Conquer Club

Post your movie reviews here


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edge of Tomorrow - 7.2/10

Overall pretty good. Ending was cheesy and predictable. Plot was meh but action was good and it was quite humorous at times.

It sucked.

Ten Commandments - Heston gave a fascinating performance but the plot was quite unbelievable and supernatural. Allegedly there is a great sky daddy of us all that is super fantastic. I recommend not seeing it.

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 - 5.5 out of 10

This thing had some cheesy lines that brought to mind Batman Forever (I love Paul Giamatti, but he wasn't given much to do). The love stuff between Peter and Gwen was sweet, though.

Spider-Man films really amp up the villains' powers, huh? I didn't remember Electro being such a force of nature in the comics, similarly to the way Sandman was beefed up in Spider-Man 3.

Look, Fox, Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2 were great in part because we got to focus on just 1 villain at a time. Please stop trying to weld together three different movies with three different sets of villains.

Army of GOD wrote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edge of Tomorrow - 7.2/10

Overall pretty good. Ending was cheesy and predictable. Plot was meh but action was good and it was quite humorous at times.

Just saw it.

8.5/10

Movie was a lot of fun. All the best elements of Starship Troopers, Groundhog Day, Terminator 2, and War of the Worlds. You'd think with all those obvious influences it would feel very derivative, but it actually didn't, because genuinely new twists were combined with each, and the final result felt original.

macbone wrote:The Amazing Spider-Man 2 - 5.5 out of 10

This thing had some cheesy lines that brought to mind Batman Forever (I love Paul Giamatti, but he wasn't given much to do). The love stuff between Peter and Gwen was sweet, though.

Spider-Man films really amp up the villains' powers, huh? I didn't remember Electro being such a force of nature in the comics, similarly to the way Sandman was beefed up in Spider-Man 3.

Look, Fox, Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2 were great in part because we got to focus on just 1 villain at a time. Please stop trying to weld together three different movies with three different sets of villains.

In one of the universes (can't remember which one, maybe just the cartoon) Electro was seriously badass. One of the most powerful mutates in the universe. He was Red Skull's son, designed to be the ultimate weapon for the Red Skull to dominate the world.

-TG

I refuse to acknowledge the new Spider Mans as a thing.

Malificent - 6.4

OK so when I originally saw the trailer, I really wanted to see this movie. I saw Sleeping Beauty about a thousand times as a kid and I wanted to see the gritty remake. I wasn't planning on seeing it in theaters though, but I was on a date and she wanted to see it.

Anyway, I think it was honorable what they tried to do (essentially, without giving too much away, Malificent is "good") but I just am too biased towards the original. I grew up with the idea that Malificent is quite possibly one of the most pure evil villians in any film. There were a few plot holes in this film that also detracted from it but Angelina Jolie is actually really good in the role.

Did he buy you popcorn?

You must immediately find this movie, rent or buy it and watch it!



Meanwhile, here is a film short for your viewing pleasure:

Dukasaur wrote:

Army of GOD wrote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edge of Tomorrow - 7.2/10

Overall pretty good. Ending was cheesy and predictable. Plot was meh but action was good and it was quite humorous at times.

Just saw it.

8.5/10

Movie was a lot of fun. All the best elements of Starship Troopers, Groundhog Day, Terminator 2, and War of the Worlds. You'd think with all those obvious influences it would feel very derivative, but it actually didn't, because genuinely new twists were combined with each, and the final result felt original.

Initial feeling once I left the theater (based entirely on the ending): 6/10

Now that I've had time to think it over: 7.5/10

Going into the movie, I was skeptical. I'm rather apathetic toward Tom Cruise at this point in his career, but the dying and starting over gimmick was nicely done, and I liked the repetition of scenes. Emily Blunt was great in it, too. At first, I didn't like the ending, but after mulling it over, it did make sense in terms of the movie. The original title of the Japanese light novel, <i>All You Need Is Kill</i>, was much better, though, and I'm going to dig it up and read it.

I watched Pulp Fiction the other day and thought it wasn't really up to much. Anyone else think so?

My main problem with it is that Tarantino obviously wants it to seem deep, meaningful and introspective, but he doesn't actually have anything to say. He just writes some abstract conversations that he thinks sound deep, chucks in a reoccurring Bible quote and reckons that he has written a work of philosophical genius, much like a teenager posting obscure song lyrics on their Twitter because they think it makes them sound deep and mysterious.

It's a shame because the action and cinematography is pretty entertaining, but it's spoilt by all the lame attempts at pretending that the film has something important to say.

6/10.

The only recent film I've seen was the last X Men, which was an entertaining enough way to kill a few hours.

mrswdk wrote:I watched Pulp Fiction the other day and thought it wasn't really up to much. Anyone else think so?

My main problem with it is that Tarantino obviously wants it to seem deep, meaningful and introspective, but he doesn't actually have anything to say. He just writes some abstract conversations that he thinks sound deep, chucks in a reoccurring Bible quote and reckons that he has written a work of philosophical genius, much like a teenager posting obscure song lyrics on their Twitter because they think it makes them sound deep and mysterious.

It's a shame because the action and cinematography is pretty entertaining, but it's spoilt by all the lame attempts at pretending that the film has something important to say.

6/10.

Pulp Fiction is my second favorite movie. I don't think he tried to make it all that "deep," but it is about redemption. And it's hilarious and offers endlessly quotable lines.

He made up most of that Bible quote, btw.

-TG

The Gods Must Be Crazy.....cult classic.

Pulp Fiction: 9/10

I love Pulp Fiction, and it's a crime that I haven't watched Reservoir Dogs or Inglorious Basterds. I really need to get on that. Kill Bill Vol. 1 was great, too, although I didn't enjoy Vol. 2 as much, and I really enjoyed Django Unchained, too.

I like Tarantino's story-telling, how he reveals bits and pieces, and even at the end, you don't have all the answers. Jules is one of the best characters in modern cinema.

Two things about Tarantino bug me, though. He uses "n*****" far too often, and his characters' speech sounds too much like their lines have been carefully crafted, that they're not natural enough.

Jules' rewrite of Ezekiel is a lot of fun: " Ezekiel 25:17: 'The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy My brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay My vengeance upon you.'"

Or this exchange:

show

Or this one:

show

Or this one:

show

Nobody talks like that, but it's gold.

Edit: Oh, hey, I gave it a 9/10 on IMDB years ago, too. Huh.

To me Pulp Fiction isn't about Tarantino trying to be deep, its about Samuel L Jackson character trying to be deep.

Bionic Ninja (1986) - One of Godfrey Ho's many masterpieces of ninja cinema, this film is easily a 9.865 out of 10.

macbone wrote:I love Pulp Fiction, and it's a crime that I haven't watched Reservoir Dogs or Inglorious Basterds. I really need to get on that. Kill Bill Vol. 1 was great, too, although I didn't enjoy Vol. 2 as much, and I really enjoyed Django Unchained, too.

Reservoir Dogs is pretty much on par with Pulp Fiction. You should definitely watch it. Jackie Brown is pretty good, not as good, but enjoyable if kinda slow.

All the rest of his directed movies are only worth a single watch, imo.

-TG

Django Unchained and Inglorious Basterds are far superior. I really enjoyed them. He drops almost all the pretention and just makes some entertaining movies. I could watch Django over and over. Pulp Fiction I'm not sure I'd even go back for a second run.

mrswdk wrote:Django Unchained and Inglorious Basterds are far superior. I really enjoyed them. He drops almost all the pretention and just makes some entertaining movies. I could watch Django over and over. Pulp Fiction I'm not sure I'd even go back for a second run.

I enjoyed the pretention in Pulp Fiction. It is aptly tittled.

mrswdk wrote:Django Unchained and Inglorious Basterds are far superior. I really enjoyed them. He drops almost all the pretention and just makes some entertaining movies. I could watch Django over and over. Pulp Fiction I'm not sure I'd even go back for a second run.

That's funny, I thought Django and Basterds were both almost insufferably pretentious. Django is a movie that relies on the righteous slave getting revenge on a slaver, and Basterds is just the same but with Jews and Nazis. It's like watching a propaganda film.

-TG

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:

mrswdk wrote:Django Unchained and Inglorious Basterds are far superior. I really enjoyed them. He drops almost all the pretention and just makes some entertaining movies. I could watch Django over and over. Pulp Fiction I'm not sure I'd even go back for a second run.

That's funny, I thought Django and Basterds were both almost insufferably pretentious. Django is a movie that relies on the righteous slave getting revenge on a slaver, and Basterds is just the same but with Jews and Nazis. It's like watching a propaganda film.

-TG

+1

"I'm a sociopath who enjoys killing, but it's okay because my victims are bad people."

Tarantino has two groups of films: Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown and then Kill Bill, Django, Basterds, Death Proof.

Am of the are amazing because I'm a huge Tarantino fanboy. First set has more complicated plot structure while the second is all revenge films.

Dukasaur wrote:

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:

mrswdk wrote:Django Unchained and Inglorious Basterds are far superior. I really enjoyed them. He drops almost all the pretention and just makes some entertaining movies. I could watch Django over and over. Pulp Fiction I'm not sure I'd even go back for a second run.

That's funny, I thought Django and Basterds were both almost insufferably pretentious. Django is a movie that relies on the righteous slave getting revenge on a slaver, and Basterds is just the same but with Jews and Nazis. It's like watching a propaganda film.

-TG

+1

"I'm a sociopath who enjoys killing, but it's okay because my victims are bad people."

Come on you guys..

YOur Tarantino-movies intellectualazing is like having a girl in all four in front of you, and at some point while you're humping her you stop to think.. mm, maybe this girl moans a little more than other girls.... and I also wonder if she's a little fat too, I mean I can easily grab her here.. mm I don't know, maybe I should keep analyzing her and not enjoy fucking her.