What movies have you seen lately? Now with reviews!Movies

[MeanElf]

Look Who's Back: (Er ist Wieder Da)

Appeared on Netflix this year, a film from the book of the same name, released in 2015. The premise is fairly simple - Hitler wakes to find himself on the site of his old bunker almost 70 years after the war, but everybody thinks he is just a comedian doing his act.

In the style of Borat the film splices in some pretty candid footage from the character Hitler as he tours Germany, asking questions of the people he meets. Like Borat too, there is some very poignant observation throughout the film.

Personally, I loved Hitler's comment about the remarkable beauty of modern TV technology; that can make a screen so thin and yet all we choose to fill it with is rubbish. There was also a beautiful Downfall parody - of course.

Comedy aside though, it faces those questions such as 'how far have we actually come since then?' I feel it's well worth the watch, especially now with that sort of mentality being so close to the surface in many countries.

 

[JKgo]

London Has Fallen aka Call Of Duty: London The Movie

...Whew boy, where should I start with this one.

Starring totally manly Gerard Butler as Secret Service agent Banning, in this sequel to the "surprising box-office hit of 2013" Olympus Has Fallen. Co-starring criminally underrated Aaron Eckhart and "I'm in every generic CGI-fest nowadays as long as paycheck's good" Morgan Freeman.

Honestly, I'm shocked this movie got greenlit in the first place: I wasn't aware the Olympus had made nearly hundred mil in US box office - which isn't too bad, but not that great either. As a matter of fact, I thought Roland Emmerich-directed White House Down which was released in the same year, was a better film overall that deserved to be more successful. But it is what it is, I guess.

General premise is fairly simple: British PM dies suddenly, and his funeral becomes a must-attend event for world leaders. And as predictably, generic and vaguely Arab terrorists start blowing people up. FOR REVENGE!!
And Butler's Banning must single-handedly thwart the said terrorists' plans all the while dodging thousands bullets, car accidents, explosions, knives to the face and terrible one-liners.

I won't lie, I was lol'ing pretty hard during its entire run time of 1 hour 37 minutes. It's so relentlessly mean spirited, cheesy and over-the-top you can't help but feel you're watching a session of COD MP match run by a bunch of 13 year olds high on Mountain Dew and potato crisps.
Hell, its climatic gunfights are staged in a narrow alleyway straight out of a generic shooter, replete with abandoned building full of baddies popping out of everywhere just to get shot in the face, and to top it off, film makers even included a brief FPS section in there.

This is a terrible movie. It feels like some sections of the film were thrown together at the last minute to shoe-horn the revenge angle for the baddies, and with many implausible plotholes laced with bad dialogues it's a small wonder how this got a worldwide theatrical release. It feels more like a straight-to-DVD action flick in its execution. Replace Butler with Steven Seagal and it'd make very little difference to the end product, quality-wise.

Since it pretty much tanked, there won't be another sequel to this. Mercy.

4/10, for making me laugh. Otherwise, ummmm, no.

 

[Brett]

I thought London has Fallen was a mindlessly fun action movie. I went in expecting to be mindlessly entertained and I was entertained.

 

[fortbo]

Saw Once yesterday in school. I'm usually not into these type of movies, but damn was this a good movie. Everything was so raw and real and just felt very authentic. It was very enjoyable for me.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

The Nice Guys

Shane Black, the man who practically invented the mis-matched buddy cop film with Lethal Weapon, returns to the genre with The Nice Guys. Russell Crowe and Ryan Gosling are a pair of losers who are forced together by circumstance to find a missing rebellious teenage girl in 1970s Hollywood. Along the way, they run into sex, corruption, violence and conspiracy; all the staples of the neo-noir genre.

What makes the film so effective is that while both their characters are completely out of their depth, they're not stupid (though they do have their moments). Nor does it feel like a retread of Lethal Weapon - at times it feels like a commentary on the police procedural genre, with Black only clueing the savvy audience members in. It's very well-paced; it runs for two hours, yet it feels like four hours, but not in a bad way - Black knows how to let a scene breathe and doesn't feel compelled to limit the dialogue to stuff that advances the plot.

 

[Lain]

Watched Now You See Me last night...

I'll give it a reasonably solid 6/10. It's a fun ride at times, but overly long and flashy CGI sequences detract from the magic rather than add to it. Plus, the ultimate conclusion leaves a bitter aftertaste... though perhaps the upcoming sequel can rectify that.

