The thread for movies that aren't going to get their own thread but are still in theaters

DSGamer wrote:
Stele wrote:

Shaky cam has been an issue since the 2nd one.

Let's spend lots of money on stunts, fights, car chases, and then shake the camera around so you can't see a damn bit of it seemed to be the plan.

Yeah. I think what got me this time is that the shaky cam is worse, it literally is zoomed in more and most of those scenes take place at night time for some reason.

I never had a problem with the shaky cam in the 2nd and 3rd movies. I actually think Greengrass did a gret job with it.
The general reaction like yours is slowly changing my mind about watching it on theaters, though. That and the consensus that it's just a retread of the previous movies and, I'll be honest, the 3rd already did this.

So evidently a change.org petition was made to close Rotten Tomatoes because Suicide Squad has gotten poor ratings.

I find it hilarious. Sadly I cannot link to The Escapist while at work, which is where I saw the article. However, it reads like a kid wrote it, someone in middle-to-high school range. The argument is that critics are biased against giving DC Universe films bad reviews, with Batman v. Superman and Suicide Squad being the only two examples, and that they're keeping people from seeing these films "even though they're great films".

It's already got 11,000 signatures.

The whole thing makes me laugh. Again, based on the grammar and the logic, it has to be either a troll or a kid, and the entire lack of Man of Steel, let alone the Nolanverse, just ....I dunno man, I think it's funny.

I'll find out what sort of mess the movie is on Sunday.

---

On another note, in case anyone else was interested in seeing The Founder, I just discovered it was delayed until December in the States, with a limited run on December 16th and a wide release on January 20th. This follows a similar release of Hateful Eight and has me curious if it's trying to release more in Oscar Movie Season rather than blockbuster season because they're hoping for it to be popular with critics but don't expect it to be popular during blockbuster season.

I cannot help but think that logic is a bit of self-sabotage, though. Right now the summer movies are pretty dreadful in terms of ratings and box office success. I was hoping The Founder would fill a similar spot as Straight Outta Compton, closing the summer with a surprise biopic hit.

Ah well. Guess that just means I'll have more of my Sunday available to myself.

Had a spare afternoon so I ended up catching Jason Bourne. I enjoyed it more than I thought I would based on the critical response, but I wonder if it was more because most action movies tend to be so bad that a well-made but unremarkable one automatically feels entertaining.

I do understand the criticisms about it, though. The shaky cam stuff never bothered me in the rest of the Bourne trilogy or any Greengrass films, but I agree with others here that it seemed much more in the way this time, possibly to hide the fact that the actual action choreography wasn't nearly as good. And while the story would have been fine if this was a separate movie, this one just feels like a retread of the franchise, and it's weird to think Greengrass put up a fuss about ever doing another movie but came back for this one.

Late to the party but I caught The Nice Guys. It was a great movie that was completely spoiled by the previews. Just about every gag was in one of the trailers. I was in the weird position of being disappointed despite enjoying the movie.

There's *way* more gags than are in the trailer, but yeah, it could have done with couple of fewer big punchlines revealed.

"Wanna see my dick?"

Alien Love Gardener wrote:

There's *way* more gags than are in the trailer, but yeah, it could have done with couple of fewer big punchlines revealed.

"Wanna see my dick?"

Okay, yeah, that was good too. Plus the homage to Abbott & Costello was great.

I can't remember and am too lazy to check if I already mentioned this in this thread, but I am a huge Bourne (movie) fan. I own at least a couple on DVD and the original trilogy on Blu-ray. I saw them in the theaters. I've seen the trilogy five times, I think, and even the Renner spin-off twice. I'm also fond of Matt Damon generally though mainly on the strength of his stuff leading up to and including the original Bourne trilogy together with Elysium (Jodie Foster's weirdness notwithstanding). So that said:

Jason Bourne is an abomination.

No later than in scene two does it become apparent that this will take strained effort to watch. When

Spoiler:

Nicky Parsons is admitted into the Super Hacker Club, we see super hackers there hacking superly. For instance, one hacker says to another hacker: "Use SQL to corrupt their databases." They're probably trading in the sickest 1337 warez.

[pause for vomiting]

The first three movies were smart, well-paced, and well-choreographed. The team made creative use of timelines, and consistently applied the conceit and thesis of their particular brand of government black-bag operation in service of a compelling if tropefisted story.

This offal they leaked onto our optic nerves is the laziest possible derivation of those themes and aesthetics absent a core of any merit. The dialogue is contrived and is delivered like a casting reading. The retcon wasn't horrible and certainly wasn't the worst part, but it was unnecessary as a function of the fact that nothing in this movie forwards anything of substance as regards Bourne's life and past and future. The exposition of why David Webb came to The Program in the first place is both misplaced and poorly developed, to be generous. There was no reason for an origin story except inasmuch as they needed something to reveal to justify a movie.

