Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Go Back   Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops > InsideHoops Main Basketball Forums > Off the Court Lounge

Off the Court Lounge Basketball fans talk about everything EXCEPT basketball here

Thread Tools
Old 12-26-2012, 03:43 AM   #11191
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,597
Default Re: Rate the last movie you watched.

The Hobbit

What an amazing movie. I saw it in HFR 3D in cinemax XD. It was my first time going to this kind of thing but it looked ****ing amazing. The 3d glasses were a bit straining but my friends told me to keep em on during previews so I forget they're there. Still bothersome going into the movie, but when the actual detail and intrigue of 3d( ) hit me, the glasses did part my mind. I found myself turning my head from side to side slightly to look at all the little details and depth added by 3d and the new hfr. I don't regularly watch movies but the script had me chuckling, nice spacing between plot development and action scenes, and great acting. This review was mostly about the 48 fps and 3d. It looks stunning, just a little strange in some scenes; but I think better makeup and set design will change those. Overall, great move. Looking forward to the rest of it.

Jello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 09:03 AM   #11192
NBA sixth man of the year
Thorpesaurous's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,596
Default Re: Rate the last movie you watched.

Saw Django last night, in a pretty full theatre.

I really loved it. Now I expected to really love it, so I don't know how that plays into my opinion of it, other than to say that if you don't think you're going to like it, then you probably won't, because to paraphrase Dennis Green on The Bears, "it is what we thought it was." In fact, as I walked out of the theatre with my cousin, there were two young kids in front of us who were pretty geeked about it, and one said to the other "The thing about Tarantino is that he'll always surprise you!!" We turned the corner and my cousin started laughing because she couldn't understand what they were surprised by. The guy just keeps making the same movie. She said it was just Kill Bill with a black cowboy. My opinion is that if you replace Nazi's with Slave Owners, and Jew Soldiers with a Black Cowboy, the structure of the movie is essentially the same as Basterds. Which makes sense, because he apparently started writing Basterds as this, then splintered off, and came back to this as a one man revenge plot instead of a team like Basterds wound up being.

Anyway, the thing about Tarantino to me is obviously not that he's always surprising me, but in fact that he's not. I knew exactly what I was heading in to see, and I got what I expected, what I paid for, and what I wanted.

I preferred this to Basterds by a pretty fair margin. I'd give it somewhere in the low to mid 90s, which I'm sure is what I gave to Basterds as well, but all in all I definitely preferred this.

For one, this is funnier. There are moments of genuine levity. The characters in both films are played to comic extremes, but in this there's a better sense for the source. Don Johnson essentially doing a Foghorn Leghorn impression is just funny. And there are straighter comic set ups, like one seen in the trailer, where Jonah Hill is griping about the hood he needs for the raid. These are straight comic routines that are more direct than what was done in Basterds, although Basterds certainly had it's moments.

Secondly, this is probably the prettiest of any of Tarantino's movies. Now I have a bit of a fetish for the western, and that's due in no small part to how they look. I love the wide angle isolation shots. Even some of my favorite looking movies that aren't westerns certainly borrow heavily from them, like Planet of the Apes, which looks distinctly western at times. Particularly the first act of this, which is a sequence of bounty hunting expiditions with Dr. King Schultz and Django, which has some of the most stunning visuals we've seen from a Tarantino movie. After that first act, it definitely gets a little more set piece-ish, although they are some pretty awesome set pieces, like both Big Daddy's plantation, and Leo's Candie Land. And the costume work is spectactular, even if it's not exactly period correct. One of the first things I noticed was how good the very first slave trader's teeth looked. Something that wouldn't have happened had we been watching a historical take on the era by someone like Speilberg, but that's not what Tarantino does or is doing.

Thirdly is the schlock factor. I expect, and want, a certain amount of hokieness from Tarantino. I was actually a little concerned about this element with Basterds before it was released, because the guy is so centralized on dialogue and cultural reference, that I was unsure how he play a film in which so much dialogue would be foreign, and so much of the pop culture he references would not have existed yet. It still worked. But this to me works better. First, he uses current pop music to tie into the race history in this country, and it definitely works. It also affects the characters to a degree. This is by no means a historical document. Jamie Fox plays Django with a modern swag to say the least. And Leo DiCaprio's Clarence Candie is a snarling villain straight out of a cowboy pulp novel. And Christopher Walz's Dr. King Schultz is a classic fast talking grifter who could've played any time period as the same type of character with little more than a wardrobe change. I mean ... there are multiple accounts of people actually twisting their mustaches. This couldn't be much more tongue in cheek.

