What Movie Did You Just Watch

[Avaitor]

So check this out- a page committed to criticizing CinemaSins. I've always felt a little uncomfortable with CinemaSins, so I find this kind of cathartic. Especially since he's not afraid to call out what they forgot to call out.

[Peanutbutter]

Cinema Sins is really a lot of stupid jokes and nitpicks that are actually awful. Glad to see them taken down a peg.

[Rynnec]

Cinemasins isn't even supposed to be taken seriously to begin with and never was.

[Avaitor]

Even if they're not supposed to be, people sure as hell take those videos seriously. And while I haven't seen the videos of him in the car, the one shown here rubbed me the wrong way about the Cinema Sins guy.

[LumRanmaYasha]

A video taking Cinema Sins down a peg is great in concept, though admittedly just like Cinema Sins itself I got bored watching it. Still, I appreciate someone is exposing all the holes in Cinema Sins' lazy, nitpicky formula and the blatant mistakes they make in their videos.

[Foggle]

A video taking Cinema Sins down a peg is great in concept, though admittedly just like Cinema Sins itself I got bored watching it. Still, I appreciate someone is exposing all the holes in Cinema Sins' lazy, nitpicky formula and the blatant mistakes they make in their videos.

Everything Wrong With Everything Wrong With Sherlock Holmes is the best one IMO. Short and sweet.

[Avaitor]

I just picked up the recent release for Crimes of Passion. The movie's screenwriter is my professor, and a really cool guy, and this is a good film. It's definitely a product of the 80's, but so out there that it's still entertaining, and has fun performances all around.

Fun fact- apparently John Carpenter was almost the director of this at one point. He and Barry, the writer, became close and were passionate about making it, but Carpenter's wife wanted to be the lead, which even he recognized was a terrible idea. Besides her not fitting the role, everyone else wanted Kathleen Turner for the role, including Turner herself. He had to back down because his wife would not drop her interest in the role. Ken Russell's an awesome director and did a good job here, but I would have liked to have seen Carpenter's take on it.

[Avaitor]

One of these days, I'll try to watch the rest of the Furious movies. I've seen the first 2, which I thought were fine, 2 Fast's weird Drive-esq subplot aside, but I haven't seen anything special yet. But apparently it gets a lot of fun with the fifth film?

It's weird that a franchise doesn't get particularly good until the fifth entry, but I do enjoy mindless action as much as the next person.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

I've never really cared for these movies, myself. The closest I came to really enjoying one would be with Fast Five, in which Justin Lin really managed to step up as a director in terms of action and pacing, but even that didn't rise up much beyond the level of dumb fun.

Even the seventh film, which I specifically watched because it had James Wan attached to it (being that I'm a fan of his recent horror films) really did nothing for me.

[Avaitor]

I haven't caught up with the franchise or saw F8 of the Furious yet, but I saw something that I'll probably enjoy more- Raw. It's a weird little horror flick that I can't really put a finger on what sect it belongs to.

But it doesn't matter, since it's hella enjoyable throughout.

[Avaitor]

Blomkamp's Alien 5 is no more.

It's probably for the best, since he isn't a very good director. I'd like to see Ripley again, but maybe we shouldn't? I still don't know how I feel about Covenant.

[Spark Of Spirit]

Blomkamp shared some artwork he made for a proposed Alien 5 that would bring Sigourney Weaver's Ripley and Michael Biehn's Hicks back into the fold, essentially serving as a direct sequel to Aliens.

Bad director or not, this was the only good idea the movie franchise has had since the early 80s.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

I saw Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 last night. The short summation of it is that it's a lot of fun, but not quite as good as the first movie.

That said, when I heard early criticisms of the film, I was worried that this would be another case of Iron Man 2 or Age of Ultron (I enjoyed Age of Ultron, but it still had problems with staying focused on its main story at times). That's really not the case here. Despite juggling so many characters, the movie actually manages to let them all be fleshed out in equal parts. I think where a lot of people have issues with the movie is how the plot essentially splits up the Guardians into two parties for most of the movie, and also the lack of a central villain until the end. On the first point, I actually appreciate that the movie took an Empire Strikes Back approach, not so much in the tone as this movie is still fairly light-hearted, but in terms of not just copying the first movie and actually splitting up the characters to further develop them on their own. While I don't like this as much as the first movie, I like it a whole lot more than if the movie just would have done the first movie again by recycling the same general plot. As for the second criticism, I'm actually glad that the movie didn't take so much time to focus on another uninteresting villain. The MCU movies are notorious for having a plethora of lackluster and forgettable villains, and while I would prefer to see a good one, I'm not opposed to seeing them take more focus away from having a weak central villain throughout the plot to instead put more focus on the characters that we care about. That's probably a big reason for why this movie is actually able to handle so many characters without it feeling like a clusterfuck, which is a pretty amazing feat if you really think about how many other movies fumble with trying to do the same thing. And the character writing and performances still stand out as much as in the original, with a good number of funny and memorable lines and moments through the run-time.

While it's still only fresh in my mind, I'd personally say that this movie is around Ant-Man or Doctor Strange levels of quality. Pretty decent and entertaining spectacles with some good dialogue and interesting characters, though ultimately not nearly the best that Marvel has to offer.

[Avaitor]

I really enjoyed the film, myself. It's not as striking as the original (which at the same time wasn't exactly that original to begin with), but it's nearly as fun. I do think that the music isn't as useful or iconic as the first one's choices (although I don't really like most of the songs from the first one either- their placement is where a lot of the movie's charm comes from), and some characters get a bit too many cheap laughs.

But the development among the characters is great, and what helps to keep this feel much more fresh than your average sequel. I especially like getting plenty of time with Rocket and Yondu, two of my favorite characters, together. They worked wonderfully together.

I think this is the most fun I've had seeing an MCU since the first one. I'd probably call Civil War a better movie, but I wouldn't call it fun. The only thing I'm worried about is if Gunn will be able to keep the mojo going with Vol 3. It's clear that he knows what he's doing with the characters, but there are times where it feels like he's resting on the first film's laurels. You can get away with that once, but it'll get old if he doesn't find a way to make the next one really stand out.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

I actually feel that while not as good, this movie did quite a bit to differentiate itself from the first, so I'm not worried about Gunn playing it safe and resting on his laurels. I also feel that with the success of films like Deadpool and Logan, Marvel as a studio is realizing that they will need to take more risks in order to stay ahead of FOX, which has gradually been becoming steeper competition for Marvel against all odds.