Buttered Popcorn: Buzzmans Movie Review Thread

[Sean]

sorry, my bad

 

[CrimsonGhost56]

and he quotes the spoiler and leaves it there

lolz

 

[Rivers17ncsu]

you should see and review Fair Game

 

[Buzzman]

Super 8 (2011)

After witnessing a mysterious train crash, a group of friends in the summer of 1979 begin noticing strange happenings going around in their small town, and begin to investigate into the creepy phenomenon.

Super 8 is not the monster fueled mystery film its marketing seemed to force down upon us. Is there a monster? Yes, but there was simply not enough time spent on “it” once the revelation occurred for the audience to be satisfied; It seemed just content to leave you with only bits on information about it that match the films theme of letting go so you can move forward. In contrast, because they didn’t spend very much time on the monster, the characters themselves were allowed to thrive in the spotlight. We watched as they went on an adventure to help themselves find what they were looking for in a time when they needed it most.

Having just one child actor star in your film can be a disaster waiting to happen, but imagine what could happen with six of them. Abrams though managed to pull the unbelievable and found some hidden gems to stand in front of the camera. They are shared some great chemistry and when by themselves managed to naturally act like children rather than being forced into awkward situations and dialogue. The cast of misfits seemed to be ripped right from the screens from similar films such as The Goonies and Stand by Me. Leading the impressive ensemble cast is the up and comer Elle Fanning playing Alice and the completely unknown Joel Courtney playing Joe. These two are thrown at each other for most of the movie and succeed at creating a meaningful relationship that never comes across as fake or forced. Fanning in particular, turns in a performance that tops anything her much more popular sister has done (Dakota if you’re wondering).

The downside of focusing so much attention onto the child characters is that only one adult has a substantial role in the film, played by the always wonderful Coach Taylor……I mean Kyle Chandler, seems to become quickly forgotten about within the story and never gets a chance to develop. It is a shame because he demands the audience full attention in scenes of him simply talking with his boy, imagine what would happen if he was given more time.

Super 8 is a film that we will all come to appreciate even if you don’t necessarily enjoy it. Its themes of letting go so you can move forward is one that will live on forever, and even if the monster aspect of the film is a letdown, that theme was handled incredibly well. This film will be hard to dislike and easy to recommend. So enjoy.

Overall Score: 8/10

 

[dell71]

Elle better than Dakota was in "The Runaways"? Not really a Dakota fan but she was great in that movie.
TXT8026/T05_0 UP.Browser/6.2.3.2 (GUI) MMP/2.0

 

[Buzzman]

Yes, even though my opinion of Super 8 is higher than The Runaways, I am willing to bet Elle Fanning winds up a bigger actress than her sister. Either way though, that family is full of win.

 

[Buzzman]

The Tree of Life (2011)

Brad Pitt and Sean Penn star in Terrence Malick's 1950s adventure about a confused man named Jack, who sets off on a journey to understand the true nature of the world. Growing up in the Midwest with two brothers, Jack has always been torn between his mother's guidance to approach everything he encounters with an open heart and his father's advice to look after his own interests. Now, Jack must find a way to regain purpose and perspective.

The Tree of Life is a film that should have been easy to fall in love with. One part hardcore family drama and the other filled with beautiful shots of the universe and how it evolved into what it has become. Individually, both were stellar to watch, but when combined, you feel a bit lost at what you’re watching. They both showcase similar themes, but the giant scale the film jumps feels too big a gap to feel like a natural flow. If handled a little better, it might have been the masterpiece some have touted it to be.

The O’Brien family is where the film spends its focus upon, specifically from the point of view of the eldest son Jack. We witness how a child can be formed through rules and punishment and through love and kindness. The latter given a lot less attention. The sons live in fear and hatred of their father. He is a man of discipline. Brad Pitt turns in a dynamite performance. He can flip a switch and go from gentle to disastrous in a second.
The relationship he shares with his son feels like the real deal of one that was considered “normal” back in the 1950s. The mother, given little screen time compared to the father, is supposed to represent the soft spoken portion of the boys lives, but feels to have far less of an impact on their lives than their father. I want to say it’s an entertaining watch just to see this family interact with one another, but that wouldn’t be the right word. It’s slow, quiet, and sometimes boring, but you cannot help but keep your eyes focused upon them; almost as if it has you in a trance. It all seems lost toward its finale though, as it passes on multiple spots to end it and eventually overlies its stay.

