Rufus Magillicutty

AH. Well that would make sense then. Thank you sir. You are a gentleman and scholar. Not to mention you smell like fresh baked cookies. Always a plus.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. Period. Nuff Said! Done. Hands down. DOTPOTA is so far ahead of the the rest of the potential candidates they're not even worth listing. Well...except for GOTG. I love that film. What Dawn did with it PERFORMANCE capture was astounding. I have a question though. What are the dates for eligibility? Why is Jupiter Ascending on this list? It's not even out yet. How does that fall into 2014?

Ok I'm getting in on this late. I only just watched it a few weeks ago. X-mas gift For me it's an A+ This is going to be one of my all time favorite movies. You guys have touched on pretty much everything I liked about the movie. There's allot of love here for it so I won't do a play by play break down. I just have to touch on a couple of my favs. First and foremost I'd like to give praise to Almighty God for making this hap................uhhh...wait. Sorry that's my - I just won the whatever ball championship speech. Sorry. *Ahem* First I have to reiterate how phenomenal Andy Serkis, Toby Kebbell and the whole CGI team are. I absolutely 100% believe this film is proof that they need to create a new award category. Oscars, Globes, MTV or Peoples Choice ... all of them. It should be a regular category just like supporting actor or cinematography. Only problem with that is that Andy would be the only winner for at least the next 5 years. In all seriousness though I was dumbfounded by the acting of the "apes/actors" and that they were all CGI. My brain literally would not accept it as fake. The weight and movement, the hair and eye refractions, the expressions and character were all just so damned real that I bought them as absolutely real. I'm telling you guys that scene where Koba plays dumb with the humans to get away was rendered so insanely perfect that I just couldn't believe it was all CGI. And I know damn well it was all CGI. I agree with Futurist that this is a milestone in VFX history.......but I'm not sure I'd say TF was one. I'd go back to Jurassic Park or T2 to mark that as a milestone. The next thing I thought was fantastic was the whole tone. Some have bemoaned that fact that it was slow or the action wasn't "fun". Well - It wasn't meant to be. Not every movie can be "The Raid". Room after room of blood shed and horrific violence designed to make the audience cheer for more like Roman citizens riled up into a blood lust frenzy. I thought the way Reeves depicted the war and violence was perfect. The tone was dark and ominous so to suddenly have a Yeehaw shoot'em up moment would destroy everything they had done to that point. There were definitely some great visual moments and character moments but you never really root for one side or the other. As I mentioned in a previous post about the design of the film I think this was a master piece of film design. For the movie to work you have to believe in the apes. In caesar. They have to be characters not VFX. I think everything from the color pallet to the environments to the weather and the understated music was designed to make the world as real as possible so when you ask the audience to believe in something that is not real it isn't such a leap. It's actually very similar to what Nolan did to Batman. It's a great technique for adding realism to an otherwise unrealistic character.

Yeah it's not a perfect comparison. I mean Turing wasn't blind and I'm guessing Ray Charles wasn't very good at crossword puzzles What I was trying to get at was that so much of what makes a bio-pic or any movie good is what challenges or adversities a person has to overcome in life. It's not drama to just be awesome and never have to deal with anything. Never falling down or having demons is just boring. In "Ray" they showed his struggles and demons throughout so you know how hard it was and what he faced and yet still became a legend. But in "The Imitation Game" this major plot line struggle became figuring out how to crack a code. Don't get me wrong I enjoyed that part. But if your going to make a movie where the main obstacle he has to overcome is just cracking a code - why bother with a showing how he died or why? Imagine how much more powerful it could have been to see him struggling to crack the code while working among homophobes. Or a scene with Clarke or someone asking why he would build a machine to save people that would kill him if they new he was gay. I think there were really two movies in "The Imitation Game". One about code breaking that the director really cared about (that was very good) and one about the tragedy of Turing's death that the director didn't and just tacked onto the ending. That's actually unfair on the director. I doubt that was his intention but that's how it played to me.

