What is the movie of the year?

[Bergomillosy]

Well, I think there are at least two movies deserving this title. These are Terminator 4 and Transformers 2. What do you think?

P.S. To moderators: sorry for possible writing to a wrong category but I didn’t find any other category for general chat.

Topic

[TheLeen]

Sure as hell not Terminator 4. And I haven’t seen Transformers 2 yet, but I doubt that, too. :p

Haven’t seen Coraline yet either, and waiting for Parnassus, Surrogates and Red Sonja.
Especially looking forward to Fanboys. (Not sure if they’re technically still “of the year” since we get films with a delay, and the delay is significantly bigger for small/indie productions than for blockbusters)

Watchmen was really good, waiting for the cut that’ll include Tales of the Black Freighter and Under the Hood (which was even better than the main film).

[Pete Part Three]

>I think there are at least two movies deserving this title. These are Terminator 4 and Transformers 2. What do you think?

No…?

[J_Spaced]

Yeah, sorry but Watchmen was superior to Terminator AND Transformers.

But then I saw The Hangover and that was brilliant too. Not an “of the year” brilliant, but still pretty damn good.

[Dave]

Star Trek is the only movie I saw at the cinema this year therefore it must be movie of the year. And with six months to spare.

[JamesTC]

Star Trek.

[si]

Bruno.

[ChrisM]

I’ve only seen Watchmen so far this year, which I liked a lot. It’s a bit early to decide the movie of the year though isn’t it?

I really wanted to see Star Trek and Terminator Salvation but it fell through. (Partly because I lost my glasses and I’m short-sighted… Hopefully that’ll be rectified this week althogh the films have now moved on…)

I’d like to get the Watchmen DVD with the Black Freighter (etc) animation too. I’d like it as an extra on the disk though rather than integrated into the main feature, which seems to be the plan for the longer feature of the film.

It’s ok integrated in the GN, due to the kind of medium (i.e. when we read books we read a bit, put it down, come back to it later rather than absorbing it all in one fell swoop like you do with film) but I think it would be too jarring as part of the main feature. If there is no choice but buy them separately or integrated, then I’ll likely go for the latter.

[Carlito]

Only films I’m looking forward to are Bruno, Whatever Works and (shame mode) The Invention of Lying.

[Mr Flibble]

Definitely not Transformers or Terminator! Star Trek was pretty damn good, The Hangover is laugh out loud funny throughout. I was at the Harry Potter premi?re last night, and that was excellent as a film – although I’ve not read the books.

[hummingbird]

I can’t say that anything has impressed me that much.
Apart from a nekkid Hugh Jackman.

Then again, we are only a little over six months into the year so it may be a little premature to pick a ‘movie of the year’.

[curtis]

‘Let The Right One In’ – Technically not of a film of this year but its really good

[Dessie]

Terminator 4 or The Hangover for me. Worst film would be Drag me to Hell

[ChrisM]

>Worst film would be Drag me to Hell

Hmm. I’ve read lots of good stuff about that one. (I haven’t seen it to judge for myself, but I like the Evil Dead films, and I understand it’s similar.)

[Dessie]

> Hmm. I?ve read lots of good stuff about that one. (I haven?t seen it to judge for myself, but I like the Evil Dead films, and I understand it?s similar.)

After reading all of the good stuff about it i went to see it expecting a really good horror. I thought it was dull and predictable but most people i know who have seen it loved it.

[Tarka Dal]

> ?Let The Right One In? – Technically not of a film of this year but its really good

God I love you Curtis. I love you so much.

T4 was a decent enough stand-alone movie, with a mixture of subtle nods and downright blatant ones to the earlier films thrown in. Overall though not a classic.

Transformers 2 was f*cking abysmal. Few shots lasted more than nano-seconds save for the soft-focus ones that lingered on Megan Fox’s curves. The plot was utter hokum and it was at least half an hour too long.

Drag me to Hell – I’m not familiar with Raimi / The Evil Dead movies so I probably shouldn’t say to much, but it all seemed a bit to schmaltzy in it’s setup, not at all scary in it’s signposted execution and then ending surely took no one by suprise?

What else is there to tear into?

Watchmen: The anti-movie. As someone, I think it was Seb has said numerous times the novel lends itself not to a movie, but to a mini-series. So trying to tell a story that isn’t a movie as one and yet remain achingly faithful to the look and structure of the original work is never going to work.

