Page 206 of 325
Posted: 24 May 2007, 21:58
by Markgway
I think all three DIE HARD films are class.
THE MATRIX is pretentious nonsense. It's no brainer than COMMANDO for gawd's sake.
Posted: 24 May 2007, 22:05
by Lourdes
Markgway wrote:I think all three DIE HARD films are class.
THE MATRIX is pretentious nonsense. It's no brainer than COMMANDO for gawd's sake.
It's pretentious nonsense but it's also a great action film.
Posted: 24 May 2007, 22:36
by EvaUnit02
The Matrix uses high school level pseudo-psychology and random biblical/mythological references to make stoners (aka the hardcore fans who liked all 3 films and over-analyse them to death) think that they're smart.
Posted: 24 May 2007, 22:50
by Lourdes
EvaUnit02 wrote:The Matrix uses high school level pseudo-psychology and random biblical/mythological references to make stoners (aka the hardcore fans who liked all 3 films and over-analyse them to death) think that they're smart.
I just call it "philosophy for retards."
Posted: 24 May 2007, 23:35
by Shingster
Haha it's true that the Matrix Trilogy is a load of pretentious old bollocks, but as Lourdes said, the action and style of the first film overwhelms any meta-physical wankery the Wachowski Brothers saw fit to include. Besides, it's more the 2nd and 3rd films that start laying it on with a trowel, not the 1st one.
Posted: 25 May 2007, 00:44
by Markgway
'Be the spoon...............'
You don't get John McClane coming out with that bunch of arse.
Posted: 25 May 2007, 04:11
by EvaUnit02
Heroes Season One - 3/5
It was ok. Addictive and entertaining TV, but entirely lacking in substance. Tided over until some REAL TELEVISION starts airing over here again, namely Sopranos S6.2.
Posted: 25 May 2007, 10:07
by grim_tales
Yeah, The Matrix is a fine action film.
The Simpsons: Season 6 - Disc 1: 4.5/5
Some true classics here. Itchy and Scratchy Land

Posted: 25 May 2007, 11:39
by thelostdragon
The whole "The Matrix" triolgy was a complete waste of talents. Good special effects department, but used for a shitty film. Good action scenes, but for a shitty film. Great martial arts director, but also used for a shitty film. I only got the Ultimate Collection because I am a sucker for extras.
Posted: 25 May 2007, 12:08
by EvaUnit02
Are the HD-DVDs of Matrix 1 and Animatrix only available in the faggot boxset? I hate you Warner, this is the 2004 remastered DVD all over again.
thelostdragon wrote: I only got the Ultimate Collection because I am a sucker for extras.
So you bought a boxset of movies that hate for the extras? Stupidest thing that I've heard all day.
Posted: 25 May 2007, 12:26
by Lourdes
Animatrix isn't in HD. Maybe for BD, who knows. But yes, only in the ultimate set. There's the ultimate set with everything and the complete trilogy which is the three films.
Posted: 25 May 2007, 12:27
by EvaUnit02
Lourdes wrote:Animatrix isn't in HD.
FAIL. Fuck you Warner.
Posted: 25 May 2007, 12:34
by grim_tales
The first Matrix is a great film. The 2nd was "okay" I guess. The third is a pile o' arse.
Posted: 25 May 2007, 14:03
by brooce-leroy
The best thing about The Matrix Reloaded is the The Architect.
Posted: 25 May 2007, 14:24
by EvaUnit02
brooce-leroy wrote:The best thing about The Matrix Reloaded is the The Architect.
If you needed to see some old fucker who looks like Colonel Sanders I'd buy a box of KFC, not sit through that dirge of a film again.
Posted: 25 May 2007, 14:34
by grim_tales
*M*A*S*H - 3.5/5
Quite funny, I enjoyed it

