What Movie Did You Just Watch

[talonmalon333]

I'm a big fan of the original novel, which is honestly my preferred version, but the first 2 films are still great. They also had Mario Puzo consulting with the screenplay, so the first movie was a really faithful adaptation of the source material, though unfortunately had to cut out a ton of backstory. We did get to see part of that backstory adapted well enough for the biggest character in the first movie, with the flashback scenes featuring Robert De Niro as Vito Corleone (or Andolini, if you remember his true family name) and those parts were the highlights of the second film for me. The film in general does feel like it really is what would happen in the continuation of the Corleone family story, but I'm in disagreement with the people who say that it's superior to the first film, mainly because I find that the supporting characters aren't nearly as interesting this time around. Even so, it's still a great movie.

Then there's The Godfather Part III, which is certainly one of the most unecessary sequels of all time (though I'd argue that the second movie wasn't necessarily needed as a follow-up, either), but I also feel that the massive hate that it gets is way overblown and largely undeserved. Is it a great film on par with the first 2 movies. No. But it's well written enough and put together in such a way that it's certainly not a bad film by any stretch, either. And yes, I know that Coppola casting his relative in the role of Michael Corleone's daughter was a big mistake and she was horrible, but one bad actress (for a character who honestly doesn't even appear that much in the film), does not kill the entire movie. It's one of those deals where people hate on the movies ore because everyone else does, these days, rather than judgining it properly. On its own, its a decent enough mobster flick. As a Godfather film, however, it's most certainly the weak link in the trilogy.

I watched the movies with my friends. I have to admit that I was kind of interested in seeing Part III, but no one else was. I will admit, though, that maybe it's for the best that we didn't watch it. Watching the first two Godfather movies in a single day was a lot, but the entire trilogy would have taken, like, 10 hours.

[talonmalon333]

I just got back from seeing The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies. Spoilers below.

Spoiler

I have to be honest, I didn't love it as much as I hoped I would. It had elements of it that were satisfying. But, to start, it honestly seemed like half of the 144 minute running time was dedicated to the battle. I also think the tone kind of clashed with itself again. Like, you had that greedy guy dressing as a woman, and then five minutes later, main characters were being killed. There's also the fact that I struggle to understand why Smaug had to be killed off in this movie. I mean, it only took a few minutes, before the movie's subtitle even came up. And I wasn't particularly fond of that cliffhanger in Desolation of Smaug. They should have just wrapped up his arc in that movie.

Some of the action was cool, though. And I did legitimately care about some of the main characters, and was sorry to see some of those dwarves go. The epilogue was also fairly nice. But overall, I remain unconvinced that The Hobbit had to be stretched into three movies.

[close]

[Spark Of Spirit]

I still need to see it, but I doubt it'll be that great. The movies tend to miss a lot from the novel, but I'm sure it's a decent movie in its own right.

[Spark Of Spirit]

I just saw this comment on spoilers for the last Hobbit movie:

One of the things that struck me in seeing this final film last night was how much material from what really amounts to just the last 53 pages of THE HOBBIT was left out - not just virtually all of Bilbo's journey back (I can see how much of that might have been anti-climactic), but the decision to kill the Master so early on wiped out so much of what was intriguing about his part of the narrative.

Despite the fact this is a three hour movie based on 53 pages of a book, he STILL cuts most of it out?

Why wasn't this just two films?

[talonmalon333]

I like the promise of taking a more serious approach to The Hobbit and intertwining it with The Lord of the Rings as a way to bridge the two stories. But it could have been done better.

Two movies, both not much more than two hours. One dedicated to the majority of the novel. The second wrapping things up, featuring the Battle of the Five Armies, and leading into the original trilogy. It could have been done with no fat ("fat" in reference to padding, not new or expanded content). Characters like Legolas can be there but they should feel more necessary. And Lord of the Rings tie-ins shouldn't feel so disjointed.

[talonmalon333]

Are any of you guys going to be seeing the final Hobbit movie soon?

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

I will. Normally I would've seen it on release day, but I've been really preoccupied lately, hence why I still haven't watched it yet. I'm planning to see it some time this week, though.

[LumRanmaYasha]

I saw it a few days back. Overall, I enjoyed it, but at the same time I couldn't help but feel that it really wasn't necessary for this to be three movies, instead of just two, since most of what this movie amounts to is original content and lots and lots of fighting. Also, I agree that they should've just had Smaug die in the last movie, since that sequence was only like 7 or so minutes long anyway which made the last movie's cliffhanger feel even more pointless. Still, I had fun with the movie, since the pacing was much better than the last, the action and humor were enjoyable, and I could get invested in all the main characters' plights very well, and it was just a satisfying experience overall.

[talonmalon333]

Spoiler

I don't know. It just felt like a big fight scene to me. I did like the Thorin bits before and during the battle, as well as the ending. So I at least liked parts of the movie. But the war just felt too long to me. I guess I just got tired of seeing CGI characters being sliced up for an hour. And I still couldn't bring myself to care all that much about the dwarves, other than Thorin and Balin. I mean I liked their presence. But even when Bilbo said goodbye to them, when they were all lined up, I still couldn't remember all their names.

