Rip Apart A Movie, ANY MOVIE

[Scarim Coral]

Battleship-

No idiots in real life would of sneak into the air vent of a closed petrol store (well get above the store) grab a food just to impress a girl. Even then aren't petrol store are 24 hours store?

There is no way a douche of the main character would of had become to be a navy officer in real life without having ALOT of discpline.

What the hell is wrong with those alien sense of passive aggressive logic? Three people in a van is a threat by a guy with a laptop or a amputee but muscular guy isn't?

After the aliens recuse one of their own inside that ship, why not keep attacking them seeing they did attack their ships earlier.

What happen to those wheels of doom that were attacking the cities?

Why the hell did those veterans were standing all over the place on that Battleship? I'm pretty sure some of them didn't want to stand on dangerous places.

Why did they had to have three destroyer inside the forcefield? If they wanted to be like the game, they should of added more like the battleship and the gunships.

 

[Eddie the head]

*Why does this [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU1hYgGcosA] exist?

That was pretty funny. I'm sorry I know you didn't like the movie, but that was so funny.

 

[Zhukov]

Expendables 2.

(Ohh, look at me, going for the hard targets.)

It was basically like Call of Duty with the controls taken away. And possibly with less brains. My uppermost thought during that first scene where they drive in guns blazing was, "This, this right here is exactly what your mother sees when she sees a video game."

The dialogue... dear gods please make it stop. No, I'm not asking for introspective explorations of the human condition (what is that anyway?). I'm not asking for wit. Hell, I'm not even asking for it to be below average. But could it at least not make me want to defy the limits of human physiology by biting my own ears off?

Every singe action scene was a one-sided massacre utterly devoid of tension or adversity. Every. Single. One. I'm pretty sure that's not how you do good action scenes.

Chuck Norris's appearances were hilarious. Best parts of the movie.

 

[WoW Killer]

I feel like cheating and pasting a link, just because this is the funniest film critique I've ever heard:


"You're not going to get a rant about this...", ha!

Ummm, one of my own... has nobody said Prometheus yet?

Ok, here's my issue: it doesn't have a plot. What it is is a collection of side-plots. None of the characters have any kind of development. You've got all sorts of tiny little themes going on - Fassbender's status as a lifeform and the analogy of him being engineered by humans, Theron's relationship with her father, the general theme of motherhood particularly with respect Rapace's character - none of this developed or focused on. There is no conclusion. Nothing amounts to anything. The whole sequence of events feels utterly irrelevant, and that's exactly how you end up feeling about the film.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Hmm. Okay.

Scott Pilgrim sucked. I'm a big fan of the graphic novels, and absolutely none of their spirit, wit or charm comes across in the plonker of a film. Many major themes...arguably even primary themes...are completely abandoned, so the film can focus on the colorful video game and geek culture allusions. Significant characters have their roles vastly reduced, and others have their roles inexplicably expanded (Knives, most particularly). Cera is dreadful as Scott, playing him as a cringing, socially awkward dork (shocking, I know) instead of the charming, affable slacker he was in the books. The pacing is atrocious, as could be expected given how much material is being crammed into the short running time, resulting in long story lines being cut into a few tiny scenes, losing much if not all of their depth and resonance. Most criminally, the film often fails at comedic timing...some scenes and lines are lifted directly from the book but come across extremely flat on screen.

Seriously, I could go on and on. I generally enjoy Edgar Wright, but this is not a good outing for him, and it's not a good movie, period. I see people list it as one of their favorite films from time to time, and I'm honestly left wondering what the fuck those people are thinking. I do understand that everyone has their own favorite things for their own personal reasons, but I don't expect to see "Dude, Where's My Car" in a lot of top ten lists, and I'm just as shocked when I see Scott Pilgrim in there.

It stinks.

Seriously, it's really, really bad.

Honestly, I love everything about this movie, except for (most) the characters. The directing is actually really, really good. Edgar Wright already showed he had some chops for directing action with Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz, but with Scott Pilgrim he shows himself to be quite an amazing action director. There's great fuidity and heft to the action scenes, despite how over the top it is. And the editing is very snappy, too.

The colourful cartoony visuals mix incredibly well with the stark realism of the live-action setting, but I reckon that's all thanks to Bill Pope who was the director of photography.

The problem I have with the movie, which is ultimately a big one, is how the characters are all too cool for school and totally blasé about everything. I know this is to reinforce this kind of laid back attitude, but if the characters don't seem to really care about anything, why should I feel emotionally invested? The only character I genuinely liked was Knives. She was the only character who had any real passion and emotion. She was also the only one who had an arc; She goes from shy school girl, to manic groupie, to jilted lover/stalker. Everyone else just seemed to meander in their own hipsteriness.

Also, Scott and Ramona have zero onscreen chemistry. Micheal Cera has no range beyond awkward schlump and Mary Elizabeth Winstead has the personality of a paper cup. They should've got the guy who plays the lead singer of the band to play Scott. He had some great energy to him.

 

[HoneyVision]

Any of the Iron Man films.