What I loved about that moment from a directorial stand point is that its the only time you hear Maurice speak. The way Matt Reeves used the apes speech was absolutely brilliant. He didn't start off with them all chattering away. I think it would have been too much too quick. You'd never buy into the apes as real because you'd be think it was hokie from the beginning. But he eased them into it a few words at a time. Used little subtle visuals like Caesar having to hold his throat to vocalize. With Maurice they held back his speech well after the other apes had began using multiple sentences. I was actually wandering at that point if he could talk at all. Then to use that moment for him to simply say "RUN" made a huge impact. That's how you design a film. Absolutely Brilliant.

I absolutely agree. The end felt like a cheat. I didn't time it but I would have said it felt more like 5-10 minutes. It was so rushed that I was left feeling short changed. There is also a haunting "what if" aspect of his death. Turing was continuing his work on the "Turing" machine in secret after the war but because of his forced chemical castration and hormone therapy and his subsequent suicide he wasn't able to complete or advance his technology. So - "What if" he lived? What if he wasn't forced to suicide by persecution? How much further along would his research have gone? How much closer to computer technology could we have been in that time? We could have been decades further along in this technology if his life hadn't been cut so short? And for what? For hatred. Bigotry. For people's intolerance of things and people they don't understand. Because the status quo abhors change. It is a sad aspect of the human condition that we cut off our own noses to spite our face. All the code breaking stuff if good fun and made for a solid movie but IMHO the real story was the one they relegated to practically a footnote. What they chose to show of Turing's life would be like making the "Ray" bio-pic, only show him singing and then at the very end saying "he also dealt with some racism" or "he also did drugs".

I agree that it was a fairly by the numbers bio-pic. There was nothing special about the overall story structure or any big reveals. They relegated the most intense and powerful aspect of the story to the last few minutes which was a shame. I'd grade it at a B- but would say the emotional connections and relationships between Turing, Clarke and his colleagues was strong enough (all credit to the superb acting of Cumberbumb:-P, Knightley & Goode) that it rates above a C+. Splitting hairs maybe there it is. I would also say that the movie put the focus on the revelation of cracking Enigma code and Turing's machine. It was very much about how Turing is the "father" of modern day computer. That's fine - but to then truncate his personal tragedy to almost a footnote at the end of the movie was a loss of a great opportunity. I feel the tragedy of how we lost such great mind to the same kind persecution and intolerance we were fighting was the real story and a much more poignant subject in todays social climate. Besides, not every movie can be MAD MAX.

I'll get in on that as well. I actually like Iron Man 2 even a bit more then that. I don't think it's bad at all. Like you said it's weaker than the other MCU movies but I enjoyed it. I own it. I watch it - not as a channel surfing filler.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Only part of the movie I actually really liked because it was so ridiculous I laughed out loud. I didn't hate it but I was just totally underwhelmed. DOFP on the other hand was a steaming pile. Mostly because of all the sentinel HYPE that was a LIE. A damned dirty LIE. I've been waiting for a Sentinel/X-Men show down since the rumors swirled after X1 and I got 5 minutes of half assed practical props on wires and some BS crap of them shooting cop cars? It was one of the biggest let downs in CBM's. I could bitch for days about DOFP but I don't want to get booted to another thread. So in keeping with the thread topic -------- I think Michael Bay is a cinematic genius!!!! Oh man I can't keep a straight face on that last part. HAHAHAH. Devastator had giant robot balls. HAHAHAHAHAHA

Which one? The one where he comes out of the ocean to destroy a city while the military looks on helplessly - or - The one where he comes out of the ocean to destroy a city while the military looks on helplessly??? HAHAHAHAHA. You are in fact wrong my good sir. I didn't NOT like Godzilla. I was only apathetically MEH about Godzilla. So there.

I know he's no spring chicken like Michael B. Jordon (LOL/JK) but I don't know that they are doing an origin story. I don't think Terry is too old play Luke Cage at some later part of his life. Terry's not exactly using a walker. The dude's in supreme shape. But it's all a moot point now. I didn't really expect him to be Luke Cage. I never heard or read any articles about him being a serious contender for it. It was just a pipe dream of a TC fan.

