOTR, with the same scruffy face and oily long hair. The dwarfs are "normal"-sized actors shrunk-down with CGI like those in LOTR (did Warwick Davis and Kiran Shah demand more than the studio was willing to pay?). There are plenty of CGI creatures, but every fantasy and sci-fi movie has CGI creatures these days. And most of the creatures in this film -- again -- look like creatures from other films.

Kirsten Stewart is remarkably bland and dispassionate in the lead, and lacks the innate beauty which is required for the part. The usually-great Charlise Theron is shockingly poor (and I'm amazed she couldn't do a better British accent). The only good performances come from the seven dwarfs (among them Ian McShane, Tobie Jones and Ray Winstone).

At the big battle scene near the end of the film, Snow White charges into the opposing forces slashing her foes with a sword. Er...this girl's been locked-up in castle tower for about ten years. Where did she learn to fight? And how does she eviscerate battle-hardened warriors three times her size?

Other than a few fleeting moments of genuinely melodic romanticism, James Newton Howard's score is blunt and unsubtle or little more than white sound. Howard began as a protege of Jerry Goldsmith. I'm baffled as to why he's sold-out to the "Remote Control" school of film music.

Without question, the most bizarre moment of this movie occurs near the end of the end credits, with a title that reads "This motion picture used sustainability strategies to reduce its carbon emissions and environmental impact." Well, now that I know that, I certainly have to re-evaluate my opinion of what I just sat through.

[AndyDursin]

I liked it! lol. Sorry Paul!

[Monterey Jack]

Without question, the most bizarre moment of this movie occurs near the end of the end credits, with a title that reads "This motion picture used sustainability strategies to reduce its carbon emissions and environmental impact." Well, now that I know that, I certainly have to re-evaluate my opinion of what I just sat through.

This has appeared in the end credits of dozens of movies over the last few years. I don't know why that would be singled out for being particularly "bizarre".

As for the movie, like Andy, I liked it a whole lot. It might be assembled from bits and pieces of other movies, but ALL fantasy movies are constructed out of the same basic storytelling blocks. Kirsten Stewart is dull, but Charlize Theron and Chris Hemsworth are both terrific, and the film looks gorgeous.

[Paul MacLean]

As for the movie, like Andy, I liked it a whole lot. It might be assembled from bits and pieces of other movies, but ALL fantasy movies are constructed out of the same basic storytelling blocks.

Story elements, yes (primarily the "Hero's Journey") but these days most of these movies re-purpose the same the same camera shots, sets, costumes, editing style, their CGI effects all look the same, etc.

Look back to the 80s -- Excalibur, Clash of the Titans, Dragonslayer, The Dark Crystal, Krull, Legend, Willow, Ladyhawk, et al -- whether one loved them or hated them, at least they all had distinctive styles.

Compare them to movies today. There is virtually no stylistic difference between LOTR, Eregon, Van Helsing, the Clash of the Titans remake, Robin Hood, Your Highness, The Eagle, Snow White, etc. They all look interchangeable.

[Monterey Jack]

Argo: 9/10

I know Andy ridiculed the trailer a few months back, but thankfully this is a classic example of Bad Trailer / Good Movie. This is an exceptionally well-crafted suspense thriller for adults, a rarity in this day and age, and Ben Affleck's direction keeps the tension popping and the Hollywood jokes crackling throughout (John Goodman and Alan Arkin are hilarious as the Tinseltown insiders who help Affleck's CIA agent concoct his absurd cover story). Affleck's lead performance is merely adequate (thankfully, his Buzz Lightyear chin is invisible behind a scratchy beard), but the film is defintely one of the best I've seen this year, and it was a kick seeing the 70's Warner Bros. logo attached to a new movie.

[AndyDursin]

Everyone loves it. Smallest drop of any film this year too in its 2nd weekend. I'll definitely get out to it when I can!

[Monterey Jack]

There was actually a smattering of applause at the film's climax, and again as the credits rolled, and for an adult thriller, that's kind of amazing. Affleck has a good long career as a filmmaker ahead of him, and I wish him the best of luck (even if I wish he'd hire a better leading man, like baby bro Casey).

[Paul MacLean]

The trailer for the sequel is already out...

[Monterey Jack]

Heh, every time I hear the word "Argo", I immediately think of this...

[Paul MacLean]

Prometheus

My second viewing (on BD; I saw it in theatres opening night). First-off, this film works better in 2-D than 3-D. While the 3-D wasn't nearly as annoying as it was in Avatar, it was distracting, and did compromise one's ability to immerse oneself in the film. Without the 3-D effect, the film was easier to follow, and details were more apparent.

Overall, while I don't think Prometheus is as good as Aliens or Alien, it is certainly far-superior to Alien 3 and most other science fiction pictures of recent years. I am baffled complaints that it "made no sense" and that the characters "weren't believable" (from people who happily swallowed the Irwin Allen-level "science fiction" of Avatar).

The characters have convincing dimension and depth (particularly Noomi Rapace and Michael Fassbender), and Scott does top his prior work with some hair-raising sequences (the abortion scene in particular). Art direction and photography are up to Scott's usual high standards. The score works well, but isn't anything particularly inventive or memorable (which is too bad, as this film could have really used an imaginative score).

