[Sentai]

I have a couple on the DVR I need to watch. City of Bones: Mortal Instruments, Frozen, Thor: The Dark World, and there's another I'm forgetting.

[2ndSndWve]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locke

In some ways maybe even because of it. The biggest props though, go to Kevin and Dug. One of which doesn't get a line of dialogue and the other where the whole joke is they do.

Who's Kevin? It's been ages since I've seen Up, I don't remember a character named Kevin with no lines.

[ZeoRangerV]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2ndSndWve

Who's Kevin? It's been ages since I've seen Up, I don't remember a character named Kevin with no lines.

The bird.

[2ndSndWve]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZeoRangerV

The bird.

Oh right, I forgot about the bird.

[Locke]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2ndSndWve

Oh right, I forgot about the bird.

I don't normally like physical comedy but Kevin is just so beautifully animated I just love it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sentai

I have a couple on the DVR I need to watch. City of Bones: Mortal Instruments, Frozen, Thor: The Dark World, and there's another I'm forgetting.

All fun movies, although Frozen is the only one that is legitimately great. In my opinion, yo.

[Dr Kain]

I got dragged to Rifftrax Live Sharknado. No, the Rifftrax was fantastic, but it was Sharknado. I give the movie a 1/10.

[Dr Kain]

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes - The Planet of the Apes franchise is one that is a mixed bag. There are some incredible movies in the series, but there are also a few major stinkers in the mixed. Nevertheless, Rise was a really movie in the series, the best since the original, and this one is even better than Rise. The movie has a great plot and there is a lot of character development for the apes, especially Ceasar. Gary Oldman was good in it, but he was pretty much just reprising his role as Commissioner Gordon instead of doing anything new. The action scenes are great but there is a moment where the CGI takes a dip in quality as you can clearly tell the fire behind them was green screened. Aside from that, this movie is one of those times when CGI is used intelligently instead of being there just for the sake of being there. There is nothing after the credits, so no need to stay. Overall, I give it an 8/10.

[ZeoRangerV]

I've never been a hater of Bay's Transformer movies, quite the opposite to begin with in fact. I love the first movie, really enjoy Revenge of the Fallen despite its flaws and outright hate Dark of the Moon. So naturally, the decline gave me pretty low expectations for Age of Extinction.

The film surprised me somewhat, it's the best of the Transformers sequels in some respects but by far the worst in others.

The basic plot of the film is pretty solid, but quickly gets muddled with things that either didn't need to be there or just plain don't make sense. Transformers weren't born they were created! Unneccessary Dinobots! Prime's a knight all of a sudden!. With the exception of Stanley Tucci all the human characters were equally as awful as the ones in the first first trilogy.

Worst of all is the Autobots though. I get this is a film about them being hunted. I get that this is a film about Optimus Prime questioning his morals. But the Autobots in this film do not feel like heroes. For a film that doesn't really have any proper Decepticons and a minimal amount of villains, these bots are really obsessed with killing. The bloodthirsty Optimus thing is always something I've found more humorous than anything, but in this film its taken to the extreme and its really unsettling. His first true lines are literally "I'll kill you", and basically tells the Dinobots that can either help him or die when they haven't been involved in any of this.

The good though? Lockdown is brilliant, Galvatron is awesome and the voice casting was spot on (especially John Goodman). Props for making the Autobots feel like actual characters this time around too, even if I wasn't a fan of them.

[guncannon109]

My sister and I watched the Lorax movie... it's just as bad as everyone says.

[Locke]

Rewatched Trolljegeren on Bluray.

This is such a beautiful film, which makes no sense within its context at all. Although it was intended as a documentary within the narrative of the footage, within the wider narrative we're watching this as a rough cut built by people investigating the footages legitimacy. So the very beautiful, artistic, look of the film is truly baffling from a storytelling perspective.

I mean it's still the best looking film in the found footage genre - how many people watched this and immediately wanted to visit Norway? It looks very cold, and wet, but also otherworldly gorgeous too - but if they wanted to just go out and do beautiful shots of the Norway scenery, why bother with the framework of found footage which forces you to lower the quality of the presentation?

It isn't just the cinematography of the Norway landscape that is gorgeous either. Made for less than five million US dollars (estimated) it's as about as small as you can get budgetwise these days but the effects in this film are stunning and almost flawless. This, once again though, leaves me baffled. Found footage is a novelty to hide and distract from the fact that your ideas and ambitious far outlive your budget but Trolljegeren proves that is has the talent to great blockbuster set pieces on a small budget anyway and if it has nothing to hide, why the found footage novelty?

I mean seriously, speaking purely of this film as an action film or just a thrill ride, does it a lot of justice as it's really bloody fun. To have such convincing CGI and such imaginative set pieces is breathtaking at points, especially considering Hollywood itself is just getting to grips with CGI on budgets that dwarf this one. The movie could have saved its budget, played it like they played Jaws and say they did that on purpose creatively, but instead they just GO FOR IT and my God does it pay off.

It also really helps that for what plays itself mainly as a tongue in cheek comedy Øvredal really put a lot of thought into his narrative and mythos. You wouldn't often call a movie like this "clever" but Øvredal has some big ideas here, and he pulls off pretty much all of them. Taking his favourite parts of Norwegian Folklore, he's added a dose of reality and logic to it that is delivered in a passionate and naturalistic way. Honestly if nothing else, it's just nice to see a film embrace the roots of its culture, making the film accessible on the quality of the storytelling and not by dumbing down and Americanising.

A character like Hans is always going to be risky, because if you make the fantastic mundane you risk losing your audience but Hans is a risk that - unsurprisingly by this point - is something Øvredal pulls off splendidly. Hans casual approach to the extraordinary is honestly half the reason he's so wonderful. From him marching into battle in armour to face Trolls with a "God, I hate this crap." to him casually eating his breakfast, spouting off knowledge about trolls like it's every day trivia and doing his Troll Slaying paperwork for that nights kill Hans makes it feel so ordinary, which makes his character feel real and lived in.

This really helps the illusion of the movie too, because at points it's gloriously silly but having a character in the heart of all the silliness who feels real and fully fleshed gives our reality something to grip onto. Yes there is a middle aged man fighting a three headed CGI giant with a tanning lamp but in the moment I'm so convinced by it all because Hans himself feels so real, that it all seems the most sound thing on the planet.

There is a weird sense of mean spirit around André Øvredal when it comes to religion, which may echo Norway's sociopolitical landscape in general. Kalle is literally killed for his beliefs only to be replaced seconds later with a new character and barely a ripple of emotion or resonance.

This new character provides an interesting new question about trolls and religion but rather than exploring this late game narrative thread the new character - introduced in the closing moments of the film I must stress - seems to only exist to hold up Øvredal's religious pessimism. Malica's defining trait, much like Kalle's, is blind scepticism in an ironic clash with their own beliefs.

Honestly though I didn't care about any of the student characters which may be the greatest, and only true failing, of the film. I went to uni and I've met people like Thomas, I didn't like them then, either. And Johanna? She is so bland, she feels like part of the furniture in most of the sequences, at points I forget she exists all together. I understand that in found footage, we have different expectations from our protagonists than a usual narrative film, but again I ask, why do this?!?! Trolljegeren doesn't need to be found footage and would have been so much better if it wasn't. What a shame.