rate the last movie you saw

[TomServo]

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (pt. 2)

I didn't have the highest expectations for this one -- I found the previous David Yates outings to be rather sedate and dispassionate. But this final film was fabulous! It gets off to a bit of a slow start, but once things start rolling it has everything that was missing from the last several films -- a truly epic scale, excitement, thrills, great character development and genuine heart. The fact that this is probably Rowling's best book didn't hurt the film either.

It still has some of the "Yates-isms" I've never cared for -- most notably the dark, washed-out photography (I'll never understand why Yates continually eschews the vibrant style of photography of the earlier films -- especially Roger Pratt's) and Alexandre Desplat's score is serviceable but thematically bland and dramatically sedate (there is even an important scene near the end which really needed music, but was not scored).

How I wish John Williams had written the music for this this film. If he had, I think it would probably be my favorite of all the Potter movies. However I was thrilled to hear Williams' "Leaving Hogwarts" used intact over the final scene, and "Hedwig's Theme" (yes, Williams' original arrangement) over the end credits!

Well, if this installment impressed the difficult-to-please Paul Maclean, then I for sure will check it out soon! I still need to see Part 7.1, though. I saw "1/2-Blood Prince" with my girlfriend at the time who had read all the books. She greatly enjoyed it, but I was a little lost at times in the plotting. I liked it overall, mainly due to fondness for the series, but it was more dour & melancholy than I expected.

[AndyDursin]

Well, if this installment impressed the difficult-to-please Paul Maclean, then I for sure will check it out soon! I still need to see Part 7.1, though. I saw "1/2-Blood Prince" with my girlfriend at the time who had read all the books. She greatly enjoyed it, but I was a little lost at times in the plotting. I liked it overall, mainly due to fondness for the series, but it was more dour & melancholy than I expected.

My theory has always been that these films were intended, first and foremost, for readers of the books. As a friend of mine said yesterday, every one of these films plays out -- to a certain degree -- as if it's working from a checklist: make sure this plot point, this character, this subplot, whatever makes it into the movie. This has resulted in passionless films (at least after Part 3) that -- to someone who doesn't know the story already -- operate on an emotional flatline. Is this scene really THAT important? Is this character entirely necessary? Why are we spending 45 minutes on this tangent? If you've already read the books and know where the story is going, you know this already, so you don't need the film to clue you in. For someone who hasn't, Steve Kloves and particularly David Yates have not a particularly good job rendering the story in a way that captivates the viewer, or informing them what's dramatically essential. As a result, I stopped "caring" about what happened to these characters several movies ago, and truth be told I found the prior two movies intermittently dull and convoluted.

That said, Paul's opinion carries a lot of weight with me and I'm almost to the point where I'll go...almost. We'll see if I need to escape the heat later this week and take in a matinee

[Paul MacLean]

I came to the films kind of "sideways". I was not a reader of the books initially, and honestly, it was mostly John Williams' involvement that interested me in seeing the first film.

The first two films made complete sense to me, not having read the books. The third film was mostly straightforward, except it didn't made clear why the "good guys" -- i.e. the Ministry of Magic -- were employing the evil dementors (reading the book after the film clarified that the Ministry was not entirely altruistic). The scene where Sirius Black's true colors are revealed was also initially confusing.

I started reading Goblet of Fire, but got distracted and never finished it, but film #4 was comprehensible (except got not making clear at what point Mad Eye Moody was replaced by an impostor).

I subsequently read books 5-7, and found films 5 and 6 the least appealing -- not owing to their differences from the books, so much as they just lacked the charm and "heart" of the early films. I also didn't warm to to the washed-out photography and lackluster scores.

But for me, Deathly Hallows pt. 2 brought back much of what I loved about the early films -- particularly the character relationships. The visual style is still a bit dreary, and there are some plot points that don't make complete sense, and some things aren't fully explained (like Dumbledore's relationship with his siblings). But the film moves so well it almost doesn't matter.

I think one can enjoy the films without having read the books...but there's no question familiarity with the books adds to the experience and clarifies things.