Look, I can have some low standards. I enjoy the Michael Bay Transformers movies. And I've seen Days of Darkness. Twice. But I can't abide this production.

This franchise remains only a trilogy.

DSGamer wrote:
Stele wrote:

Shaky cam has been an issue since the 2nd one.

Let's spend lots of money on stunts, fights, car chases, and then shake the camera around so you can't see a damn bit of it seemed to be the plan.

Yeah. I think what got me this time is that the shaky cam is worse, it literally is zoomed in more and most of those scenes take place at night time for some reason.

SHAKY CAM ON THE PHONE WHILE HE'S READING TEXTS WE ARE SMRT

I saw Kubo and the Two Strings last night. It is stunningly well animated, taking full advantage of the stop motion medium for some imaginative and breathtaking sequences. It also has one of the gutsiest opening lines of any movie I've seen.

The story itself is sweet. You will see every twist and turn coming, but I don't know that adults are meant to find the story surprising. I was also a huge fan of the Sisters, voiced by Rooney Mara, and of Monkey, voiced by Charlize Theron. The battles between those characters are also fast, fluid, and satisfying.

Did anyone else see it yet?

ClockworkHouse wrote:

Did anyone else see it yet?

I think I'll have to wait till I can just rent it at home, but I'm looking forward to it. I did listen to the soundtrack yesterday because it was done by Dario Marianelli. It's pretty good but probably something I wouldn't seek to listen to outside the context of the movie unlike, say the Coraline and Paranorman soundtracks.

I dunno, maybe I'll make an effort. Theaters are hard for me because I got spoiled by the ones in downtown Portland. Since I'm out in the suburbs now, I find settling for a Regal Cinemas difficult.

I don't know what your home theater setup is like, but Kubo really benefits from a theatrical screening. There's a richness to the animation and level of detail that I think would be lost at home. (Although maybe not anymore. I haven't had a chance watch a 4K Bluray on my TV yet.)

I loved it especially the music that was in it.

Even if you're used to the suburbs, Regal Cinemas is the very definition of "settling". I was dying for at least a Cinemark before the Movie Tavern made its way.

As for Kubo, I'm going to try and see it with my niece. I want to try and be a better and more involved Uncle, at least as best as I can as she enters the Tween years and starts to drift into her own things. I'll have to double check and make sure she is interested first, and if she's not I'll go see it on my own.

I'm hoping the film gets a lot of positive word-of-mouth if it's good, because it didn't do too well on the billboard charts. Then again, nothing did well this past weekend. Suicide Squad maintained top position by raking in a mere $21 million rounded up.

Yeah Kubo is already down to like three showings a day at the theater I usually hit.

I may check it out tomorrow or Friday just because it may leave decent theaters before I get another opportunity.

I'm not surprised. It's a good movie, but it's not tied to an existing property, is being made by a studio that's talented but isn't a household name, and is being distributed by an art house label. I doubt they ever meant for it to run for more than a few weeks. It's destiny seems to be as an Oscar nominee with strong home video sales.

Ooh, can't wait to see that movie, Clock! Good to hear you enjoyed it and lobby for a theater viewing. Laika hasn't done many movies, but I adore the ones they have so we've been waiting awhile to see this one.

Crap, it's down to barely any showings here, too. Guess I'm gonna have to just see it solo or with my brother or something because I don't have the faith it'll be in theaters labor day weekend. Movie Tavern doesn't even have it, and they've had all the family films this year.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

I don't know what your home theater setup is like, but Kubo really benefits from a theatrical screening. There's a richness to the animation and level of detail that I think would be lost at home. (Although maybe not anymore. I haven't had a chance watch a 4K Bluray on my TV yet.)

No, but your take may be all my wife and I need to see it this weekend. We both thought the trailer looked fun.

OK Harmonix. I want my Kubo and the Two Strings video game now please.

I saw it last night. I was expecting a pretty and enjoyable fantasy. I was not expecting it to hit me that hard emotionally. Wow. Definitely go see Kubo while it's still in theaters.

Finally got to see Kubo and the Two Strings with my family. Definitely the film of the summer, and definitely one of my top contenders of the year. Clock is right in that adults will see the majority of the twists coming, but it feels partially because they foreshadowed much of it in some way rather than relying on typical Chekov's gun tools. For example:

Spoiler:

Immediately after Monkey/Kubo's Mom makes note of the Moon King wanting to make Kubo blind so that, like the King, he cannot see Humanity, Kubo has a dream in which he is sitting beside an old blind man that has the moon on his chest plate. The location of the Magic Helmet is obviously a trap, but it feels more like they're dropping clues to observant viewers rather than holding back on some big surprise twist mystery box.