My Review is somewhat truncated as I could not finish the film. About half way through I got up to pee and just never came back. I really couldn't care less about it. I'm a tentative fan of film musicals. I can't say I am a fanatic about them but there are a few I just adore. This was not one of them. I have a number of complaints about this film, at least the half I saw. Chief among them was that the singing was just TOOOO damn much. There was no easing into it. No breaks between numbers. It was just one long number that never stopped. I didn't give a crap about the characters or what ever the plot was getting at. I thought the idea of intertwining different fairy tales together was interesting at first but it quickly became a huge meh fest. After endless singing and prancing around I just could take any more. And I know it's a musical but to never stop for a breath or a beat just to be in the world and characters was exhausting. Then once I was exhausted I just became irritated. My next complaint would be that it all felt very contrived. Not natural to the characters. All the pippitty pippitty and dancey dance clever little rhyming dialogue was so forced. I got this annoying feeling in the back of my head like the "actors" not characters were smirking to themselves thinking "look how clever I am and how theatrically wonderful I am". The only exception being Emily Blunt. She was the only one who felt sort of real. The rest of the cast just felt pretentious. I'll give one comparison to expand on this. In Sweeney Todd (my Favorite musical) the music came from a dark painful place. All the characters were damaged and their musical delivery expressed it. the singing was mournful. Dreadful, as in - Full of dread. The singing was to express and color the characters state of mind. Where as the singing in ITW was a nonstop gimmick to have all the dialogue be sung in an annoyingly chirpy way. The rest of my complaints are more nit picky in nature so I'll just end with this.... In the words of Peter Griffin, "I did not care for it. It insists upon itself."

X-Men: Days of Future Past - sucked balls. How do you have a movie about sentinels that only show up in the last five minutes, only fight 2 mutants (including a BONE clawed Wolverine - LAME) then turn into Magneto gun turrets. I hated it. HATED IT. HaaaaaAAAAATTTTEEeeeDDDD iiiiiIIITTTTTT !!!!!!!!!!

Not to take anything away from Mike Colter but I was holding my breath for Terry Crews as Luke Cage. I wish Mike the best and have thought for a while now he's gonna blow up big time. He's got blinding charisma shining from that smile of his and I'll be watching him with bells on. I'm just a little sad though because TC has always been one of my all time favorite actors. When he comes on the screen I just smile from ear to ear. You'll never see another actor having so much fun doing his job. I thought for sure it would be him. To me he's the physical embodiment of Luke Cage. Oh well. We'll get'em next time TC.

I totally agree. I have no idea why Sony wants to rush these stories or jam them into one film. Look at SM3. They could have had Peter in the costume the whole movie, have it take him over so at the end he nearly kills Harry or does something more viscous and inline with the comics then the very finally battle would be him removing the suit. At the end credits have in a scene of Brock in church and the Venom suit dripping on him. Done.----THEN----you could have a SM4 that would feature Venom as the only villain and make him much more effective. Not just a last minute throw away villain. In ASM2 its the same thing with Harry and his Goblin transformation. I seriously thought the movie was over when Eletro was destroyed. Then I was like --WTF? They're seriously going to do this GG crap? Sony and all of the people in charge of Spidey have there heads up their A$$e$.

I saw that Tele hasn't gotten around to posting this so I'll do it for him..... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWNWi-ZWL3c

Too bad Gwen in dead. I don't get why Sony was in such a rush to kill Gwen. I know not everybody is a Garfield fan but by "most" accounts the Peter/Gwen chemistry was one of the better things about this current reboot. That's not to be confused with the amount of love story being piled onto the story. I think the love story could have been dialed way back. But the chemistry between Garfield and Stone was amazing. Not to mention that people (IMHO) seem love Emma Stone in general. She was great. So why then did they (Sony) rush to kill her off? Why not have her into a 3rd film? They could have taken their time turning Harry into the Green Goblin. Make him sick in 2 but make the change in 3. Then leave Gwen in until the end of 3 where the goblin stuff could have played out properly. They have no idea how to pace themselves. Rush in all these characters, rush in plots and sub plots. They force too much stuff into one film. I feel like Spidey is the child of and abusive parent (SONY) and pray he ends up back at Marvel for his own safety and well being.

