There's really no point in hiding the spoilers anymore since we both basically spoiled it anyway.

You're right about why the lobotomy was taking place, i had forgotten about that.

Look im not arguing why she created the stupid worlds. That's not my point, my point is that its just ridiculous and boring that after all that, it was just a fantasy world that she created in her head. I pretty much suspected that the video game levels/over done special effects scenes/whatever were in her head which was just dumb because why would she need to go into some kind of weird world in her head while she danced and distracted the people so her friends could steal random items so they could escape? It made sense when you found out that she was just trying to cope with everything but re-read that paragraph i just wrote and then try and tell me that isnt crazy.

The movie was boring, even during the action scenes and i just couldnt get past how unbelievably stupid it was that this girl was dancing to distract people so her friends could steal random items to escape and while dancing her mind took her to a fantasy world where she fought robots and nazis. There, i just rewrote it in a slightly different way and it still sounds like the stupidest plot idea ever made. Maybe this idea would work if it had a comedic element to it but the movie was trying to be dark and serious.

I never said i was confused about which world was which, it was very obvious which world was which but try explaining the entire scenario to someone and tell me that isnt just a little bit confusing.

You asked how having an imaginary world inside an imaginary world is any different from Inception. Its because in Inception the dream sequences werent imaginary, the characters were actually inside the dreams. The scenes inside the dreams actually happened, you didnt find out in the end that it was all made up by some crazy chick.

Of course the dreams in Inception looked like the real world. Thats how dreams look. Have you honestly ever had a dream that looked like what happened in Sucker Punch? I bet you havent, but i bet you have had some kind of daydream where you thought about something along those lines. That's the difference, one is a fantasy, the other is a dream. Completely different things.

Here's another difference between the movies. In Inception, them going into the dreams was part of the plot. They needed to go into the dreams and into more dreams and everything and it was explained why. That was the whole point of the movie. In Sucker Punch the only reason we're given as to why she goes into the fantasy worlds is because she needs to cope with what happened to her and you only get that explanation at the end of the movie. Also even that explanation is pretty thin. I get that she created a fake world to deal with her problems but why did she need to create another fake world (to further deal apparently) whenever she danced in the first fake world? Was the dancing just that traumatizing? It makes no sense, even for a disturbed person to have that kind of thought process and my head now hurts from writing all this.

Here's another difference. Both movies had cool visuals but Inception's actually went with the story and made sense but there was no reason for Sucker Punch's cool visuals except to wow the audience and try to get people to go see the movie. It had nothing to do with the plot.

You said Sucker Punch was more in your face, well Inception wasnt trying to be in your face. It was trying to be an entertaining movie with a clever story while Sucker Punch just tried to wow the audience and have cool visuals without a good story. There's nothing creative or interesting about a movie that just tries to make money by having lots of explosions and fight scenes that have nothing to do with the plot.

But at least we agree about the bus driver.

Not to mention: The Whore House/Cabaret World was downright retarded.

Honestly, THIS would have been a better movie -

Take out the superfluous middle layer - There's enough disgusting abuse within the context of an insane asylum that makes the middle layer really unnecessary... I think that it would have been a much, much better movie if they made it significantly darker - Put the environment/action purely in the insane asylum, but pull it to the extreme a bit, and then she uses her fantasies to escape abuse...

That way the fantasies can still be a metaphor for her struggles, you can still make more elaborate horrors out of the "reality" and you don't need to have the retarded unnecessary middle layer. I thought the Cabaret was so unnecessary.

Brazil, anyone? Two layers are quite enough to make a great escapist/fantasy movie. Why have a third?

But enough of that..


http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p...500_AA300_.jpg

"Devil times five" 6-7/10

Evil children from the 70s.

Sure, they kill people, but they're too cute to really dislike.



http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p..._76/images.jpg

"Tangled" 7/10

The humor and the story luckily made up for the horrible, horrible musical songs. Thank god there wasn't more of 'em.

Haha, I'm with you on this. I enjoyed this one quite a bit, definitely more than I expected to. But yeah, the songs were pretty lame. Just really boring.

The Innocents (1961)

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_f9pvdIisA4...cents.Kerr.jpg

Showed this to a friend that had never seen it. Holy smokes, still one of the best ghost stories ever put on film.

Most likely THE horror movie that has been remade the most.

