Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep

Discuss past, present, and future releases. This is the place for news, reviews, and your 'best' lists.

Moderators: Buscemi, BarcaRulz, Geezer, W

Buscemi
CONGRATS! You may now chose your own rank!
Posts: 16164
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 11:14 am
Location: Baltimore State Hospital for the Criminally Insane

Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep

Post by Buscemi »

Free Fire 1/10

Plotless, brainless action film sold as a comedy (there are no laughs whatsoever here) that's really nothing more than an excuse to show one-dimensional characters shooting at each other. Ben Wheatley phones it in behind the chair and the cast seems to be in competition to give the worst performance (Sam Riley is the "winner"). But the biggest problem lays in the script. In addition to every other word seemingly being fuck, there is no character development at all (this is why you need exposition, otherwise you are left with stock characters and random action sequences), the film gives us no reason why this is set in the 1970's or Boston (it could have been modern-day London or Dublin and it would have been the same film), and worst of all, the film has no point at all. It's simply people getting shot and/or killed in horrible ways (it's funny how we criticized the Saw movies for excessive violence but give things like this a free pass).

I don't know why anyone at A24 thought this was worth going wide. It's nothing more that a cheap straight-to-DVD quality B-movie (with an Oscar winner) that thinks it's clever.
Everything on this post is strictly the opinion and only the opinion of Buscemi.

Spotify: http://open.spotify.com/user/1244530511 ... 9GBj16VEmr

User avatar
Ron Burgundy
Red Redding
Posts: 2466
Joined: November 23rd, 2009, 7:27 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep

Post by Ron Burgundy »

1/10....ouch

Even makes me think six's 6/10 rating was bloated
“One time I wrestled a giraffe to the ground with my bare hands.” — Dale

User avatar
Geezer
Axel Foley
Posts: 4967
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 11:22 am

Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep

Post by Geezer »

A 6/10 from Six is like a 12 from anyone else
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man. - The Dude

User avatar
undeadmonkey
Leon
Posts: 4413
Joined: October 22nd, 2009, 1:39 pm

Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep

Post by undeadmonkey »

well it would be unlike six to not rate something a 6.

User avatar
numbersix
Darth Vader
Posts: 11545
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 2:34 pm

Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep

Post by numbersix »

It's the only number I know!

User avatar
JohnErle
Snake Plissken
Posts: 2905
Joined: October 22nd, 2009, 4:01 am
Contact:

Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep

Post by JohnErle »

I think Six just accidentally revealed his PIN # online. Costa Rica, here I come! :twisted:

Buscemi
CONGRATS! You may now chose your own rank!
Posts: 16164
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 11:14 am
Location: Baltimore State Hospital for the Criminally Insane

Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep

Post by Buscemi »

I thought it was President Skroob's luggage combination.
Everything on this post is strictly the opinion and only the opinion of Buscemi.

Spotify: http://open.spotify.com/user/1244530511 ... 9GBj16VEmr

User avatar
numbersix
Darth Vader
Posts: 11545
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 2:34 pm

Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep

Post by numbersix »

Pretty sure $66 will get you as far as the county limits.

Buscemi
CONGRATS! You may now chose your own rank!
Posts: 16164
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 11:14 am
Location: Baltimore State Hospital for the Criminally Insane

Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep

Post by Buscemi »

What about a ferry to Craggy Island?

Anyway...

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword 7/10

It's at least better than Antoine Fuqua's "realistic" take from 2004. Serving mainly as an origin story for the planned franchise (which I expect to become an HBO series rather than five sequels, imagine King Arthur becoming Westworld meets Rome), it's a admirable enough adventure film with enough fantastical elements to satisfy the viewer. Charlie Hunnam's not the first actor I'd think of as Arthur but he's decent. Jude Law, Djimon Hounsou, and Aiden Gillen give the best performances. Daniel Pemberton's score and the production design are also major highlights.

But I can see why critics hate the film and why audiences have liked it so much more (the advance screening I went to had some positive reactions). It's very much a Guy Ritchie film, with lots of flashbacks and flash-forwards (things can get confusing at times but then I remembered Sherlock Holmes was like this) and tough, anachronistic dialogue that would more at home in a Sherlock Holmes films (or even one of Ritchie's earlier films). Also, Lancelot (who appeared in an earlier draft, when it was called Arthur and Lancelot), Merlin, and Maid Marian don't appear but I imagine they're being saved for the sequel (much like how Moriarty and Mycroft were saved for Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows).

