What movies have you seen recently?

Post Reply New Topic

Dr. Strangelove

exmachina

on youtubeonfire
(dont know whether I can post here direct link)

Amelia.

Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace

"Blank Check" - It was alright----Disney, so it can't be TOO bad----can't stand Debbie Allen, though.

"The Color Purple" - As good as I have always remembered it.

"Tootsie" - Still good.

"Murphy's Romance" - Still as good, as the first time I saw it.

"Guess Who's Coming to Dinner - Still as good, as the first time I saw it.

I saw Inside Out a while ago. The folk at Pixar probably used the money they made from Cars 2 merchandise to make that film.
LOL

Well, at least something good came out of 'Cars 2'.

Re-watched with Blu-ray audio commentary by director Andrew Stanton and producers Jim Morris and Lindsey Collins.

'John Carter' was both surprisingly and disappointingly good. When it came out, it tanked hard and I was left with no choice but to see it because, well, box office bombs are my specialty. I was hoping to see an unmitigated disaster of a film, but instead I got a pretty solid if flawed sci-fi adventure.

'John Carter' is a prime example of how marketing can make or break a film. The trailers and television commercials showcased absolutely none of the its strengths and almost made it look like an entirely different movie. I think most people dismissed the film altogether based on how generic the commercials made it seem. Worst of all, though, had to be the alteration of the title from 'John Carter of Mars' to just 'John Carter'. What the heck was wrong with "of Mars"? Is outer space just not cool to kids anymore? "John Carter" is just such a terrible name for that type of movie.

Bravo Two Zero

God I love just about anything Sean Bean is in

I loved it when I saw it in the theatre, and my appreciation for it grows with each viewing. (This was #5.) I'm not going to waste my time speculating about why critics dismissed it and audiences stayed away, because it's not worth it. This happens to too many good movies, and time is always kind to them. This is Blade Runner all over again; 15 years from now, nobody will even remember that John Carter wasn't an instant success.

I think it is worth it; I think it's fascinating why certain movies bomb, and the fact that we still remember that movies like 'Blade Runner' tanked upon release is kind of a testament to that. Even adjusted for inflation, 'John Carter' is one of the ten biggest box office bombs of all time, so I doubt anyone's going to forget about that, but as many movies like 'Blade Runner' show, people can easily separate that from its own merits as a film.

It's always interesting when a movie really bombs, because it's rarely because a movie is simply bad and nobody wanted to see it. If you've ever looked at a list of the biggest box office bombs, you'll notice that most of them really aren't *bad* movies...most of them are just pretty mediocre, or decent at best. They all have various reasons for tanking, and in 'John Carter''s case, I think it will long stand as an emphatic demonstration of how important marketing really is for a movie, as most sources pinpoint that as the primary cause for its downfall.

It's also a fine example of modern studio overbudgeting (note that eight of the top ten bombs are from the last ten years, with four from 2013 alone); 'John Carter' cost $350 million, production and marketing combined. When a movie grosses $284 million and is still considered a colossal bomb, that speaks greatly about how messed up the studio system can be. That stuff fascinates me.

The Next Three Days.
I really like this movie.
I am a big Russell Crowe fan.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

"The Survivors" - Phew, that was rough gettin'-through it----good cast, though (Robin Williams, Walter Mathou, and Jerry Reed).

"Jersey Girl" - Kinda sweet; good cast (Jennifer Lopez, Liv Tyler, Ben Affleck, and George Carlin).

I hadn't seen either one of these, before.