The plots are awful, Robert Downey Jr. is awful, the dialogue is awful, they're all just garbage.

The first film was undoubtedly made for ignorant Americans who will actually believe that a dying man living in a cave in captivity can single-highhandedly defeat the entire Afghani army.
The second film was so badly written, I wanted to shoot myself to entertain myself.
And I'm almost completely certain that the third film will be some hideously ridiculous addition to the first 2 rubbish excuses for a film.

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

Expendables 2.

(Ohh, look at me, going for the hard targets.)

It was basically like Call of Duty with the controls taken away. And possibly with less brains. My uppermost thought during that first scene where they drive in guns blazing was, "This, this right here is exactly what your mother sees when she sees a video game."

The dialogue... dear gods please make it stop. No, I'm not asking for introspective explorations of the human condition (what is that anyway?). I'm not asking for wit. Hell, I'm not even asking for it to be below average. But could it at least not make me want to defy the limits of human physiology by biting my own ears off?

Every singe action scene was a one-sided massacre utterly devoid of tension or adversity. Every. Single. One. I'm pretty sure that's not how you do good action scenes.

Chuck Norris's appearances were hilarious. Best parts of the movie.

If you think Expendables 2 is bad, I just have to ask: Have you seen the first one? Because compared to it, the second is Citizen Kane. It's absolutely abysmal, one of the most boring films I've ever seen.

I feel like cheating and pasting a link, just because this is the funniest film critique I've ever heard:


"You're not going to get a rant about this...", ha!

And 7 minutes later he's singing the Internationale I love Dr Kermode, but I don't think SATC2 is his funniest review. It's probably "Last Days" or "Seven Pounds"

 

[Zhukov]

Expendables 2. Grrr...

If you think Expendables 2 is bad, I just have to ask: Have you seen the first one? Because compared to it, the second is Citizen Kane. It's absolutely abysmal, one of the most boring films I've ever seen.

I have seen it and I remember hating it.

However, I can't remember enough about the first one do decide which movie is worse.

 

[orangeban]

I adore Let The Right One In, but there's a scene where some cats attack someone, and it's the stupidest fucking scene. Like, in this dark horror story, suddenly you have the most ludicrously absurd scene which I couldn't stop laughing at, the cats look so fake and just... it's hilarious.

 

[Lazy]

The Last Airbender

*Why are the characters' names pronounced differently?
*Why do most of the cast members have the opposite complexion of their character from the show?
*Why doesn't Zhao have awesome sideburns?
*Why are the characters' names pronounced differently?
*Why can't all firebenders produce fire by themselves?
*Why are the earthbenders dancing?
*Why isn't Iroh fat?
*Why are the characters' names pronounced differently?
*Why does Princess Yue's hair look like a penis?
*Why is Ozai in this film?
*Why does this [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU1hYgGcosA] exist?
*Why does this film exist?

* WHY DID THE FIRE NATION HAVE THE EARTH BENDER PRISONER IN A PRISON MADE OF EARTH AND WHY DIDNT THE EARTH BENDER"S ESCAPE
*why did mknight shamamamamlamdingong change the way bending work it was fine the way it is
*why is aang a moody teen and why is he called ung
*why is sokka so dull
*why is katara so horrible

*Why does Appa look so horrifying?
*Seriously, why don't the Earthbender's just escape? IT'S A FUCKING QUARRY FULL OF ROCKS!
*Why is the dialogue so horribly awkward?
*Why is the acting uniformly terrible on a level almost on par with "The Room"?
*Why did they put a drunk homeless man in charge of choreography?
*Why can't any of the benders bend for shit?
*Why is M. Night Shyamalan still getting money to make movies?

 

[YuberNeclord]

The film 1408 really pisses me off.

I think the biggest reason that I hate this film is that I really love the short story that it is adapted from. For anyone that doesn?t know, it is a short story by Stephen King that you can find in his book ?Everything?s Eventual?.

The reason why I love this story is because it was one of the few things that I read in my adult life that had a deep effect on me. I wouldn?t go so far as to say that it scared me, but it did leave me deeply unnerved. It wasn?t so much what happened in it, it?s more how the protagonist starts off as a perfectly sane individual and then rather rapidly descends into madness. And it?s written in such away that I almost felt myself going insane right along with him.
Or at the very least it felt like I was experiencing a bad drug trip.

I?ve never had a story that effected me like that before.

Anyway, none of that sensation is present in the film at all. Where I would describe the short story as neat little mind fuck, the film feels like a hackney z grade horror film that contained horror cliches that wouldn?t scare small children.

Also, it needed to be shot and cut in an extremely abstract experimental kind of way and it was shot and cut in a typical hollywood style that was completely wrong for the material.

For example;

there?s a part in the book where the character is fumbling around looking for the light switch and when his hand accidentally touches the wallpaper he suddenly has the thought ?it feels like skin like old dead skin?.

Now this little sequence isn?t in the film at all but if I had of done it I probably would have tried something like having the shot of his hand touching the wall, then cut to a shot of a dead body or a piece of skin, and then cut to a close up of his face.