 

[05XR8]

X-Men: Apocalypse

I don't like that Isaac's guy as an actor. He's too short to play the role of a "giant" like Apocalypse. That's my only gripe.

I was entertained throughout. I entered the theatre at 10:40am(21 minutes of ads and previews). The film rolled at 11:01am and I left when the credits began at 1:42pm. Didn't even feel fatigued.

Visuals are what to be expected. The actors chosen, played their roles superbly(I still don't like that Isaacs guy).
Quicksilver. I'm still not convinced with his voice and look but, his speed is unfathomable. Amazing.
Storm. Brilliant to finally hear her with her native voice.
Angel. Glad he was in the movie.
Psylocke. She was convincing.
Cyclops. Once again, they choose an actor too short for the role. It's ironic, throughout the franchise, Wolverine was the tallest and all the other male heroes(bar Collosus) are shorter than him.
Nightcrawler. Superb casting.
Jean Grey. Perfect. Loved Famke but, this Jean can grow in this role.
Beast. Still seems weak minded no matter how brilliant he is.
Mystique. I still prefer her character in the first films.
Magneto and Charles are bookends for the "kids" to tell the tale.
Apocalypse. I still don't like that Isaacs guy.

I'm not going to compare this movie to current hero movies. I'll give it 8/10. Would be a 9 or 9.5 but, that Isaacs guy. I just don't like him.

 

[Lucas]

X-Men: Apocalypse

I may as well start out by giving some insight with my X-Men experience:

- I've watched every single X-Men released to date with the exception of one: X-Men First Class.
- My favorite X-Men film so far is, by far, Days of Future Past.
- I really, really, really like when a superhero film makes me feel like I'm in the movie, like I'm part of the world.

That said, here's my main issues with this film:

- The plot feels way too disjointed. It feels as if this movie would have benefited greatly from being two separate films. One that would set the stage with the main villians, and a second one to unleash the full events of the film. This is not to say Days of Future Past is perfect, but it certainly felt more connectedm, even if I believe the end was a bit rushed.
- The cast, I didn't enjoy. The biggest issue is the portrayal of Apocalyspe. The problem is two-fold: first, we have Oscar Isaac who can be downright terrifying, as Ex Machina showed me. But in his role as Apocalypse, I never felt any fear at all. He is the strongest mutant (that we know of) to exist, and yet, he never inspired any terror on me, except one scene early in the film which is nightmare fuel when you start to think about it.
And this is related with the second problem: the makeup and his suit. I'll put it bluntly: I never felt like I was watching a real person. I felt like I was watching an actor wearing blue makeup. There's nothing more immersion-breaking that being reminded, every time you look at the big bad guy of a film, that you are effectively watching a film. Some concessions need to be made when moving from a comic book to the big screen. Apocalypse's look was one of it. Look at the Sentinels from DoFP. They were scary as hell, you couldn't help but fear for your own life as you saw them take care of every X-Men effortlessly. And it wouldn't have been the same effect if they looked anything like their comic-books counterparts. Apocalyspe didn't look scary. He didn't look majestic either. He just looked silly.
- The last act was rushed, but at the same time, dragged on for too long. This is mind boggling. I'll use a simple comparison to make my point here: imagine pouring water into a glass, but in slow-mo. You realize what is happening, how it is developing, but so little happens yet it drags on for too long thanks to the slow motion. That's what I felt during the last act of the film.
- The ending was too predictable. And the building to it drags on for so long that I came to hate it by the time it happened. Straight out of Dragon Ball Z.

I don't know how to rate this film. It was a huge disappointment, especially after seeing the extra scene at the end of Days of Future Past. I'll just put it with words: I wouldn't even bother letting it run on TV while I use my computer next to it. It's not even "watch as a loading screen is going on in your current game" material. I'd rather watch the news or turn off my TV altogether.

Maybe superhero films aren't for me. The ones I REALLY enjoyed (The Dark Knight Trilogy, Iron Man 1, DEADPOOL), I would gladly turn off my computer to watch them (provided they were in English and not Spanish...). And every other X-Men, I can see myself letting the TV run as I glance at it every few minutes. But not Apocalypse.

 

[FoolKiller]

Kung Fury (9/10)

Do you remember the eighties? If so, you will love this half hour indie film that mocks the eighties in every conceivable way.

