What is the last movie you saw? and rate it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *Classic*Charm*

I started watching Dracula last night with high hopes because it stars my favourite actor and one of my lesser favourites, Anthony Hopkins and Gary Oldman and is directed by Francis Ford Coppola.

I had to stop part way through- I just wasn't in the right mood I guess. The costuming and blatantly sexual everything were irritating.

---

*Classic* - it's not just you. I found that movie irritating myself. Isn't Keena Reeves (sp?) in it, also? I just recall those outlandish outfits for Dracula. I love Oldman and Hopkins too, but these were not their finest moments. I saw the film years ago with my son when it first came up for rental; but I was not too impressed actually. I found the Extra Features actually more interesting than the film. I just got totally bored with the film after awhile....too silly and some of the acting was just plain laughable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janine

*Classic* - it's not just you. I found that movie irritating myself. Isn't Keena Reeves (sp?) in it, also? I just recall those outlandish outfits for Dracula. I love Oldman and Hopkins too, but these were not their finest moments. I saw the film years ago with my son when it first came up for rental; but I was not too impressed actually. I found the Extra Features actually more interesting than the film. I just got totally bored with the film after awhile....too silly and some of the acting was just plain laughable.

---

Oh my goodness, Jeanu Reeves is just TERRIBLE. He's just a bad, bad actor who doesn't even warrant mention haha. Yeah, I was just really unimpressed and disappointed. Maybe I'll try again sometime? I don't know...I didn't even watch the special features!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *Classic*Charm*

I started watching Dracula last night with high hopes because it stars my favourite actor and one of my lesser favourites, Anthony Hopkins and Gary Oldman and is directed by Francis Ford Coppola.

I had to stop part way through- I just wasn't in the right mood I guess. The costuming and blatantly sexual everything were irritating.

---

I am a big Vampire Fan you know that - I could not stand this movie either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *Classic*Charm*

Oh my goodness, Jeanu Reeves is just TERRIBLE. He's just a bad, bad actor who doesn't even warrant mention haha. Yeah, I was just really unimpressed and disappointed. Maybe I'll try again sometime? I don't know...I didn't even watch the special features!

---

Joreads and *Classic*, you both seem to have good taste in movies. I agree with both of you in your disappointment with this one. It just seemed so corny to me. I don't recall much about it; only two things stood out after all these years - firstly, Jeanu Reeves was just dreadful! You are right *Classic* he cannot act, period. He's the weakest actor in Kenneth Branagh's fine film "Much Ado About Nothing"; I winch ever time I see that performance. It's totally flat. Barring his role and Michael Keaton's as crazy Dogberry, it would have been a 10/10 film for me. I still don't know why Branagh chose those two for such key roles. But back to this film; the second thing that stood out to me and I recall is the stupid way Dracula crept up and down the walls of the castle, like some strange alien or insect. What the heck was that all about? I don't think that was in the original book, was it? I am yet to read the book; I think that's partly because the movie turned me off to the story, which is a darn shame. Afterall, I am sure it's a terrific novel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janine

Joreads and *Classic*, you both seem to have good taste in movies. I agree with both of you in your disappointment with this one. It just seemed so corny to me. I don't recall much about it; only two things stood out after all these years - firstly, Jeanu Reeves was just dreadful! You are right *Classic* he cannot act, period. He's the weakest actor in Kenneth Branagh's fine film "Much Ado About Nothing"; I winch ever time I see that performance. It's totally flat. Barring his role and Michael Keaton's as crazy Dogberry, it would have been a 10/10 film for me. I still don't know why Branagh chose those two for such key roles. But back to this film; the second thing that stood out to me and I recall is the stupid way Dracula crept up and down the walls of the castle, like some strange alien or insect. What the heck was that all about? I don't think that was in the original book, was it? I am yet to read the book; I think that's partly because the movie turned me off to the story, which is a darn shame. Afterall, I am sure it's a terrific novel.

