Article ITT I attempt to review every movie I've seen.

Mostly Harmless said:
I was going to stickie this thread till I realized "Ghostbusters" and "The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy" (The 2005 movie, not the original TV show) weren't on the list :(

j/k Stickied.
Click to expand...

yay its been stickied. thanx so much. *hug*
 
Mostly Harmless said:
I was going to stickie this thread till I realized "Ghostbusters" and "The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy" (The 2005 movie, not the original TV show) weren't on the list :(

j/k Stickied.
Click to expand...

Yay!


Ghostbusters_cover.png


Title: Ghostbusters
Year: 1984
Country of Origin: US
Director: Ivan Reitman

Story: Who you gonna call?

Review: This film is so perfect that I have difficulty believing that it actually exists. I mean the execution of this film had to be pitch perfect to take an idea of catching ghost and turn it into solid gold. If you haven't seen this one, then you're really missing out.

[9/10]
 
Sexy Beast said:
Remowilliamsposter.jpg


Title: Remo Williams: The Adventure Begins
Year: 1985
Country of Origin: US
Director: Guy Hamilton

Story: The Karate Kid meets Awesome

Review: Here is a movie you probably haven't seen, but should. This is one of the most entertaining films that the 80s has to offer. The film begins with a tough New York cop, whose death is faked and is recruited into a secret government agency. He is taught matrix like martial arts from a Korean master and soon he is able to dodge bullets and run on water. One of the most underappreciated action films of all time, do yourself a favor and watch this one.

[9/10]
Click to expand...


wow, almost forgot about this one but yah Remo Williams was awesome......just wish the adventure would continue.....:(
 
does that mean i get monies because you haven't seen it?
 
Death said:
does that mean i get monies because you haven't seen it?
Click to expand...

Technically not, since it's not a movie. Oh, and the rule is that you have to have seen the film...that is if you could call Hannah Montana:The movie a movie.
 
Grimm911 said:
How about Quarantine?

or the movie that quarantine was remade off of, .REC
Click to expand...


Rec_poster.jpg


Title: [REC]
Year: 2007
Country of Origin: Spain
Director: Jaume Balaguer?, Paco Plaza

Story: 28 Days Later meets The Blair Witch Project

Review: I'm going to review this film in just adjectives: Gory, intense, claustrophobic, high adrenaline...ehh...thrill ride...yeah I'm out of them. Anyway the film follows the film crew of some public access show which is following around a crew of firemen. Unfortunately for everyone the crew of firemen respond to a call in an apartment building that happens terrible infestation of rabid-zombies. Oh...and the government has quarantined the building so no one can get out. This is a spectacular horror film and one that pretty much all horror fans should see.

[8/10]

*I haven't seen the sequel yet.
 
Last edited:
Quarantineposter.jpg


Title: Quarantine
Year: 2008
Country of Origin: US
Director: John Erick Dowdle

Story: 28 Days Later meets The Blair Witch Project...yet again.

Review: This is the US remake of REC and as remakes go, this one isn't half that bad. It's pretty close in quality to the original, but subtle changes in the films characters, pacing and story knocks the film down a couple of pegs. As such I do recommend the original over the remake.

[6.5/10]
 
pillar said:
pulp fiction will be an interesting review. & since summer is coming up, i think ill help sexy beast out when it comes to watching movies & doing a review on them. im sure he wont mind the help.
Click to expand...

I don't know man. It's something to think about though. It would definitely help give this thread a more comprehensive feel to it if there is more than one author.
 
Hitchhikers_guide_to_the_galaxy.jpg


Title: The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
Year: 2005
Country of Origin: US
Director: Garth Jennings

Story: "In many of the more relaxed civilizations on the Outer Eastern Rim of the Galaxy, the Hitchhiker's Guide has already supplanted the great Encyclopaedia Galactica as the standard repository of all knowledge and wisdom, for though it has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least wildly inaccurate, it scores over the older, more pedestrian work in two important respects. First, it is slightly cheaper; and secondly it has the words DON'T PANIC inscribed in large friendly letters on its cover."

Review: Despite having not watch any Star Trek, I still consider myself a geek. As a geek of my self-inflated stature I've read the whole of Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series. I love the series with all my geek laden heart. So when I heard that there was going to be a movie based on the books that were written by Adams I jumped for joy. Of course Adams died three years prior to the production of the film and his script was rewritten, but my hopes were still high.

My hopes, that were so high, were dashed by the final product. That's what this film was...a product. The humor was muddled, some of the characters where miscast and the story was handicapped by extraneous scenes. Now, I'm certain that my opinion of the film has been clouded by my past experience with the material, which is why I wrote the first paragraph. I've seen other reviews from people who actually enjoyed the film, so try to read those to get a more balanced opinion...but for me, this film sucked.

[4/10]
 
2010-poster01.jpg


Title: 2010
Year: 1984
Country of Origin: US
Director: Peter Hyams

Story: "My God... it's full of stars!"

Review: This one is a weird one to review. because it's difficult not to make comparisons to Kubrick's film. It's a sequel to 2001: A Space Odyssey, but at the same time it's not. This film is a sequel to the book 2001: A Space Odyssey and not Kubrick'. As such there are a lot of inconsistencies between the two films in both story and tone. This one is diffidently more Clark than Kubrick. As such the film feels more concrete and less whimsical than it's former. The film is by no mean bad, in fact the only real problem that this movie has is that it's floundering in the shadows of Kubrick's magnum opus.

[8/10]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top