The woman standing on the other side of the lake watching is one of my favorite horror moments ever. It's bright daylight and still it's creepy as hell. :)

God Told Me To (1976)

http://i1097.photobucket.com/albums/...odToldMeTo.jpg

>>: B-

Close Your Eyes/ Doctor Sleep/Hypnotica (2002)

http://i1097.photobucket.com/albums/..._sleep2002.jpg

>>: B-

100 Rifles" (1969)
-Jim Brown, Raquel Welch, Burt Reynolds

Plot: Rotten Tomatoes

Lyedecker (Jim Brown) is the Arizona lawman who travels to Mexico in search of Yaqui Joe (Burt Reynolds). Joe has made an illegal withdrawal of $6,000 from the band in Phoenix to help finance his tribes's uprising against the Mexican government. Sarita (Raquel Welch) is the local woman who is friendly towards the Indian leaders. Both men are tracked by General Verdugo (Fernando Lamas), the career-minded military man who realizes a victory could boost his station in high-society and politics.

Phantom's Review: DEAR GOD! Raquel Welch is so HOT!.......Oh, and Jim Brown and Burt Reynolds are in the movie too. Plenty of action and a good story make this a very entertaining film (did I mention Raquel Welch..and extreme hotness?)

Super 8 - Not bad. Quite atmospheric. Plot kind of fell flat towards the end but it was entertaining enough and had some interesting effects. I was thinking if I were about the same age group as the kids in this film I would have been all over it, like "Flight of the navigator" and "Goonies"...but, I'm not...however it was a decent film with some very cool scenes and an appropriate level of tension throughout.

X-Men - First Class.
Probably the best X-men film.
Comics fans will have to look past continuity issues with the books, as will fans of the previous films looking for some kind of link-up. It varies here and there from both, and very much establishes it's own continuity.
The guy playing Xavier did ok, the guy Playing Erik/Magneto was awesome.
It's not the origin story I was used to, but a good origin story all the same.
Very well done.

Insidious:

I'm not really sure how to take this one. Is it kinda campy and ridiculously unsubtle because Wan wanted it that way to bring something different to the haunting/possession genre or is it campy and ridiculously unsubtle because Wan is used to making Saw movies? That's not to say it's particularly bad, but throughout the movie I kept wondering just how I was supposed to be viewing the movie. Is it serious? Is it tongue in cheek? Is it a well done homage to say something like Twilight Zone? Or is it just a bad movie because the director doesn't know how to be subtle? I liked it, but I just found too many things to be too farcical to take it very seriously all the while it really felt like it was trying to be serious.

I dont want to fight with you because i think we've done enough of that already :rolleyes: but what do you mean campy? I didnt take anything that way, did i miss something?

Just the overall look of things. The old woman in the window and the "demon" which was quite obviously just a guy painted black with a red face with some fake fur around his shins. Maybe campy isn't the right word. Probably cheap and low-budget might be better. But combined with with the overall serious tone of the movie I just thought it came off looking somewhat ridiculous and campy for lack of a better word.

Went to see this yesterday and loved it. Man the set design was impressive.
The only thing I didn't like was the Wolverine cameo.

Okay that makes sense. I tend to like cheap, low-budget movies so maybe thats why i didnt see it that way. I actually liked the demon and the old lady, i thought they were pretty creepy. The thing i liked most about the movie was that it was actually able to create a scary atmosphere. It felt tense and was actually frightening instead of just having frightening elements.

http://i1101.photobucket.com/albums/...ake/shrine.jpg

I thought this was just gonna be another evil cult/americans in a foreign country movie but by the end it turned into a completely different thing. I liked the path the movie took and it actually surprised me. It's not the greatest horror movie i've ever seen but i like how it didnt fall into the trap of using typical cliches and the same old pattern.

Plus the statue was awesome.

From the R.I.P thread
Just got back from The Hangover: Part Two.
Pretty fun movie. Thought it was fairly different from the style of the first one but it still comes off as a worthy sequel. For me it wasn't as outrightly funny but I thought the events of the film and the storyline were equal if not better.
Good follow up. Nothing remarkable but one I'll add to my collection nonetheless.

Prey (2010)

http://i1097.photobucket.com/albums/...dc/PreyDVD.jpg

>>: B-

Christine Watched it last night. based on the Stephen King novel. directed by John Carpenter.
nothing can beat a kiler car classic. Love it!!!
I wanted to upload a picture of the movie but the attachment thing wouldn't let me.
so i just type the title in stead of using a picture.

http://i1101.photobucket.com/albums/...ke/images1.jpg

Luckily not as cartoonish as i thought it was going to be but unfortunately it wasnt as epic as well. But it was fun and exciting and that was all i was looking for.

http://www.movieever.com/wp-content/...vie-Poster.jpg

I must say I was pretty impressed.
It was a little different than I expected and pretty ambitious for a low budget horror film. I expected some thing along the lines of Zombieland but its more serious kinda like a cross between The Road and Omega Man (it does borrow alot of elements from other films but it still feels original enough).