---

Janine it has been a while since I read the novel but I seem to recall he did crawl up and down the walls I cannot remember how it was described in the book though. I will have to dust it off and have a look.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janine

...Keanu Reeves was just dreadful! You are right *Classic* he cannot act, period. He's the weakest actor in Kenneth Branagh's fine film "Much Ado About Nothing"; I winch ever time I see that performance. It's totally flat. Barring his role and Michael Keaton's as crazy Dogberry, it would have been a 10/10 film for me. I still don't know why Branagh chose those two for such key roles.

---

Hi Janine! I was just checking recent posts, and saw you go off on a tangent about Much Ado. I can't remember Dracula too well--just the brief Absinthe commercial in the middle somewhere (it looked like a commercial to me, anyhow). But Branagh's "Much Ado About Nothing" is one of my top 5 favorite films of all time.

I read or saw on a program somewhere somebody saying how great it was that the bad-guy (Keanu) was disposed of swiftly and effortlessly, an event of little consequence. I think it might've been a PBS analysis during a pledge-drive break, or something at the end of a VHS tape, I don't know... At the time, I just said to myself, "Yeah, that's cool." All the drama was about the couples, and I had worn a smile the whole way through. "Much Ado About Nothing!" Anyhow, I had an ex-girlfriend that loved Keanu, so I had been happy to see him out of the picture after some brief "handsome" struggle against justice. And then that analysis left me thinking it had all been an example of the Bard's brilliance.

I later checked into things, read the whole play, etc., and it turned out the bad-guy had a bit bigger role in the original script/play as written by Shakespeare, so I guess you're right to be disappointed in Keanu's role, especially if you're a big fan of the play. But it might be Branagh's fault too, a bit. I think he might've had less to work with than a stage actor would. Aww, what am I saying--that's crazy of me, defending Keanu!

Regarding Michael Keaton, I had thought he was gonna work out much worse, so I made it through those scenes almost feeling a sense of relief.

Well, that's the story of why I give it a 10/10.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by billl

Hi Janine! I was just checking recent posts, and saw you go off on a tangent about Much Ado. I can't remember Dracula too well--just the brief Absinthe commercial in the middle somewhere (it looked like a commercial to me, anyhow). But Branagh's "Much Ado About Nothing" is one of my top 5 favorite films of all time.

I read or saw on a program somewhere somebody saying how great it was that the bad-guy (Keanu) was disposed of swiftly and effortlessly, an event of little consequence. I think it might've been a PBS analysis during a pledge-drive break, or something at the end of a VHS tape, I don't know... At the time, I just said to myself, "Yeah, that's cool." All the drama was about the couples, and I had worn a smile the whole way through. "Much Ado About Nothing!" Anyhow, I had an ex-girlfriend that loved Keanu, so I had been happy to see him out of the picture after some brief "handsome" struggle against justice. And then that analysis left me thinking it had all been an example of the Bard's brilliance.

I later checked into things, read the whole play, etc., and it turned out the bad-guy had a bit bigger role in the original script/play as written by Shakespeare, so I guess you're right to be disappointed in Keanu's role, especially if you're a big fan of the play. But it might be Branagh's fault too, a bit. I think he might've had less to work with than a stage actor would. Aww, what am I saying--that's crazy of me, defending Keanu!

Regarding Michael Keaton, I had thought he was gonna work out much worse, so I made it through those scenes almost feeling a sense of relief.

Well, that's the story of why I give it a 10/10.

---

Hahah,...billl..... I really enjoyed your comments here. The reason being is that I am a huge Branagh fan. I hardly ever will fault him for a thing. Normally, I will overlook his flaws; not his acting ones, 'cause I don't think there are any! haha...just kidding, no one is perfect and it's true of Branagh, too. I have winced once or twice in a performance moment, but it's rate. He may have listened to his casting director as to who to pick for the various roles; it may not even be his complete fault choosing Reeves.

I own nearly all of KB films. In fact, last night I watched the most excellent production by the BBC of Ibsen's Ghosts. I have seen it a number of times by now. For your information, I adore Much Ado About Nothing also, and I have seen it dozens of times! I watch all my KB films at least 10 times, some much more. I am a bit obsessed! hahah. If MAAN put a smile on your face, have you seen his musical version of Love's Labour's Lost? I think I had a smile on my face the entire time I viewed that film. I just love it! It's such a frothy, fun movie....very witty and a beautifully artistic; it's mostly staged and one feels the excitement/fun the actors had in making this film. I love the Extras, too. I even watch those over again each time I repeat the film. It's not long at all so it flies by quickly (too quickly). I usually watch it after something super depressing to cheer myself up. It does the trick!