When we jump away from the family we are taken to shots of the universe and how it can to be in existence. Are these scenes beautiful? Yes. Would I want to watch them again? No. I found myself wanting to get back to the family because it was easier to follow and contained a flow that seemed be much smoother than these portions of the film. If I wanted to watch great shots of the universe I’d go to actual science documentaries for that. These sections nearly ruined what was a great film otherwise. I don’t mind artsy material, but Malick seemed to get lost in himself a bit and went overboard.

It may seem as if I didn’t enjoy The Tree of Life, but I really did, just it seemed to be a tale of two stories. On one hand this could be easy to recommend to someone, but on the other, I know for a fact the dialogue free shots of the universe will instantly turn away most of its viewers that are not die hard film fans. So despite its score, I am telling you to pass on this film. It most likely isn’t in your area of comfort. That may be the only time you ever hear me say that, but it remains to be true.

Overall Score: 7/10

 

[Buzzman]

Green Lantern (2011)

Hal Jordan (Ryan Reynolds), a brash, talented test pilot, is chosen by an alien force of warriors to become their representative on Earth and use his new powers as the Green Lantern to promote order and justice before conflict destroys his world. Despite being the first human to wear the ring that bestows his abilities, Hal must combat villain Parallax.

The superhero hype train is at an all-time high right now X-Men First Class rejuvenating a dead franchise and Thor being an unexpected hit, but to say Green Lantern crashes that train and lets it burn would be an understatement. It is terrible in nearly every way imaginable. This would have easily been sitting at the very bottom of my 2011 films list, but some of the scenes were so unintentionally hilarious it gets a mini boost for the laughs.

As far as origin stories go for any superhero, this one does a poor job at a lot of things. The character Hal Jordan when not in costume is a cocky unlikeable cry baby who runs at the first sign of trouble. That is not the type of person you want to be the star of your movie. When he is a Green Lantern, he feels like much of the same except nobody realizes who he is because of his Zorro mask. That is one of the many laughable responses the film has to offer. The transition his character goes through to become this leader who can overcome fear feels forced. Most of the film he’s afraid and literally when the film needs him to become strong, he suddenly has a revelation on who he needs to be. It just never felt natural to me.

Maybe the transition would’ve gone smoother if they didn’t handle the villain(s) so poorly. The big bad Parallax looks like a giant piece of poop that wants to suck the very life out of earth so he can overtake the Lanterns. The problem with him is they briefly show him. He’s talked about in the background but never focused on until the very end. Instead all of the attention is shifted onto Dr. Hector Hammond. Now I don’t know what the hell they were thinking but his big headed appearance doesn’t translate well to the big screen. Every moment he was on the screen, I couldn’t help but crack up laughing. It didn’t help that when the character was trying to be serious, his big ole head combined with awkward movements and a high voice got in the way. He may have been the films downfall, but he also was also its biggest star. Quite a feat I must say. The film spent too much time trying to develop this character and connect him with the film’s other characters, but he simply was not an intriguing character that you wanted to know. I would have much rather they focus the screen on Hal Jordan since this is his origin story and everything.

Now the CGI in the film was one if its biggest risks. Most superhero films today attempt to set it up without our reality, but they couldn’t do that with Green Lantern. He travels the vastness of space, interacts with aliens, and has powers from a ring that allows him to create anything his mind allows him. When the film shows these parts on screen, they are its shining moments. The world of Oa looks great, the action scenes flow good, and even the suit never is the bother it looked to be in the trailers. The problem is that there simply isn’t enough of this. Most of the film takes place on Earth and they were not creative enough to incorporate it into those spots. You have to wonder how the hell they needed a $300 million dollar budget for this film.

Green lantern fails at most of the things it tries to accomplish but that may have been because it was trying to introduce us to a character we’ve never seen on screen before. With a little more effort, they could run off with something special in a sequel. But as a film trying to become a franchise starter, it simply wasn’t good. Even comic books fans might have a hard time taking a liking to this interpretation. Watch this if you must, but if given the choice, give this a pass. I’ll leave you with this:

In brightest day, In blackest night;
No evil shall escape my sight.
let those who worships evils might,
Beware my power;
Green Lanterns Light.

Overall Score: 3/10

 

[tigstah]

Green Lantern (2011)



Hal Jordan (Ryan Reynolds), a brash, talented test pilot, is chosen by an alien force of warriors to become their representative on Earth and use his new powers as the Green Lantern to promote order and justice before conflict destroys his world. Despite being the first human to wear the ring that bestows his abilities, Hal must combat villain Parallax.