Kudos to Zack Snyder though for allowing ideas and themes which we don’t often see in a blockbuster movie to be experienced by a wider audience. Allthough surely more credit to Alan Moore for having such ideas in the first place?

Star Trek: Hmm. Everyone seems to love it and it sure is a lot of fun. That said it felt fundementally un-Star Trek at times. Star Trek – particularly the movies – usually being about themes and ideas and not the characters. Whereas Abrams’ movie centred around Spock and to a lesser extent Kirk with some sci-fi hocus pocus thrown in to speed things along. Hopefully Chris Pine will get more chance to sign in the envitable sequel since Kirk experienced bugger all character development in this one remaining a cock-sure self-satisfied git from beginning to end, more Karl Urban would be welcome too.

Since starting this post I’ve managed to do what is technically know as ‘Going off on one’. So in my follow-up post I’m going to go through EVERY new film I’ve seen at the cinema this year.

[Tarka Dal]

Okay then, in approximate viewing order:

The Spirit: Sin City cash-in about a misognystic twat. Features Scarlett Johanssen smouldering in a nazi uniform.

Yes Man: Jim Carrey treads water and you get to stare at Zooey Deschanel for a bit, whilst the chap from Flight of the Conchords steals it.

SlumDog Millionaire: Defintely not the feel good movie of the decade, but a strong multi-faceted fulfilling couple of hours.

The Wrestler: A magnificient performance, an okay movie. Takes on more resonance if you’ve any appreciation of the independent Wrestling scene.

Valkyrie: Laugh as a Nazi Tom Cruise with an Apple Pie American accent undermimes a potentially fantastic cast.

Underworld: Rise of the Lycans / Frost-Nixon.
I utterly refuse to believe that it’s the same Michael Sheen in both of these movies. ‘Lycans’ much like Wolverine is a bit daft, but loads of fun and prove positive that Rhona Mitra’s budget-price Angelina Jolie should be seen more often.

Frost/Nixon: Good character piece, that makes you want to watch the real thing.

Milk: Sean Penn as a 70s gay rights activist in a movie that’s surprising engaging with several very strong supporting performances.

Watchmen (see above)

Gran Torino: Clint Eastwood distills his entire career into one movie growling and threatening his way through a modern riff on ‘Deathwish’.

The Damned United: Michael Sheen’s impersonates Brian Clough by way of Mike Yarwood in a 90 minutes plus extra-time testimonial movie to Old big Ed.

Let the Right One In: Inventive, diverse, original, sweet, dark and unlike anything you’ve seen before.

The Boat That Rocked – The Movie that Sunk? A fantastic soundtrack, and in theory a magnificient cast. Unfortunately also burdened with a rubbish plot, lame jokes and a coffee-table picture book take on the 60s.

In the Loop: Peter Capaldi redefines the boundaries of swearing.

State of Play: Awesome political/media industry thriller which I’d entirely forgotten I’d seen till I just found the ticketstub. Gritty, well-paced and absorbing.

Coraline 3D: Scar your kids for life in 3D!

Star Trek: (See above)

Angels and Demons: Tom Hanks bible-babbles his way across Rome in fluff ‘end of day’s romp. Followed by a short-film starring Ewan Macgregor as a flying priest.

12 Rounds: John Cena stars in a re-make of Die Hard with a Vengeance (minus the jokes.

Wolverine – Hugh Jackman rocks in one of those pointless movies, that’s ultimately pretty good.

Doghouse: If you’ve seen a worse movie this year, you’re lying. Completely missing an ending. Can only assume the producers buggered off down the pub rather than film one as a laddish in-joke.

Drag me to Hell (See above)

Terminator Salvation (See above)

The Hangover: Damn funny, with a bit of moral garbage thrown in.

Red Cliff: Enjoyable enough wannabe epic about ancient fueding chinamen.

Transformers 2: (See above. Don’t see the movie).

Year One: Michael Cera and Jack Black in a desperate search for good Bible jokes.

Ice Age 3: Wonderful stuff. A chocolate box of humour, some great art
direction, a quality score and a belting final act.