Well, it might be a good thing to exit Keanu's as soon as one can. His first lines were really stiff and deadpan. I was winching and hoping the whole time he had only a tiny part. He's cute and that's his strength. He is not good at Shakespeare. I just didn't expect to see Michael Keaton on the set at all so it was a bit of a shock. I suffered through his nonsense, too. I guess Ken likes his humor but I felt it was pretty over-the-top. Still all in all I give the film just under a 10/10 too. I would say 9.9/10....how's that revised rating. I think Ken's performance in it was impecable. The majority of the supporting case as well. It's a totally fun and romantic film.

@ Janine--Branagh's Much Ado is an example of something that sometimes happens to me: if I really enjoy something, I sometimes delay enjoying the next installment, save it for later. I don't know if I'm worried that they'll be different and somehow (illogically) spoil the perfection, or if I just like having plenty of good stuff to look forward to, or if (in this particular case) I just didn't want to see the movies in the theater, and then I forgot about them once the hype died down, or what. Anyhow, I haven't seen any of his other Shakespeare films, but I have been wanting to for a long time (and I already know that that means I've missed some great stuff!). Thanks for the tip on the Ibsen and the Love's Labour Lost, though, those weren't on my radar at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *Classic*Charm*

I started watching Dracula last night with high hopes because it stars my favourite actor and one of my lesser favourites, Anthony Hopkins and Gary Oldman and is directed by Francis Ford Coppola.

I had to stop part way through- I just wasn't in the right mood I guess. The costuming and blatantly sexual everything were irritating.

---

Oh i love this movie :)
It is a bad adaptation of the book but somehow i didn't much care (and i am a fan of Stoker's dracula :)).
I have seen it more than 10 times. Ok i can't really say why i like it so much..i guess it's the artistic aspects, the music(one of my favorite soundtracks) and Gary (whom i love).
Give it another try :) (it has Gary talking transilvanian :-)))))))))

Coppola's Dracula is great, it's a very personal adaptation of the novel but the take on storytelling is interesting.

Hey Janine did you enjoy Benjamin Button? I'm curious to know what you thought about it. I enjoyed it but I admit it was quite a bit to wrap my head around! Let me know!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manolia

Oh i love this movie :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark F.

Coppola's Dracula is great, it's a very personal adaptation of the novel but the take on storytelling is interesting.

---

I agree.

I had to watch some Dracula adaptations for an assignment, and I thought Coppola's version was quite accomplished - much, much better than Tod Browning's 1930 version, which was absolutely dreadful. I found Van Helsing's ambiguity in Coppola's film very interesting indeed. Keanu Reeves was his usual self (even a shoe is a better actor than him), but Oldman and Hopkins were great.

As for the sexual elements: I fully support their explicit presence. Vampires are meant to play with our fascination for unrestrained violence and sexuality, so why not be honest about it ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grace86

Hey Janine did you enjoy Benjamin Button? I'm curious to know what you thought about it. I enjoyed it but I admit it was quite a bit to wrap my head around! Let me know!

---

Grace, I can't write much now; but first thing, is my impression that the film was way too long and cumbersome, also. I think parts were good, but then it began to annoy me. It was predictable and I found the frame story format, one I am not too keen on to begin with. This type 'frame' reminded me immediately of Big Fish; if you have seen that film, you will know what I mean: dying mother, reminescing about her secret past, mother/daughter strained relationship. As to if I really liked this movie, I would have to accumulatively say "not really". You are not the only one who had trouble getting it to all gel. I thought it didn't have enough of a climax; was there actually ever one, if you think about it? I found that disappointing. Yeah, the photography and the effects were pretty amazing, but one can't give a film credit, unless it had some deep substance; it had a deeper idea but not sure the film makers imparted it totally to the audience - something was missing. I liked the idea very much or a man aging backwards, but just felt they missed the boat on it in some respects. Still not specifically sure why. Here may be somethings, personally, I thought were disappointing. I love and admire Cate Blanchett as an actress, but I didn't particularly warm up to her character in this film; I even thought her a little heartless old lady at times. She may have been lovely towards here ex-lover's memory, Benjamin, but she sure did miss out with her very alive daughter. When the daughter showed real anger (understandable) and confusion, the mother never truly reached out to her to amend things; the mother never really showed much true tenderness, if any, towards her daughter. Even in the film I felt her character seemed a bit selfish and self absorbed. Not sure I liked her at all. This part bugged me right away. I felt the ending left me hanging as far as their relationship was concerned. I can't write anymore now.

