K1stpierre

Rest are added.

Discuss

Discuss

Discuss

Discuss

Discuss

Discuss

Discuss

Discuss

Miller's Crossing is there: http://forums.boxoffice.com/index.php?/topic/9380-millers-crossing-1990/ Collateral Damage is there: http://forums.boxoffice.com/index.php?/topic/7595-collateral-damage/

This movie.....

I'm into that weird horror/sci fi crap. My dad got me into this one (told me back in the day when drive ins were popular there would be 2-3 movies you'd watch, the first one being complete crap, the second movie was like a B movie, okay but grabbed your attention and sometimes really good, and then the last movie is the movie you intended to see)

So does that make a BLT not thrilling then?

Love the poster

Hey it's some big purple alien in a comic book movie. How should I know they'd have two of me?

Oh I thought it was Ultron.

This is another great classic too, and one of the rare times you'll see Sunderland play as a good guy (and for those my age, see him so young). Story/pacing is great, keeps you guessing and on your toes. Some things were silly (like the dog scene) but overall is a great flick. Solid A from me, 8.5/10.

Just saw it again last night, still leaves you with the creeps.

Discuss

Discuss

Discuss

That's what I'm scratching my head over! It just doesn't make sense to me, until I read tele's comment and perhaps that's why.

It was never going to surpass the original, but it did surprise at least with the effort they made to making it match how we see it in the original (the detail is there, even the structure of the house is pretty legit). However, this is where CGI can kill a film. The director obviously 1. Overused it, and 2. Didn't really have either the budget for it or just had average people working it cause some of the cgi is cringeworthy. It just goes to show you don't need all this fancy computer crap to make a good horror flick (or flick in general). The characters were a bright spot in this. Even though I knew they were doomed, I generally felt bad for them, mostly Kate as she was likable (though i found it unrealistic for her to solve what eas going so fast, whereas the first felt legit. I mean, kate was just like "yeah, its a thing that can replicate people" ehereas in the original, they had to actually see it to believe in such a crazy idea could happen).The pacing I thought was fine, not too rushed. Some of the things though didn't make sense to me, but I didn't dwell. The ending with the last monster.......oh my god, again that terrible cgi . It had me laughing. I did think it was cool though and a big twist after the fight when Kate torches that guy due to the earring. I didn't see that at all. Overalls, I guess I could say it was a fine take on a prequel that is considered a classic, which I think should be a win for this. I'd say a B- overall, 7/10. Characters: 8/10 Score: (pretty much the same as the first, can't really give it full credit) 8/10 Special effects: 5/10 Plot: 9/10 Script: 9/10

Kind of weird. The beginning is definitely rushed, things happen and you are kind of like "huh"? However, it does have its moments where it tries and I'll give it credit, but it just didn't connect with me for some reason. Overall, C+, 6.5/10. Characters: 7/10 Plot: 5/10 Script: 6/10 Animation: 8/10 Score: 8/10