It had a lot of subject matter that is surprising for family films in this day and age, but I actually appreciated that. When I was younger I could tell when something was condescending to me, and my favorite shows and films often dealt with some meaningful and even challenging subject matter for kids. I don't know if kids younger than 10 will get nervous or scared from the movie, but my 11 year old niece had a good time.

I'll be buying this one on Blu-Ray for the featurettes as well.

Did Warcraft get its own thread? I thought it did, but I can't seem to find it.
Anyhow...

HO-LY CRAP that movie was terrible.
I had read reviews that blamed too much exposition, how the director loved Warcraft so much he thought every member of the audience needed to know every town's name and trivial piece of information.

Guys, that is NOT the reason that movie is as terrible as it is.

It's a cheap B-movie with the budget to topple a couple of Central American governments.
The script was --at it's best-- a very rough early draft. The characters are a shallow, there is no interaction between them, people just follow the plot because the plot requires it.

Half the conversations between one character and the other make no sense.
WTF is the logic behind the half-orc and the King.

I remember playing Starcraft and Warcraft III. The stories in those games were MUCH better writen than this junk. Did Blizzard really not know what was being done with their IP?

Yikes.

Hobbes2099 wrote:

Did Warcraft get its own thread? I thought it did, but I can't seem to find it.
Anyhow...

HO-LY CRAP that movie was terrible.
I had read reviews that blamed too much exposition, how the director loved Warcraft so much he thought every member of the audience needed to know every town's name and trivial piece of information.

Guys, that is NOT the reason that movie is as terrible as it is.

It's a cheap B-movie with the budget to topple a couple of Central American governments.
The script was --at it's best-- a very rough early draft. The characters are a shallow, there is no interaction between them, people just follow the plot because the plot requires it.

Half the conversations between one character and the other make no sense.
WTF is the logic behind the half-orc and the King.

I remember playing Starcraft and Warcraft III. The stories in those games were MUCH better writen than this junk. Did Blizzard really not know what was being done with their IP?

Yikes.

You do realize that the story in the movie is actually very faithful to the IP? It's why most folks i've seen that's familiar with the story actually enjoy the movie and are excited about the 2nd one while others who have next to no context hate it.

ranalin wrote:
Hobbes2099 wrote:

Did Warcraft get its own thread? I thought it did, but I can't seem to find it.
Anyhow...

HO-LY CRAP that movie was terrible.
I had read reviews that blamed too much exposition, how the director loved Warcraft so much he thought every member of the audience needed to know every town's name and trivial piece of information.

Guys, that is NOT the reason that movie is as terrible as it is.

It's a cheap B-movie with the budget to topple a couple of Central American governments.
The script was --at it's best-- a very rough early draft. The characters are a shallow, there is no interaction between them, people just follow the plot because the plot requires it.

Half the conversations between one character and the other make no sense.
WTF is the logic behind the half-orc and the King.

I remember playing Starcraft and Warcraft III. The stories in those games were MUCH better writen than this junk. Did Blizzard really not know what was being done with their IP?

Yikes.

You do realize that the story in the movie is actually very faithful to the IP? It's why most folks i've seen that's familiar with the story actually enjoy the movie and are excited about the 2nd one while others who have next to no context hate it.

Yeah! It's not for you!

"It's faithful to the video game but people who haven't played it think it's crap" was probably not the goal of the production.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

"It's faithful to the video game but people who haven't played it think it's crap" was probably not the goal of the production.

True, but that's what ended up happening. There's still definitely issues with it especially some of the green screen acting moments, but i went in expecting a complete pile and came out pleasantly surprised at how much i liked it.

The current rumour is that the 2nd one will be a direct to video release.

I figured Ranalin was more specifically responding to the comparison to Starcraft and Warcraft III's stories, as if the film were somehow lacking in that department despite being pretty spot-on with the first game.

I myself cannot comment, and it's not a movie I'm interested in renting.

Shin Godzilla will be hitting select theaters on October 11th-13th it looks like, which means I gotta figure out how to see it with my brother and buddy in Jersey on a weeknight.

ranalin wrote:
ClockworkHouse wrote:

"It's faithful to the video game but people who haven't played it think it's crap" was probably not the goal of the production.

True, but that's what ended up happening. There's still definitely issues with it especially some of the green screen acting moments, but i went in expecting a complete pile and came out pleasantly surprised at how much i liked it.

The current rumour is that the 2nd one will be a direct to video release.