I am curious to know what you thought of it also. I would not rewatch this film. It would be too much to suffer through 3 hours again! Too long!!!

PS: I know, I have been really brutal lately to my critiques on the films from last year. Actually, only one I would watch again would be Valkyrie, which surprised me. At least the script was new and original. I didn't much like The Reader, another one with extensive prosthetics - I will get to why later on. I have been quite picky lately. Thankfully I have an old film to watch tonight - a Bogey film - The Big Sleep.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by billl

@ Janine--Branagh's Much Ado is an example of something that sometimes happens to me: if I really enjoy something, I sometimes delay enjoying the next installment, save it for later. I don't know if I'm worried that they'll be different and somehow (illogically) spoil the perfection, or if I just like having plenty of good stuff to look forward to, or if (in this particular case) I just didn't want to see the movies in the theater, and then I forgot about them once the hype died down, or what. Anyhow, I haven't seen any of his other Shakespeare films, but I have been wanting to for a long time (and I already know that that means I've missed some great stuff!). Thanks for the tip on the Ibsen and the Love's Labour Lost, though, those weren't on my radar at all.

---

Hi again billl, you might want to check out his other films such as Henry V, Othello, Hamlet. They all are excellent. I am still of the belief that his Henry V is a perfect film. Your theory is not too illogical, not the way you presented it; but it may prevent you from discovering some other really fine films. Love's Labours Lost was far from a box office success but I think it's a really quirpy, funny and stylish little film well worth your viewing. I rented it at first but since then purchased my own copy; it's so entertaining I watch it often as I do with Much Ado. If you are interested in the actor/director Kenneth Branagh you might want to join our social group Kenneth's Friends. We could use some members. Now one recently has been too active in there. I see to be talking to myself in my last few postings. You can get a lot more information from reading the posts in there.

I last re-watched Almost Famous.

Almost Famous is probably my favorite movie of all time.

It gets a big 100/10 from me.

Oh yeah! I also saw Wristcutters, with the boy from Almost Famous... it gets a 15/10, for it's fantastic cast and soundtrack! The singer from Gogol Bordello, the guy from Almost Famous, and the ever infamous Tom Waits xD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeccaT

Oh yeah! I also saw Wristcutters, with the boy from Almost Famous... it gets a 15/10, for it's fantastic cast and soundtrack! The singer from Gogol Bordello, the guy from Almost Famous, and the ever infamous Tom Waits xD.

---

Wow, Becca, you mean your generation is into Tom Waits? I remember him from way back. I had a friend who loved his stuff. I think with Youtube, these groups and singers never get stale or go out of style. I've been on the exploring a group I liked in the mid 70's. Now I am finding all kinds of stuff out about the group and the original group. I am even getting to be a groupie in there! I have to laugh at myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janine

Wow, Becca, you mean your generation is into Tom Waits? I remember him from way back. I had a friend who loved his stuff. I think with Youtube, these groups and singers never get stale or go out of style. I've been on the exploring a group I liked in the mid 70's. Now I am finding all kinds of stuff out about the group and the original group. I am even getting to be a groupie in there! I have to laugh at myself.

---

Haha. I wouldn't say 'my generation', but a lot of my friends are into Tom Waits. Also remember I grew up surrounded by musicians, so I have vast exposure! ;). I think it's neat that you can find out more about an older group. The magic of the internet! Everybody can be immortal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeccaT

Haha. I wouldn't say 'my generation', but a lot of my friends are into Tom Waits. Also remember I grew up surrounded by musicians, so I have vast exposure! ;). I think it's neat that you can find out more about an older group. The magic of the internet! Everybody can be immortal.