Public Enemies: Johnny Depp has lots of fun robbing banks. Johnny Depp gets captured. Johnny Depp escapes. Johnny Depp realises robbing banks isn’t so easy anymore. Johnny Depp gets shot. Christian Bale magnificiently disguises a smile for two and a half hours knowing he’s picking up a hefty paycheck for a Johnny Depp movie.

[Nick R]

I’ve only seen a few films at the cinema this year:

Watchmen: I enjoyed it, and was relieved it was so much better than it could have been (with an Alan Moore adaptation, that’s high praise!). However I mainly enjoyed it for the spectacle of seeing those familiar comic book panels on the big screen; I didn’t really give it much consideration on any deeper level than that, I didn’t get involved in any debates on the changes they made to the ending. They nailed Dr Manhattan’s origin sequence, though – screw the critics who thought it was a pointless digression that dragged the pace to a halt! (I’m glad the hydrogen symbol explanation is being restored in the director’s cut.)

Coraline: Excellent, although I’m not sure yet if I like it as much as Nightmare Before Christmas. I enjoyed my first 3D eperience (bring on Avatar!), but it was a bit distracting: the glasses were a bit uncomfortable over my own.

There was also a weird, faint ghost image some way to the lower-right of the main image, visible both with and without the glasses, and through both eyes. It was only really noticable with bright parts against a black background – like the shots of the Moon, or the end credits. Like this, only fainter. I don’t know if that’s an inherent side-effect of all 3D films (at least the ones that use polarisation rather than synchronised LCD shutters), or if it’s just the way Birmingham Cineworld had it set up. Only explanation I’ve heard so far is that it was some form of internal reflection within the projector…

Star Trek: I’ve never really been that into Star Trek. Loved the original series when BBC2 ran them in prime time about 10 years ago; seen a few TNG episodes and First Contact; liked the two or three DS9 episodes I saw; haven’t seen anything more recent than that. For me, what I’ve seen of Star Trek has always come across better in theory (via second-hand sources like “The Physics of Star Trek” and Wikipedia character/episode descriptions) than in execution. But like Casino Royale and Batman Begins, this reboot sounded promising from the moment it was announced, and lived up to it.

However, I don’t think it was better than Mission: Impossible 3 (one of my favourite blockbusters of the last few years, which was better-paced, had a better MacGuffin, and a much better villain), but it was definitely tremendous fun, with a great ensemble cast that I definitely want to see playing those parts again.

[Ben Paddon]

Coraline was miles better than The Nightmare Before Christmas. Nightmare had a fantastic concept but was very badly executed. Coraline, conversely, had a superb concept and was an utter joy (albeit a creepy joy) from start to finish.

I’d say it’s a close tie between Coraline and Star Trek for film of the year.

[Pete Part Three]

Saw Bruno. You should see it too.

[Tarka Dal]

> Coraline was miles better than The Nightmare Before Christmas. Nightmare had a fantastic concept but was very badly executed. Coraline, conversely, had a superb concept and was an utter joy (albeit a creepy joy) from start to finish.

I should admit that Coraline for me suffered from A) A child sat behind me chewing incredibly loudly for most of the film and B) falling asleep half way through. Something I’ve only ever done twice, and oddly both times they’ve been adaptions of Neil Gaiman stories.

[Tarka Dal]

I have now seen Bruno. It’s a bit shit.

[si]

When I said Bruno before, I was being sarcastic. I haven’t been to the pictures all year.

[Tarka Dal]

It’s a bit like a punchdrunk heavyweight. It connects with some big shots, but a lot of it’s just flailing around aimlessly. The hit-rate isn’t great.

[Ben Paddon]

A bit like Borat, then.

[SkyAndSun]

I laughed a lot. Though I did get the feeling that he had to really push, sometimes, to get a reaction.

[Squeaky Gibson]

i’d say it must be Star Trek, it is now the highest earning ‘Trek in film in the series. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallens looks good, but the reviews seems a bit hit and miss

[JamesTC]

>A bit like Borat, then.

The first person I have seen not to like Borat, I found Borat just recycled comedy with hardly any new material. I will stick with the original Ali G show, I do have high hopes that Bruno will be good and not just recycled, if it is just as with Borat recycled comedy I have another annoying few months of people quoting stuff I heard years ago as if it is fresh.

