Them?... THERE'S MORE!

Yes, quite a few iirc. :lol

*Edit: 4 counting the remake.

... I'll be right back.

I'm not a fan of horror movies, but I'm making an exception because of Halloween. I went with Cabin in the Woods and so far it's pretty awesome.

So since I saw Thor 2 at a staff screening that happened even before the advanced previews, I wasn't allowed to talk about it. Now the previews are behind us, I figured I could speak out.

Overall, the movie was okay. The thing about the first movie was Branagh brilliantly brought the Kirby Thor comics to life, managing to convincingly include every crazy aspect of those stories and art styles into one gorgeous whole...until the second half of the movie took place on Earth, where it appeared to have been filmed entirely on studio backlots and Branagh proved he had no idea how to stage a convincing action sequence to save his life.

Taylor on the other hand, was almost the complete opposite. Although Dark World is a gorgeous movie, with some incredibly impressive CGI effects, it has pretty much no visual identity of its own. Nearly every stand out visual is something Branagh had already created in the first movie.

However the big difference here is Taylor seems no stranger to action or the blockbuster and although he doesn't seem quite as tight on the Thor mythology as Branagh did, this feels much more like a superhero movie than the original Thor did.

Large quantities of Dark World take place on Earth, without ever feeling smaller for it. Dark World is a bigger, more epic, action packed....more blockbuster feeling version of the original movie. And honestly when it comes to superhero films, I think the entertainment is more important than the art.

Had to sit through most of Ted with some relatives.

Not a fan of Seth MacFarlane but there were a couple laughs here. Also probably the best cameo I've seen in anything since X-Men: First Class.

I don't remember the cameo, what was it about?

I was bored and waiting for the Arceus Pokemon movie to download, so I decided to re-watch TF Prime: Predacons Rising.

I just remembered that there was never any resolution for Airachnid from the series, and Shockwave just...Disappeared. That bugged me the first time I saw it, still bugs me now. I only remembered Airachnid because I was browsing the TF wiki :lol

Arceus movie? Oh dear... :lol

I remember in the dub he was a whiny bitch. I hope that's not the case for the subbed version :lol

Ah you're watching the subbed version. That might be better, I've only watched the English one.

And dear me, how Arceus has fallen. :D I like it though, so people can slow down with the god-Arceus memes.

Watched "The Shining" tonight.
T'was nice. I enjoyed it.

So I watched Ender's Game. Ender's Game could have been a good movie but thanks to the pacing, it ends up being a lot of pretty visuals wrapped in a muddled bunch of plot twists. And sadly since a lot of point of Ender's Game is to be a subversion of the genre, and be built more on the tactics and reasoning behind the violence more than the violence itself, the visuals are usually pretty for pretties sake, rather than truly providing purpose.

The focus of the movie is in all the wrong places and some of the most crucial moments are brushed over or forgotten about leaving you momentarily dazed and unsure of what is happening. That wouldv'e been great if intentional, but the film isn't that smart. I guess you can't criticise the film for being 'unoriginal' given how old the book this is based on is, but doesn't make the more stupid sci-fi trappings feel any less well...stupid. Which is lucky for us I suppose, as it's impossible to be confused for long.

So I've been trying to get back into movies again, so I decided to check out the Man of Tai Chi. I'll be honest, I've...never heard this, and as a lover of martial arts movies and this being Reeves (an actor I greatly admire) directorial debut, I'm surprised it was able to sneak up on me in the way it has.

Just because a film is deliberately slow, doesn't somehow make it any more interesting because of it. When The Man of Tai Chi comes together, when the camera zooms out and we see the big picture, it's an impressively jaw dropping moment. But my God is it a slog to get there.

Tiger's opponents are near consistently entertaining, bringing a wide range of styles into the fights, all of which are very entertaining to watch. Tiger himself sadly, isn't nearly as interesting. The whole point is Tiger fights with a style built on control, not intended for offence, and as the film progresses he loses the control his style is built on and descends into greater and greater brutality. This is fine from a storytelling point of view, but visually, you have to wait until nearly the hour mark hits before Tiger gives us a truly impressive fight.