[AndyDursin]

DEEP IMPACT 8/10

Whereas "Armageddon" was a piece of junk, this 1998 sci-fi "disaster movie" is one of the best of its kind -- and calling it a "disaster" movie is really doing it a disservice because of the strength of its writing and direction.

Well written (by Bruce Joel Rubin and Michael Tolkin), DEEP IMPACT is taut, exciting, well acted and just a superb science fiction thriller across the board. A Zanuck/Brown/Spielberg production, it boasts the same basic premise as Michael Bay's overblown "Armageddon," but in terms of character and drama is completely different -- offering a believable group of characters, an emotional conclusion, a marvelous James Horner score and some truly memorable sequences that have lost none of their punch. In fact, I liked this film even better on Blu-Ray than I did seeing it in theaters in 1998.

Highly recommended!

[Monterey Jack]

The Back To The Future trilogy sure looks swell on Blu-Ray (even if the extra detail makes the old-age makeup appliances glaringly obvious, and the pre-digital F/X seams more noticable), and the films remain as fresh, funny and fantastical as always (even if Part II lacks the "heart" of the first and third installments).

-BTTF: 10/10

-BTTF II: 7/10

-BTTF III: 8/10

However, I will never be able to unsee the following bizarre moment...

[AndyDursin]

I love BTTF II -- for me it's one of the most inventive sequels ever made. It does lack "heart" -- and really both sequels suffer from not having Crispin Glover and making the George McFly character a non-factor as a result -- but the way the movie zips in and out of multiple time paradoxes...and then, ingeniously, goes back INTO the original movie...is just great. I enjoyed it so much that it took me a while to get used to BTTF III's Old West-only setting and having Christopher Lloyd become the main character -- yet it's terrific and a great end to that trilogy.

What's even more remarkable about those sequels is you've seen other directors attempt to make back-to-back, connected sequels since then -- and failed spectacularly both times (the PIRATES and MATRIX sequels). It makes the achievement of those sequels even more noteworthy IMO.

On the other end, I found Elisabeth Shue's involvement in those films utterly baffling. She was a name commodity by that time and she ended up taking a nothing role, barely gets billed, and has nothing to do in either movie? Weird!

Claudia Wells was hot in the first movie too...

[Monterey Jack]

I love BTTF II -- for me it's one of the most inventive sequels ever made. It does lack "heart" -- and really both sequels suffer from not having Crispin Glover and making the George McFly character a non-factor as a result -- but the way the movie zips in and out of multiple time paradoxes...and then, ingeniously, goes back INTO the original movie...is just great.

I greatly admire the Rube Goldbergian ingenuity of Part II (and the home stretch, where Marty and Doc return to 1955 and we see the events of the first film from a totally different perspective, is probably the greatest-ever example of a sequel giving the audience the "same-but-different" experience), but it's the one BTTF movie that, for me, lacks humor. Yeah, I know, "dark middle chapter of the trilogy" and all, but the "Alternate 1985" segment is just plain unpleasant.

I've also found Elisabeth Shue's involvement in those films utterly baffling too. She was a name commodity by that time and she ends up taking a nothing role, barely gets billed, and has nothing to do in either movie? Weird!

Bob Gale and Robert Zemeckis have stated that the biggest mistake they made with the first movie as far as setting up potential sequels was having Jennifer get into the Delorean with Marty & Doc, as it severely hampered where they could go with the story, which is why Doc knocks her out as soon as they get to 2015 and she spends the majority of the remaining two films(!) unconscious on the porch of her house.

Claudia Wells was hot in the first movie too...

Hey, maybe all of the time travelling in the first movie is what transformed Wells into Shue in the sequels! Of course, you probably saw that as an upgrade, Andy.

[Monterey Jack]

What's even more remarkable about those sequels is you've seen other directors attempt to make back-to-back, connected sequels since then -- and failed spectacularly both times (the PIRATES and MATRIX sequels). It makes the achievement of those sequels even more noteworthy IMO.

Indeed, this is the ONLY time this "two sequels shot at the time time" idea has actually worked (I don't count Kill Bill, as it was one giant movie cut in half late in the editing process, and both halfs are so tonally different from each other).

