OT - see any of these movies?

AMBlai01 · 01-13-09, 11:18 AM

I only saw 21 and Vantage Point from those lists. I thought Vantage Point was average. I wouldn't call it good but it definitely was watchable and had some action so it kept you interested.

21 was pretty bad, I don't think any one can deny that. The only reason to watch was the fact that Kate Bosworth is hot as hell.

Sinister Cat · 01-13-09, 11:26 AM

Saw part of Mamma Mia. It seemed horrible, so I stopped watching it. The actors act in it as if it is a stage production musical-- like they talk in a stupid excited voice before they burst into song. It is really annoying. But people who really like musicals might like it.

Casperwaits · 01-13-09, 11:43 AM

Mankiewicz is a tool. He has selections in his worst that are considered above average, and he had a couple on his best list I though were barely watchable. "Vantage Point" and "Rachel Getting Married" are not bad movies at all. Indiana Jones, while not the greatest of films was definately not the worst film of the year. Mama Mia was a chick flick, and when looking at it from that standpoint was not bad at all. All in all, his list is useless.

AMBlai01 · 01-13-09, 12:11 PM

Oh wait I must change what I said above...I tried to watch INdiana Jones. I thought it was completely unwatchable. I agree that the movie was garbage.....Sorry Casper, I think he got that one right.

Tchocky · 01-13-09, 12:11 PM

I saw "21", The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Vantage Point, Love Guru and "Rachel Getting Married". I didn't see any of the movies Ben Lyons mentioned.

Mudcat · 01-13-09, 12:12 PM

Originally posted by Sinister Cat

Saw part of Mamma Mia. It seemed horrible, so I stopped watching it. The actors act in it as if it is a stage production musical-- like they talk in a stupid excited voice before they burst into song. It is really annoying. But people who really like musicals might like it.

I have amazingly avoided all forms of Mamma Mia! so far. There was a stage production in Toronto a few years back and I got invited multiple times. I ducked it. Then the movie came out and once again, a couple chicks tried to drag me out.

I was worried because I dragged this one chick out to The Dark Knight and she felt that I owed her a movie of her choice. She wanted to see Mamma Mia. But fortunately she went with girlfriends a few nights prior to our date.

About 10 times I have been asked why I don't want to see it.

THE OBVIOUS REASON!!

Mudcat · 01-13-09, 12:17 PM

Originally posted by Casperwaits

Mankiewicz is a tool.

I'm still getting a read on these guys. For years I watched Siskel and Ebert, then Ebert and Roeper, then Roeper and assorted guests, then Roeper and Phillips. It takes a while to decide how much to trust these guys.

I know Mankiewicz rated Beverly Hills Chihuahua as a "See it." I haven't seen it so I can't say for a fact that is a bad call but it sure don't seem right.

Honestly, to my way of thinking, he can't be as bad as Ebert.

Bread · 01-13-09, 12:17 PM

'21' was God-awful.

I can't WAIT to see 'Mad Money'. A movie with Katie Holmes, Queen Latifah and Diane Keaton??? Sign me up for some pain!!!

Like last night I saw a preview for some new flick starring Dane Cook, Kate Hudson, Jason Biggs and Alec Baldwin. DOUCHEBAG CENTRAL!!! Kill me now.

The General · 01-13-09, 12:53 PM

I seen a few of those, but something about movies. I can recall a ball game loss or a debt for years, but certain things like movies, I put in some dead brain cell. Watch, but don't remember the story for long. When I go to watch a movie, I check the feedback and rating on IMDb and if not around a six, I usually pass. Thanks for sharing the thoughts.

pavyracer · 01-13-09, 12:55 PM

Don't watch movies. Too busy watching sports and betting to make a living.

Sinister Cat · 01-13-09, 01:02 PM

My strategy for selecting movies to watch, for quite a few years now, has been to simply look at the consensus via rottentomatoes.com or metacritic. The rationale was that I didn't want to waste my time & money watching something crappy, so at least if it's generally well-reviewed there is a high probability that I'll at least think it's okay. I've been watching a lot of movies lately, and am starting to realize that this isn't the right strategy-- it seems to guarantee that the movie is "okay" but there doesn't seem to be much upside; I think i'd rather take greater risk for the potential of seeing something a little more interesting. As has been alluded to in this thread, it seems like the smart thing to do is to follow a particular critic whose taste in movies matches your own.. trick is finding such a critic though. I wonder if there's a website that matches your own preference to those of popular critics. I have signed up on movielens.org, so maybe I'll give those recommendations a shot for now...

Mudcat · 01-13-09, 01:19 PM

That's the thing. I used to be pretty much in tune with Richard Roeper. Even if I'm not in perfect agreement with him, I can sort of tell just by the way he describes things what it will mean to me.

But I lost track of him since his TV show was replaced with this Lyons/Mankiewicz deal which I now watch every week. Same thing though, I watch their reviews and , even if I don't always agree with them, just the way they describe things gives me a vibe.

Plus it's good to have reliable friends. I have a good friend and my sister whose recommendations I can almost always work with.

Dark Horse · 01-13-09, 01:23 PM

I have a simple rule of thumb where it comes to bad movies. If it didn't put you to sleep it wasn't that bad. And if it did, how would you know how bad it was?

You can't rate sh*t. To do so is a contradiction in itself.

Mudcat · 01-13-09, 03:32 PM

Some truth to that. There can be a built-in conundrum.

People often talk about the worst movies of all time. I usually mention The English Patient and Moulin Rouge. But I didn't watch them to the end so how can I rate them? But the reason I didn't watch them to the end was because they were so bad. If they were that bad, they must be candidates for worst movie. But how can I call them the worst when I haven't actually seen them.

Gemoka · 01-13-09, 04:26 PM

I saw 21

You just know that everyone in the cinema watched that film and thought "I`m gonna be a Blackjack wiz now"

treece · 01-13-09, 04:42 PM

Originally posted by Gemoka

I saw 21

You just know that everyone in the cinema watched that film and thought "I`m gonna be a Blackjack wiz now"

Until they play at Bodog.

ryanspeer2001 · 01-13-09, 04:47 PM

Twilight- My girl dragged me along to see this and it was pretty rancid. Overall it could have been better if it wasn't for teens, definitly some potential if it was "R" rated.

Indiana Jones- I enjoyed the majority of this film going in to it not seeing the first films from a while back. Besides the ridiculous nuclear bomb scene and the ending it was fine by me.

Mudcat · 01-14-09, 09:40 AM

I don't think the South Park guys would agree. They did an episode to express their reaction. It involved multiple scenes of Spielberg and Lucas raping Indy in different ways.

No sir, I don't think they liked it at all.

Casperwaits · 01-14-09, 09:47 AM

I may be one of the few people to see Repo The Genetic Opera, and while it wasn't amazing, I would say it was a lot more creative than most of the crap out there. My problem with worst lists, is something like Repo gets panned for taking risks and because it had Paris Hilton in it (which by the way she wasn't bad) and movies that are just beyond awful "Disaster Movie" do not even make the lists. I mean is there a movie as baf this year as THAT? Neither one of these morons had that on their list!! If anyone that has seen that movie can honestly say it wasn't the worst piece of trash they have seen all year, I need to know what trash they are watching.