It's the story of a 1989's cop who is granted with mystical powers that turn him into the kung fu master, Kung Fury. With help of friends like Hackerman, Triceracop, Thor, and machine gun wielding Vikings he must take on sentient arcade machines, laser raptors, Nazis, and the greatest criminal of all time: Adolp Hitler, aka Kung Fuhrer.

It is stupidly funny a it is constant references to eighties entertainment, but at only 30 minutes it ends before you can get tired of it.

X-Men: Apocalypse

I left when the credits began at 1:42pm.

You left before the post credits scene?



For me it was 6.5/10, maybe 7/10. It went longer than necessary. There was a 30 minute side story in the middle that was almost completely unnecessary, but it was also a huge fan service that included one of my all-time favorite comic stories growing up.

Spoiler

The escape of Weapon X/Wolverine, complete with wires and tubes still in his body, along with the headgear.

This story could have been told better in under two hours.

It wasn't a bad film and I enjoyed Psylocke and Archangel appearing on screen. While I felt off about Isaacs as Apocalypse at first he grew on me. I decided that the moment he showed off his transmutation ability that all bets were off. It's hard to beat a guy that can turn you into dust with the flick of his wrist. But that also created a plot hole. Early on he basically just waves his hand to kill off extras. The moment a named character is fighting him he suddenly has to become creative. Ultimately all the X-Men should have died the moment he saw them, but we had to have our required morality debate.

It's worth a watch and not as bad as critics have made it out to be. I think it is receiving some negativity because it was right after Civil War. It would be a bit better reviewed if it were to come out later in the summer. It could also be fatigue. Memorial Day weekend in the US is the typical start for the blockbuster season and we already have four mainstream superhero movies this year.

Anyway, give it a watch. If you're a fan of the comics you'll likely question some changes they made, as I did, but you'll see the bones of the story.

 

[05XR8]

You left before the post credits scene?

Yep. Watched spoilers on YouTube.

 

[JKgo]

Bridge of Spies

...I meant to watch this last year but things happened, so here we are.

First of all, Tom Hanks never fails to amaze me with his acting chops. Quite frankly I've not yet seen the man ever phoning it in. He also possesses a nose for sniffing out the good roles. In this film he plays a US insurance lawyer named Jim Donovan who must negotiate a complicated prisoner swap in crumbling ruins of Berlin with The Cold War (literally - it's snowing like crazy in East Germany) looming ever so largely all around him.

I must say, I found the overall music score and the subtle, suggestive elements laced throughout the film to be a bit too manipulative. But Spielberg certainly hasn't lost it as a competent director and the narrative flows quite strongly here. I didn't feel the 2 hours 15+ minutes (minus the credits) running time bloated at all.

The biggest applause of the film however, must go to the script written by the Coen Brothers and some bloke named Matt Charman - it's witty yet subtly ambigous, and on top of that it's concise as well. When mated with Spielberg's direction, it's able to incite surprising amount of suspense even though you can pretty much tell how the movie will end.

I'm glad I've missed this film in the theaters - films like these are meant to be savored in the comfy confines of your home and that's just exactly what I've done. It's not without faults for sure, but I won't hesitate to recommend this to anyone who wishes to see a good period drama/thriller hybrid. Oh and by the way, don't fall for the marketing campaign - it's emphatically not an espionage thriller. Not at all.

8 out of 10.

 

[niky]

It's worth a watch and not as bad as critics have made it out to be.

You say that, but then you also say:

For me it was 6.5/10, maybe 7/10.

Which definitely puts it on the low end of the scale.

I agree, it might be blockbuster fatigue, but it might just be that this film required much more knowledge of comic lore and the minute details of the half-dozen X-titles that came before it than Civil War did... at least if you were to enjoy all the cameos, appearances and nods to the comics that occurred throughout the movie.

-

While I did enjoy myself... I felt that the movie never really connected on an emotional level. Too busy moving around showing off side-characters and side stories to allow the audience to connect with any of the protagonists long enough to care about them.

I only found myself actually caring about Storm. And possibly Nightcrawler. We've seen Magneto's schtick before. And the same tragedy angle was played in Wolverine: Origins. Mystique spends most of the movie sulking. The Charles and Moira angle was funny and, okay, touching at times, but old hat. Jean and Scott were just too generic "80's couple" for me to care. Angel's storyline had potential but all we got was that he was an angry boy with wings. Jubilee stuck out like a sore thumb... there just for the sake of being there. Psylocke was worse. I know Munn actually has some acting chops, but:

Spoiler

I just about laughed out loud at her last scene, exiting stage left with a glower worthy of a top-hatted silent movie villain.