I also think Legolas being in these movies didn't amount to anything, and in some ways actually hurt the Lord of the Rings trilogy. I like how his skills were more grounded in Fellowship, and then he progressively got better as the movies went on. But here, we learn that he was a super hero from the beginning. First he was hopping across dwarf heads in Desolation of Smaug over the river to fend off orcs, which wasn't necessary. But in this movie, it was just tiring to me. I especially didn't like seeing him run up falling rocks. Seriously, even the movie theater I was in broke out into laughter at that moment. He can do all that in The Hobbit, and suddenly his skills seem like such a downgrade when we see him again in Fellowship, when the best he did was shoot orcs impressively. More importantly, though, I think it's just really weird seeing him working together with all of these dwarves, witnessing Tauriel fall in love with one of them... and then being all racist against them in Fellowship. It's like Star Wars where the prequel just sort of contradicts the later storylines.

And the romance between Tauriel and the dwarf didn't really amount to anything. It wasn't developed, and ultimately it just led to his death and her feelings being "real", which doesn't mean much to me because I don't care about her and she isn't relevant to anything. The saving grace was that she was played by Evangeline Lilly, who was Kate Austen in Lost.

I also said this in an earlier post, that I felt the tone clashed too much between comedy and darkness (I didn't like that guy in Laketown who was bad and was played up for laughs), and that I didn't like how they waited till this movie to kill off Smaug when his death was done in less than 10 minutes, anyway. Desolation of Smaug was already about 10 minutes shorter than An Unexpected Journey. So incorporating Smaug's death into Desolation would have just put in on par with the first movie in running time, so I don't think length would've been much of an issue. And even with that aside, they could have just cut something down if they had to. I mean, I'm sure there was something in that movie that could've been cut or shortened.

Then there was the scene at Dol Guldur. I'll admit that it was kind of nice seeing those guys all band together against Sauron and the Ringwraiths. And I liked seeing Galadriel so easily release Gandalf from his prison, as we hadn't yet seen much of her power. It was a little bit of fan service. But I do have to admit it just felt disjointed and maybe a bit too fanservicy, especially when Galadriel went all dark and glowy and did what she did in Fellowship.

That's just what I think, and I don't really expect anyone to agree. Maybe this will be a popular or unpopular opinion, but I just felt this movie was, for the most part, varying degrees of okay.

[close]

[talonmalon333]

By the way, it's funny thinking about Gollum back when The Hobbit was still new. First of all, Tolkien hadn't yet planned out how important and evil the Ring is. So, after Bilbo wins the riddle game, Gollum originally handed over the Ring to him as a reward and then showed him the way out of the cave. These were changed in later editions of the novel.

Also, originally Tolkien didn't describe how Gollum looks, so many artists imagined him as being really big.

[talonmalon333]

Sorry for a triple post. Especially since it's another Hobbit one.

Spoiler

I saw Battle of the Five Armies again and liked it a bit more this time. My problems with the movie do stand. But I just think the parts with the dwarves, and the parts with Bilbo, are solid, and even though there is too much of them, the action scenes themselves are well done. I particularly like the fight scenes between Thorin and Azog. Also, Sauron's role isn't quite as disjointed as I initially said it was. But I do think Bilbo feels too sidelined in these movies, especially this one. To me, it feels like, for all intents and purposes, Thorin is the main character and Azog is the main villain.

Overall, I think that, in terms of pure entertainment, this movie is better than An Unexpected Journey. It's one-note, but An Unexpected Journey just wasn't that interesting to me, and was the movie where I most felt its length and thought dragged most.

[close]

[Foggle]

Saw The Grand Budapest Hotel yesterday. Easily my favorite film of last year, though Why Don't You Play In Hell? comes close. Just really, really funny and expertly paced. Ralph Fiennes was simply perfect.

[Avaitor]

I'm thinking of Redboxing Grand Budapest when I go home for the weekend. I still need to see it, and my mother's interested as well.

[Avaitor]

In the past week or so, I've been able to see both of the Anderson's new movies, and I really liked each one!

Grand Budapest Hotel might be Wes' strongest story, at least if we're talking narrative. Yes, most of his idiosyncrasies are still present, but I think he actually restrains himself enough to tell a unique, cohesive Agatha Christie tribute. That said, I feel like I need to see it again to fully grasp my opinion on it, which might happen soon! Until then, I'm perfectly fine with it scoring some love at the Oscars this year.

And Inherent Vice, wow. Take Big Lebowski, add in the craziest Raymond Chandler elements that used, along with a dash of Punch-Drunk Love, and a composition of Miami Vice and Easy Rider into a blender, and that's this movie. Might just be my favorite film of the year.

[Lord Il]

Saw Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb on the weekend. To be honest, I put off seeing this for a bit because, frankly, this should have stopped after the first movie. These movies are fun, but nothing too much unique outside the first movie.

I don't know... I'm still glad I saw it, though. It ended on a somewhat high note, but at the same time it was a terrible tearjerker for most because of this being Robin Williams' last film - it was difficult to watch towards the end. I actually heard someone sobbing in the theater.