Fourthly are the performances. I'm beginning to think that I'm just not a huge Brad Pitt fan. Perhaps I still have a bad taste in my mouth from Killing Them Softly, but as much as I enjoyed his bad assery in Basterds, it wasn't as relatable as the feeling Django has for his wife, or more importantly, the genuine feeling you sense develops between Django and the good Dr. Schultz. And Leo is spectacular. Perhaps not on the Antagonist level of one Hans Landa, but between him and a great characterization by Sam Jackson, there's more than enough bad guy to go around. Particularly because this was built in set piece type stages. So we get a few other bad guys to root against along the way. All of whom are more fleshed out than the storm trooper style faceless Nazi's we run into along the way in Basterds. Now I'm by no means a believer in god, but every once in a while the idea of intelligent design makes sense, like when I see the right woman's ass, or in this case, the fact that Christopher Walz and Tarantino seem to have stumbled onto each other. The guy's multi lingual pallet once again plays a part in making this movie work. But in addition to that, the way he lays it on so thick, with dialogue that you know he's not allowed to change, but in his speech patterns, it's like the two were meant for each other.

Fifth is the shock factor. Tarantino from day one has been cutting off cops ears with razor blades to pop music, and really hasn't stopped since, and in fact has had to ramp it up every movie to keep us, the blood thirsty audience, at bay. In Basterds it was the gorgeous Bear Jew scene, the vicious scalpings, and a masterfull payoff in the theatre. This has even more. From the Mandingo fights, to the slave treatment, Django's treatment, and yet again another masterfull closing set piece. This thing will have your eyes widen with shock more than once. He does it quickly but deliberately. Just enough to see, then quickly looking away. He's not implying the way some directors do. He's showing you, but only for a second, so your head can do the rest. And the styelized graphic violence is beyond most anything else I can recall from him. Seems like he had blood kits left over from Robert Rodriquez's Planet Terror.

Thorpesaurous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 09:04 AM   #11193
NBA sixth man of the year
Thorpesaurous's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,596
Default Re: Rate the last movie you watched.


Things you may not like:
Look ... if you're uncomfortable with the word ******, just don't go see this movie. It's thrown around by actors in a way that makes wonder just how they can do so so comfortably. You're gonna hear it a lot. Sometimes it sounds informal, like it's just the word used to describe these people and it's fine. Sometimes it sounds venomous. And other times it takes on it's modern almost friendly greeting tone. You're gonna hear it from white people and black people. Good guys and bad guys. For effect. For comedy's sake. You're gonna hear it a lot. Tarantino is at his heart made a career parodying the exploitation movies of a previous era, and it's sometimes hard to tell parody from the real thing, but that's what he's doing, he's exploiting our culture's emotional funny bone, and this is more in that wheel house than anything.
Also, as I said before, this is by no means a historical document. If you're gonna be bothered by the fact that guys have better dental hygene than they should. That the guns are probably far more accurate than they should be. That it's an awfull long ride in a chinchilla coat from West Texas to Mississippi. That I'm not sure when and where the sunglasses were finally popularized. Don't bother with this. Let those things go and enjoy the ride. These things are rides.
There are also some pretty hard plot hole issues. Why for example they felt the need to go into the mandingo fighting ruse to try to get hildy back makes no sense. Had Dr. Schultz simply approached Candie with a reasonably absurd offer for a house slave girl who spoke his native german tongue, I don't see how it would have been any different than making a similarly absurd offer for Eskimo Joe the Mandingo fighter. It wouldn't have made for much of a movie. But it's the type of thing that can take me out of the story in a way. They say she was worth 300 dollars. Had he gone to Candie saying that he heard he had recently purchased a slave girl who speaks German, and he'd be willing to overpay for her, say 2000 dollars, based on what we know about the characters, I don't see any reason why that wouldn't have worked, or at least would've been worth trying. It makes sense for the doctor to want her. Candie would be getting a great deal, and be "winning" as he's obviously want to do. They had over 12,000 dollars in cash on them as it was, so the 2000 wouldn't have been such a big deal, especially compared to what they risked to get her anyway. Just seemed a little extra convoluted. But again, you have to let go of these types of issues in a movie like this.
Finally, this is a long long mother****er. Longer than this review. Longer than my Russian Mafia Casino trip post even. I went to a 705, got out at 1015. Granted there were an ass load of trailers, but still. I know the guy hates editing his stuff. And honestly there wasn't a ton of fat. It's deliberately paced, especially early on. And Walz's dense dialogue takes time. They could've trimmed out some somewhere I suppose, but it's not like there was a lot of dead spots.
And while I'm hard pressed to make a complaint about it being too short, I will say I felt like they edited out what may have been a plot line I would've like to have seen played out. For the sake of dialogue for those who've seen it, and there is no spoiler here ... there's a character on the tracking group at Candie Land, a seemingly attractive woman who wears a mask. On a couple of occasions they go out of their way to show her eyes. It felt like she was supposed to play some larger role that never comes to fruition.