In the end, it's an interesting film. Not a great film but decent enough. It should do okay business to get at least one sequel produced.

Meanwhile, my mother went to an advance screening of Snatched. She said it was okay.
Everything on this post is strictly the opinion and only the opinion of Buscemi.

Spotify: http://open.spotify.com/user/1244530511 ... 9GBj16VEmr

User avatar
Ron Burgundy
Red Redding
Posts: 2466
Joined: November 23rd, 2009, 7:27 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep

Post by Ron Burgundy »

Saw John Wick 2 in cinemas the other day. Both me and my younger brother gave it 6/10 (compared to 8/10 in the first one)

Just didn't quite cut it, and I saw it in an advanced screening too. A little letdown. Let's hope Guardians 2 will meet expectations
“One time I wrestled a giraffe to the ground with my bare hands.” — Dale

Buscemi
CONGRATS! You may now chose your own rank!
Posts: 16164
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 11:14 am
Location: Baltimore State Hospital for the Criminally Insane

Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep

Post by Buscemi »

The Lost City of Z 9/10

Part costume drama, part expedition adventure, all engrossing fever dream vision. Perhaps the best film James Gray has ever done, this fact-based drama could best described as Fitzcarraldo with elements of Apocalypse Now and Mountains of the Moon thrown in for good measure. Charlie Hunnam does a great job as Percy Fawcett, an explorer whose initial exploration of Amazonia leads him to a near-obsessive journey to discover the lost city in the title, despite many obstacles. The rest of the cast is just as strong (especially a near-unrecognizable Robert Pattinson under a large beard) but it's Hunnam's performance that carries the film. Also standing out is Darius Khondji's cinematography, which gives the film a feel that can be seen as dreamlike in many places while also feeling like a nightmare unfolding before your eyes, and Christopher Spelman's score, which should satisfy those who complain that scores sound too modern nowadays.

This is a odyssey that keeps you engaged and wondering what will happen next in the journey. It also might be the best film Amazon has put out to date.
Everything on this post is strictly the opinion and only the opinion of Buscemi.

Spotify: http://open.spotify.com/user/1244530511 ... 9GBj16VEmr

Buscemi
CONGRATS! You may now chose your own rank!
Posts: 16164
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 11:14 am
Location: Baltimore State Hospital for the Criminally Insane

Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep

Post by Buscemi »

Alien: Covenant 2/10

The first movie that I saw with my $100 gift card and I'm glad that I didn't pay $11 and change of my own money to see it. The latest attempt to bring back the Alien franchise to the level of the first two films is nothing more than a tired retread of the original film with elements of the original Prometheus 2 concept thrown in for good measure. It took four writers (plus a few uncredited script doctors) to create a script that gives us no memorable characters (as well too many characters), tedious overexplanation of things that we didn't need to know about (when you don't have long scenes of Fassbender talking to himself), the reveal that Elizabeth Shaw died off-screen all because they couldn't be bothered to bring back Noomi Rapace but somehow felt James Franco needed to show up for two minutes, and an ending that somehow lasts 20 minutes longer than it needed to. Ridley Scott, who should have retired a long time ago, runs on fumes by reliving past glories and somehow making the deaths more graphic than in Prometheus (watching this makes you realize what Quentin Tarantino was talking about when he said that he wanted to retire before he totally lost his ability to make good movies). The end result just makes you wish Fox would leave Alien alone and focus on making new franchises or bring back long-dormant ones.

But at least it's not as bad as Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem.
Everything on this post is strictly the opinion and only the opinion of Buscemi.

Spotify: http://open.spotify.com/user/1244530511 ... 9GBj16VEmr

User avatar
numbersix
Darth Vader
Posts: 11545
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 2:34 pm

Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep

Post by numbersix »

Wow, been ages since I posted some reviews. Here's a big one...