Probably the biggest problem with the action though is a lack of consistency, the film bobs and weaves with no sense of reason or purpose between the fantastical and the real, as characters defy physics and use superpowers before switching back to statically, slowly fighting like we're watching a live martial arts match before going back into crazy wirefu. This blend just doesn't work, it makes the fantastical elements feel more ridiculous while the more realistic elements more boring.

However, the greatest problem with this film is its lack of originality. The core, bigger picture story, of the loss of innocence is solid and beautifully crafted flipping some of the most tired aspects of the genre on its head. But it seems unnecessary to bog down the film with so many clichés. These were obvious, intentional red herrings, but much like with the pacing, just because it's intentional doesn't make it any more interesting for it.

Even Reeves plays it safe with himself, giving his character zero emotions to try and act around. Hell at some points he even wears an extra, expressionless mask, that I can't work out if it is meant to be tongue in cheek humour or not.

James Wan is a great director. His work on the Saw Franchise, Dead Silence, Death Sentence, Insidious, all great movies, so when the Conjuring was released, I was hella excited to go see it. Sadly, as often with these things, life gets in the way...until now.

What makes The Conjuring so enjoyable is its approach to the material. Firstly, it's the time period, its the 70s so our ghost hunters are limited to the tech and the resources of the time, this is basically window dressing but it helps the ghost hunting feel fresh even though it isn't doing anything new.

Although most importantly is its approach to the supernatural. Many similar films will waste a long chunk of their movie being sceptical of their own story, questioning the reality of the world in which their film inhabits. The Conjuring does no such thing, within the opening moments of the movie it's established that ghosts, demons and the whole shebang are the real thing with no hint of irony and then moves on. The film never questions itself, and never gives the audience enough time to question it either.

It actually has a lot of fun with this approach as well, like when Ed claims he 'doesn't believe in vampires' while trying to piss demons off with religious paraphernalia. or the way Lorraine jokes about the sceptics before the Warren's go to a house to prove it isn't haunted at all, it's just the wind and floorboards.

The strong writing also continues into the continuity, the filmmakers have a firm grasp on their internal logic and cause and effect, meaning no matter how small, if something feels out of place, it's only a matter of time before the purpose is explained. It's strange for a film like this to feel thought out.

Sadly though, that still doesn't excuse just how unoriginal this films plot is. When it's not enjoying itself talking about exorcisms in the same way someone would tell you to use febreeze to get the smells out of your fabrics, it just sort of feels like it's going through the motions.

This feels especially true of the scares which are cheap and tired, featuring lots of 'oh it's gone silent all of a sudden, better take my headphones off before the noise starts blaring' moments that made films like Sinister such a chore to watch.

So even with the fun approach to the cliché, I still don't see why you'd watch this instead of something like Poltergeist or The Shining if you've somehow not seen them already.

No movie year is complete without checking out at least one Asylum film, so what better than Battledogs? A film that takes your typical zombie movie and replaces the word 'zombie' with 'werewolf'.

It's a rocking premise, but with none of the Asylum's usual self aware humour, and their much more typical measly budgets, they shot way past their reach and didn't do such an awesome premise any justice. I mean seriously, these werewolves can be defeated by single gunshots and kindness. I think the bigger problem is this, the story is crap. It moves through such an utterly clichéd trajectory, with every storybeat a by the numbers affair for this kind of film.

About the only thing that sets it apart is the whole film is so rushed, it feels like whole chunks of the movie are missing as it leaps from one plot point to another, barely giving a moments context to what is transpiring. Which is a problem when your main villain is devoid of any sense of logic and reasoning, and yet still has a cult of devoted followers willing to die for him. Or that our central 'heroes' have a romance, despite it never being established at all, but the film wants us to care anyway.

And before someone says 'what do you expect', I think the Asylum have made some genuinely great movies, if you don't believe me check out flicks like Abraham Lincoln vs. Zombies or their take on Sherlock Holmes. This just wasn't one of those great ones, not by a long shot.

watched the Watchmen movie uncut.

I don't like Zach Snyder all that much, "Man of Steel" was pretty weak overall and "Sucker Punch" was really kinda terrible but this is easily his best work. I think its the best adaptation that could possibly be made from the iconic graphic novel.

Great effects and mostly good cast with a very faithful screenplay.

So since Asylum failed to satisfy my Z Grade cinema itch, I decided to take a look at what SyFy had to offer this year, and then I found it...GHOST SHARK.