All in all, this was a really entertaining movie. Tarantino, for all his pecadillos, really knows how to write a payoff. He creates characters to an extreme, forces the audience to feel a certain way about them, then pays it off in an entertaining way. At the end of the day, that's the name of the game. He'll throw you a twist here and there. Push the envelope a little further than anyone else, but you get what you came for when it's all said and done. You will be paid off. And in this one, you actually get a couple shots at that pay off.
It was nice seeing this with a crowd. A Christmas day audience that was in the mood, racially diverse, and while I normally like a quiet theatre, QT's movies play to the audience, so I sort of appreciate it. Everyone's been to those movies that get an ovation at the end, well this one drew a couple mid movie. Sometimes I feel like I'm laughing at QT jokes that the rest of the audience isn't seeing, but that's ok.

Go see it. And go see it soon so you get a crowd with you. It's well woth the 11 bucks.

Last edited by Thorpesaurous : 12-26-2012 at 10:00 AM.
Thorpesaurous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 12:48 PM   #11194
NBA sixth man of the year
Thorpesaurous's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,596
Default Re: Rate the last movie you watched.

Originally Posted by ProfessorMurder

That's my biggest complaint of the movie. I thought those squibs were fine in Planet Terror, but they look really really watery. I much prefer the older style squibs like these: Robocop Scene. At least Tarantino doesn't use digital blood splatter, but they look off to me.

Effects genius Tom Sevini played one of the trackers as well, just like he played that Sheriff that got ripped into quarters in Planet Terror. Those are totally his squibs.

I just looked up the IMDB page to see who played the chick tracker, and discovered it was Zoe Bell. So yeah, that was probably just a chance to put her in there. But I still wouldn't be shocked had she had a bigger role that was cut down. Her looking at the slides was an odd touch. And I don't recall her being expressly killed when he enters the house. I actually thought it was her who came in when Django was hanging upside down and all you could see were the spurred boots. I thought that was gonna be the foot fetish moment. Hell, maybe it was. I don't remember one otherwise.

And Sam was spectacular.
Thorpesaurous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 12:49 PM   #11195
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,793
Default Re: Rate the last movie you watched.

Life of Pi - 8/10
millwad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 01:00 PM   #11196
NBA sixth man of the year
Thorpesaurous's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,596
Default Re: Rate the last movie you watched.

Originally Posted by ProfessorMurder

That's my biggest complaint of the movie. I thought those squibs were fine in Planet Terror, but they look really really watery. I much prefer the older style squibs like these: Robocop Scene. At least Tarantino doesn't use digital blood splatter, but they look off to me.


I agree with most of your thoughts, except for your take on the Broomhilda plan.

Remember that quick conversation Schultz and Django had? They talked about going up to a farmer and asking to buy his horse; then the farmer would respond, "F*ck no." That's right on the money.

If they went up to a guy like Candie, a rich, faux-intellectual with an inferiority complex and asked to buy Broomhilda that would only pique his interest. He'd think they were playing him. He'd think she was much more valuable than originally thought. He'd be curious as to how they heard about her. Etc.

Schultz posing as a man interested in Mandingo fighting opened the door to get into Candie's plantation and 'happen to hear about Broomhilda'. They concluded a lucrative deal for the fighter (that Schultz obviously didn't intend on fulfilling). And when Candie's attention was totally on that, overwhelmed with the deal he thought he was getting, you bring up Broomhilda as an off-handed thought. It's a simple con that was going to work if Django and Broomhilda weren't caught gazing at each other.


A couple of thoughts:

1. I honestly don't think the n-word usage was as bad as people are acting. I think the first 4 or 5 uses caught my attention, but after that it just became a part of the 'world'.

2. Sam Jackson absolutely killed his role. He brought so much physicality and intensity to it. I mean he went straight sociopath with it. His character played the sick, old, shaky man card to get a little extra sympathy from the white people… While simultaneously being conniving, horrible, and fear inducing. I knew something was up with him, and then at the end when he dropped the cane and the whole act I knew I'd pegged him right. He was brilliant in that part.

3. I also thought there was a scene cut with that female tracker because they really made a point to show her twice… But I think that was just Tarantino giving Zoe Bell a few moments of screen time.