Granted, the actors playing these people were all pretty decent. I felt that there was a lot of potential there. And there were a lot of bright spots in the movie. But it got lost somewhere along the way in all the grinding doom and dust.

I'd say 6.5 is accurate. But if I didn't know anything about X-Men beyond First Class and Days of Future Past, I don't think I'd be any kinder than the critics.

 

[FoolKiller]

You say that, but then you also say:



Which definitely puts it on the low end of the scale.

When I wrote that it was at 48% on Rotten Tomatoes with a 5.8 average rating. I was above the average.

A quick glance shows that not much has changed.

 

[niky]

When I wrote that it was at 48% on Rotten Tomatoes with a 5.8 average rating. I was above the average.

It's down to 5.6 now.

You definitely would score it higher... as would I... we're both fans, and there's a lot of stuff we can take away from the movie beyond the basic plot... but to most reviewers, it's just another superhero movie... with a lot of nods to material that has never been on the movie screen before.

Granted, a lot of the reviewers nowadays are of a generation that has watched X-Men cartoons on TV... but nostalgia for X-Men cartoons and all other things 80-ish or 90-ish isn't going to sway everyone.

 

[FoolKiller]

Granted, a lot of the reviewers nowadays are of a generation that has watched X-Men cartoons on TV... but nostalgia for X-Men cartoons and all other things 80-ish or 90-ish isn't going to sway everyone.

Let's be honest, if their only background is cartoons a lot of nods to comics will seem inaccurate, as much as I loved the cartoon.

 

[niky]

Let's be honest, if their only background is cartoons a lot of nods to comics will seem inaccurate, as much as I loved the cartoon.

True enough!

 

[Brett]

It's down to 5.6 now.

You definitely would score it higher... as would I... we're both fans, and there's a lot of stuff we can take away from the movie beyond the basic plot... but to most reviewers, it's just another superhero movie... with a lot of nods to material that has never been on the movie screen before.

Granted, a lot of the reviewers nowadays are of a generation that has watched X-Men cartoons on TV... but nostalgia for X-Men cartoons and all other things 80-ish or 90-ish isn't going to sway everyone.

I think a 5.6 is fair. The movie runs long with little emotional punch. I found myself bored at points because I felt like they were just trying to do too much and show off superpowers for the sake of showing off superpowers.

It was a bit superhero fatigue, but mostly Fox not doing a good job with the source material, thinking they can just make a superhero movie, and it be successful. They have done the same with Fantastic Four.

Thankfully they allowed people incredibly passionate about Deadpool make Deadpool.

 

[UKMikey]

I'm not generally a huge fan of Kinberg's scripts (although I think the Star Wars Rebels CGI series is great) but I feel sorry for Apocalypse being the first superhero movie to follow Civil War.

Finally got a chance to watch Sicario last week on the flight over to California. No time to write a full review but this was a terrific if brutal thriller despite its slow build up and initial misdirection of focussing on Emily Blunt's character when the story wasn't about her at all. Actually that last part was my favourite thing about the movie besides the soundtrack.

 

[Lain]

Finally got around to watching a movie that I wanted to watch as a kid but never got the opportunity to...

Why didn't I get to see it at the tender age of 11? Was it the R rating? No, my dad didn't have a problem with that... he just thought the movie looked dumb.

And yeah, it kinda was. The premise was interesting, but the mostly bad acting (I love looking at Radha Mitchell, but she is very not good here), ultra cheesy early-00's editing, and spotty writing really drag it down. To be fair though, as interesting a premise it may be, it doesn't really lend itself well to a feature-length film... which I guess explains why this movie felt so excruciatingly slow despite a rather brisk 1h 21m runtime.

4/10.



Another movie I saw recently is:

I went into this one somewhat blind. A synopsis went in one ear and out the other, so my preconceptions were pretty much just going off of the name and that cover art.

Guy named Garp, with a funny way of looking at life? Kinda sounded like maybe it'd be about a Forest Gump-esque character, though one who's perhaps more "odd" than "dumb".

Well... he is occasionally odd, but relative to some of the other happenings in this movie he's rather sane. This movie is absolutely psychotic, and it's all the more disturbing due to how it actually mirrors real life in regards to how asinine and radical some people's stances on topics of social justice can be (on both sides of the fence).

Good movie with decent acting. Moderately entertaining... but it might be a bit too insane for some people's liking.