---

It is so true about everyone being immortal these days. They can even perserve their youth when they are old rockers looking pretty gray and haggard. One still sees them cumulatively; it's a whole new experience. I am even networking with others on Youtube who send me rare concert clips and also ones for movies or TV production for actors. It never fails to delight and amaze me. I am loving it on Youtube. Do you have a channel page on there, Becca? I didn't know till recently one could have a personal page, even if you don't create videos. It's so totally entertaining and already I have saved a lot of videos in playlists.

Becca, how cool that you grew up with a broad knowledge and exposure to music. I all for being versatile. Good for you!

Transformers 2: Revenge of The Fallen

0/10. I've never seen a worse film, truly. And the thing is the original was done so cleverly and was so entertaining. This will go down in history years from now as the worst movie ever made.

Beverly Hills Spy Transformer Chihuahuas at High School 2, and it was great! Hehe, just kidding. I saw the first Part of Che by Stephen Soderbergh with Benicio del Toro as Che Guevara and I liked this film very much for it seemed to be very authentic and unadorned. 10/10

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amarna

Beverly Hills Spy Transformer Chihuahuas at High School 2, and it was great! Hehe, just kidding. I saw the first Part of Che by Stephen Soderbergh with Benicio del Toro as Che Guevara and I liked this film very much for it seemed to be very authentic and unadorned. 10/10

---

Che is soooo good! My friend got me to see it, and at first I didn't know what to think of it, but it's really well-acted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Endon

I agree.

I had to watch some Dracula adaptations for an assignment, and I thought Coppola's version was quite accomplished - much, much better than Tod Browning's 1930 version, which was absolutely dreadful. I found Van Helsing's ambiguity in Coppola's film very interesting indeed. Keanu Reeves was his usual self (even a shoe is a better actor than him), but Oldman and Hopkins were great.

As for the sexual elements: I fully support their explicit presence. Vampires are meant to play with our fascination for unrestrained violence and sexuality, so why not be honest about it ;)

---

Interesting that so many of you liked it so much! I will definitely give it another try at some point, but Keanu just kills more brain cells with every minute of screen-time. As I said, I was expecting a lot from Coppola with Hopkins and Oldman in it.

Maybe it's just my lack of knowledge of Vampire lore haha. It just threw me off: having blood sucked = orgasm. Really?! :sick:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *Classic*Charm*

Interesting that so many of you liked it so much! I will definitely give it another try at some point, but Keanu just kills more brain cells with every minute of screen-time. As I said, I was expecting a lot from Coppola with Hopkins and Oldman in it.

Maybe it's just my lack of knowledge of Vampire lore haha. It just threw me off: having blood sucked = orgasm. Really?! :sick:

---

I mentioned Transformers 2 being the worst movie of all time. Well, Keanu Reeves is certainly the worst actor of all time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mathor

I mentioned Transformers 2 being the worst movie of all time. Well, Keanu Reeves is certainly the worst actor of all time.

---

Yea, Keanu isn't even worth being called an actor.

But no, Phone Booth what definitely the worst film of all time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *Classic*Charm*

Yea, Keanu isn't even worth being called an actor.

But no, Phone Booth what definitely the worst film of all time.

---

Hey, *Classic*, I think I saw Phone Booth. Is that the film that completely takes place within a phone booth? If so, it was different.:goof:

The other night I thought of you, since I saw an Anthony Hopkins film, Meet Joe Black. I wondered what you thought of the film. I rather liked it although I could see some flaws. I still like the idea and the acting was excellent, I thought. It's funny, it took me till now to finally see that film. I guess eventually I will have to see Silence of the Lambs. I watched Sweeney Todd, so now I am sure I can deal with SOTL.

10,000 B.C: was the worst movie of all time... Keanu is one of the worst actors of all time... and haven't seen Transformers 2, but agree about Phone Booth. How awful!

Burn After Reading. I am a big John Malkovich fan but I think this is the first time I have seen a movie with him that I didn't like. It was a big turn off for me to have Brad Pitt in it, I rarely like his movies. This one had potential I think but it just didn't fulfill it.

