ainsleyb
-
Posts
220 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Annual Subscriptions
Media Demo
Posts posted by ainsleyb
-
-
Saw this today.
It's alright, the effects are impressive, there are a couple of nice looking action scenes, the acting is solid too but it feels like it's missing something. It's not particularly deep, I'm not familiar with the anime so I had no connection to the characters going in and I felt like the trailers gave away the story.
Overall I'd say 6/10, worth a watch but only once.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Captain H said:
Finally watched this. Cute, and the chemistry is good. But frontrunner for Best Picture? ....kay. Not a bad film by any stretch, but feels pretty vanilla.
This winning Best Picture over Moonlight will mirrors the Grammy giving Album of the Year to Adele instead of Beyonce, tbh. But I digress.
It will mirror it in that the deserving film/person wins but the same people as usual will cry that it's because the losers are black that they lost.
-
1
-
-
I mainly agree with the above, I enjoyed it but it did have stretches where I was starting to get a bit bored. The scenes in the doctors office went on for too long and the flashbacks to the girls camping trip kept taking you out of the story and could have been put together to form one scene.
As for the ending, as someone who likes and remembers Unbreakable, I thought it was a great little nod that wrapped up the film nicely and gave some basis to Kevins transformation. However, 95% of the audience did not understand the ending at all. Unbreakable is over fifteen years old and wasn't a huge box office hit back in the day so the reference is going to throw a lot of people off.
overall I'd give it a high 6/low 7, for now I'd say I prefer The Visit. I've ranked the Shyamalan films that I've seen below.
The Sixth Sense
Unbreakable
Signs
The Visit
Split
The Lady in The Water
The Village
The Happening
The Last Airbender
-
21 minutes ago, superweirdo87 said:
The storyline is driving the critical response, but I am totally with the critics. Jim took Aurora's life away from her. Even if he debated and was in a hard place, that's someone agency and their dreams. That choice and the way a movie treats it warrants scrutiny. If the movie conveyed the costs and tragedy that entailed, and did it so in a thoughtful and emotionally resonant way, that would be interesting and potentially powerful. But, "Chris Pratt was in a hard place, debated it, and it is all good fun" glosses over consent and morality.
He does attempt to redeem his decision though, twice. He puts himself in front of the fire to save Aurora and he then gives her the opportunity to go back into hybernation. She realises at that point that she has found someone that can make her life worthwhile in a way that she couldn't find on earth.
The morality issue isn't really addressed because I thought it was posing the question to the audience, if you were a man would you have done the same to have female company for the rest of your life and if you're a woman, could you forgive him for taking your life away even if you were in love with him.
I found it a much more thoughtful and interesting storyline than, they both woke up at the same time and fell in love, which was what I went in expecting.
-
5
-
-
I also thought it was better than the reviews would have suggested. It's not perfect but I think a lot of the hate stems from the way Aurora and Jim come to meet, which is unjustified in my opinion.
He's been without human contact for over a year, he has all day everyday by himself, why wouldn't he watch the passenger videos and find out more about the people on the ship. He debated waking her up for months before he did it as well so I don't get the politically correct "its misogynistic and creepy" talk.
The two had good chemistry together, Pratt is likable as usual and Lawrence looks like shes actually putting in a bit of effort here which she doesn't always do (Apocalypse).
I'd recommend it for someone looking for a light sci-fi that doesn't take itself too seriously.
7/10
-
3
-
-
On 9/12/2016 at 8:23 PM, ainsleyb said:
WOM will be poor on this, it'll have its fans but it's just not that great of a movie, the concept is way overdone now. Cinemascore of C or below is what I'm expecting. My screening was probably a D- reaction and I went to a specific horror showing where the crowd should be lapping this sort of thing up.
Lionsgate's Blair Witch won't even come close to the most modest of expectations after an estimated $4 millionFriday will lead toward an opening right around $9-9.5 million and a "D+" CinemaScore won't be helping word of mouth over the weekend or weeks to come.