Hey Treeroy - Was your first viewing of Gravity in the theater or on disk? Because I have found it makes a big difference. I saw it at the producers guild state of the 3D theater and man I'll tell you I was literally dodging 3D debris. It's super impressive when viewed on that level. I was absolutely head over heels in love with that film but when I watched it at home on regular blu-ray it did hold up nearly as well. I was kinda meh about it. I still think it deserves on spot on the list but I do question it being considered Sci-Fi. I don't remember there being any Wookies in it. Unless you count Sandra Bullocks bad wig as one.

The Super Duper Box Set - Collectors Extended Edition 3D/Ultraviolet, Steel Box, Criterion Director's Anniversary cut of....."Freddy Got Fingered". Friggin awesome flick.

Transformers - Age of Extinction Hands down worst film this year. I don't know why I expected better but I wanted kick myself in the face for watching it.

After seeing it and Primer on so many lists I had to go and watch them both. While I thought they both had some very thought provoking ideas and very interesting directorial execution at the end of the day, I had no freaking clue what I had just watched. To me they are really more experimental. Closer to something I'd watch in film school than pay to go see. I would never watch those movies again like I could watch a Star Trek movie or Inception. My criteria for ordering my list was simply which one I would want to watch more. Upstream Color and Primer are both one time viewings for me.

Hey Stingray thanks for doing the list and countdown. Nicely done sir. I commend you. You came with the speed and quickness. Sorry I didn't come across the entry thread until it was to late to submit but never the less....here's my list. 1 INCEPTION 2 AVATAR 3 DISTRICT 9 4 GRAVITY 5 RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES 6 STAR TREK 7 STAR TREK: INTO DARKENSS 8 PACIFIC RIM 9 SERENITY 10 THE PRESTIGE 11 SOURCE CODE 12 MINORITY REPORT 13 JOHN CARTER 14 WALL-E 15 ZATHURA 16 CHRONICLE 17 FREQUENCY 18 LOOPER 19 MOON/OBLIVION 20 CHILDREN OF MEN 21 ELYSIUM 22 THE CHRONICLES OF RIDDICK 23 TOTAL RECALL 24 EQUILIBRIUM 25 A.I. Runners up: PRIMER TRON I AM LEGEND LIMITLESS

Yes. Edge of Tomorrow and DotPotA would have been in my top ten. I LOVED both of those. Not sure about Interstellar. I liked it but not one of my favorites of the last 13 years. But then again I would put there just for the fact they depicted a generation ship like imagined in "Rendezvous with Rama" and "The Expanse Series". I was actually shocked when I saw it. Awesome sci-fi reference.

I get that. When I realized this poll was only from 2000 and after I thought there goes most of my top contenders. For a top 25 film though I was just expecting something better than "Not Bad".

OK somebody help me with Sunshine. I don't understand why it's in a top 25 list. There were a number of films I saw on people's list's that I had not seen. So I gathered up the repeat offenders and started viewing. I don't get Sunshine as a top 25. I'm not saying it's a bad film. It's just completely devoid of anything original or exceptional. It's very competent film. It does have some nice visuals and cinematography but what else? The characters have zero development. The story premise is old hat to me. Practically the same as something like "The Core". There are no real interesting concepts or theories. There's no great reveal or twist. The antagonist, Mark Strong is totally wasted in this film. Could have been any actor in hamburger patty makeup. Not to mention the the whole 3rd act is a total mess. It went from slow and deliberate to a slasher film? I don't see anything here that is ground breaking or worthy of emulation. The acting was flatlined. No fault of the actors. There's just nothing to chew on. The only conflict is Mr. Crispy showing up to stab everyone. By the way, did the "sun" give Mr. Crispy super human strength? Maybe it's a Darkman thing. No nerves left to feel the muscle fatigue? Bleh. I could go on and on about what's NOT special about Sunshine but I'm not trying to just Mitch about it. Please if you like it tell me what I'm missing cause I just don't see it.