[AndyDursin]

Yeah, I know, "dark middle chapter of the trilogy" and all, but the "Alternate 1985" segment is just plain unpleasant.

You're right about that, I think it was a bit too heavy with Lea Thompson and the breast implants and all. But, that said, I still admire the movie and I feel a lot of people overlook it.

Hey, maybe all of the time travelling in the first movie is what transformed Wells into Shue in the sequels! Of course, you probably saw that as an upgrade, Andy.

Oh yeah, Elisabeth was an upgrade (not that Claudia Wells was anything to sneeze at)................please, someone, release ADVENTURES IN BABYSITTING on Blu-Ray!! STAT!!

[Monterey Jack]

Oh yeah, Elisabeth was an upgrade (not that Claudia Wells was anything to sneeze at)................please, someone, release ADVENTURES IN BABYSITTING on Blu-Ray!! STAT!!

Are they still doing that Babysitting remake with the Cosby kid? If so, they might do a Blu release of the original as a tie-in. And they could cast Elisabeth as the mother of the kids getting babysat...!

[Eric Paddon]

DEEP IMPACT 8/10

Whereas "Armageddon" was a piece of junk, this 1998 sci-fi "disaster movie" is one of the best of its kind -- and calling it a "disaster" movie is really doing it a disservice because of the strength of its writing and direction.

Well written (by Bruce Joel Rubin and Michael Tolkin), DEEP IMPACT is taut, exciting, well acted and just a superb science fiction thriller across the board. A Zanuck/Brown/Spielberg production, it boasts the same basic premise as Michael Bay's overblown "Armageddon," but in terms of character and drama is completely different -- offering a believable group of characters, an emotional conclusion, a marvelous James Horner score and some truly memorable sequences that have lost none of their punch. In fact, I liked this film even better on Blu-Ray than I did seeing it in theaters in 1998.

Highly recommended!

While it was certainly way better than Armageddon, I still wish it hadn't resorted to the cliche of genius teen and saving his girlfriend etc.

Tea Leoni in that film was a virtual dead-ringer for Laura Ingraham! And today, we all know that MSNBC would not be covering this disaster in the same way it does in the film! (I can just see Matthews and a former employee of theirs blaming the approaching meteor on GOP cutbacks!)

[AndyDursin]

Oh yeah, Elisabeth was an upgrade (not that Claudia Wells was anything to sneeze at)................please, someone, release ADVENTURES IN BABYSITTING on Blu-Ray!! STAT!!

Are they still doing that Babysitting remake with the Cosby kid? If so, they might do a Blu release of the original as a tie-in. And they could cast Elisabeth as the mother of the kids getting babysat...!

Yeah why not! Sounds as if the remake stalled out because Raven (or whatever her name is) apparently passed on it so it's kind of sitting there. The script was commissioned in 2008.

[Monterey Jack]

Yeah why not! Sounds as if the remake stalled out because Raven (or whatever her name is) apparently passed on it so it's kind of sitting there. The script was commissioned in 2008.

Plus, now the Thor references from the original would be a lot more popular.

[AndyDursin]

Tea Leoni in that film was a virtual dead-ringer for Laura Ingraham! And today, we all know that MSNBC would not be covering this disaster in the same way it does in the film! (I can just see Matthews and a former employee of theirs blaming the approaching meteor on GOP cutbacks!)

I noticed that too when I was watching it! To be honest I think I was more of an MSNBC viewer back then, mainly because they actually, well, covered NEWS and not opinion so much. Matthews wasn't nearly as awful as he is now either.

Apparently that character was supposed to be a CNN anchorwoman but CNN didn't want to be involved at the time...go figure (kind of makes sense given where their ratings have fallen over the last ten years too!).

[Eric Paddon]

MSNBC also used to have a wonderful show back then "Time And Again" that would revisit events in history using old NBC news coverage from the archives. I have over a hundred plus of these programs because it was my chance to raid the archives and get some historic material. That show alas disappeared around 2002 or so which is when I stopped watching that channel altogether.