Even worse than I thought.
-
8 minutes ago, Emerald kikyou said:
so , I have two questions:
1- Does it end with a person standing in the corner?
2-Does it have pitch black darkness scenes that goes on for God knows how long?
1.
Spoilerkind of. two characters stand in the corner trying not to see the witch and both get 'tricked' that one of their friends is behind them so that they turn around.
2.
SpoilerA couple but they dont go on for that long, it doesnt have as many plainly boring scenes as the original.
-
1
-
-
27 minutes ago, Baumer loves Oogieloves said:
And i thought Dont Breathe was a nice horror film. But very pedestrian.
No idea how you'll feel about this one then. I don't always agree with critics (the Babadook and the witch spring to mind) but this film is the epitome of pedestrian. Some will like it though, it's just underwhelming after two months of the game changer talk.
-
24 minutes ago, Boxofficerules said:
I've been suspecting for awhile that there is something going on with horror sites. I don't know if they are being bought or not but I suspect that they become good friends with certain people (IE Adam Wingard, Mike Flanigan), if that person does something bad, the sites are still going to suck their dicks and praise the movie.
Hell, Dread Central did a whole article complaining about people who think the new Hellraiser film looks terrible. The last Hellraiser film was a cheap, rushed piece of shit that was clearly only made to keep the rights. The new one looks like they are doing the same thing. Instead of putting time and effort into the movie, Hell, they didn't even address the rushed fact, they just get their old buddies at Dread Central to write an article attacking the fans who don't want to get burned again.
I don't think these sites are trustworthy any more.
The end of Brad Miska's review even has a disclaimer stating that Bloody Disgusting produced VHS 1 & 2, of course they were going to hype up one of their buddies films.
55 minutes ago, Baumer loves Oogieloves said:Not weird at all. The early revirws came from Fangoria and Dread Central..you know...publicstions that actually understand horror. Not Peter Travers and Geoff Pevere, guys who dont look for the same things in horror i do.
There's a difference between understanding horror and wanting to get your name on a poster to drum up attention for your site. All they had to do was ask a couple of guys at horror sites to give their movie a glowing review and promise that their quotes would feature on the poster and in the trailers in the months coming up to the release.
If anyone comes out of Blair Witch and agrees with comments like "game changer for the horror genre" and "one of the scariest movies ever made" then I would seriously doubt how well that person knows the horror genre. I went to see Don't Breathe beforehand and that has more tense scenes than Blair Witch and it isn't even an all out horror movie.
-
2
-
-
17 minutes ago, Gumby said:
The thing that concerns me is that many say nothing freaking happens until the last 10 minutes or so.
That's a very different take than those first horror movie site reviews that kept saying it was the scariest movie ever from the opening to the ending.
Makes you wonder if those reviews were on the up and up and not just bought and paid for.
They were so obviously bought. The reviews all came from horror sites who blew their load at the opportunity to review a film a month or two before anyone else. Brad Miska's review in particular makes me wonder if we were watching the same film.
-
WOM will be poor on this, it'll have its fans but it's just not that great of a movie, the concept is way overdone now. Cinemascore of C or below is what I'm expecting. My screening was probably a D- reaction and I went to a specific horror showing where the crowd should be lapping this sort of thing up.
-
1
-
-
Just watched this tonight, Disclaimer: I did not like the original at all, I thought it was dull and scare free.
My thoughts on this one are about the same, the first 70 minutes are not particularly interesting, it feels like you could be watching any found footage film from the past ten years and they basically just rejigged the first film but added newer cameras. At least the first film had the intrigue and originality behind it when it was first released, this one just seems tired after the enslaught of similar films we have had since 99'.
To give it credit, the final 10 minutes or so does up the creepiness level and is certainly more effective than the nothing that was the end of the original. However, there is nothing to give you nightmares here, if it didn't have the Blair witch name no one would be going fawning over it like the initial reviews have (that RT score is going way down once the real critics see it)
Overall, if you liked the original and thought that was scary then you will probably like this. For what it's worth, I saw it at a discount screening and there will people in the audience jokingly asking if they could still get their money back.
