Forums

Topic: The Movie Thread

Posts 601 to 620 of 1,614

KALofKRYPTON

@Rudy_Manchego Fair. I detest Bale's performance. I don't particularly 'need' comic accuracy, also at this point, the term is meaningless - but I really can not stand his delivery of any of his spoken Batman lines. I get the psychology of what he was aiming for and have seen and read plenty on his characterisation. Just, don't like.

Should've ended on TDK. Would've still been a satisfying ending... more so probably.

PSN: KALofKRYPTON (so you can see how often I don't play anything!)

Twitter: @KALofKRYPTON (at your own risk, I don't care if you're offended)

"Fate: Protects fools, little children, and ships named Enterprise." - Cmdr William T. Riker

Rudy_Manchego

@KALofKRYPTON Fair dues and in my mind. TDK was close to perfect. It could only go downhill!

Now I may be an idiot, but there's one thing I am not sir, and that sir, is an idiot

https://jambags.co.uk

Twitter:

BAMozzy

@KALofKRYPTON Just because those films are made by Fox and don't interact with the MCU, they are still 'Marvel' films. I wasn't just talking about the 'connected' films of DC or Marvel but ALL films with Marvel or DC characters. Nobody argues that films like Deadpool or Logan aren't some of the greatest Marvel films and if it hadn't been for the success of the X-Men, maybe we wouldn't have had Iron Man and the start of the MCU. All these films still have 'Marvel' branding!

I know that BvS doesn't have a lot of source material for these two coming to blows but both have a long history and quality of Source material to make the film more meaningful. The Dark Knight Returns though does climax with a showdown between an aged Batman and an angry, politically-motivated Superman. The fight sees Superman fight not only an armored Batman, but also a brand-new Robin and a one-armed Green Arrow, with the latter employing synthetic kryptonite that allows the Dark Knight to triumph. Before this, they had always been seen as 'friends' and it took years before friendship returned in the comics. Anyway, the point was more about the source material of both characters, the supporting cast etc that could of been used to improve the movie - not just the collision course that Lex put these two on and the 'Martha'. There was so much more they could have done, better casting for Lex for a start. It seemed that the movie missed the mark with the DC history, missed the mark with some casting and certainly editing and also was split by the setting up of the Justice League movie and telling a cohesive Story.

As for the future, Part of the issue with having a 'connected' universe is that the cast grow old, contracts run out, get bored of playing the same role etc. That means that they either have to write characters out, move on to other, maybe less popular heroes, reboot the Universe or set it in a 'different' time zone - similar to the X-Men First Class. At least with 'stand alone' movies, they can have a different actor, focus on different storylines - whether directly from the comics or even using the comics as inspiration. I liked the Nolan Batman trilogy - not so much the third - funny how things tend to drop with the third (Superman 3, Batman Forever, Spiderman 3, X-Men 3 - even Iron Man 3 wasn't the 'best' although that was tied into the MCU). I know it gets 'tedious' with each new group also doing an Origins movie but as with comics, you don't get a 'continuous' shared universe. With the amount of reboots, different directions etc, its hard to know what is 'canon' any more - especially as the majority have ended up 'dead' at some point or another and then been alive in a different storyline.

Its easier to take each as separate and not have to watch 'every' movie in the universe to understand what's going on. Miss the Winter Soldier out for example and the films before and after are 'different' because of the events in that movie. You have to watch a movie that has little/no interest just to make sense of the movies that do interest. Not every of course as some stand-alone movies stand up in their own right because they are either introductions or 'separate' events that don't tie in to the main story arc because they happen somewhere (or when) else - off world, different time zone etc.

I have no issue with watching say a Spider-Man trilogy and then a totally different take on Spider-Man in another trilogy. Its doesn't need the same actor as the other Spider-man and can still tell a great Superhero story - doesn't need to tie in to Hulk or Iron Man movies or even tie in to the previous Spider-Man movies - just stand up on its own merits.

A pessimist is just an optimist with experience!

Why can't life be like gaming? Why can't I restart from an earlier checkpoint??

Feel free to add me but please send a message so I know where you know me from...

PSN: TaimeDowne

JohnnyShoulder

Rudy_Manchego wrote:

@Feena I watched Annihilation last night. Had been looking forward to it after reading the book trilogy. I really liked the adaptation, gutted I couldn't see it in the cinema here but really great and thoughtful sci-fi/horror.

Don't think it was ever released in the cinema, just went straight to Netflix.

JohnnyShoulder

PSN: JohnnyShoulder

Th3solution

Not being a student of the comics or animated series either with DC or Marvel, I guess you could call me a more casual superhero fan. I do watch all the movies from DC and Marvel and follow cinema plot lines, but as a casual fan, I enjoy the spectacle of new characters and seeing the heroes interact with each other. So I think I probably represent the less educated masses a little more who just want to see how does Hero A interact with Hero B and C and how would their powers size up against each other. For that reason I have liked the Marvel movies that get a bunch of other movies protagonists all together, as now in the later movies is happening with regularity. I can’t wait to see how the Guardians of the Galaxy interact with the Avengers in the next film. Some of this pandering to the masses creates confusion and weak storylines and characters that felt ‘plugged in’, which I think Justice League was guilty of, with Cyborg and Flash, and to an extent Aquaman just being forgettable.
I can appreciate whoever said Affleck was just going through the motions in JL. To me he seemed weak, overweight, and old compared to his companions — all actors who are buff and in their 20’s or 30’s and look more, ... heroic. I guess the 45 year old Affleck was supposed to be the distinguished elder statesman and leader but he came off looking lazy I thought.
And I agree with Spiderman Homecoming being quite good. It was a pleasant surprise.