"Public enemies" by M Mann and i liked it very much :nod:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manolia

"Public enemies" by M Mann and i liked it very much :nod:

---

manolia, is that a remake? I heard of that title a long time ago and saw it recently advertized. Who is in it?

manolia, I think I owe you a profile message or maybe it's a pm. I will try to get to it later on. You must think me terrible if I neglected it. Things are difficult here.

hahaha....we seem to all be in agreement on this one ...."Keanu Reeves is certainly the worst actor of all time"....I have thought so for sometime now. He's dreadful!


Last night I watched for about the 25th time Kenneth Branagh's beautiful film:

Hamlet

Thank God, Ken had the sense not to employ Keanu again for a role in his film. 'Much Ado' and his poor role as the villian was quite enough...thank heavens it was a short role. I suffered through his horrible delivery of the lines. Ken must have had off that day, or maybe one can't do a thing with Keanu playing Shakespeare.

Hamlet - what can I say, stunning! I know it's not perfect but I can overlook the flaws. One that sort of cracks me up at the end, when Hamlet dies, is that after all my viewings, I began to notice that his hand is in one position on the floor; then they pan away, a few minutes focus on Hamlet's body and his hand is in a different positon...more clenched and closer to his legs. I don't know, do corpses move? heheh.....

still all in all... this play and film fascinates me, because the complex character of Hamlet never ceases to fascinate me. Everytime I rewatch the film, I also have to watch the 'extras'. They're so entertaining.

The last couple minutes of the film are my favorites. I must love funnerals. I love the way the soldiers carry Hamlet 'like a soldier' to the stage. I love the ending with the outdoor funneral - the way it is shot is perfect. I love the contrast of black with the white snow. I love the song while the final credits run....In Pace. I usually go back and watch this part 2 or 3 times. I know, a bit obessive...but that is me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janine

manolia, is that a remake? I heard of that title a long time ago and saw it recently advertized. Who is in it?

manolia, I think I owe you a profile message or maybe it's a pm. I will try to get to it later on. You must think me terrible if I neglected it. Things are difficult here.

---

Hmmmmmm...i don't know if it's a remake. I think it is based on a true story though. Johnny Depp and Christian Bale are in it :) :brow:
No worries about the pm..take your time, i know you have too many things to worry about ;) :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by manolia

Hmmmmmm...i don't know if it's a remake. I think it is based on a true story though. Johnny Depp and Christian Bale are in it :) :brow:
No worries about the pm..take your time, i know you have too many things to worry about ;) :)

---

Now that I think of it, there was a stage play called Public Enemy, I beleive. I will have to do some further research on the matter.

Thanks for being so understanding, manolia. I will get a PM off to you as soon as I can. I miss our little conversations. Hope all is well with you.

Last night, a friend and I watched Hamlet 2 - a bit slapstick-humor for my taste, but it had its good parts, and had a relatively original plot with a save-the-arts theme that seemed very easy to understand, almost too easy. It really had some funny scenes, but little consistency or relevance in the humor, other than to make the movie watchable, or so I felt; even the serious parts of the film showed some greatness here-and-there, but, in terms of both direction and writing, the movie seemed much like itsy-bitsy plots combined into 90 minutes with emphasis upon nothing in depth. I would not call the film a waste of time, since it surely had something to say, but someone other than the writer and director could have written and directed it better. As to the acting - silly, great, twisted.
Rating: 6/10

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mono

Last night, a friend and I watched Hamlet 2 - a bit slapstick-humor for my taste, but it had its good parts, and had a relatively original plot with a save-the-arts theme that seemed very easy to understand, almost too easy. It really had some funny scenes, but little consistency or relevance in the humor, other than to make the movie watchable, or so I felt; even the serious parts of the film showed some greatness here-and-there, but, in terms of both direction and writing, the movie seemed much like itsy-bitsy plots combined into 90 minutes with emphasis upon nothing in depth. I would not call the film a waste of time, since it surely had something to say, but someone other than the writer and director could have written and directed it better. As to the acting - silly, great, twisted.
Rating: 6/10

---

I had such high hopes but I couldn't sit though the whole thing. I agree it could have been better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PoeticPassions

10,000 B.C: was the worst movie of all time... Keanu is one of the worst actors of all time... and haven't seen Transformers 2, but agree about Phone Booth. How awful!