-
I'm not sure why people are surprised by Kubo's performance. Critically acclaimed or not, Laika's films look so visually unappealing to the average child, they look dull and a bit odd which doesn't encourage kids or their parents to go see them. Plus that title is a mouthful.
-
8 minutes ago, The Stingray said:
TC2 not even making 40m is disappointing to me. Maybe moving the story to the UK played a factor?
Anyways, TC3 is happening, no two ways about that.
Nah, releasing a turd of a movie called Annabelle played a factor.
-
I'm not the biggest Marvel fan but i thought this was excellent and in the very top tier of Marvel movies, on par or maybe even ahead of the first Avengers. The new characters aren't just thrown in to the mix, they get their own brief introductions, without giving away so much that their eventual origin film seems redundant.The action scenes are fantastically choreographed and the airport battle is surely going to be up there with the best scenes of the year.
It isn't perfect though, i agree with another commenter that Spiderman seemed fine in this but in his own film he may grate on the nerves. Buckey again just isn't that easy to sympathise with and you can't help but think that Cap should have just handed him over and avoided splitting the Avengers.
Overall though this is a highly enjoyable film with a number of comedic moments thrown in that is elevated due to the sheer spectacle of seeing so many recognizable characters battling each other.
-
1
-
-
Like 'The Babadook, this is another raved about horror film which completely fails to deliver. The audience I saw it with could best be described as bemused throughout at what they were seeing. Firstly, I didn't have a problem with the olde english, if you're a native english speaker then it's not particularly hard to follow and it is at least authentic to the time in which the film is set. The problem I had was that the film is just plain not scary, not in the slightest. The witch is in it for maybe three minutes of a 93 minute film and the rest is just build up which isn't particularly engaging and finally ends with an anti climactic non ending. What happened to the twins? had they been speaking with black phillip?
I'd classify the acting as generally pretty strong, unfortunately there is no depth to the characters they are portraying and as such, I didn't care about any of their fates.
Really hard to recommend this one, even to die hard horror fans. 5/10
-
1
-
-
20 minutes ago, Total Treecall said:
I agree that the British stuff may not go down well with overseas audiences, but most of the film is spy action buddy comedy and I don't really see why that can't be successful. As I said, the other 300 people in my audience were laughing the whole way through. Dunno how representative that is but it was a big audience.
I just dont see it being a WOM hit, I only saw it a few hours ago and the only thing I can remember are the gross out scenes which were more for shock factor than genuine comedy. Early IMDB and box office isn't looking too good for it either. I like sacha and his films but this one lacked the wit that his screenplays usually have.
-
I just went to see it and its okay but its probably Cohen's weakest film. It has more gross out humour than laughs which is its biggest weak point. I can't see it going over well with the GA and the RT will probably drop into the 40's after it's U.S release.
The funniest lines come from the fact they're making fun of a town like Grimsby and the stereotype of people who live there, that might completely go over the heads of American and international audiences.
-
Where to begin? A big let down for me as the film fails at being either funny or scary.
There is no suspense, no tension, no laughs, plenty of dull or annoying characters, essentially the ugly sister to Dougherty's far superior 'Trick r Treat'. The films aims for a 'Gremlins' type theme which doesn't really kick in until the last 20 minutes or so but it's all played so nonchalantly that we don't care if the characters live or die because no one in the film seems to mind all that much either. Children go missing, a baby is snatched by elves and you get the reaction of the parents is "we have other children to protect". The pacing was all off for me as well, the sister being the first to be taken didn't make much sense as she had more screen time than the cousins, why spend 15 minutes building her character at the beginning to kill her off 25 minutes into the movie?
There is no gore at all, it's a very tame 15 rating (u.k) which isnt necessarily a bad thing but none of the creatures are scary. Krampus himself seemed to have jaw lock for the last 15 minutes of the film and everything else is played for laughs but not enough is done to make them either truly funny, or truly scary. It all comes across as just being very silly which isn't what the trailers sold.