The movie takes place in the fictitious Smallport, your typical small town with big secrets with a less typical history of ghosts and magic. How does our shark fit into all this? Well first we have to answer the mystery of the cave - and the possible murder of a woman within it. A cave which connects to the mysterious disappearance of the entire population of Smallport just a few hundred years ago, a cave which can give back life to those who have had theirs taken....

The plot of the movie is actually surprisingly a lot better than the title perhaps deserves, coming across as refreshingly original and very engaging. Sadly, the mystery doesn't really yield any answers...like at all and in the end almost feels unnecessarily convoluted. I guess it's nice that they allowed the Ghost Shark to exist beyond the reasons of 'because it's cool', but if you're expecting everything to fit together, or to learn what truly happened in the past to the town or why the cave has the powers it does...yeah, you're not going to get those answers.

When the shark is resurrected after being murdered by a couple of rednecks, it gains the power to no longer be bound by the oceans, and is instead able to freely move around any body of water. I know that doesn't sound that impressive on paper, but the writers have a lot of fun with a simple premise, creating natural reasons for our characters to always be near water, so we're constantly uneasy, and no one ever seems to be safe. A world where every rain drop, every toilet, every bucket, every bath, every sprinkler system, every burst pipe and all the rest is a window for you to be eaten by a killer shark. And thanks to some surprisingly decent special effects the deaths scenes really are very awesome.

What this does mean though, is in many ways the film actually becomes more generic. I mean there is nothing really generic about the death sequences, they are very imaginative indeed, but it's much less of a creature feature and more a series of gory death sequences, where the killer could be around any corner. So in many senses it plays out more like a slasher, than say...Jaws. I love sharks and slashers, so I honestly don't mind, but I could also appreciate if you perhaps wanted more from a movie with a title such as this.

Probably the only problem with this premise is of course is the human body is 50 - 60% water, so how 'staying dry' is an active way to stop the Ghost Shark is anyone's guess. But then logic really has no place in a film called Ghost Shark, does it?

It's just a shame Furst doesn't direct his action as well as his murders. Minus Lucky Johnson who is an atrocious actor, the acting here is a cut above the usual fair here, this is especially true of Richard Moll (famous for voice Two-Face in Batman The Animated Series) who puts in a fantastic performance as Finch.

Sadly here, as said, the problem is more down to Furst, as weaker members of the cast who need a director to support their performances, clearly lack that support from Furst, coming across as emotionless at points where they need the most emotion of all.

Obviously there is no uniformed reaction to death but people literally stare blankly, almost bored looking, as their loved ones/friends are torn apart by a ghost shark, and their lack of reactions take some of the punch out of the scenes. Plus, the fact that there are moments where people react naturally to what is happening, only make the lack of reactions in other moments that much more apparent.

I saw Thor: The Dark World last night. I won't go into a lengthy dialogue about it but it was sufficed to say it was thoroughly enjoyable, especially when they just let Hiddleston ham up the humor for a bit.

A few small spoilery bits. Don't read if you haven't seen it, I don't want to get blamed for ruining your fun.

Sadly, Jane Foster does not die, as I had hoped.

The Guardians of the Galaxy scene in the credits is awful. Benicio Del Toro chews the scenery something awful and reminds me a bit of Will Ferrell as Mugato in Zoolander. Granted it was a small scene, but if the rest of the movie is as bad, Guardians could blunt the MCU momentum.

Not really spoilers, but some people like to remain totally unsullied: A little more of both Sif and Darcy than the first one, though never enough for me. :D

Watched Gravity today.

It's difficult to separate out the merits of the narrative film Gravity and the experience of watching Gravity. Because know this, seeing this on the biggest screen you can find and in 3D, is a treat. It is so well realised, and CGI has come such a long way, it's very easy to forget you're in a movie theatre and be utterly convinced you're right there in the middle of the chaos, it's an incredible experience.

Death is a constant in the film. Literally in the surprisingly dark and brutal results of an initial debris storm, but then continuously through the eyes of Ryan Stone as we literally wear her shoes through first person shots, as she avoids death at every single turn. When we aren't facing the terror head on through her HUD and helmet, the camera sweeps outwards to capture either the carnage or the utter nothingness that surrounds her, each are as terrifying as the other in their own way. This kind of intensity, and surprising bleakness, make this feel as much a horror as it does a space adventure.