[Smeg4Brains]

Has anyone else seen the Directors Cut of Watchmen? Doesn’t look like it’s going to be released in the UK so I may have to import the blu-ray. I saw it last week and much preferred it to the original. It’s worth getting the Directors cut if only for this scene of Hollis Mason’s death. http://www.comicbookmovie.com/watchmen/news/?a=8531

[Tarka Dal]

> A bit like Borat, then.

Well my gut feeling was it’s not upto the standard of Borat. Up until Borat I hadn’t really liked Sasha Baran-Cohen’s material, milking laughs from the ignorant can be funny (Cake), but I find it pretty shallow and in a way pretty cowardly.

Borat from memory I thought went after some viable targets and in the process pulled out some big laughs. Bruno does that at times, but it just seemed to be trying to hard for the majority of it. I thought the song at the end was rubbish too. For a satirist, who likes to get his humour from people’s predujices, to rope in several of most pompous arses on the planet and a homophobe for a celebrity-buddy singalong it’s – much like the movie as a whole – underwhelming.

[Ridley]

Red Cliff: Enjoyable enough wannabe epic about ancient fueding chinamen.

*cough*

What’s interesting about Red Cliff is that it plays out like a (video) game. The soldiers are fodder, the general/the player characters have powers and there’s a boss fight at the the end. So it’s Dynasty Warriors unless that’s how Romance of the Three Kingdoms tells the story.

Ideally the DVD will have the complete version.

[TheLeen]

Has anyone else seen the Directors Cut of Watchmen? Doesn?t look like it?s going to be released in the UK so I may have to import the blu-ray. I saw it last week and much preferred it to the original. It?s worth getting the Directors cut if only for this scene of Hollis Mason?s death. http://www.comicbookmovie.com/watchmen/news/?a=8531

Or you might NOT get the director’s cut and instead get the ULTIMATE cut that you THOUGHT the director’s cut was going to be.

http://geekadelphia.com/2009/07/15/rant-with-watchmen-we-find-out-double-dipping-now-starts-even-before-the-first-version-is-released/

I’ll wait for the full thing anyway…

[Smeg4Brains]

I knew since before the film was released at cinema that there were multiple versions going to be coming out. The Ultimate Cut is the Directors Cut with Tales of the Black Freighter cut into it…and I already have Tales of the Black Freighter.

[pfm]

Surely the version with TotBF cut into it is going to be virtually unwatchable in one sitting?? The DC is long enough. It’s definitely better than the theatrical, obviously what Snyder wanted everyone to see. I’m not sure of all the changes but the first half seems to flow a hell of a lot better; it feels more like the epic they were trying to sell us with the theatrical cut but didn’t quite get there.

The whiners can just pick up the graphic novel again. If they can still read it through all the decades-old dried semen lining each page.

[TheLeen]

Surely the version with TotBF cut into it is going to be virtually unwatchable in one sitting??

If it takes less time than The Lord of the Rings (SEE)… cakewalk!

[ChrisM]

I hope the Ultimate version has the other versions too. Especially the DC. At 5 disks it should do.

[Smeg4Brains]

Well whatever the movie of the year is it definitely aint Harry Potter. I was rather looking forward to watching it but the general lack of story made it tedious.

Ice Age 3 on the other hand, rocks.

[Dessie]

Bruno is shit. I don’t see how Sacha Baron Cohen is so famous.

[peas_and_corn]

His humour is lazy and easy to understand.

[Tarka Dal]

> Well whatever the movie of the year is it definitely aint Harry Potter. I was rather looking forward to watching it but the general lack of story made it tedious.

I didn’t think it was too bad at all. True in terms of a story it’s all pent-up tension and people walking on egg-shells for the first hour and a half without any clear explaination as to why, but it looks good, it sounds good and *guilt mode* some of the gawky sexual tension skits actually made me laugh. A lot of the scenes seemed to end very weakly, which doesn’t bode well for the two to come, but overall it was one of the better movies of the last month or two.

[pfm]

I thought Bruno was pretty good but it’s not the same when you’ve got so many people in on the joke. Showing the pitch for his TV show to the execs was good because you could tell that was real, and a couple of the other situations, but overall it probably didn’t hold together as well as it should. The Bruno parts of Da Ali G Show were better.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince IMO is the second best of the series behind Prisoner of Azkaban. A great mix of dark and light with David Yates doing a brilliant job after the lame Order of the Phoenix. I know some people aren’t gonna like it because so much of it deals with the teenage infatuations, but I love all that stuff. Maybe they could have made it more clear about Horcruxes but they’ll deal with that in the next film, I’m sure.