The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

Feena

@JohnnyShoulder it was released in cinemas in the US. Everywhere else it went straight to Netflix.

Never belligerent but always uncompromising.

BAMozzy

@JohnnyShoulder It was meant to be released in the Cinemas outside of the states but internal arguments between director and studio bosses over a poorly received test viewing, with a Paramount exec demanding changes and the Producer refusing and opting to keep the film as was, a deal was struck with Netflix to handle international distribution.

It was however made for the cinema first and foremost. As Director and Screenplay Writer Alex Garland said:

"We made the film for cinema. I've got no problem with the small screen at all. The best genre piece I've seen in a long time was The Handmaid's Tale, so I think there's incredible potential within that context, but if you're doing that – you make it for that [medium] and you think of it in those terms. Look... it is what it is. The film is getting a theatrical release in the States, which I'm really pleased about. One of the big pluses of Netflix is that it goes out to a lot of people and you don't have that strange opening weekend thing where you're wondering if anyone is going to turn up and then if they don't, it vanishes from cinema screens in two weeks. So it's got pluses and minuses, but from my point of view and the collective of the people who made it – [it was made] to be seen on a big screen."

A pessimist is just an optimist with experience!

Why can't life be like gaming? Why can't I restart from an earlier checkpoint??

Feel free to add me but please send a message so I know where you know me from...

PSN: TaimeDowne

Rudy_Manchego

I don't want to blow anyones minds but after watching the toddler TV show 'In the Night Garden' on BBC Cbeebies I am convinced that Annihilation is a prequel to it. If you know, you know.

Now I may be an idiot, but there's one thing I am not sir, and that sir, is an idiot

https://jambags.co.uk

Twitter:

Ralizah

I really wanted to love Annihilation. On paper, it ticks off all of my boxes.

In practice? It felt like it had a lot of unexplored potential. Tons of interesting themes and plot points are introduced or alluded to, but never explored. The movie has some wonderful, fantastical imagery that feels like it's being squandered by an unfocused script. It also didn't do a good job walking the line between science-fiction and horror.

With that said, it was an interesting failure. I'd still much rather see this than Black Panther, Avengers 3, Pitch Perfect 9, etc.

Edited on by Ralizah

Ralizah

PSN: Ralizah

Th3solution

Alright, I was weak. I had to go see Tomb Raider today. And I’ve got a lot of thoughts about it. I’ll try my best to avoid spoilers as I know many on the forum will be interested in watching it eventually. Where to begin ...

Let me preface all my impressions with saying that I am a big Tomb Raider fan. I’ve liked both old school and new. Lara Croft is easily one of my very favorite characters. I watched and enjoyed both of the Angelina Jolie movies years ago, although I would never say the movies or her portrayal of Miss Croft resonated well with me. They were okay, but nothing I ever felt the need to highly recommend to anyone but a TR fan. So with that background in mind ....

I will start by saying Alicia Vikander is fabulous in the role, in my opinion. Obviously this being an origin story patterned after the 2013 game, she plays young Lara extremely well. In fact, she has officially moved way up my list to become one of my very favorite actresses after watching this movie. Honestly, I did feel like the script and direction of the movie actually seemed to hold her back, like she was shackled a smidge and could have really nailed it if she had a little better screenplay to deal with. That said, she performed admirably in the lead role. Her strong acting skills in portraying Lara’s naïveté and then escalation into violence for self preservation was spot on. Unfortunately the film itself has some pacing issues and jumps around a bit and falls short of really showcasing that progression well. Lara’s first kill is very well done, and even when the dialog of the script is lacking, Vikander’s face communicates the emotions of the character well. Wealthy and intelligent, yet very much the girl next door. Strong and athletic, yet vulnerable and inexperienced. It was probably my favorite part of the movie was watching Vikander take the role. And man, she’s cut. Physically much thinner than Jolie (and the video game character) but impressive nonetheless. Abs goals for sure.

The supporting actors are rather pedestrian. Perfectly serviceable, but nothing special. Perhaps because they are in stark contrast to Vikander, I don’t know. The villain is alright, but despite the movie’s attempts, he didn’t quite reach the level of disdain he should have. Her companion Lu Ren stuck out to me as a weak link. He’s a good actor, but I don’t think he was quite the right fit for the role. Something just didn’t set well with him, imo.

