Best and Worst movies of 2008

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 04 Jan 2009, 14:01

Updated:

(Out of ****)

No Country for Old Men ***
Rambo ***
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull **
The Dark Knight (2008) **.5
Quantum of Solace (2008) ***
There Will Be Blood **
The Forbidden Kingdom **

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 04 Jan 2009, 14:02

Yi-Long wrote:
romerojpg wrote:
bradavon wrote:I
Rambo 4 - 7 out of 10 - Such a joy after all the CGI shite of recent years
You must have watched a different film to what was made, its chock full of CGI from beginning to end.
Damn... I thought those heads popping off and fountains of blood were real....

I am sure he did not see the stuntmen as well...

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 04 Jan 2009, 14:35

gasteropod wrote:I daresay there's quite a difference between someone shooting a gun, and martial artists performing intricately choreographed moves and stunts. Rambo shooting someone vs. Jackie Chan's end fight in Drunken Master II... hmmm.

Fair point, to an extent.

Neither Rambo or most Martial Arts films have anything left when you take away the action though. That can sometimes work to it's favour, often not.

Drunken Master 2, Police Story and Police Story 2 are all dull to me. Okay action and no story at all to speak of. Maggie Cheung is good in the Police Story series though.

saltysam wrote:fairly consistent batch this year but certainly no classics among them.

Would you say it was an improvement over last year? Which was dire IMO. I would.

grim_tales wrote:I thought it was just best movies you saw in 2008, not that the movies had to be made in 2008. I havent seen many then

The title says:

Best and Worse "of 2008"

.

Why would we want to discuss old films you've happened to see this year?

That said I included films which were probably released in 2007 but only in 2008 over here. It gets a bit anal to be that specific IMO.

Yi-Long wrote:Damn... I thought those heads popping off and fountains of blood were real....

Damn weren't they?

Seriously, okay it has CGI (yes I knew that) but the style was definitely 80s action and for that alone it was a joy to watch. It was a lot more subtle than Indy 4's completely in your face CGI.

romerojpg wrote:I am sure he did not see the stuntmen as well...

I've no idea if I did. I wasn't looking for them.

You must ruin so many films by looking out of stuntmen and such things.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 04 Jan 2009, 14:36

I forgot about:

Eastern Promises - 7 out of 10 - Decent but not great, the bathhouse scene was great though, very visceral.
American Gangster - 8 out of 10 - Much better than most seemed to think. IMO.

Has anyone else seen The Changeling then? This sort of film never seems to get discussed here. In fact unless the female lead is an action here no one on this forum seems really interested.

Godzooki · Post by **Godzooki** » 04 Jan 2009, 14:53

bradavon wrote: Has anyone else seen The Changeling then? This sort of film never seems to get discussed here. In fact unless the female lead is an action here no one on this forum seems really interested.

Yeah had an Eastwood feast a few weeks back and watched this and Gran Torino! Changeling was excellent!

Notable Mentions

ASIA
- Ip Man (HK)
- The Good, the Bad, the Weird (Korea)
- CJ7 (Hong-Kong)
- The Chaser (Korea)

EUROPE
- Låt den rätte komma in / Let the right one in (Sweden)
- Frontière(s) (France)
- Martyrs (France)
- El Orphanto (Spain/Mexico)
- Rec (Spain)

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 04 Jan 2009, 14:53

OK

In that case I saw:

Hancock: 3.5/5
The Dark Knight: 4.25/5
Lust Caution: 4.25/5
Quantum of Solace: 3.75/5
Mama Mia!: 5/5
Madagascar 2: 3/5
I Am Legend: 3/5

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 04 Jan 2009, 14:59

grim_tales wrote:OK
I Am Legend: 3/5

2007

get on the ball Grim

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 04 Jan 2009, 15:09

Mama Mia!: 5/5

Shingster - Ban Grim

.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 04 Jan 2009, 16:18

I watched that at the cinema.

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 04 Jan 2009, 16:52

bradavon wrote: Would you say it was an improvement over last year? Which was dire IMO. I would.

oh yes.in fact i think i started a thread last year bemoaning the crapness of the 2007 output

bradavon wrote:Why would we want to discuss old films you've happened to see this year?

Hungfist included Exorcist 2 in his list

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 04 Jan 2009, 16:54

You did.

Oh did he, I missed that.

HungFist · Post by **HungFist** » 04 Jan 2009, 17:06

Different lists

HungFist wrote:2008 films only (not 2007 films that arrived local cinemas in 2008), ratings included.

HungFist wrote:General personal 2008 statistics (no matter when the film was produced).

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 04 Jan 2009, 17:16

No one on here seesm to see that many new films at all anymore, in cinemas at least.

HungFist · Post by **HungFist** » 04 Jan 2009, 17:34

Hard to justify spending money on new films (outside festivals at least) when you can get more interesting old films on dvd. That's what happens to me all the time. There's something interesting in cinema, but I end up spending that money on a more interesting dvd instead.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 04 Jan 2009, 17:38

I guess I am a cinema addict still, I love the gigantic screen in front of me.
My set up at home probibly beats some of the screens I go to in cinemas mind you, but hey I still love the cinema (even if the crowds can be a pain, sometimes).

I try to see every film in the cinema while its out, its only the 4th January and I have already seen 3 films this year in the cinema. None classics mind you, but hey.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 04 Jan 2009, 20:10

HungFist wrote:There's something interesting in cinema, but I end up spending that money on a more interesting dvd instead.