The superhero hype train is at an all-time high right now X-Men First Class rejuvenating a dead franchise and Thor being an unexpected hit, but to say Green Lantern crashes that train and lets it burn would be an understatement. It is terrible in nearly every way imaginable. This would have easily been sitting at the very bottom of my 2011 films list, but some of the scenes were so unintentionally hilarious it gets a mini boost for the laughs.

As far as origin stories go for any superhero, this one does a poor job at a lot of things. The character Hal Jordan when not in costume is a cocky unlikeable cry baby who runs at the first sign of trouble. That is not the type of person you want to be the star of your movie. When he is a Green Lantern, he feels like much of the same except nobody realizes who he is because of his Zorro mask. That is one of the many laughable responses the film has to offer. The transition his character goes through to become this leader who can overcome fear feels forced. Most of the film he’s afraid and literally when the film needs him to become strong, he suddenly has a revelation on who he needs to be. It just never felt natural to me.

Maybe the transition would’ve gone smoother if they didn’t handle the villain(s) so poorly. The big bad Parallax looks like a giant piece of poop that wants to suck the very life out of earth so he can overtake the Lanterns. The problem with him is they briefly show him. He’s talked about in the background but never focused on until the very end. Instead all of the attention is shifted onto Dr. Hector Hammond. Now I don’t know what the hell they were thinking but his big headed appearance doesn’t translate well to the big screen. Every moment he was on the screen, I couldn’t help but crack up laughing. It didn’t help that when the character was trying to be serious, his big ole head combined with awkward movements and a high voice got in the way. He may have been the films downfall, but he also was also its biggest star. Quite a feat I must say. The film spent too much time trying to develop this character and connect him with the film’s other characters, but he simply was not an intriguing character that you wanted to know. I would have much rather they focus the screen on Hal Jordan since this is his origin story and everything.

Now the CGI in the film was one if its biggest risks. Most superhero films today attempt to set it up without our reality, but they couldn’t do that with Green Lantern. He travels the vastness of space, interacts with aliens, and has powers from a ring that allows him to create anything his mind allows him. When the film shows these parts on screen, they are its shining moments. The world of Oa looks great, the action scenes flow good, and even the suit never is the bother it looked to be in the trailers. The problem is that there simply isn’t enough of this. Most of the film takes place on Earth and they were not creative enough to incorporate it into those spots. You have to wonder how the hell they needed a $300 million dollar budget for this film.

Green lantern fails at most of the things it tries to accomplish but that may have been because it was trying to introduce us to a character we’ve never seen on screen before. With a little more effort, they could run off with something special in a sequel. But as a film trying to become a franchise starter, it simply wasn’t good. Even comic books fans might have a hard time taking a liking to this interpretation. Watch this if you must, but if given the choice, give this a pass. I’ll leave you with this:

In brightest day, In blackest night;
No evil shall escape my sight.
let those who worships evils might,
Beware my power;
Green Lanterns Light.

Overall Score: 3/10

thats about what i figured......i didnt see anything in the trailer that said must see.....

 

[Buzzman]

Buzzmans 2011 Movie Rankings

1. Drive
2. Shame
3. 50/50
4. Warrior
5. X-Men: First Class
6. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
7. Attack the Block
8. Hugo
9. We Need to Talk About Kevin
10. Young Adult
11. Crazy, Stupid, Love
12. Rango
13. Another Earth
14. The Skin I Live In
15. Source Code
16. Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol
17. Our Idiot Brother
18. The Artist
19. Scream 4
20. The Lincoln Lawyer
21. Thor
22. Friends with Benefits
23. The Descendants
24. Trust
25. Martha Marcy May Marlene
26. My Week with Marilyn
27. Horrible Bosses
28. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2
29. Cedar Rapids
30. Super 8
31. Paul
32. The Ledge
33. Water for Elephants
34. Like Crazy
35. Take Shelter
36. The Ides of March
37. Rampart
38. Fright Night
39. Melancholia
40. Rise of the Planet of the Apes
41. Bridesmaids
42. Contagion
43. We Bought a Zoo
44. J. Edgar
45. Terri
46. The Adjustment Bureau
47. Moneyball
48. The Change-Up
49. Limitless
50. Take Me Home Tonight
51. The Tree of Life
52. In Time
53. Tower Heist
54. The Devil's Double
55. Cowboys and Aliens
56. Insidious
57. The Help
58. Apollo 18
59. Fast Five
60. A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas
61. Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows
62. Battle: Los Angeles
63. 13
64. Hanna
65. The Smurfs
66. The Art of Getting By
67. Bad Teacher
68. Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
69. Transformers: Dark of the Moon
70. Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1
71. Drive Angry 3D
72. The Green Hornet
73. Your Highness
74. Captain America: The First Avenger
75. Straw Dogs
76. Hall Pass
77. Don't Be Afraid of the Dark
78. I Am Number Four
79. Midnight in Paris
80. Just Go With It
81. The Hangover Part 2
82. The Muppets
83. The Thing
84. Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides
85. The Adventures of Tintin
86. Unknown
87. No Strings Attached
88. 30 Minutes or Less
89. Paranormal Activity 3
90. Final Destination 5
91. Wrong Turn 4: Bloody Beginnings
92. Real Steel
93. New Year's Eve
94. Green Lantern
95. Sucker Punch
96. The Sitter
97. War Horse