6/10.



Lastly, I also saw this the other day:

Unlike Garp, I went into this one knowing the premise. I still wasn't prepared to see Tom Hanks and Antonio Banderas as an item on screen, however.

A wee bit heavy handed, and the jury deliberation is completely anti-climactic after all the courtroom drama... but excellent acting and smart writing ensure this movie's greatness.

8/10

 

[JKgo]

@Lain You were 11 when Phonebooth came out??

Holy moly. I was in my mid twenties.




....I feel so very, very old right now...

 

[Lain]

Yep. In my mid twenties now.

And I know the feeling... some of my favorite videogames are nearly two decades old, and that definitely doesn't make me feel young.

 

[Brett]

I saw Warcraft on Friday afternoon. It really needed a longer running time to add some background to all of the moving parts. Fortunately, I had a good idea who all of the characters were, so I was able to follow along. The movie does a good job of fan service for those that have played the games. Outside of that, I can see it being hard to follow.

 

[CodeRedR51]

Independence Day 20th Anniversary Edition Blu-ray (remastered with extended cut)

8/10

This is one of my favorite movies of all time. It may be cheesy, but it's a good popcorn flick. It does a good job of providing a realistic picture of what a hostile alien invasion might be like and how we would defend ourselves with current(ish) technology. With the sequel coming out, I figured a new version would pop up in stores and so it did. This one is remastered (says on the back cover not shown above) and includes some extended scenes which I enjoyed, but it was clear why they had removed them from the original release as they were not really necessary. Most of it was just added fluff to conversations between characters. I didn't see any additional action scenes. The quality was pretty good for a 20 year old movie, I would have to watch this back to back with my older Blu-ray release to see if I can tell the difference. Looking forward to the sequel, but given how over the top the trailers look, hoping for the best.

 

[MeanElf]

@Lain You were 11 when Phonebooth came out??

Holy moly. I was in my mid twenties.

....I feel so very, very old right now...

And I was 43...

Age is relative my friend - I also quite enjoyed the film even though it wasn't Mr Farrell being typically himself (if there is such a thing) Personally though of his films I prefer Intermission followed very closely by In Bruges.

 

[Mrs. Famine]

I watched Deadpool the other day, for the first time. It can be summed up relatively easily in emoji form:





👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍/10

 

[stiggygonzalez]

I'm not sure what happened to Gerard Butler;he used to make decent movies like Rock 'n rolla,Butterfly on a wheel and Law abiding citizen.Now he's making these dull action movies that fly over your head.

 

[Mrs. Famine]

Secret Life Of Pets

Something for everyone in this film! From the makers of Minions, as you'd expect it's a good all rounder. Very funny for the majority of the time even when the jokes hit different levels depending on the age of the person watching!
The writers have managed to capture typical pet dog and cat behaviour to a T, with a few more animals thrown in for good measure. In fact I think the only pet missing is a horse? And the white dual personality bunny rabbit just makes the film.

I loved it so much I'm planning to see it again, this time with the kids... (I had to check it was suitable for them first )

8/10 only because I didn't physically pee my pants laughing

 

[stiggygonzalez]

Jack Reacher

A surprisingly fun,entertaining action-thriller.
Tom Cruise performs with a slightly smug,knowing look on his face throughout the movie because he's surrounded by nutless monkeys,and this transcends his character to a sort of superhero,which I liked.
A well made film with funny dialogue,interesting villains,and finely paced action sequences.
Reacher is like a Batman/Sherlock Holmes/Jason Statham/Bond combo,using brains and brawn when necessary;which is refreshing,given all these mindless action movies over the past few years.
Jack Reacher is well worth a look,if you'd like an alternative throwback to clever action thrillers.

9/10

 

[JKgo]

...Jack Reacher? I remember enjoying it when it came out a few years ago.

Having said that, I don't remember much about it other than the, uh, "ill-fitting" wardrobe for Ms Rosamund Pike...

I hear the sequel's coming out.

 

[stiggygonzalez]

...Jack Reacher? I remember enjoying it when it came out a few years ago.

Having said that, I don't remember much about it other than the, uh, "ill-fitting" wardrobe for Ms Rosamund Pike...

I hear the sequel's coming out.

Yes,Pike's wardrobe was a little revealing...
But yeah I look forward to the sequel.
I had the film recommended off a friend;glad I watched it,otherwise I wouldn't of considered it,because of previous Cruise action flicks.