Basically I?d try to put in shots that would represent what he is thinking.

I?d also play around with the pacing of the edits, starting off with slower cuts then speeding up the cuts as he becomes more and more disorientated.

And I?d make use of jump cuts and several other techniques that break continuity as he goes more and more insane.

 

[Living Contradiction]

If 300 is the worst movie you've seen, then you my friend, are truly truly fortunate.

Now i'm debating whether to go after something more well known, or something obscure and supernaturally deplorable...

Such a comment begs clarification. Bring on the supernaturally deplorable!

On topic, while I hated Batman Forever with a passion (oooo, neon melodrama and solid wood performing! What wonderful value for my money!) and still recall the horror that was The Telephone (any Whoopi Goldberg fans out there? Watch this one and know that she has plumbed the depths), I have to say that I cringe whenever I remember Spiderman 3.

1. Take humble Peter Parker, surround him by CGI effects that are quite tasty, and make him indestructible. No really, bounce him off of a few skyscrapers, let him kiss an I-beam or three, and have him stagger away as if he was just sucker punched. When last I checked that thing on his chest wasn't an "S", so why isn't this fine fellow expiring messily?

2. Comic-book movie makers, take note: One villain per movie! Not three one-dimensional cardboard cutouts that step on each others toes because you had a fever dream of monochrome Spiderman throwing bombs at you during a sandstorm. Pick a villain (there are lots to choose from and if you pick Batroc the Leaper, I will laaaaaaugh), develop the character and give us a good solid plot instead of several weak stories with no purpose.

3. 86 the melodrama. I know you're targeting a teenage audience, Mr. Raimi, but please leave the high school he-said/she-said/oh-this-will-make-her-SO-jealous for folks willing to endure daytime TV. I don't want to see it.

4. Comic-book movie makers, take another note: Make me care about the hero! Please! Give me a reason to want the hero to win instead of seeing how much you can make me desperately wish that the villain succeeds in giving this vapid person a dirt nap. I really wanted to see Spiderman buy it in this film and that is not something I should want.

5. Piano bars. Do not use them. Ever.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

The directing is actually really, really good. Edgar Wright already showed he had some chops for directing action with Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz, but with Scott Pilgrim he shows himself to be quite an amazing action director. There's great fuidity and heft to the action scenes, despite how over the top it is. And the editing is very snappy, too.

The colourful cartoony visuals mix incredibly well with the stark realism of the live-action setting, but I reckon that's all thanks to Bill Pope who was the director of photography.

The problem I have with the movie, which is ultimately a big one, is how the characters are all too cool for school and totally blasé about everything. I know this is to reinforce this kind of laid back attitude, but if the characters don't seem to really care about anything, why should I feel emotionally invested? The only character I genuinely liked was Knives. She was the only character who had any real passion and emotion. She was also the only one who had an arc; She goes from shy school girl, to manic groupie, to jilted lover/stalker. Everyone else just seemed to meander in their own hipsteriness.

Also, Scott and Ramona have zero onscreen chemistry. Micheal Cera has no range beyond awkward schlump and Mary Elizabeth Winstead has the personality of a paper cup. They should've got the guy who plays the lead singer of the band to play Scott. He had some great energy to him.

Fair praise and fair criticism. If I hadn't been such a fan of the books I may not have reacted to the film as violently as I did. That hipster blankness you're talking about is indeed a problem in the film, and that's either bad direction or the inability of the actors to understand their characters. There are a lot of deadpan lines and stares in the books, but O'Malley manages to convey quite a lot of emotion in his characters eyes despite simple drawings. About the only character who is frequently deadpan is Wallace.

They really did alter the characters significantly though. Scott has gone from being a hapless but adorable lady killer to a simpering geek (really, the major conflict resolution in the books is Scott being revealed as an unreliable narrator, and a perpetual womanizer, and his realization of THIS is what makes him "grow up", not getting a job or moving in with someone). Kim has gone from a snarky, bitter ex "Pining" for Scott to just snarky and bitter for absolutely no discernible reason. Stephen Stills had one of his smaller personality traits (his nervousness/neuroses about performing) blown up and turned into his entire character. Knives, whose role dwindled rapidly as the books went on, became a major character and the focal point of the entire resolution and new theme they felt obligated to ship in for some ungodly reason.

I did like Brandon Routh as Todd though. He came pretty close to nailing Todd. Their Envy, alas, was HORRIBLE. Way to nail a minor character and screw up yet another major one, film.

Anyway, it's hardly the worst film of all time, but it's up there amongst the most disappointing for me. It's the ME3 ending of films.

 

[cojo965]

OT: So... about Scorpion King 3...
I kid of course, this forum is a dictatorship when it comes to contrary opinions to this particular film. But I feel like giving Marter that second of shock was worth it if he should ever stumble into here.

I did have a mini heart attack when I was reading through the thread and totally not participating because apparently I've been barred from doing so.

I love how "stumble" was the word you used. Very fitting.

Marter I said you were exempt, I never said you couldn't participate.