[mkaroly]

I saw PROMETHEUS in the theater in both formats...I thought the 3D was fun but I definitely enjoy the 2D format more (for any film).

I watched the DVD with a friend the other day while on a long study break. I still love this film a great deal. It is still one of the most gorgeous films visually I have seen in a long time in the sci-fi genre. The scale, the environments, the colors...all just spot-on. I was anxious to see the deleted scenes, and after watching them (only once though) I felt that Scott made some good decisions in leaving some things on the cutting room floor. I will list a couple that I felt strongly about:

***The opening scene was extended to include a bunch of hooded Engineers basically blessing the Engineer Seeder before he did his thing. While it was cool to see, in retrospect I liked the ambiguity of the opening of the theatrical cut. This alternate opening gave the Engineers a compassionate aspect that I felt took away some of the enigma and mystery surrounding their intentions and reasons for seeding the Earth.

***I was very happy that Scott cut out a sequence on the Engineer bridge towards the end. In the deleted scenes the Engineer actually speaks to David when David asks him a question. In all honesty, the speaking sounded bad and pretty much cliche. I think Scott was going for ambiguity and I really like that...in addition, that sequence gave Weyland and opportunity to say some additional dialogue that really didn't add much to the story...I think enough was said earlier that it was unecessary. Excellent move on Scott's part.

***There was an alternate scene in which Charlie and Elizabeth argue in her quarters adn it becomes violent before they have sex. I understand that you needed to get to a lovemaking scene between the two of them for the story to move forward, but neither the theatrical version nor the alternate version really work for me, mainly because I can't believe someone as intelligent as Dr. Shaw would be in love with such a self-centered idiot like Charlie. Because Elizabeth is such a strong character, I would have preferred to see her comfort Charlie in his despair rather than Charlie insult her and basically emotionally abuse her. You turn Dr. Shaw into a victim (IMO), and she is never portrayed that way in the rest of the film. In the alternate scene she responds to his abuse by slapping him, but either way the scene makes her out to be a victim...her responses to it are just different. I may be way out of line here, but that's where I am about that scene.

***There is an alternate scene in which Fifield's body outside the Promtheus has morphed into a more Alien-like hybid...his movements were less human and more Alien-esque. Scott made a great decision in removing that Alien-hybrid look to Fifield because it just didn't look right and it reminded me too much of the previous Alien films...the timing wasn't right.

***There is an extended scene in the lifeboat where Elizabeth fights the Engineer. I didn't think that worked well...it wasn't suspenseful and seemed unnecessary in light of the climactic battle between the Engineer and the "face hugger". I prefered the theatrical version which was suspenseful enough, considering the Engineer appears so quickly after David warns Elizabeth that he's coming for her.

***There is an alternate and extended scene between Weyland and Meredith Vickers that has more dialogue and is interesting, but I don't know if it adds a whole lot to the story or not.

I think there were a couple other scenes, but I can't remember them. I am looking forward to going through the documentary stuff and listening to the commentary tracks when I can. I think it's a solid film and holds up well.

[Eric Paddon]

The Perfect Storm (2000) 5.5 of 10

-Yeah, I had to be demonstrating a bit of warped gallows humor to decide to watch this earlier tonight. I guess in part to remind myself of how horrific the power of this kind of storm can be since it's the only thing that compares remotely to what's happening now. And in the process I get a nice reminder of why this is one lousy film.

-Regarding Horner's music. It just seems like this is a score that stays perpetually stuck in one mode for the whole duration of the film. Like hearing a first movement of a symphony for two hours that never changes once, and that's the real problem with it. If this had been a score that had just had something a little *different* in spots, I could have appreciated it, but it just repeats itself over and over.

-The side plots of the yacht and the Coast Guard rescue were poorly executed. Is that guy who owned the yacht making a play for both women? We needed some context for this instead of getting this story from out of the blue.

-I can see why the real life family of Billy Tyne sued the producers, because as written and as played by Clooney he is a one-dimensional cliche-spouting character who in the end puts the lives of his crew at risk for nothing, ultimately.

[Eric Paddon]

Return Of The Pink Panther (1974) 8 of 10
-This was the movie I watched during the power failure to kill time because I needed some levity. I have a soft spot for it because it was the first Panther movie I ever saw, and that was in the theaters when I was six years old! Despite many viewings over the years and knowing it by heart, the familiar scenes always evoke a chuckle. Because this Panther movie was not made by UA it has a more low budget British TV feel to it, which helps it seem less overblown than the last two Panther movies did when it had become a full-blown megabucks franchise as a result of this film's success.

[mkaroly]

Return Of The Pink Panther (1974) 8 of 10
-This was the movie I watched during the power failure to kill time because I needed some levity. I have a soft spot for it because it was the first Panther movie I ever saw, and that was in the theaters when I was six years old! Despite many viewings over the years and knowing it by heart, the familiar scenes always evoke a chuckle. Because this Panther movie was not made by UA it has a more low budget British TV feel to it, which helps it seem less overblown than the last two Panther movies did when it had become a full-blown megabucks franchise as a result of this film's success.

I love this movie...the scene where he and the bellboy are caught in her room and sliding all over the place cracks me up every time, as well as the "Guy Gadoir" stuff. I first saw it at a drive-in theather when I was a kid...great times.