MissNathalieVintage
Practically Family
- Messages
- 757
- Location
- Chicago
The Amazing Spiderman in 3d. I could've done without the 3d there really was not that many 3d shots in the film. Other then that its was worth watching.
Watched several over the long weekend but the one I enjoyed the most was "The Aviator".
Great movie! DiCaprio was very good, Cate Blanchett absolutely channeled Hepburn and Kate Beckinsale was one of the most fantastic looking women I've ever seen on film.
I'll definitely get a copy for my own collection.
The Thin Red Line is far and away my favorite war film. Terrence Malick is a fantastic director.
To me it was just okay. The sets were amazing, loved the cars & costumes, but I felt the plot was really predictable. Meh. lol
Spiderman 3 was on public TV on Sunday so I watched it. Pleasantly surprised. I don't usually enjoy superhero films, and previous Spiderman efforts (before the current franchise) have been risible. But this one (and the previous one that was on TV last weekend) was good.
bk
Hi
I went to see the new Spiderman on Sunday afternoon. I liked the new guy better than the Tobey guy as Spiderman. The plot was more believable from an emotional standpoint. I understand that the term believable and super hero movie don't go well together, but there it is. The version I saw was in 3D, but it was wasted for most of the movie. Nothing came your way into the audience. Be sure and stay for the credits or you'll miss the end of the movie. The bad guy was pretty well done also.
Later
...As to 3D, I think that the less that comes out of the screen the better. Every time something breaks the fourth wall, it reminds the audience that they are in the theater. If the 3D is used to provide depth, instead of gimmicks thrown at us, it is as though the back of the theater is not there, and you get to observe reality.
That is interesting. Most people thought that Spiderman 3 was an extraordinarily bad effort, and that is what prompted the current reboot.
As to 3D, I think that the less that comes out of the screen the better. Every time something breaks the fourth wall, it reminds the audience that they are in the theater. If the 3D is used to provide depth, instead of gimmicks thrown at us, it is as though the back of the theater is not there, and you get to observe reality.
Really? Any particular reason people thought it was bad? I thought Venom was cool, and I always liked Sandman.
Always with the proviso that I'm certainly no comic book or superhero movie fan. The one that was on before it (and preceded it in the franchise) was better, but really, are people honestly looking for a "good movie" when they go to watch superheros? Surely no-one could possibly be looking for anything deep in these movies? They're just a bit of light entertainment, right?
Some crazy 70s vampire movie that I didn't even finish. The clothes were bad enough but the story also stunk.
What was it about the 70's that made for such poor cinema? The over use of the anti-hero was one but somehow the stories were really awful for many 70's flicks.