 

[wingsfan77]

I tried to watch Green Hornet today and I didn't even make it through the whole thing, I just didn't find it funny/entertaining at all, and I'm usually incredibly easy when it comes to liking movies haha.

 

[Rivers17ncsu]

Good list, we disagree on Hangover 2, but from what I've seen that is a good list.

 

[Buzzman]

Buzzmans 2010 Movie Rankings

1. Inception
2. 127 Hours
3. Black Swan
4. Toy Story 3
5. The Social Network
6. Kick Ass
7. Blue Valentine
8. The Fighter
9. The Town
10. The Kings Speech
11. Exit Through the Gift Shop
12. Shutter Island
13. The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo
14. The Book of Eli
15. Winter's Bone
16. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1
17. Cyrus
18. Robin Hood
19. The Troll Hunter
20. Unstoppable
21. How to Train Your Dragon
22. Paranormal Activity 2
23. Scott Pilgrim Vs The World
24. Leaves of Grass
25. Daybreakers
26. Despicable Me
27. Hot Tub Time Machine
28. Megamind
29. Pirahna 3D
30. Easy A
31. The Lasst Exorcism
32. The Other Guys
33. Morning Glory
34. The Losers
35. The Crazies
36. She's Out of My League
37. True Grit
38. Green Zone
39. Faster
40. Salt
41. Predators
42. Due Date
43. The A-Team
44. MacGruber
45. Frozen
46. Splice
47. Get Him to the Greek
48. Killers
49. Ondine
50. Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time
51. Conviction
52. Defendor
53. Devil
54. Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps
55. Remember Me
56. Iron Man 2
57. Tron: Legacy
58. The Next Three Days
59. Stone
60. Machete
61. The Kids Are All Right
62. The Sorcerers Apprentice
63. Date Night
64. Clash of the Titans
65. Howl
66. Never Let Me Go
67. The Twilight Saga: Eclipse
68. The Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole
69. Love and Other Drugs
70. Letters to Juliet
71. A Nightmare on Elm Street
72. The American
73. The Karate Kid
74. The Switch
75. Life As We Know It
76. Alice in Wonderland
77. Barry Munday
78. Dear John
79. Charlie St Cloud
80. The Last Song
81. I Spit on Your Grave
82. Edge of Darkness
83. Brooklyns Finest
84. Percy Jackson and the Olympians: The Lightning Thief
85. Grown Ups
86. Repo Men
87. Monsters
88. Cop Out
89. Jonah Hex
90. Knight and Day
91. Youth in Revolt
92. Saw 3D
93. From Paris with Love
94. Going the Distance
95. How Do You Know
96. When in Rome
97. The Bounty Hunter
98. And Soon the Darkness
99. My Soul to Take

 

[Buzzman]

Those are just quick lists that somebody could look at instead of just going through the scores.

 

[Buzzman]

I tried to watch Green Hornet today and I didn't even make it through the whole thing, I just didn't find it funny/entertaining at all, and I'm usually incredibly easy when it comes to liking movies haha.

I initially loved it, but upon two more viewings I didn't, I changed the score of the initial review awhile ago to represent more how I feel about it. I find red scores are helpful and most used in comedies.

 

[Buzzman]

Midnight in Paris (2011)

A romantic comedy about a family traveling to the French capital for business. The party includes a young engaged couple forced to confront the illusion that a life different from their own is better.

Before I walked into Midnight in Paris I was excited for two reasons. The first simply being the reviews have been phenomenal and touting it as Woody Allen’s best film in years. The second came as a surprise to me; looking over Allen’s work, I realized that despite having directed over 40+ films, this would be the first one that I will have watched. It amazes me that I have somehow never come across one of his films before. It is a shame then that the first look into his work is one I had a hard time enjoying.