4. I assumed, based on the first trailer that the story would play out a little differently. The Brittle Brothers seemed like they'd be much more important. Like Shultz takes Django, and through 2/3 of the movie tracking the Brittles, Django learns to bounty hunt. Then they go after Candie through information they found along the way. Instead they just kill the Brittles in five minutes. Not a big deal, but that's just what I thought would happen. I was happy to finally see MC Gainey in a Tarantino movie (Brittle Brother with the Bible pages and whip that Django shot and said, 'I like the way you die boy' to.) He's a great character actor that can really play sleazy, so that was cool.


I really liked it. I'd give it a 9/10 and will probably catch it again before it leaves theaters.

Also, did you like it more or less than Basterds? My initial reaction was that it was better. But it's been a year since I've watched Basterds.
Thorpesaurous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 01:04 PM   #11197
NBA Legend
TheSilentKiller's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 17,552
Default Re: Rate the last movie you watched.

Some Christmas movies I've seen this year:

Jingle All the Way: 9/10
The Santa Clause: 8/10
Frosty the Snowman: 6.5/10
Home Alone: 8/10
A Christmas Story: 8/10
Miracle on 34th Street: 8.5/10
TheSilentKiller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 01:08 PM   #11198
(◣_◢) CoLa
Loneshot's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: 3rd Rock
Posts: 3,259
Default Re: Rate the last movie you watched.

Cloud Atlas - 6.5/10

I guess i didn't get it, lol. It feels like whoever wrote it first thought that line "what is the ocean but a multitude of drops" and decided to make a whole movie just to lead up to that line. It was a great line to close things out, but the movie still feels pretty random. Was each time line a show for the other? Something to do with our art, our creations, being real in another life? It felt like somebody watched 2046, Mr. Nobody, and Hunger Games and said to themselves "pfft, i can out confuse those movies" and put all of them into a ball and threw it against the wall and that's how we got Cloud Atlas.

Flight - 7/10

I was expecting something else, but what i did get was still a pretty decent movie. Its really hard not to like Denzel in anything. Alcoholism is no joke.

Last edited by Loneshot : 12-26-2012 at 01:13 PM.
Loneshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 01:20 PM   #11199
stay mad golden state
heyhey's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: North Carolina -Currently
Posts: 3,057
Default Re: Rate the last movie you watched.

Finally saw Days of Heaven from Malick

awe inspiring. the movie tests a person's ability to describe a film and his or her reaction to it. From the haunting score and sombering photos that accompany the opening credit, the entire film leaves you with a lingering impression that you have just witnessed something of immense personal value and meaningful universally.

Favorite of Malick's movies thus far.
heyhey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 11:10 AM   #11200
Lets go Kni....Giants!
Bano114's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: MetLife Stadium
Posts: 3,561
Default Re: Rate the last movie you watched.

Originally Posted by Thorpesaurous
Also, did you like it more or less than Basterds? My initial reaction was that it was better. But it's been a year since I've watched Basterds.

The first thing I thought when the credits rolled was that it was not much better than bastards. That's not a knock on the movie because Bastards was awesome and so was this.

Beforehand a friend of mine who is a big QT fan told me this movie was better then Pulp Fiction and Samuel L Jackson was better in this movie.

My reaction was:

But the claim still kind of raised my expectations. I felt a little let down as the movie went on and it wasn't what my friend said it would be.

On a more positive note...the length didn't really get to me that much. I felt like it was a long movie but I didn't feel overwhelmed by the length. The movie had my attention throughout because of how great the characters were.

Christoph Waltz...once again amazing and hilarious. He's quickly rising as one of my favorite actors because of how damn entertaining he is. Kind of Samuel L. Jackson who was also fantastic. Every time I watch those two on screen I'm as entertained as I will ever be watching a movie, so having them together was just pure awesome.

The final actor that deserves accolade for his performance in this movie was Leo. Usually, I'm pretty tough on Leo when it comes to his movies because he's put up some great performances, and he's been in some movies where I felt like he wasn't right for the role. This role was perfect for Leo and he killed it. I was not disappointed one bit by the casting of him as Calvin because he pulled off the psycho thing really well.

Back to the things I didn't like. There were too many scenes where not alot was going on except for the characters moving around and music blasting at the audience. I don't know about anyone else but when I throw on a QT movie it's for the dialogue and the story, not to see a music video. That happened far to many times for my liking.

SPOILERS start here

Finally, I didn't like how after Schultz shot Candies he stood there, and had enough time to say "my bad Django" before he got shot. We saw the guy through out the movie cut more than 1 person down in about the span it took him to say that sentence. Why did he accept his death like that?