A big missed opportunity and definitely not worth seeing in the cinema.
**/*****
-
2
-
-
I was looking forward to this because i'd heard the ending was shocking but, in all honesty, i pretty much guessed it 10-15 minutes into the film. As soon as the wife was awkward about the neighbours baby my thoughts were "hes going to get her pregnant".
That's not to say I didn't enjoy the film, its slow but builds up a good amount of tension with a few turns along the way. Nothing groundbreaking but a solid film.
I'm also in the 'he didn't rape her' camp. I found it interesting seeing the links between Simon's lie and how it had effected Gordo as an adult. I might be reading too much into it, but the lack of a wife, his awkwardness and even his hooped ear ring made me think he actually was gay and that the bullying as a teenager had turned him that way. Simon kept saying that Gordo was obsessed with his wife but he was actually obsessed with Simon, he had been since high school. Robyn was just a way for Gordo to get at Simon.
-
I'm not sure why anyone is surprised about the number for Ted 2, I predicted $41 M and I went too high. The original had a good multi but it's like Paul Blart, Identity Thief, We're The Millers, Horrible Bosses etc... in that it wasn't a beloved comedy and a sequel was/is unnecessary. The main problem was that the trailer gave no incentive to go and see the movie, there was nothing new and even the tagline was 'Ted is coming again'. It's clear that audiences won't just go and see any sequel for the sake of seeing the same characters do the same things as they did in the first movie.
-
I'm still not entirely sure what I think of this film after experiencing it on the big screen. I haven't seen any of the other Mad Max films before so I went into FR blind essentially.
The first 15-20 minutes I honestly had no idea what was going on, it all seemed just beyond weird to me. Why were the workers boys covered in white paint? What was with the chrome obsession? What did the syphoning of blood from Max do? I didn't feel like any of these questions were really answered because the film presumes you have at least some knowledge of the series, which I didn't. So in my opinion, it really doesn't do enough to acquaint new viewers to the goings on of the franchise.
The action sequences are impressive, well shot and energetic, but ultimately i felt like i was watching extended versions of the same scene on repeat. Car chase, mumbled speech, car chase, mumbled speech, car chase etc...
The action was exciting but at no point did I get the feeling that I was watching something special, my feelings on this were probably affected by the fact that this has a ridiculous 98% on RT, which got my expectations unrealistically high, and from the films multiplier it's clear that the film hasn't connected as much with the general audience as it has done with critics and the internet crowd.
The acting is fine, Theron is solid and Tom Hardy does what he can with a role that is honestly pretty limited, i found Holt and the other women to be fairly out of their depth.
In all I found this film to be a mixed bag, the action scenes are entertaining but felt repetitive, the story isn't anything complex and the ending was predictable.
6.7/10
-
1
-
-
Selma number is bad. An OW of only 12 million? It will finish somewhere in the 60s, with probably 10 million overseas. White people in America show up in large numbers to see Unbroken, Lincoln, American Sniper, or a hundred other stories revolving around White heroes. They will go see The Help when 60% of the story is about a White person. They will go see The Butler when the commercials advertise the White presidents as half of the film. But a movie where 90% of the speaking parts are Black people? Ehhh...good luck.
You could say the same for black people though. A very highly regarded film about one of the most important black leaders in recent history and it's going to make less than a mid-tier Madea movie.
-
1
-
-
Just watched this for a second time and it will be an absolute travesty if a film as powerful and moving as this loses to the light and completely underwhelming American Hustle come Oscar night.
Ghost in the Shell | March 31, 2017 | Scarlett Johansson | Paramount | New Trailer on page 43!!!
in Box Office Discussion
Posted
Then don't see it in 3d whatever you do, it was my only option and whilst the visuals still looked good, the 3d itself was garbage and the colour was so much more muted than the 2d version.