BF2S Forums Rate the last movie you've seen

AussieReaper wrote:

See that movie has some great dialouge.

Worth more than a 6.5 imo.

And then there's this.

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2213119744/tt0093058

ah, the kubrick stare

Poseidon wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

See that movie has some great dialouge.

Worth more than a 6.5 imo.

And then there's this.

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2213119744/tt0093058

ah, the kubrick stare

It had some memorable moments, but seemed to dull out after the island.

Actually he did it in response to my pictorial taunt. If you want to blame somebody for that, blame me.

@uzique: Just because you are educated in the arts doesn't mean that your opinions are inarguable. Professional disputes exist in pretty much any field, from philosophy to engineering. The difference is that interpretation of the arts is far more subjectively-oriented than, say, engineering or other hard sciences.

But was it subtly evocative?

13/f/taiwan wrote:

Together- 9/10

Go watch it. Now.

watch mine and i'll watch yours.

because no review is unpretentious and sincere unless it's 5 paragraphs about some indie game nobody cares about, penned by unnamed himself. and dilbert is just suspicious of anything artistic because it can't be expressed in a graph or laid-out in a textbook, and away from that territory he gets very unsteady on his two cute little feet...

True Grit 8/10.  For reference: Jose Wales = 10, Unforgiven/No Country for Old Men = 9, 3:10 to Yuma = 7

I also saw a movie where Christina Ricci gets naked but it was negated by that actor who played Obi Wan as an undertaker...but then again it was Ricci was naked.  Reminded me of a box of dead puppies.  Sort of cute...because they are technically still puppies.  unsure/10 might watch again, but might be too lazy to look up the movie's title.

Hope that helps

I would not give No Country for Old Men a 9.  Id give a 7

good for you, i can replace a broken psu/mobo too by buying new ones and putting it together

justice wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

But was it subtly evocative?

You and Dilbert seem to be somewhat insecure about your ability to review a movie, you 2 are acting like little bitches, from what I can see he was just writing some good reviews and then gets these unprovoked responses, if you don't like his writing style, why not just move on?

No, no, I'm fine. I just find it hard to resist poking fun at people who do the same thing they shit on everyone else for.

Uzique wrote:

because no review is unpretentious and sincere unless it's 5 paragraphs about some indie game nobody cares about, penned by unnamed himself. and dilbert is just suspicious of anything artistic because it can't be expressed in a graph or laid-out in a textbook, and away from that territory he gets very unsteady on his two cute little feet...

Uzique wrote:

of everyone on this forum... you cannot point that stick

They are similar not in style, but in pomposity.

I could grind coffee every morning for the rest of my life with the lofty bitterness and outright flames with which you've treat other people on BF2S. But your inability to casually accept (or ignore) something like the humorous similarity between your review's wording and the stereotypography of Fig A, in my opinion, represents an even greater character flaw. Bug out of ripping on other people's reviews if you can't take criticism of your own contributions.

In the interests of the thread, I'll rest my case for now.

Uzique wrote:

dude if you can't see the difference between me attaching a few succinct sentences to a movie review... and you writing paragraphs of thoughtful analysis... then you're crazy. all i'm trying to do is justify my 'rating' so it doesn't seem like a completely abstract, non-referential, arbitrary score. you do something pretty damn different.

In summary, when you review something its awesome, when anyone else does its shit.
Even when your review amounts to no more than

Uzique wrote:

holy shiiiiiiiiiiit

?

I enjoyed The Lion The Witch and the Wardrobe, but didn't see the second, and the third was 2+ hours of my life I want back.

Narnia isn't too big of a deal to me, I like the story, which is why I've seen the first and third. I read the books (was a gift) so I had to see the movies. Speaking of which, the 3rd movie differs from the book a lot.