Last movie you watched......

A Michael Bay movie unwatchable? The hell you say!

 

In what way? I mean, it was kind of like Titanic. In the end you knew what was going to happen.

 

I think even if you didn't know the history aspect of Argo, with some deduction you can be like, "Well, we're probably not going to see a movie in which a group of hostages are gunned down by militants." I thought Argo was really well done, but I didn't like it as much as the two other Affleck-directed movies I've seen, Gone Baby Gone and The Town. Both of those just had this tense feeling throughout that I never felt that Argo had.

 

That.

Argo had almost no suspense because you knew or could deduce what will happen. And that bit att the airport and the soldiers running after the plane, it never happened so it was a fiction of a story. And the fiction was the most suspenseful aspect. That and watching Goodman and Arkin trying to cross a movie set. 2 very contrived plot devices. That's what made ZDT so much better, while it was fictionalized by condensing a few characters into one, it wasn't contrived and suspense wasn't forced.

The Titanic was about the characters, their stories and special effects. Which characters do you remember from Argo? Goodman, Arkin and Affleck. Not the hostages.

I liked it, but now that I've seen ZDT, Lincoln and Pi, Argo is the #4. And I'm pretty sure that I liked Pi better than Lincoln. I would have like Lincoln better but again a plot contrivance that seemed so obvious that I didn't think Speilberg was lazy enough to include, Tommy Lee Jones and S. Epatha in bed.

 

Extremis is different in the comics, though, isn't it? I really don't know, which is probably part of why I liked the movie.

Iron Patriot is silly. It was always silly, so I liked having them make fun of it. I don't really think that was a dig at comic book fans because Rhodey wasn't Iron Patriot in the comics. It was Norman Osborne in the Iron Patriot armor.

 

Just got back from seeing Iron Man 3. It was definitely worth the price of admission, but it didn't blow me away. I don't know, maybe my expectations are way too high after The Avengers. The post credits scene was amusing, but I don't know if it was worth sitting through the credits for.

But the movie was good enough. I can now look forward to the Thor sequel.

 

Saw IM3 last night. Was a little impressed, but overall the movie felt like ti was missing something. How things get solved/how bad guy dies didn't elicit more than a "That's how it happened? OK." Ben Kingsley, as someone else said, was underused. Disappointed in ending; leaves some questions for future.

 

I must admit I was super bummed when I saw leaked photos of Iron Patriot. First of all, I wanted another super team up of Iron Man and War Machine, but I guess Marvel did that in 2. Regardless, I wasn't all a big middle finger, I meant that in jest, hah. Rhodey was never Iron Patriot and the Osborne could never be Iron Patriot due to character rights and it might be way too, too confusing, haha.
As for extremis, wasn't it compared to the suer-soldier serum? I don't think fire, melting, or blowing up was part of it. Killian is basically Mallen even though Mandarin did have an intent to spread extremis to the world population. One could think Tony perfected the extremis code by saying he fixed Pepper. Why stop there? I would love to see Tony with super strength and healing powers in Avengers 2.

All in all it was a good movie, just wish there was more War Machine in the franchise!

 

I love it. A comic book discussion and I don't understand half of what you are talking about!

I don't really know the comic book version of Extremis.

The bit about Osborne just reminds me how much I wish Marvel could get all of its characters back. I'd love to see the Avengers with Spider-Man and/or Wolverine. Also, I'm not thrilled about Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch possibly being introduced in Avengers 2, but they either have to change the characters' histories or ignore them.

 

Oh yeah, one last thing on IM3, a small thing: I really loved the closing credits sequence. Some may call it bombastic, with the quick cuts and freeze frames, but I thought it worked (and the music was great too). And, I always liked the credits where they do a "roll call" of the cast with a scene and freeze frame and a graphic appearing of the actor's name.

 

"Life of Pi"

It was OK. Spectacular visually. I didn't even realize the tiger was CGI until afterward when I looked up some information on the effects.

Major flaws, though. The message was a combination of preachy and muddled.

I'm supposed to believe in God now ... why? Because he survived? Because he made up a story? Because he didn't make up a story?

And Pi had to make up this story ... why? Because the real story was too tramautic? I'm not clear.

And it's good to follow ... multiple religions? One religion? No religion?

This wasn't a spectacular suck fest like "Hunger Games," but I'm left with the same sort of bewilderment from it, in that the director believes he is passing down some profound lesson about life, but the message is so muddled and mixed and lacking in clarity that I can't pin it down. Ultimately too incoherent (which is different than being challenging or ambiguous, which I actually would like) to warrant the praise and accolades it has received.

 

I don't have time to do a long post now on it, but I disagree on it being muddled. I thought it was pretty clearly a story about stories, and how people use stories to make sense of their lives. That's why the main protagonist takes bits from all different types of religions. Religions are the ultimate way in which people use stories to explain the unexplainable. As far as Pi's story, he made it up because it was much easier for him to digest that than what actually happened.

My biggest problem is that I felt they held the hand of the viewer and led us to that conclusion, especially at the end with the author talking to Pi. I would have liked the movie to stop when he explained what the real story was.