---

I've heard nothing but disappointingly bad things about 10,000BC so I've never bothered to see it. Shame because they could have made a really cool movie out of that. I wasn't aware that Keanu was in it...it all makes sense now :D

Last night I watched A History of Violence. The story line was pretty cool but a lot of what happened was a little to convenient. I get the Viggo's character was supposed to have been a bada** but he's mister top of the line kung fu and perfect timing. I don't know. After he'd killed several of the mobsters, I wondered why they didn't just pop him off? If he was so dangerous just shoot him and kill him. With all the stalking and the talking they were just asking for it. I understand that you're supposed to suspend your disbelief while watching a movie, but there are moments when it's difficult to do that.
And then there's the wife. I can't remember the actresses' name, but her acting was a bit choppy and sudden. She would have these strong reactions out of nowhere. She wasn't terribly believable.


All in all I'd give it a B. I wouldn't buy it but I would probably watch it again sometime in the future.

Mono, what is Hamlet 2? I take it it's a comedy. I just watched a BBC set I bought of 4 plays called Shakespeare Retold. The best one on of the set, so far (haven't watched Macbeth yet), is Taming of the Shrew...I first saw it on Youtube and it's hilarious...it prompted me to buy the set, since you can't get this one without doing so. I had to own it. Rufus Sewell plays the lead and he appears at his wedding/the alter in drag. His outfit itself is totally worth viewing the film - he is outrageously funny! The woman playing opposite him, the part of Kate, is a total riot, as well. She is very little and petite and mades outrageous faces when she is mad, which is most of the time. He says she's not horrible, as her relatives have described her, but 'plucky'...the elevator scene is great! I watched Much Ado About Nothing and although I did find it amusing, it could not hold a candle to Ken Branagh's excellent version of the same play. It has some merit being a more modern version, but don't expect it to stick anywhere near the original storyline. It's hardly resembles the story at all.

There is a terrifically funny version of Hamlet which was directed by Kenneth Branagh, also written by him, nearly impossible to get a hold of though - only available on VHS or you can watch parts on Youtube - called In the Bleak Midwinter. It's really about a group of threater enthusisats trying to finance and put on the play by themselves. I saw some of it on Youtube and it's quite amusing. You might check it out, Mono.

There is also a very funny skit from Black Adder on Youtube of revisions to the "To be or not to be" speech. I will find the link and post it. It cracks me up everytime I see it. Hugh Laurie plays Will. Now, Hugh Laurie, in a long wig is enough to make one laugh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stargazer86

Last night I watched A History of Violence. The story line was pretty cool but a lot of what happened was a little to convenient. I get the Viggo's character was supposed to have been a bada** but he's mister top of the line kung fu and perfect timing. I don't know. After he'd killed several of the mobsters, I wondered why they didn't just pop him off? If he was so dangerous just shoot him and kill him. With all the stalking and the talking they were just asking for it. I understand that you're supposed to suspend your disbelief while watching a movie, but there are moments when it's difficult to do that.
And then there's the wife. I can't remember the actresses' name, but her acting was a bit choppy and sudden. She would have these strong reactions out of nowhere. She wasn't terribly believable.

---

Stargazer, I saw this film awhile back; my library owns it. I recall thinking it was pretty good; but now that I think on it, quite honestly, I can't recall one detail about it - now, that is how memorable it was! I guess that tells the whole story. It certainly did not have any 'staying' power with me.