The movie itself was well told, outside of the pacing and jumping around a bit like I said. It could best be summed as an Indiana Jones meets National Treasure on a island type of movie. No surprise there. It loosely follows the game, and if you have seen the trailers you knew that. It’s slow to get going because it does the audience the service of a fair amount of build up and back story, rather than just jumping in at the scene on the boat sailing to the island like the game did. I liked the story and appreciated that it did vary from the game a little so it kept it fresh for me. Nevertheless if you’ve played the game, certain aspects of the plot and story won’t have the same impact. But don’t worry, there are plenty of surprises where it does deviate. I liked the nods to game’s fans like the inclusion of the bow and arrow and the pickaxe, and the funny scene where she buys her 2 handguns (that was in the trailer, so not a spoiler)

The action sequences were really good and are some of the best part of the show. The narrow escapes, the fights, the chase scenes. It all builds tension well, and is interestingly framed and realistically rendered, although if you have seen the trailer some of the video game-esque jumps and such are (intentionally) awe inspiring, but yet not too unbelievable. I kept thinking of Uncharted as a lot of the sequences are reminiscent of what Drake goes through in his adventures. However, unlike the other TR movies, the action doesn’t seem ridiculously superhuman (any more so than most action movies) and I appreciated that Lara was more realistic.

Overall I would recommend seeing it. Not great or transcendent, but a solid fun time. In my opinion it’s probably one of the best video game licensed movies out there. I realize this may sound like damning it with faint praise considering it’s peers (kind of like calling it the tallest dwarf) but it really is entertaining, especially for fans of the latter games. If you’re one of those TR purists and think the new games ruined the franchise, then you should probably avoid this movie though.

Edited on by Th3solution

The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

RogerRoger

@Th3solution A big thanks for writing up your thoughts so comprehensively and clearly. I've been reading film critics' reviews (marking it down because they're not gamers and turn their nose up at anything connected with the "lesser" medium) and fan reactions (going nuts over it because it's got the words "Tomb Raider" on the poster and so therefore it can do no wrong, or alternatively ripping it to shreds just like the critics but simply because they don't like the recent reboot). Taking little nuggets of commonality from those perspectives, I'd say you've likely provided the most fair and balanced opinion possible, and it's likely the one I'll trust the most when I sit down to watch the Blu-Ray later in the year (cinema is out of the question for me right now, alas).

Alicia Vikander seems lovely in the handful of pre-release interviews and behind-the-scenes clips I've glanced at, and I'm glad she fits the new approach to Lara's character. I adored Angelina Jolie in the role, but have no problem with a different take. It's kinda like when they re-cast a new James Bond; you want it to be familiar, but also fresh enough to make it worth the price of admission, and you can always watch the old stuff as many times as you'd like. I'm also glad it decided to tell its own story in part, rather than replicate the 2013 reboot scene-for-cutscene, because otherwise I might as well just replay the gosh-darn thing.

PSN ID: GDS_2421
Making It So Since 1987

Kidfried

@Th3solution Push Square staff should just place this comment on their front page. Love reading your impressions!

Kidfried

Th3solution

@Kidfried Thanks man! I get pretty long-winded sometimes and should probably restrain myself from rambling 😅 But I figured people would have a lot of interest in the movie seeing as many on here love the franchise.

The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

RogerRoger

@Th3solution It's not "long-winded", it's "detailed" and yes, there's a difference! If you were meant to restrain yourself, they'd put a character limit on the reply box.

PSN ID: GDS_2421
Making It So Since 1987

usb

Watch King Kong Skull Island. Felt really uncomfortable watching the movie. Special effects were great though.

usb

PSN: noodledreamz

Jaz007

@WanderingBullet What's funny is Chinese movies already act like DW with how the generals and such can fight and kill so many regular soldiers on the battlefield. They're good movies too,so I feel like we already have movies for DWs.

Backkoggery ID: Jaz007

KALofKRYPTON

@Th3solution Nice review.
I don't think I'll be going our of my way to see it. But I'll give it a go.

The Eurogamer review seemed to nail my expectations to the board though. These days I feel like you could almost 'shot-for-shot' film a game movie and have it turn out better than what ends up on screen after creative license trims and adds elements.

PSN: KALofKRYPTON (so you can see how often I don't play anything!)

Twitter: @KALofKRYPTON (at your own risk, I don't care if you're offended)

"Fate: Protects fools, little children, and ships named Enterprise." - Cmdr William T. Riker

WanderingBullet

@Jaz007 I don't think it'll happen often but it'll be interesting to see how many times we'll see those kind of action sequences during the film.

Huntin' monsters erryday.

Th3solution

@KALofKRYPTON Thanks, my friend. It is fun to share my impressions and I would be curious to read how others receive this latest video game movie adaptation of Lara Croft’s adventures. I hadn’t read the eurogamer review until just now and in fact, hadn’t read a single review of the movie. But now reading that review, which is of course written from a gamer perspective, it does resonate with some of my thoughts. He is a little more down on the movie than I think I am, but I believe he’s right about things like the lack of any real humor, and the inherent challenges of transporting the game plot over to the cinema. Telling a story effectively in a game is different than telling it effectively on the big screen. Maybe one day some film maker will get it right, but for now I think this latest Tomb Raider is one of the better attempts at that lofty goal.

The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

Top

Please login or sign up to reply to this topic