I didn't expect to see any name actors but Kelly McGillis and the throaty guy from Generation Kill made an appearance.
The acting was better than I expected - the script was a little clunky at times but I got over it.

The main guy reminded me alot of William Smith:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-pHNm8zq9Ar...keland_430.jpghttp://www.librarising.com/astrology...lliamsmith.jpg

Completely agree. I was expecting a slightly more grand-scale, effects-laden, epic GL but it felt a bit flat.

Ryan Reynolds was his usual self but needed some support from his fellow cast. Blake Lively looked gorgeous and that was about it.

Highlight of the film - the Abin Sur scene and Sinestro.

* * *

Yeah a pretty forgettable superhero movie if you ask me.

Yeah...very decent indeed, even most of the times it didn't feel like a low budget effort.

Though I have to wait for the dvd release (or I hope I can catch it on the theaters next month as my friends here are planning to have a little trip to Kolkata by then and we've already even bought the plane tickets:)) but still I think there are more suitable actor(s) to play the role of Hal Jordan than Ryan Reynolds...even every time I sees those posters it's kinda looks like Hrithik Roshan is on GL suit! Grrrr!

Oh man! Rosh, don't make me drool! :cool:

I think Hollywood is reusing the same actors too much for superheroes. Reynolds played Green Lantern and Deadpool and Chris Evans played Human Torch and Captain America. I know thats only two but with such a wide selection of actors out there, why not broaden the scope a little bit?

Apartment Zero (1988)

http://i1097.photobucket.com/albums/...Apartment0.jpg

An amazingly intense psychological drama-thriller with a quite a bit of 'sexual' overtone but more than that this is something extraordinary of its kind where Colin Firth gave a monumental performance.

>>: A-

The Passing (2011)

http://i1097.photobucket.com/albums/...assing2010.jpg

>>: D

Shutter (08 remake). I liked it tbh, pretty scary.:cool:

Because Hollywood has absolutely no balls. They consistently go for the lowest common denominator, the surest thing, the easiest way to draw the people into the theater. The lower the risk, the better off they think they are. If an actor is hot at the moment, get him in every single movie possible to cash in on that popularity before he gets caught railing coke off a dead hooker's stomach while screaming anti-semetic remarks at the camera.

They think that people are going to a movie like Green Lantern because of the leading man. Sure that's part of it, but if it was only about Ryan Reynolds, why not make the Ryan Reynolds movie? Just have an hour and a half of Ryan on screen cracking one-liners and taking his shirt off. Why bother with all the Green Lantern nonsense? I think a good portion of people going to see Green Lantern are amazingly enough going to see a movie about the Green Lantern.

I would give Ridley Scott's Alien prequel as a prime example of the lunacy that is Hollywood. How many millions upon millions has the Aliens franchise made over the years? It's not exactly a weak franchise. So when they finally get the man who started it all to make a prequel they start quibbling over rating and budget? I'm sorry, but a properly done Alien prequel, helmed by Scott is pretty much a sure-fire way to print money. There's so little risk involved with that movie, but yet it's been put in jeopardy because the execs are too-shortsighted to see the reality of it.

They do this over and over again and then wonder why something like Doom (which if done right would have been another way to print money) utterly tanks. It's because they were too afraid to accept a tiny bit of risk in order to get that big payoff. Instead they try to play it safe and fail horribly.

The Last of the Mohicans. -- Dainel Day-Lewis has become my favorite actor. I really love his performances and his approach to acting. Does anyone else like him?

Trick r' Treat. -- I was presently surprised by this movie. I though Sam was cute until he took off his mask. Then I was like "FUCKING KILL IT." I shall be getting it on blu-ray.

Couple of great watches. I adore Daniel Day-Lewis. He's one of the best actors out there, several notches above a lot of others.

And welcome back, Dante!

Hahahahaha

Funny.

Dude, i 100% agree with you on like all of that

Aight, what should I see tonight?

-A Nightmare on Elm Street 4,5,6 or 7
-The Mothman Properties
-Cube 2
-Silent Hill

None of the above!:)

Those are some crappy movies man. Why not the first Cube or the first Nightmare?

The Mothman Prophesies is a damn good movie.

I found it kind of boring myself

Naturally.

It's still damn good.

Because I've already seen the first Cube and the first Nightmare. ;)

Maybe i'll have to give it a second watch. Done that before and ended up liking movies i didnt.

You should try Silent Hill. If you are a fan of the games you would like it.