Posted: 25 May 2007, 15:10
by Lourdes
grim_tales wrote:The first Matrix is a great film. The 2nd was "okay" I guess. The third is a pile o' arse.
I turned off Reloaded quickly. Too much pretention, CG and general twatiness.
EvaUnit02 wrote:Lourdes wrote:Animatrix isn't in HD.
FAIL. Fuck you Warner.
Agreed. I really, really hope the BD gives us a better showing.
Posted: 25 May 2007, 15:16
by Lourdes
Layer Cake - 3.5/5
I'm maintaining my original opinion of this. There's good cinematography and music which creates somewhat of an atmosphere. However, it's marred by too much cheap gangster nonsense and the lack of a solid central plot. A clone of Guy Ritchie with some decent technical skills. Mixed feelings about it.
The Fugitive - 4/5
Great film, always suceeds in holding me throughout. And seeing the janitor from Scrubs is the cherry.
Lost: Season 3 - 3/5
Entertaining but so frustrating. I DO NOT BLOODY CARE ABOUT THE WORTHLESS FLASHBACKS THAT PISS ME OFF AND DON'T CONTRIBUTE A DAMN THING, GET ON WITH IT! With a lot more being revealed in Season 3 it makes the previous seasons seem entirely worthless. And as we're going to get 3 more seasons at least I expect they'll do the same to this one. It's somewhat entertaining and interesting but the way they drag it out is dreadful.
Posted: 25 May 2007, 18:28
by RickyTheDragonSteamboat
Well atleast we now know for sure that they do get rescued.
Posted: 25 May 2007, 19:25
by grim_tales
The flashbacks which don't really go anywhere (so far anyway?) annoy me about S2 as well so far. Terry O' Quinn is a good actor though.
"You want your damn $30 back?! I want my kidney back!"

Posted: 25 May 2007, 20:12
by bradavon
After reading reports of how bad Pirates 3 is (worse than 2) it seems they've not learned their lessons after The Matrix by releasing one solid and well paced film they have to balls it up by releasing a second BUT making it so long it's deliberately chopped in two. This then introduces so much bloat that would ordinarily appear on the cutting room floor without question.
The really dumb thing is people fall for it and they can effectively charge twice for the same film, or to put it another way charge you full price to only see half a film.
Posted: 25 May 2007, 20:17
by romerojpg
bradavon wrote:After reading reports of how bad Pirates 3 is (worse than 2) it seems they've not learned their lessons after The Matrix by releasing one solid and well paced film they have to balls it up by releasing a second BUT making it so long it's deliberately chopped in two. This then introduces so much bloat that would ordinarily appear on the cutting room floor without question.
The really dumb thing is people fall for it and they can effectively charge twice for the same film, or to put it another way charge charge you to only see half a film.
and you care still? See it yourself, then comment

bollocks to what every other Joe thinks. Esspecially saddo net types who wank off in the cinema no doubt. Everyone I know how has seen it loved it, and part 2, so bollocks to everyone else.
I will see it soon, and wont even read what other people say as I dont care. I am not a sheep.
Posted: 25 May 2007, 20:19
by bradavon
Well Pirates 1 was so average there's no way I'm going near Pirates 2 or 3. Bloated tosh with not an ounce of quality. Sure Depp was good but that passed after about 20 minutes.
I bet I'm right about my previous comment. There was not remotely enough decent/worth while footage in Matrix 2/3 to make two films but they did it anyway. To a large extent this was a problem on Kill Bill 1/2 too.
I will see it soon, and wont even read what other people say as I dont care. I am not a sheep.
Is your record stuck again?
Posted: 25 May 2007, 20:25
by grim_tales
I saw Pirates 2 and certainly didnt "love it". It was overlong, and Depp wasn't in it nearly enough IMO. It (Pirates 2) was OK but like Brad says, it didnt work as a standalone film (ended on a stupid cliffhanger).
I've read varying reports of Pirates 3, some bad, some OK/good, its agreed Depp is the best thing in the film.
Posted: 25 May 2007, 20:31
by Shen
I saw pirates 3 today...
3/5
its not a bad film, plenty of action and some great comedy moments...a little odd and surreal at times. which i found to be annoying. but its still good
if you go, stay 'til after the credits there's another clip shown...