:werd:
porque es una estúpida película
it was a pretty stupid movie
So, I saw Batman. I'm regretting this post as I type it haha. I'll keep it simple:
I liked it. It was a good movie. Good. Good for an action flick. Good for any type of movie. However, (uh oh) it wasn't great by any means. I assumed it was waay over hyped, and wanted to be wrong, but wasn't. It was what I expected. Very drawn out. That was my main complaint. Do we really need 2 hrs and 30 minutes for that simple of a story?...My son (though only 6, usually sits through superhero movies) was moving in his seat a lot, and even said "why is this so long?" haha. It was a bit more 'grown up' than other movies in it's class though.
Ledger did great, but I liked him as an actor since A Knights Tale - and he was alive then! For as little as that role required, I read him as the type that could take challenging roles and do well. He did so in this one.
Bale is a great actor, but his hoarse voice when he's Batman is irritating. It sounds so terribly forced, like a kid trying to be tough. Other than that, he did ok.
But basically, it was a good movie. I'd never buy it. Not sure I'd even watch it again if it came on tv, (i don't re-watch very many movies anyway), but I left thinking it had some cool scenes, and that I'll catch the sequel.
here's that oh-so-important ranking:
8/10
I should de-duct 8 points just for having Maggie Gyllenhall as the leading female. 2 guys in love with her? HA! She'd be flattered if a dog humped her leg. I'm not gay, but I'd throw her brother the pipe before letting her get a shot.
I liked it. It was a good movie. Good. Good for an action flick. Good for any type of movie. However, (uh oh) it wasn't great by any means. I assumed it was waay over hyped, and wanted to be wrong, but wasn't. It was what I expected. Very drawn out. That was my main complaint. Do we really need 2 hrs and 30 minutes for that simple of a story?...My son (though only 6, usually sits through superhero movies) was moving in his seat a lot, and even said "why is this so long?" haha. It was a bit more 'grown up' than other movies in it's class though.
Ledger did great, but I liked him as an actor since A Knights Tale - and he was alive then! For as little as that role required, I read him as the type that could take challenging roles and do well. He did so in this one.
Bale is a great actor, but his hoarse voice when he's Batman is irritating. It sounds so terribly forced, like a kid trying to be tough. Other than that, he did ok.
But basically, it was a good movie. I'd never buy it. Not sure I'd even watch it again if it came on tv, (i don't re-watch very many movies anyway), but I left thinking it had some cool scenes, and that I'll catch the sequel.
here's that oh-so-important ranking:
8/10
I should de-duct 8 points just for having Maggie Gyllenhall as the leading female. 2 guys in love with her? HA! She'd be flattered if a dog humped her leg. I'm not gay, but I'd throw her brother the pipe before letting her get a shot.
accidental double-post, so we might as well do this:
http://www.tackystars.com/pics/maggie_armpits.jpg
At first I thought she was the joker, but her lipstick wasnt the right shade.
http://www.tackystars.com/pics/maggie_armpits.jpg
At first I thought she was the joker, but her lipstick wasnt the right shade.
It's not so irritating when it's seen for what it is: disguising his voice so as not to be recognised. It wouldn't work so well if he disguised it to sound like, say, South Park's Mr. Garrison.
Ya, I was discussing with some people about why they cast her for that role. Your telling me they couldnt find anyone better?!!!!
I was just pissed that Katie Holmes left, and they just wanted us to ignore it... ok, yeah, sure they're the same person... but yes, she was terrible too.
That explains alot..
When Joker says "hello beautiful" i really wanted to say... "more so than her brother heath?" Was that wrong?
Does it? lol It's pointless to me to watch the same movie over and over unless it's one of your absolute favorites. A movie is a story, knowing every twist, turn, and upcoming sequence pretty much ruins it.
Its just impossible to form such outspoken Gloat-like opinions having only seen some movies only once. If it's an extremely good or extremely bad movie that's one thing but some of those movies in the middle need to be seen a few times to fully be taken in. For example, you bagged Shaun of the Dead, which is a brilliant flick but it may take 3 or 4 viewings to really get the entire gist of what they created. Deadwood, which we're talking about in another thread is a perfect example of greatness that needs to be seen a few times, in succession to fully appreciate..
Not unlike music, most great songs take many listens to fully blossom while many songs that immediately impact good don't stick..
i was VERY excited to see Katie Holmes gone...she's a horrible actress. I think the whole "Rachel Dawes" character was stupid in the first place. Bring on Celina Kyle.
Eh. If you have to watch something more than once to figure out whether it's crap or not - chances are, it is. Shaun of the Dead is one of the lamest movies I've ever seen. The comedy level of a 4th grade child wont amuse me no matter how many times I watch it. 30 minutes was enough there. What they created was a movie that could've been made by any college kids on any campus across the globe with a shoestring budget and mom's camcorder.
haha.. your loss...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