If their target market is their players, they should distribute it directly through Battle.net.

ClockworkHouse wrote:
ranalin wrote:
ClockworkHouse wrote:

"It's faithful to the video game but people who haven't played it think it's crap" was probably not the goal of the production.

True, but that's what ended up happening. There's still definitely issues with it especially some of the green screen acting moments, but i went in expecting a complete pile and came out pleasantly surprised at how much i liked it.

The current rumour is that the 2nd one will be a direct to video release.

If their target market is their players, they should distribute it directly through Battle.net.

If you pre-purchase, you get access to the opening credits one week early. The DLC Third Act will be dropping in November. If bought the Collector's Sequel Edition for $120, you get the entire movie plus the Third Act DLC and exclusive access to the end credits.

Worldwide, Warcraft made $434M on a $160M production budget. For a very genre film, those are respectable numbers.

For comparison, Star Trek Beyond has made $286M on a $185M budget; The Huntsman made $165M on a $115M budget, and Ghostbusters made $219M on a $144M budget.

Warcraft performed above average for a genre film this year. A direct-to-video release for the sequel seems unlikely.

As far as the movie itself goes, I agree that it probably didn't do a very good job of easing new people into the Warcraft universe, but as fan service, it was pretty good.

ranalin wrote:

You do realize that the story in the movie is actually very faithful to the IP? It's why most folks i've seen that's familiar with the story actually enjoy the movie and are excited about the 2nd one while others who have next to no context hate it.

I'm definitely on the second wagon. I stayed away, mostly because I had my own rabbit holes back in the day (Counter Strike, DotA). Friends kept describing WoW as "chocolate covered crack".

having said that, I'm going to insist: Warcraft a terrible movie because it's a terrible movie. It has nothing to do with context and it has nothing to do with exposition or canon from the original IP. I had read early reviews on how Duncan Jones wrote a love letter to fans, or how it's all fan service, or how he was terribly overhanded with exposition.

That wasn't it. Yes, I did notice when I was hit up with too many names, places and backstory. I agree that's not great story telling, but that is not why it's bad. It's a bad movie because it was very poorly executed.

A couple of examples of poor film execution;
I'll wrap in spoilers.

Spoiler:

1. Calleb, Lothar's son, dies at the Orc ambush. The son is onscreen for five minutes and suddenly we're supposed to care. If the writer/director is going to fridge the kid and want us to care about it, he needs to make us care. He needs to make us care about Calleb, we need to care about Lothar and we need to care about the father-son relationship. Instead, we get a one-liner about how "Calleb's mother died during childbirth, I blamed him for years." Presto! Now we care?

Plot point: child dies defending father and king. Poor execution: protagonist's child dies needlessly because he happened to be standing on the wrong side of Medivh's spell. Raise the stakes so that Calleb dies for something other than bad luck.

2. similar thing with Khadgar with Lothar; they share two scenes and suddenly Lothar is calling Khadgar names ("bookworm") because the wizard apprentice praised books. It's practically the jock vs nerd trope; it's 40 years old, can we give it a rest? It comes off as cruel mocking and bullying instead of friendly banter.

3. Lothar is facing terrible pain (he even tells us so) for the loss of his son, and Garona feels this is the perfect time to make out with Lothar.

4. The whole bit whether Medivh's been corrupted or not; the timing is all weird. So he's under the influence of the Fel; It's not clear whether he was outright sabotaging his allies or sees things differently but still feels he's helping out.

Sometime after we know he's corrupted, he still has heartfelt moments with the allies. How are we, knowing he's under the Fel, supposed to feel about these interactions? Is he sincere and we should assume he can momentarily control the effects of the Fel? Is he playing his allies? Was the scene supposed to be somewhere else during the timeline and got edited in that order within the movie? I'm guessing it could be canon; but movies and games are different media; not everything in a game necessarily translates into a good sub plot for a movie.

Nolan's Batman showed we could take a comic-book story seriously (by Hollywood standards). Of course, Hollywood being Hollywood, studios learned the wrong lesson and we got dark and gritty for the next couple of years.

In a post-Marvel Hollywood, Disney/Marvel has shown us that we can dive face first into full fantasy and scifi stories and embrace all of it; the narrative, the style, the universe, full use of all colors, the laws of physics they want to arbitrarily want to break.

8 years and 13 films later, Marvel has confirmed we can have likable characters, interesting narratives thanks to a smart script and keep a completely over the top plot and still combine all that it into very profitable movies.

We could and should have gotten a good movie Warcraft with the exact same story, characters and sub plots. This movie is bad because it has none of these elements, regardless of how close or far it may have deviated from the original IP.