I liked the way you wrote this up. It's a very honest account of how you saw the film. Good for you. I would probably agree if only I could remember the story at all. I don't think I have any burning desire to see it again....haha...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janine

Mono, what is Hamlet 2? I take it it's a comedy. I just watched a BBC set I bought of 4 plays called Shakespeare Retold. The best one on of the set, so far (haven't watched Macbeth yet), is Taming of the Shrew...I first saw it on Youtube and it's hilarious...it prompted me to buy the set, since you can't get this one without doing so. I had to own it. Rufus Sewell plays the lead and he appears at his wedding/the alter in drag. His outfit itself is totally worth viewing the film - he is outrageously funny! The woman playing opposite him, the part of Kate, is a total riot, as well. She is very little and petite and mades outrageous faces when she is mad, which is most of the time. He says she's not horrible, as her relatives have described her, but 'plucky'...the elevator scene is great! I watched Much Ado About Nothing and although I did find it amusing, it could not hold a candle to Ken Branagh's excellent version of the same play. It has some merit being a more modern version, but don't expect it to stick anywhere near the original storyline. It's hardly resembles the story at all.

There is a terrifically funny version of Hamlet which was directed by Kenneth Branagh, also written by him, nearly impossible to get a hold of though - only available on VHS or you can watch parts on Youtube - called In the Bleak Midwinter. It's really about a group of threater enthusisats trying to finance and put on the play by themselves. I saw some of it on Youtube and it's quite amusing. You might check it out, Mono.

There is also a very funny skit from Black Adder on Youtube of revisions to the "To be or not to be" speech. I will find the link and post it. It cracks me up everytime I see it. Hugh Laurie plays Will. Now, Hugh Laurie, in a long wig is enough to make one laugh.

---

Thanks for the suggestions, Janine - I will definitely have to do some research on the recommendations, for sure. Hamlet 2, to tell all honesty, has almost nothing to do with the epic Shakespeare play, and, to tell the honesty even more bluntly, seems nothing worth looking into as a film, but I do not consider myself a big fan of slapstick humor. It had its so-so parts that had me laughing, most definitely, and it had a "save the arts" message worth revering, but I felt a bit generous at giving it a 6/10 rating more for the purpose of its funny acting than writing or directing.
Thanks again, Janine - I wrote them all down. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mono

Thanks for the suggestions, Janine - I will definitely have to do some research on the recommendations, for sure. Hamlet 2, to tell all honesty, has almost nothing to do with the epic Shakespeare play, and, to tell the honesty even more bluntly, seems nothing worth looking into as a film, but I do not consider myself a big fan of slapstick humor. It had its so-so parts that had me laughing, most definitely, and it had a "save the arts" message worth revering, but I felt a bit generous at giving it a 6/10 rating more for the purpose of its funny acting than writing or directing.
Thanks again, Janine - I wrote them all down. ;)

---

Oh, good Mono, glad that helped. I think you could look them all up on Youtube, to see parts or even all of the film. I never saw the complete In the Bleak Midwinter, but it looked entertaining. It looks a bit crazy, but funny; it's all shot in b/w, which adds to it being theatrical and a independent and poor group of actors trying to put on a serous (?) play...:lol:. My favorites are the Branagh Much Ado About Nothing and the BBC version of Taming of the Shrew. In turn, I will have to check out this Hamlet 2 just for fun. I might find it just wacky enough to be interesting. I am not much for slapstick either but some parts may elicit some amusement. I love that skit by the Black Adder guy and Hugh Laurie - it has me in stitches everytime I watch it; especially how Hugh Laurie rolls his eyes. Funny to think of him now in the popular TV series of House. He's done a lot of humor in the past and he's very funny.

[QUOTE=Stargazer86;747015]I've heard nothing but disappointingly bad things about 10,000BC so I've never bothered to see it. Shame because they could have made a really cool movie out of that. I wasn't aware that Keanu was in it...it all makes sense now :D
[QUOTE]

hahaha... I think that even if Keanu was in the movie it could not have been any worse... that says a lot.


Anyway, on Monday night I finally watched The Last King of Scotland. I give it a 7.5/10... I give it a higher score for the wonderful acting (Forest Whittaker really is teriffic), yet something was lacking in the movie... overall I found it to be a good movie but just cannot put my finger on what's missing. Perhaps it was the fact that it doesn't really address certain things (the white man coming to “save” Africa) or has some hollywood-esque sequences and was at times really predictable... or maybe because I found the character of Nicholas Garrigan kind of improbable/unbelievable. He does such stupid things in the movie, he risks everything for sex, and yet also seems so naive! But to such a fault that it seems highly unlikely.