But the film itself...eh, there isn't really a lot to it. Everything about the film serves the visuals, it's basically a themepark ride. It may not play out in real time, but minus a single dream sequence, the film constantly powers forwards and never takes a breath. This makes the film all that more thrilling, sure, but that also means Bullock has so much more of the movie to carry alone with dialogue being the only brush to paint anything in this world that isn't currently exploding. And when an actress with a face so plastic it barely emotes, is your human core, you have problems.

Watched Thor. Surprisingly enjoyable movie. My favourite bit is how it is set mostly outside Earth, really gives a lot of visuals to work with.

Started rewatching Skyfall, and dang, this is an excellent movie!

I am a James Bond fan, I enjoy all of the movies, there isn't one I hate (though there are lots of things I hate IN some of them, there's not one that I hate everything), I like all the Bonds, but Skyfall is a step above the rest.

Went to see Thor: The Dark World and really enjoyed it despite not being the biggest Thor fan. There's nothing wrong with the two character, I've just never been a big fantasy fan and that franchise in particular draws heavily on fantasy.

Still, I thought the movie was great...especially after being so disappointed with Iron Man 3. Despite again not being the biggest Loki fan he absolutely stole the show and I'm so glad they did decide to bring him back. Lovely to see Eccleston again too, he seems to always do a great job if villain roles.

Also - best cameo ever.

Skyfall is my fourth or fifth favorite Bond movie.

Pirates of the Caribbean 4: On Stranger Tides.

in a word- AWFUL.

Plot manages to be both confusing AND boring. Lame action, meaningless characters and some really ugly, murky imagework. Jack Sparrow cannot carry the film on his own.

and it pains me to know there's at least two more on the way.

THor 2 - This movie was pretty good. It is no where near as good as the first one, as it feels like a sequel, but it is by far the best Marvel sequel since X-Men 2. It puts to shame the god awful Iron Man sequels and shows that sometimes Marvel can do a follow up right. Unfortunately, the movie does sacrifice character development for countless action, which is cool, but the movie needed to be at least 20 minutes longer so there could actually be some breathing room in between the action. Loki is by far the star of the movie as every scene with him is nothing short of brilliant. He is pretty much The Dark Knight's version of the Joker in this movie. I did like the Cybermen... I mean Dark Elves a lot better than the Frost Giants. Lastly, there are scenes during the credits and after, so make sure you stay throughout the entire thing to get both scenes. One leads into Guardians of the Galaxy while the other is pretty much the end of Thor 2. Overall, I give this movie a 7 or 8/10, haven't decided yet. Need a few days to think about it.

I'm curious, which films do you rank higher than Skyfall?

Although, after what you just said about Thor 2, I feel that perhaps we don't have similar taste in films. I didn't think Thor (the first) was all that special, and most people I'm hearing from are saying Thor 2 is far better than the first.

Also, I liked all of the Iron Man sequels, in fact, I enjoyed Iron Man 3 nearly as much as Iron Man 1, and consider it one of the three best Marvel films (IM1, IM3 and Avengers).

Back to Bond, if forced to come up with my top 5 films, they would be along the lines of Skyfall, Casino Royale, and then it gets hazy and I have trouble choosing the same films I choose the last time I thought about it. From Russia with Love, Thunderball, The Spy Who Loved Me, License To Kill, Tomorrow Never Dies are the usual contenders. I really enjoyed Quantum of Solace a lot (except for that godawful opening car chase and foot chase - once they fired the ridillin addict camerman and editor the film got very good, I felt) and even Die Another Day I liked lots as well, except for any scene with Jinx. Wow, Haley Berry was absolutely abysmal in that film, and I often felt like she was dragging others down with her.

1. Casino Royale
1. From Russia with Love (tied)
3. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
4. Skyfall
4. Thunderball (tied)

I still think the first Thor is the best Marvel movie, but I'm also big into mythology. Yes, it is based off a comic book, but it is still a movie based in Norse mythology.

I give the first movie a 9/10, the second a 5, and the third a 6. The third movie had a great build up and then it just fell apart into predictability and boredom for its final third.