You can always do both. How do you really know it's more interesting?

romerojpg wrote:No one on here seesm to see that many new films at all anymore, in cinemas at least.

I too find that a weird one. No way does Home Video replace the Cinema IMO. I find it odd how some people won't go to the cinema any more, preferring to only watch at home.

I go most weeks. Not as much as you but more than many.

The crowds in multiplexes usually really annoy me (most are so inconsiderate), thankfully in my experience you don't get that in arthouse cinemas, people respect their fellow patron much more.

Surround sound in cinemas is never as good at home but that for me really isn't the point. It's all about the experience, that watching at home cannot compete with. I'm not saying cinema is better, it's different.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 04 Jan 2009, 20:17

The worst thing about average Joe is they dont even watch dvds, they watch poor quality rips from the net, pretty much every single person I know buys pirates (tonnes of them), bad ones.
I caught my dad watching one today, with burned in english subs over an english language film, the picture was abysmal. Yet I probibly have it on dvd, or Blu Ray!

Basically if people can see them a little earlier, or pay £5 they want it, even if its shocking crap.

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 04 Jan 2009, 20:19

I rarely go to the cinema because the picture quality is shit, the price is high, and there's a fair chance of my falling asleep against my will.

HungFist · Post by **HungFist** » 04 Jan 2009, 20:32

bradavon wrote:
HungFist wrote:There's something interesting in cinema, but I end up spending that money on a more interesting dvd instead.
You can always do both.

Can't go to cinema without money

bradavon wrote: How do you really know it's more interesting?

lol, what? How do I find the one I find more interesting more interesting?

bradavon wrote:
romerojpg wrote:No one on here seesm to see that many new films at all anymore, in cinemas at least.
I too find that a weird one. No way does Home Video replace the Cinema IMO.

It's not a question of equipment, but films. Of course I would go to cinema more if they played good films there. But I can get much better movies on dvd.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 04 Jan 2009, 21:05

HungFist wrote:lol, what? How do I find the one I find more interesting more interesting?

That's a tongue twister

.

I meant how do you know which is better if you've not seen either of them? I find there is as interesting films at the cinema as on DVD. Even if agreed the ratio is probably higher on DVD.

romerojpg wrote:I caught my dad watching one today, with burned in english subs over an english language film, the picture was abysmal. Yet I probibly have it on dvd, or Blu Ray!

Basically if people can see them a little earlier, or pay £5 they want it, even if its shocking crap.

Oh man tell me about it.

My Dad hasn't been to the cinema in years and prefers downloading everything.

He saw Australia 10 days before the UK cinema release and I shit you not the quality of the rip he watched was so poor you couldn't see who was who. It was atrocious. I would say unwatchable. I can appreciate if it's a good rip or even an okay rip but some of the ones he watches are unbelievably poor.

He put up with it, just so he could see it 10 days early (big freaking deal) and put he's too lazy to go to the cinema.

He then said Australia was only okay. I quickly replied with, how on earth do you have any idea? The quality was so bad, he could've been watching anything. The stubborn sod disagreed and said it was perfectly watchable. Bollocks it was.

I only ever resort to bootlegs if it's a film I'm really not sure I'll like and then it HAS TO BE a decent quality rip. If I can only find a camcorder bootleg I won't bother. Otherwise I wouldn't go near them, even good quality rips don't come close to DVD quality.

HungFist · Post by **HungFist** » 04 Jan 2009, 21:31

bradavon wrote:
HungFist wrote:lol, what? How do I find the one I find more interesting more interesting?
That's a tongue twister .

I meant how do you know which is better if you've not seen either of them?

Of course I don't know what is going be good and what isn't. That's the whole point. I can't choose based on something I don't know. Therefore I choose the one that seems more interesting/promising.

bradavon wrote: I find there is as interesting films at the cinema as on DVD. Even if agreed the ratio is probably higher on DVD.

Depends on a person's taste of course. Myself I'm not as interested in new films as I'm in older movies. And half of the new films that I am interested in won't be playing in cinemas on this side of the globe.

HungFist · Post by **HungFist** » 04 Jan 2009, 21:42

There's a teacher in my school who always brags about downloading movies. He's a weird man. Sometimes he quotes Dirty Harry and asks students "do you feel lucky?" (politely omitting "punk" from the end).

Once he asked every student who came late "have you seen Saturday Night Fever?". It really confused some people.

Also, a friend of mine told me that a year ago the teacher had told him during the first class that he would pass the course. My friend didn't mind. After all, it was true. He didn't pass

Oh, sorry, I forgot we were talking about top 10 2008. Oh well, this guy was funniest teacher of 2008.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 04 Jan 2009, 23:08

I'm not sure a teacher should be bragging about breaking the law 8).

Once he asked every student who came late "have you seen Saturday Night Fever?". It really confused some people.

I'm one of them.

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 04 Jan 2009, 23:33

bradavon wrote:I'm not sure a teacher should be bragging about breaking the law 8).

My Sociology teacher at college told us to take ecstasy instead of alcohol

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 04 Jan 2009, 23:56

When I did graphic design, ofcourse we had to work with photoshop, illustrator, indesign, etc etc. So in our first year there were students going :'But I dont HAVE those programs!!!'

'Just download them, or copy them from someone else in your class'.

I'm not a big downloader of movies. hardly ever actually, and usually I end up buying them on DVD anyway.

Music on the other hand, I ONLY download. But I hardly ever listen to music, so ...