The Transfiguration: 5/10
Disappointing take on the vampire myth, as a teenage African American living in working class flats preys on people before forming a bond with a self-harming but pretty young girl. The pace is languid and there are no great visuals or style to compensate. An interesting approach that fails in its scene-by-scene storytelling

Colossal: 6/10
So close to being a good film. Anne Hathaway is incredibly charming in this story of a women who is failing at life, only to return home to realise she is somehow responsible for a giant monster that randomly appears to terrorise Seoul. Like the director's previous movie Timecrimes, this is a great idea that doesn't quite live up to expectations, mostly because of a bloated second act and a conclusion that seems to indicate that the failings of the main character are entirely due to other people and not herself, and thus comes across as shallow feminism rather than complex drama.

Lady Macbeth: 7/10
Superb low-budget indie film. It takes the scheming character from the Shakespeare play and puts her into a different setting, where she is essentially a young woman forced into a marriage with a loveless but wealthy man. Left alone, she falls for a labourer and plots to break free from her figurative shackles. You feel for her despite her becoming increasingly violent until things go too far. It's well acted and incredibly well paced, and is definitely the breakout film of 2017.

Mindhorn: 5/10
British comedy about an actor who could never regain the fame he had as an 80s sci-fi detective. A murder on a British island leads to the actor having to play his role so he can catch the person behind it. Not enough laughs, and a confusion about whether the film wants us to mock self-delusion or feel for the person's naivety.

Alien Covenant: 4/10
While not as ridiculous as Prometheus, it's less ambitious and thus comes across as a dull retread of all the elements wev'e seen in previous Alien flicks. Only they are done better. Worse, there are still moments in which characters make no sense, such as wandering into a creepy basement led by a character everyone knows is untrustworthy, after already being attacked by a beastie. Fassbender does his best, but it's all too disposable.

The Void: 6/10
A much better horror, made on a 100 times less budget. This Canadian film is in debt to 70s and 80s horrors from the likes of John Carpenter, and despite the flaws in pacing, characters, and genuine surprises, it still manages to be a fun and involving creature feature.

Tehran Taboo: 6/10
Rotoscoped drama about the hypocrasy in Iran when it comes to sexual politics, told mostly from three women: a prostitute trying to raise her mute son, a married woman who is pregnant but wants to work, and a woman who loses her virginity and needs an operation to sew it back again. In all instances their fates are determined by uncaring men. It's approach is interesting, although the storytelling a little didactic.

The Killing of a Sacred Deer: 6/10
A disappointment, considering how high I rate both The Lobster and Dogtooth. Yorgos Lanthimos's film is about a father who befriend a teenage boy, lets him into his home, only for the boy to reveal that a sort of spell has been cast which will kill off his loved ones unless he kills someone first. It's sort of an ancient Greek Myth told in a deadpan and clinical world. The premise and themes are strong, but the film is too slow and ends up with nowhere to go.

Buscemi
CONGRATS! You may now chose your own rank!
Posts: 16164
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 11:14 am
Location: Baltimore State Hospital for the Criminally Insane

Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep

Post by Buscemi »

I just watched Colossal online (missed it in the theatre as the day I was going to see it, I had terrible back pain and thought I was going to throw up from the pain) and I think this will teach me to avoid Nacho Vigalondo films from now on. The guy cannot direct actors to save his life. Also, Hathaway is all wrong for the lead and Sudeikis is typical annoying Sudeikis. I'd rather watch The Host (a good Korean monster movie that isn't trying to be ultra-clever) again.

Amazingly, it's not the worst Jason Sudeikis film to come out this year.
Everything on this post is strictly the opinion and only the opinion of Buscemi.

Spotify: http://open.spotify.com/user/1244530511 ... 9GBj16VEmr

User avatar
numbersix
Darth Vader
Posts: 11545
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 2:34 pm

Re: Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep

Post by numbersix »

War Machine: 4/10
Ugh, Netflix are going to have to do a LOT better with their Originals than this big-budget disaster of a film. David Michod seems lost and confused about what kind of a film to make - is this a wry satire, a war drama, or an all-out farce. And fails at all, particularly the comedy which is used as ancillary jokes (a sneezing Ben Kingsley) to try and lift up the dull scenes. Brad Pitt is a cartoon, more like George Clooney's character in Oh Brother Where Art Thou, but without the film's comic mania. A poor script and a director not cut out for this kinda movie all joins together to make a bad, bad film. Here's hoping Okja can break the spell of Netflix's crappy original content (although I did enjoy I Don't Fell at Home on the World Anymore)

Post Reply