Daniel Radcliffe and Rupert Grint can do comedy really well. It cracked me up that part where they’re lying in bed (not together, obviously, this isn’t a fanfic…) and Ron asks Harry what’s attractive about Ginny and Harry says ‘she’s got nice skin’ and Ron says ‘Hermione’s got nice skin’ there’s a really long pause then Harry’s like ‘right, I, er think I’ll be going to sleep now…’ All the interactions between the main three felt so genuine this time, and Tom Felton who plays Draco Malfoy showed he could act too. Jim Broadbent was maybe a bit too much of a ‘luvvie’ but I suppose it suited the character.

[JamesTC]

> The Bruno parts of Da Ali G Show were better.

[Tarka Dal]

> All the interactions between the main three felt so genuine this time

Absolutely this. I’m probably in a minority in that I’ve not read the books, and I’d only previously seen the first two movies. For me Harry Potter is Grint, Watson and Radcliffe. They’ve grown-up together so It’s no wonder really how that shone through.

> so much of it deals with the teenage infatuations

I guess it depends on how likeable the characters and actors are. I thought all of them seem pretty comfortable with who they are (as characters) along with a warm and camaraderie that made it easy to laugh along with.

I adored Luna too, but then that’ll come as no surprise to anyone who knows me.

[Tanya Jones]

I didn’t think much of Sacha Baron Cohen until I saw Borat, and then I realised the man was very funny and had balls the size of Texas. There’s nothing lazy about the stuff he did in that film.

[pfm]

One funny thing about Borat is how some people STILL don’t quite get how much of a pisstake it is and how clever Sacha is, yet they’ll still laugh at it on the level of “oh it’s a funny foreign guy.” That’s one reason Bruno could never be as popular, he’s just not as generally funny as Borat. Also there’s the fact that Bruno is an overtly gay character which I know turns some stupid people’s stomachs from the get go. It saddens me to read reports of people walking out as soon as ‘the gay stuff’ started happening. Some people just need to get over themselves.

[si]

My mum can’t stand Sacha Baron Cohen, and upon seeing all the hype for Bruno, she said to me, ‘You know, it wouldn’t surprise me if he really is like that.’

I replied with, ‘What? Austrian?’

[Tanya Jones]

Good joke, Si. Anyway, he’s married to the lovely Isla Fisher and they have a bouncing baby.

[Pete Part Three]

Mmm…Isla Fisher.

They’re not married yet, btw. I still have a chance.

[Tarka Dal]

> I didn?t think much of Sacha Baron Cohen until I saw Borat, and then I realised the man was very funny and had balls the size of Texas. There?s nothing lazy about the stuff he did in that film.

He has a great cameo in a Will Ferell film called ‘Talledaga Nights’. You’re usual Blades of Glory, Dodgeball type stuff only this time about the NASCAR series. Cohen turns up as a homosexual French F1 Champion and the unlikely chemistry between him and Ferell works really well.

[Anonymous]

I agree with Tanya and Performing Monkey – Cohen is an intelligent performer who knows how to exploit prejudices that folks usually hide. Hardly cowardly. How many times did he nearly get lynched recording Borat?

Talledaga Nights is a typical Ferell vehicle. Starts well but fades badly. Cohen is bloody funny in it though and that makes it just about worth watching.

[Carlito]

> Cohen is an intelligent performer who knows how to exploit prejudices that folks usually hide

If somebody is prejudiced, but hides it and doesn’t act on those prejudices, are they really hurting anyone? Other than themselves by being so small minded?

And if they aren’t hurting anyone, do they really NEED to be exposed?

Being prejudiced = wrong, right? Or so “right-thinking society” dictates, at the very least. Being actively and aggressively prejudiced, might mean you get what you deserve.

But if you’re quietly and unassumedly prejudiced and you have Cohen riling you up, egging you on, manipulating you to get the reaction he seeks, is it right for him to expose these people in that way?

Is a man who thinks Jews are scum, for example, actually a hateful person if he keeps his opinion to himself and it only exists inside his own head? And when Cohen manipulates it out of him to feed his own gain, is it the closet Anti-semite or the puppet master who is at fault?

[Author]

Replies