I have to admit. That shoot out scene that followed with Django in the house was awesome, but would have been much better with Schultz still around to help him.

After one viewing in theaters, I would give it an 8.8/10. The thing with QT movies are you can't just watch them once. From my experience, rewatching them you find so much more you do like than you don't. Will watch this movie again soon.
Bano114 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 02:47 PM   #11201
ZeN's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Roshar
Posts: 24,895
Default Re: Rate the last movie you watched.

Brave - 8/10

The Godfather I & II - 10/10

The Lion King - 10/10
ZeN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 04:39 PM   #11202
Rivalries Never Die
Faptastrophe's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: LV
Posts: 3,245
Default Re: Rate the last movie you watched.

Dredd. 6/10

One of those movies that you watch while also browsing the net.

edit: Loved the gun 'wounds'.

Next Up: Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

Last edited by Faptastrophe : 12-27-2012 at 04:55 PM.
Faptastrophe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 06:12 PM   #11203
NBA Legend
pauk's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,722
Default Re: Rate the last movie you watched.

LA Confidential


Considering the reviews and ratings, i gave it a try and i have to say this is according to me the most overrated movie of the 90s....

It felt like this movie was trying to be too cool.... with the amount of "cool lingo" that they use I began to get lost with exactly what the characters were really proverbing. It is okay to a point, but this movie did it far too much where it became distracting and very impractical. I really didn't care too much for the plot itself either, it has punch--but doles it out in spurts, the first hour is best, and most of the ensemble acting is spot-on, but interest wanes once the story becomes too muddied up..... Again, it was okay, but I can think of plenty other cop dramas that are far superior to this one........

Last edited by pauk : 12-27-2012 at 06:15 PM.
pauk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 09:47 PM   #11204
NBA Legend
RoseCity07's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Portland
Posts: 17,232
Default Re: Rate the last movie you watched.

Django Unchained - 5/10

Tarantino is clearly coasting on his reputation. While I won't say this movie is terrible it suffered from poor writing. There is interesting dialogue at times but I found myself waiting for something interesting to happen. After a lot of nervous laughter from me and the crowd I just wanted the movie to be over. The performances by the actors are the only redeeming quality of the movie.

Dicaprio and Samual L Jackson are easily the best performers in this film. The scenes with them are the ones that I remember the most because you really can't take your eyes off either of them when they are on screen.

This film suffered from a really bad job editing job. I was reading some other reviews online and one person commented that there might be a good movie somewhere in this drawn-out mess of a film. I think that could be true but we'll never really know.

I'm no fan of Tarantino but I will say that this guy does know how to make gore and violence somewhat hilarious. You can tell Tarantino is making fun of racists throughout the movie. I suppose he was trying to be Mark Twain-esque in that way but he isn't nearly as good at it. If Spike Lee really won't see this film I am a bit disappointed because I thought he was more sophisticated than that.

I'd say this movie is worth seeing if you really love seeing over the top action. I really wish he'd make movies for adults though.
RoseCity07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 10:41 PM   #11205
Great young streetballer
AboveTheRim.'s Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 566
Default Re: Rate the last movie you watched.

The Hobbit: an Unexpected Journey 8.7/10

Saw RT and was thinking that I'd end up disappointed when I finally got around to seeing it, but I was very pleasantly surprised. Jackson deserves praise for what he was able to do with the first installment in the trilogy. He was able to not only capture every important aspect from the book, but added in more side stories that weren't' really talked about in the Hobbit. I thought the side-story with Radagash the Brown was interesting, and added in some comic relief, which was acceptable because this movie ended up being a lot more serious than I thought it would be.

I'm not one to be a stickler for the quality of 3d vs. normal, so for the most part, I thought that the 3d made the movie absolutely beautiful. There were a couple scenes (namely action scenes) where I felt like the speed was off a little, but the movie was the 2nd best 3d movie I've ever seen (behind Avatar).

I was/still am a little skeptical about Jackson making the Hobbit into 3 parts, but with how good the first part was, I am greatly looking forward to parts 2 and 3, and will happily purchase tickets to see each one in theaters.

Definitely go see this if you haven't already.
AboveTheRim. is offline   Reply With Quote
This NBA Basketball News Website Sponsored by:

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:01 AM.

NBA Basketball Forum Key Links:
InsideHoops Home
NBA Rumors
Basketball Blog
NBA Daily Recaps
NBA Videos
Fantasy Basketball
NBA Mock Draft
NBA Free Agents
All-Star Weekend
High School Basketball
InsideHoops Twitter
Search Our Site

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy