Last movie you watched......

Have you seen "Easy A"? She's in pretty much every scene, and it's an enjoyable little teen comedy. Kind of a John Hughes throwback.

I thought she was going to play a more prominent role in "Friends With Benefits." Makes me wonder if her subplot ended up on the cutting-room floor.

 

It was pretty clear from the get-go her role (and Andy Samberg's) were cameos. Have no idea why you would think otherwise.

As for Sherlock, I rather enjoyed the first one. It was light, funny... buoyed by another fun run by Downey. Was even looking forward to the sequel. Then, I watched the BBC modernization of Holmes with Benedict Cumberbatch, which is how Holmes is supposed to be done. Probably won't even see Downey's second stab, as I eagerly await the BBC show's second series.

 

If you like Ritchie's style, you'll like it. If you don't, you won't. The gay subtext with Holmes and Watson is really out of place, here, but putting that aside, there'll be far worse ways to spend two hours, and Downey fans will overcome even personal misgivings about Ritchie to swell the BO.

 

You'll be hard-pressed to find a more beautiful movie than that. Visually stunning. Dunst was great. I enjoyed Kiefer Sutherland as well.

Saw that and "Young Adult" last night as all movies at the local theater were free thanks to a corporate donation. YA is a good movie, but certainly worth waiting for on DVD. "Melancholia" is made for the big screen.

 

Why was it that obvious?

She showed up in an early scene of "Crazy, Stupid, Love" for five minutes, then disappeared for 40 minutes, then returned.

Is Emma Stone big-time enough yet to be doing cameos?

I knew Rashida Jones was a cameo. Just failing to see how it was "obvious" that the Emma Stone character was a cameo. Is it that implausible that the ex-girlfriend, who even calls his cell phone during a date, might show up later to complicate things?

 

Slate ripped it a new one for being more style than substance, too long and redundant, and I can see there point(s), but it worked for me. I guess it could've been 20 minutes shorter, but like I said, you have to be patient.

 

Saw MI4 in IMAX on Friday night. It didn't disappoint as far as the visuals and action. The imagery and cinematography were stunning. The direction was superb. The acting was fine, as you'd expect. The script lacked character depth and when it tried it was forced, but that doesn't really matter in these movies. You know what you're getting and you go with it. Same with the Pirates series. Although Transformers is so shitty that not even its action and visuals can overcome the shit script (fuck you Michael Bay). Had to get in a shot on that. Anyway, MI4 was good and I recommend it. Plus, Paula Patton is gorgeous.

 

Paula Patton needs to leave her husband.

 

I'm not a huge movie-goer, so this isn't my best thread, but I saw "Young Adult" last night, and I'm still not sure how to feel about it. It's pretty damn interesting, but one critic called it "ferociously funny," and I'll be damned if I got a lot of laughs out of it. But that's not to say I didn't like it and, like the few movies I see that I'd describe as "good," it was worth talking about when it was over.

Weird one. Ebert and some other critics loved it:

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20111207/REVIEWS/111209991

I'm up in the air, which is fine.

 

I resemble that remark, Diet Coke excluded.

 

I will see it to support Patton Oswalt getting more leading roles. He proved his chops in Big Fan and seemingly still can't get anything more than bit roles.

He's hilarious, he's smart and he's a really good actor. He deserves more.

 

My apartment is reasonably tidy, and I ditched the bourbon coming up on two years ago.