I approve of your James Bond list. :D

The thing about the original Thor is I think it's best watched on the small screen. That wasn't a typo. Branagh brings the Kirby comics to life creating an incredible visual style. However, even though only two years have passed since the release of that movie, you can still see just how far the CGI has come. For a superhero film, Thor feels cheap, juggling between what looks like sound stages and green screens. And bless him, Branagh can't stage a superhero fight to save his life.

And although Thor 2 isn't "better" in the most literal sense, CGI is finally almost "there" and new director Taylor knows how to stage an epic blockbuster and the action that comes with it. So although it may actually be a weaker, blander movie, it's actually much more fun to watch on a big screen.

Yes, but Branagh was so much better at character development, which is why the first one is so much better. Who cares if the CGI is not perfect, a movie should not be good just because it looks pretty.

Ender's Game.

I liked this movie but again, I'm the King of Mediocrity so of course I'm gonna like mediocre stuff. I felt the ending was handled way better in the movie then in the book. The last 4th of the book was the last half of the movie and had much better relative pacing.

Thor
I rented this movie from redbox the day before I went to go see the sequel. I liked the movie. Granted, it did not have an amazing plot and the ice giants were thrown aside but it was good. Thor and Natalie Portman's relationship was good along with the origin of Loki's quest of self-identity and thirst for power. This movie has only few bad things about it but doesn't have more then a few amazing qualities either.

The best part of the movie was finding out the Idris Elba was the teleporter guard. For being in a boring job, he sure had a damn good role.

Thor: Dark World

This blows the original out of the water. Interesting setup, great villain, some humor here and there, stronger character relationships and better development and cool fight scenes. Thor and Loki's struggle was an interesting concept the only barely touched on at the end but I hope it goes somewhere.

I also liked the use of CGI in this movie better due to having more elements that deemed it necessary. Plus, the 3D is good and it doesn't hurt your eyes although it didn't make the CGI look amazing like Pacific Rim did.

My only major problem that it shared by both Thor movies is that they are filled to the brim with annoying movie cliches. The last minute save, the twist that requires you to forget one aspect of a character, the comeback everyone saw coming, e.t.c.

Rewatched 3 Idiots with a few friends of mine. It still holds up, despite all of the points that we could make fun of.

True point. But I do think that the entertainment factor, visuals and action ARE the most important thing in a superhero blockbuster. I'm not saying superhero movies shouldn't or can't have great characters, but I wouldn't go to a summer popcorn flick (or winter popcorn flick in this case) in search of a character drama. Maybe that is wrong, but that is also how it is.

I think The Dark Knight proved you can do a super hero movie and have character drama at the same time.

I don't get the whole, "It's a popcorn flick, it doesn't need that," argument. Yes it does. Why watch a movie that is all Bayplosions when I can watch something that has that AND characters?

Batman is a very different kind of superhero to Thor though, isn't he?

And largely because it doesn't. Superhero films can get away with flinging people through walls for an hour and a half in a way say a...romcom, couldn't. It's just how genres work. Some need different parts to others, that isn't to say other parts wont fit, but they still aren't integral to the film working.

So I decided to give The Asylum another go by checking out American/Barrio Brawler - which comes up as 'Pitfighter' during the credits and the DVD references the film as 'Fight Club 2'. It doesn't even have a wiki page...

This is about Carlos, a guy who is struggling to make ends meet as he tries to run a dojo with no students and just generally try and hold his life together. In search of money he reunites with his deadbeat gambling addict brother, who ends up dragging him into the criminal underworld and the world of illegal fighting. The two brothers are extremely competent fighters, but it doesn't take long for them to realise that this won't be easy money.

Most surprising of all? It's actually pretty great. The acting is good (for the most part), the dialogue is well written, the comedy is intentional and the fight scenes are awesome. Really fun watch.

Probably top 3 for me. Goldfinger is still tops.

Just got back from seeing Thor 2.

It's not without it's problems, but I liked it better overall than the first film. Everything was just bigger and better.

The 'moral sacrifice' bus was hilarious. I just can't work out if it's a bad attempt at subliminal messaging or self referential humour. Either way I chuckled =p

Phase 2 has definitely started off well, and Cap looks to be sticking to the trend. I just hope they don't drop the ball with Guardians.