• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

Rate the last movie you saw

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Jack Brickman said:
The issue for me was that I read the book and it was really good. The movie had absolutely nothing in common with the novel other than zombies to the point where I have no idea why they even bothered licensing it to begin with if they had no intention of even trying to adapt it.
Click to expand...
Wasn't the rumor that they started the novel adaptation and thought it wouldn't appeal to the masses so they scrapped it? Thus the bastardized version was made into a movie?
 
FiveThous said:
Wasn't the rumor that they started the novel adaptation and thought it wouldn't appeal to the masses so they scrapped it? Thus the bastardized version was made into a movie?
Click to expand...
Yup, Pepsi had a pretty big shot which paid for all the re-shoots
 
The Oi said:
How did people feel about World War Z? I watched it the second time last night looking for some cheap thrills rather than anything that took any thought.

I like apocalyptic themese, which is why I enjoy a lot of zombie movies. I like seeing people broken down to that fight or flight, survivalist aspect.

I thought it was overall enjoyable, but there were moments where I was very annoyed by lack of realism. I had no problem with the capabilities of the zombies. I'm willing to accept hat the rabies causes them to achieve physical feats that are at the absolute maximum capabilities of human beings.

I was just more annoyed by the Hispanic family not leaving their apartment, their kid running out and shooting the zombie attacking Gerry, the fact that people were relocated from the ship when there were really no safe areas outside of it and other small things.

I thought it was worthy of about a 7/10, but I felt like if done properly it had a shot at a good 8.5
Click to expand...

For the amount of money spent and the fact that it had a solid book behind it and had an A list celebrity in it, It was one of the worst Zombie movie. UNderwhelming. I have seen shittier Zombie movies than this but i knew they would be shitty. This one was disappointing. Oh and the fact that there was no blood also did not help. It had a few great sceenes like the one in the plane and the Jerusalem wall one but otherwise nope. Dawn of the Dead, 28 days later, The Horde are few movies i can think off of the top of my head that i enjoyed way more.
 
San Andreas - Did anyone in casting notice that the Rock isn't white? Because I'm pretty sure if he impregnated Carla Gugino, his daughter wouldn't come out looking like Alexandra Daddario. I don't want to complain too much, though, because his daughter in the movie is smoking hot and has great cans. Anyway, this movie is basically what you'd expect it to be: god punishes San Francisco for all the gays. That was the point of the movie, right?

Seriously, though, it's a dumb movie, but you know that going in. It would have been better if they hadn't made Carla Gugino's new boyfriend like the most selfish prick in the world. That really didn't make the movie any better, and a good disaster movie doesn't need a bad guy outside of the disaster itself. The special effects were pretty solid, although it kind of sucked that the massive 9.6 earthquake (to be fair, there are like ten different earthquakes in this movie, but still) only lasted about a minute of screen time, even though Paul Giamatti explicitly tells us at the start of the movie that these things can last a good ten minutes.

Really, the movie should have been called Tsunami, because that was what really killed like everyone. And this was another instance where what could have been one of the coolest moments in the film was ruined by the trailers. This is becoming a trend now with Jurassic World (Pratt riding a motorcycle with the raptors) and Genisys (John Connor being a terminator). Seriously, trailer guys...STOP SPOILING THE BEST PARTS OF A FILM IN THE FUCKING TRAILER.

Anyway...5 out of 10. I wasn't bored, but the movie is like the most predictable film ever. They really should have killed off the Rock's wife, because at least that might have been interesting.
 
Self/Less 5/10

It got horrible reviews and the trailer looked "meh" at best, but my favorite movie critics ("schmoes know") gave it a solid review. Better than the majority of critics thought, but still blah.

Imagine a pretty creative and original premise with the most bland, cliched, safe script possible. The first act was paced and edited terribly. The ending was a bit anti-climactic. Acting was average.
 
Minions: 3/10. They can't carry a movie. Sucks even for the nephew who loved the Despicable Me films. More annoying than anything else.
 
It Follows: 6/10.

Boy was this movie hyped the fuck up by reviewers.

I think a lot of people just get off on watching teenage-looking adults simulating sex. Because this was a run-of-the-mill horror movie - it might even be less than that.

At no point will this movie scare you, or anyone really.

Everyone says it's about STDs, pregnancy, etc; but once you read the writer/director's original thoughts you realize that's just projection and instead the sex was just added to make the movie "interesting."

Since that isn't interesting to me in the slightest, and the fact that the protagonist is literally responsible for the deaths of 5 people, 3 of whom were unsuspecting innocent dudes she decided to gang-bang, you really - quickly - lose all interest in her survival.

Imagine if you contracted HIV and were told, the only way to survive is to continually pass it on - and once you start to feel sick or feel the effects of the virus and you see it coming, you better act quick and fuck someone unprotected, or else it will get you. Would you then go out and kill countless numbers of people for your own survival? I wouldn't, nor would I stand by anyone who would.

The initial antagonist in this film (for like the first 45 minutes of the movie), a guy named Hugh, turns out to have infinitely greater moral character than the protagonist. And while this might be realistic in some ways, as she might just be a grimy bitch worried about her own survival, once she consciously decides to fuck 3 guys and you realize within minutes those guys surely died because of her, you lose all respect for her.

She could've done exactly what Hugh did if she wanted to go down that road; but she chose not to, instead, slinging her pussy around to buy a few more minutes of life.

Instead, she ultimately decides to kill her best friend; essentially, using him as a human shield.

I'm good on this bitch...

Anyway.. The movie had a reported budget of $2M, but I could've sworn it was filmed on a hacked GH2 in a weekend (in Detroit no less). Where'd the $2M dollars go? Actors? There's like 6 unknowns in this film.. Where'd the $2M dollars go???

Lastly, the film goes for a retro look but that also immediately fails when there are modern cars driving around and someone is using an eReader; so it makes the use of these retro cars and retro clothes feel extremely out of place. It was more of an annoyance than anything else. I get it was a homage to John Carpenter, but, it made no sense in the movie.

Overall, I felt the movie was a bit of let-down. There were so many plot-holes, too much media overanalyzing (that turned out to be wrong), and I guess the movie was rated SO HIGH that it caused me to have expectations that this film really couldn't meet.

I would recommend watching it simply because there aren't any other horror movies to watch; but it's not something I would ever feel inclined to watch again.
 
gourimoko said:
It Follows: 6/10.

Boy was this movie hyped the fuck up by reviewers.

I think a lot of people just get off on watching teenage-looking adults simulating sex. Because this was a run-of-the-mill horror movie - it might even be less than that.

At no point will this movie scare you, or anyone really.

Everyone says it's about STDs, pregnancy, etc; but once you read the writer/director's original thoughts you realize that's just projection and instead the sex was just added to make the movie "interesting."

Since that isn't interesting to me in the slightest, and the fact that the protagonist is literally responsible for the deaths of 5 people, 3 of whom were unsuspecting innocent dudes she decided to gang-bang, you really - quickly - lose all interest in her survival.

Imagine if you contracted HIV and were told, the only way to survive is to continually pass it on - and once you start to feel sick or feel the effects of the virus and you see it coming, you better act quick and fuck someone unprotected, or else it will get you. Would you then go out and kill countless numbers of people for your own survival? I wouldn't, nor would I stand by anyone who would.

The initial antagonist in this film (for like the first 45 minutes of the movie), a guy named Hugh, turns out to have infinitely greater moral character than the protagonist. And while this might be realistic in some ways, as she might just be a grimy bitch worried about her own survival, once she consciously decides to fuck 3 guys and you realize within minutes those guys surely died because of her, you lose all respect for her.

She could've done exactly what Hugh did if she wanted to go down that road; but she chose not to, instead, slinging her pussy around to buy a few more minutes of life.

Instead, she ultimately decides to kill her best friend; essentially, using him as a human shield.

I'm good on this bitch...

Anyway.. The movie had a reported budget of $2M, but I could've sworn it was filmed on a hacked GH2 in a weekend (in Detroit no less). Where'd the $2M dollars go? Actors? There's like 6 unknowns in this film.. Where'd the $2M dollars go???

Lastly, the film goes for a retro look but that also immediately fails when there are modern cars driving around and someone is using an eReader; so it makes the use of these retro cars and retro clothes feel extremely out of place. It was more of an annoyance than anything else. I get it was a homage to John Carpenter, but, it made no sense in the movie.

Overall, I felt the movie was a bit of let-down. There were so many plot-holes, too much media overanalyzing (that turned out to be wrong), and I guess the movie was rated SO HIGH that it caused me to have expectations that this film really couldn't meet.

I would recommend watching it simply because there aren't any other horror movies to watch; but it's not something I would ever feel inclined to watch again.
Click to expand...

I watched this movie as well a couple of weeks ago and in the end, I feel the same way.
The plot, as you already described in detail, was kinda weird, a bit too far-fetched, even for horror (science fiction?) movies, and had many holes.

But what makes this movie actually worth watching is Maika Monroe, the main actress, who did a great job.

Also, while it may not really be a horror movie in a traditional sense (as you said, it won't really "scare" you), it has a very depressing atmosphere (at least I felt this way) and the fantastic soundtrack was largely responsible for this - it compliments the film so well and sets the tone and atmosphere in the best way.

7.5/10
 
Jack Brickman said:
The issue for me was that I read the book and it was really good. The movie had absolutely nothing in common with the novel other than zombies to the point where I have no idea why they even bothered licensing it to begin with if they had no intention of even trying to adapt it.
Click to expand...

I thought it was pretty good all things considered. It wasn't 28 Days Later, but I was entertained and liked the way they portrayed the zombies as legitimately threatening. Having not read the book probably helped, as I too often feel disappointed with adaptations of books I like.
 
The Oi said:
I absolutely hated Ted. South Park ruined Seth McFarlane humor for me. The whales putting joke combinations together was dead on and I could never get it out of my head for Family Guy.

Cosmos is the only thing he's been involved with recently and that ended up getting a bit heavy handed with the alternative energy bit at the end, so I got annoyed with him again.
Click to expand...
American Dad is actually not mostly written by McFarlane so the comedy is a lot fresher. To me American Dad surpassed Family Guy a long time ago.
 
gourimoko said:
American Dad is actually not mostly written by McFarlane so the comedy is a lot fresher. To me American Dad surpassed Family Guy a long time ago.
Click to expand...

Have not watched more than 30 seconds of American Dad. I feel like it's too late, already have enough on my television watching docket.

I'm also completely not interested in most comedies anymore, which has been discussed.
 
Yeah!

That trailer is pretty solid. That movie looks like it has some serious potential, Killer Croc and the Joker look awesome.
 
After being shoved down our throats for a few years now, Jai Courtney is looking a lot more than serviceable here. It probably really, really helps that he is speaking his native tongue, but i'm totally buying him as Captain Boomerang. The casting all around is just phenomenal for this movie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-15: "Cavs Survive and Advance"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:15: Cavs Survive and Advance
Top