What general film/series have you just seen.. marks out of 5

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 15 Mar 2009, 13:48

Go fuck yourself Romero and pick on someone else for a change. It really fucks me off how you pick at my posts, yet ignore others, who say the same fucking thing.

For the third time you dickwad: I'VE NOT SEEN IT!

Show me where I proclaim to know about the intricate details of Watchmen? It's true it's hard to get an 18 nowadays, it's true that must account for something, if not gratuitous.

I clearly state I was merely quoting what Kermode thought on the subject and you call me a sheep for taking his opinion as my own. I did nothing of the sort (which is obvious if you actually bother to read what I said), how can I? Again I'VE NOT SEEN IT.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 15 Mar 2009, 13:55

Subjective quoting as if you know what you are on about

luckystars · Post by **luckystars** » 15 Mar 2009, 16:18

Lol it is funny how little some of you seem to go to the cinema - but then this is a DVD forum

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 15 Mar 2009, 17:35

I don't go to the cinema that often. I rarely have time nowadays. That said, many I have seen this year, I've not felt the inclination to write about (such as Slumdog, as brilliant as it is).

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 15 Mar 2009, 19:13

luckystars wrote:Lol it is funny how little some of you seem to go to the cinema - but then this is a DVD forum

Well many people rarley even watch many films at all, never mind cinema.

It is amazing how many people spend time talking 100 times more about films on the net, then acctually siting down and wacthing the things they talk about.

Still I even know people who only watch films and TV shows on tiny Ipod players, now thats the future

they say how exactly is watching films on an Ipod and watching a film on a massive HD screen any different

I just freeze and honestly dont know what else to say to that

luckystars · Post by **luckystars** » 15 Mar 2009, 19:20

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKiIroiCvZ0

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 15 Mar 2009, 19:26

I'm not sure how many people only watch movies on MP3 Players (there's nothing special about the iPhone/Ipod) but it is true most people under 40 only watch movies downloaded off the web or worse yet streamed.

At least with MP3s they're "near" CD quality. Streamed movies aren't even remotely close to DVD quality, let alone anything else. It's all about how most people consider movies to just pass 2 hours of time and instead not having to pay for cinema tickets, popcorn, transport etc...

Most people have very little to no respect for movies. The amount of people I know who no longer go to the cinema and much prefer ripped copies. I'm astonished at the quality my Dad puts up with, just because he cannot be bothered to wait for the DVD or go to the cinema. He showed me the camcorder rip he had of Australia, it was so dark, you honestly couldn't see who was who. He watched it though and said it was only okay. Needless to say I said he wasn't qualified to comment, given that he couldn't even see the actors on screen.

I have the odd movie on my MP3 Player but it's only so I could see what it was like. I've watched a TV sitcom on mine but anything more or in depth no way.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 15 Mar 2009, 19:31

I am sure very few watch all their stuff on Ipods, phones etc.. just a friend of mine I guess

he loves it, and he says its as good as going to the cinema

I have tried to watch things on tiny screneed MP3 players etc.. I just cannot, its evil and awful. Only things i can get away with are short funy clips etc.. and music vids. I tried a few films and TV shows, made me want to just turn it off and go home and stick my TV on

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 15 Mar 2009, 20:49

romerojpg wrote:and he says its as good as going to the cinema

Clearly he doesn't have a clue what he's talking about or thinks of cinemas differently from you or I. In that he just wants to "watch a movie" for 2 hours, there's nothing wrong with that per se but I bet he cannot remember stacks of the film, watching it on such a small screen.

I wouldn't watch something like 24 on an MP3 Player but something like "The Big Bang Theory" is fine, it's not exactly taxing on the brain. Not that I ever do mind you. It's too much hassle to convert to MP3 Player format.

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 15 Mar 2009, 20:54

romerojpg wrote:Only things i can get away with are short funy clips etc.. and music vids.

Yeah, I'd say they're ideal for sharing YouTube clips with each other out and about.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 16 Mar 2009, 14:04

Bolt: 3/5

Not too bad, I enjoyed it and it was certainly better than I thought it would be.

The film does play with your expectations a bit a few times, which is fun You start to think maybe the whole movie is about a Superhero dog.. with the impressive set pieces at the beginning, it is then the film changes tack slightly as we find it's just a TV show of his adventures so its not real. Unfortunately, Bolt (the dog, voiced by John Travolta) doesn't realise he is not a hero and thinks everything is real There is perhaps some mild satire about the shallow, ratings driven nature of TV and then there's a standard Disney moral in the film. Bolt's owner Penny (Miley Cyrus) is kidnapped on the show and Bolt, thinking she really HAS been kidnapped, sets out to find her.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 16 Mar 2009, 15:20

gasteropod wrote:Yeah, I'd say they're ideal for sharing YouTube clips with each other out and about.

The thing is, you may as well put them on your mobile instead of MP3 Player.

YouTube apps on Smartphones are better though, no conversion needed.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 16 Mar 2009, 17:14

grim_tales wrote:Bolt: 3/5

Even better in 3D

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 17 Mar 2009, 00:30

bradavon wrote:The thing is, you may as well put them on your mobile instead of MP3 Player.

I wasn't referring to MP3 players specifically, Romero said 'MP3 players etc.'

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 17 Mar 2009, 01:06

I know. I was just commenting that Video on MP3 Players is a bit silly, well unless your phone sucks.

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 17 Mar 2009, 01:32

I still use a Nokia 3510

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 17 Mar 2009, 10:57

My Dad uses a Nokia 8210. He has about 6 of them and refuses to upgrade. Whenever he gets a free upgrade, he sells it on. The trouble is, the screens are all shot to shit but he stubbornly refuses to get a new one.

I use a Orange SPV C500 (Windows Mobile 2003 SE aka v4). It's a nice phone but only has GPRS (think Dial-up) meaning it's Internet capabilities are severely hindered. I'm waiting for Windows Mobile 7 due next year and can finally get something modern with Wireless and 3G, to take on the mighty iPhone. I'll then be able to access the web/have my e-mail pushed to my phone pretty much anywhere I am.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 17 Mar 2009, 14:52

I'm thinking of getting a new phone at some point (maybe).

luckystars · Post by **luckystars** » 21 Mar 2009, 22:18

Body of Lies 3/5
Should've been titled Jobby of Flies - what a stinker.

Looks like Ridley Scott has a few more turds in the pipeline too. A return to Sci-Fi? He's a brave man...

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 21 Mar 2009, 22:21

You call it a stinker yet rate it 3 out of 5? Some crazy logic right there

HungFist · Post by **HungFist** » 21 Mar 2009, 22:24

gasteropod wrote:You call it a stinker yet rate it 3 out of 5? Some crazy logic right there

3/5 is almost masterpiece by my standards

luckystars · Post by **luckystars** » 21 Mar 2009, 22:44

3/5 as in, whatever happened to Ridley Scott? Churning out a film that is just 'ok' and no better. I seriously doubt he even Directed this other than just yelling action and cut and letting the crew do the work.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 21 Mar 2009, 23:24

You need to re-evaluate your ratings system.

3/5 does not equal "stinker".

luckystars · Post by **luckystars** » 21 Mar 2009, 23:29

A film that is ok and no better is a 3/5 for me. Totally average.

A 3/5 from a Director like Scott is a WTF stinker.

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 21 Mar 2009, 23:35

Sorry to be nitpicky, but 'totally average' and 'ok and no better' would be a 2.5/5