It is not that it wasn’t a bad movie it’s just one that I don’t understand. Apparently because our protagonist Gil yearns to feel alive, he ends up traveling back into a time in Paris where all of his greatest idles flocked around parties and invite him along. Seeing these characters of history on screen were said to be great performances, but the problem was I have no idea how these characters acted. I know most of them by name and some of their work, but I am ignorant on everything but the basics. Maybe if I had known more about them I would have enjoyed it considerably more?

Even if you don’t understand the films characters, you will have no problem with Gil and his troubled outlook on life. Owen Wilson here plays his typical fast talking character, but it seems to flow with the films style. Everything is constantly moving and changing that Wilson is given a chance to thrive in the role. He kept me from feeling as if I completely wasted my time on this film. I can’t say the same for the Rachael McAdams. I love her too death and will watch anything she is in, but I have no idea how they can turn her into such a bitch that you want to physically slap her. Michael Sheen in his brief moments on screen almost made up for her character.

The film asks its audience to take a look in the past and really look hard because usually only the good things are remember making it seem like a better time in your life. It wants you to realize that living in the now is where you are and will always be so let the past influence you enough while you move forward instead of stopping to look back. If that question interests you enough you and you are a Woody Allen fan, this may garner your interest more than I. My first trip into the work of Woody Allen is disappointingly a forgettable one.


Overall Score: 5/10

 

[Buzzman]

The Next Three Days (2010)

When his wife is sent to jail on murder charges she fervidly denies, college professor John Brennan comes up with a plan to break her out by meticulously plotting the ultimate escape -- despite the fact that he's never committed a crime in his life.

The Next Three Days feels as if Hollywood took a great idea and flipped it into a film where everyone comes out a winner in a good ole fashion happy ending. Had it dared to take a few more risks, it could have been something great, maybe even special, but instead the film came and went without very much attention. It is almost as if the film doesn’t exist at all. That is a pretty good accomplishment when you consider Russell Crowe, Elizabeth Banks, Olivia Wilde and Liam Neeson all turned up in front of the camera.

The safest decision they decided came in regard on whether or not his wife actually committed the crime. Instead of playing with the ambiguity of it, I guess they felt it necessary to show her innocence so you could root for her and the mess that the characters make to break her out of prison. I think if they were to make her guilty or rather make it appear she was guilty, would have made the escape and aftermath to feel different in tone and make it a more rewarding payoff. It’d essentially be asking what you would be willing to do to help a loved one rather than freeing her from the injustice the system did to her. The reward would have been worth the risk for this film.

The escape is a little different from your standard breakout film because majority of the film is setting it up and allowing the audience to get a good understanding of how exactly he is going to breakout his wife. It’s interesting, but it all feels a bit too cheesy. Liam Neeson just happens to be readily available in a bar and gives exact instructions on how to break someone out of prison. Just too much of a coincidence to me. It helps a bit though when you see Crowe fail a few times at what he’s doing and seeing him struggle with putting together enough money to make this work. It helps keep the film from steering too far off into the unbelievable.

All of the action is saved for the film ending escape and it is well-done. The plan has to have precise timing to work, and for the most part it pulls that off. There are a few minor kinks in the plan that the film avoids to make the movie work, but I think they once again played it too safe so that the audience wouldn’t dare question that what this couple is doing is the right thing to do. I just keep seeing the missed potential.

If you’re interested in watching a good but too cautious prison break film, look no further than this. It plays out a little different than most and the payoff is probably not worth the buildup, but it’s different and you have to give it credit for that. Put in a little more daring plot points and it might not have been passed over as if it never existed. Walk in expecting something better then Takers, but not too much better.

Overall Score: 5.5/10

 

[Rivers17ncsu]

Yea I was hyped to see The Next Three Days, but left disappointed afterwards

 

[wingsfan77]

I am Number Four (2011)

Overall Score: 5/10

Watched this today, wasn't a great movie by any means and won't win any awards but I thought it was solid, I'm hoping if they make a sequel it'll delved more into the back story of the planet that they came from. Oh yeah and I thought Teresa Palmer was hot before, but with an Aussie accent?? Holy crap.

 

[Buzzman]

Watched this today, wasn't a great movie by any means and won't win any awards but I thought it was solid, I'm hoping if they make a sequel it'll delved more into the back story of the planet that they came from. Oh yeah and I thought Teresa Palmer was hot before, but with an Aussie accent?? Holy crap.

I didn't like it because of the two young teenager side characters, both of them were so lazily written and acted. Maybe thats how they were in the book? IDK.

I like Palmer too but I prefer her to be all glammed up, not filthy like she was here.