Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

Rate The Last Movie You Saw


Recommended Posts

Date Night - 6.5/10

A few laughs courtesy of Steve Carell. Not much other than that.

Worth a rental I'd say.

You know, I thought it was better than that, certainly better than I expected, and maybe that's why. The premise was very good, as any couple married for a while can tell you. I'd give it a 7.5.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Finally got around to watching Bon Cop, Bad Cop - not bad, I'll give it a 7/10. I think you have to be a passionate canadian hockey fan to really get it - but I am, so I did! :lol:

Yeah, as a hockey fan, I found it pretty amusing. For non-hockey fans, it's probably pretty stupid.

Spiderman: 7

Spiderman 2: 6.5

Spiderman 3: 6.75

Wow, you don't find a lot of people who liked the 3rd one. I loved the first two and thought the third was one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I almost walked out of the theater during the whole emo-Peter stuff. Much of the humor of the first two was also corny, but that took things way too far. It seemed like they couldn't decide what to do with the movie and put ideas for three different movies into one. Did we really need three villains? Did they really have to do so little with Venom, who had tons of potential to be an awesome villain?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jennifer's Body - *sigh* Just horrible......2/10 (don't even know what the "2" would be for, but whatever...)

Saw VI - Wow. Udder disappointment. Though I guess I didn't really expect much, they've seemed to have gotten worse (less good) with each one they do. First two were great, third was good, fourth was alright/ok, and the fifth and sixth were pointless...IMO. Thought I heard this was going to be the final movie in the series, but they left it open for, possibly, another one. End It Already!......5/10

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kick-Butt (Modeator censoring plobably won't allow me to state the true name of the movie. :lol: )

8.5/10 It was really well done, although the level of violence and prfanity around and involving a charachter that is supposed to be around 11 years of age (Hit Girl) was some disconcerting. Certainly, if the movie was not so well made, I would have to be expressing reservations, but I'll let artitistic license apply to this one. The movie really is well made.

Now, the mother who brought her 4 and 5 year old children to the screening I was at could do with the kids going instead to CAS. ;):blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kick-Butt (Modeator censoring plobably won't allow me to state the true name of the movie. :lol: )

8.5/10 It was really well done, although the level of violence and prfanity around and involving a charachter that is supposed to be around 11 years of age (Hit Girl) was some disconcerting. Certainly, if the movie was not so well made, I would have to be expressing reservations, but I'll let artitistic license apply to this one. The movie really is well made.

Now, the mother who brought her 4 and 5 year old children to the screening I was at could do with the kids going instead to CAS. ;):blink:

I really liked the movie too ... and the forum's censoring function didn't like me posting the real title a few days back :P

Interesting read from Macleans: http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/04/16/where-n...as-gone-before/

I was kind of shocked to learn the movie got the PG-13 in Quebec, yet it seems to be rated R in the rest of the world. Strange :blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
actually the new one lol!! I guess i have weird movie taste!!

Hey, its fine - i was just teasing you. I havent seen the remake, so I cant say for sure, but I just dont understand it. I mean the original british version was brilliant - and only made like 3 years ago, so remaking it seems so completely stupid... On the other hand, Roger Ebert (who I actually tend to agree with on most films) gave the remake 1/2 a star more (31/2 vs 3) than the original. So even though the idea of remaking a movie only a couple of years later seems ridiculous, I will give it a look at some point. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
I really liked the movie too ... and the forum's censoring function didn't like me posting the real title a few days back :P

Interesting read from Macleans: http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/04/16/where-n...as-gone-before/

I was kind of shocked to learn the movie got the PG-13 in Quebec, yet it seems to be rated R in the rest of the world. Strange :blink:

i was just coming into the thread to see if anyone had seen kick-a. nice to hear it's living up to hype. is it too violent though? i'd like to see it with a friend who hates violence.

as for the rating, you shouldn't be surprised. qc is always more liberal in its 'tastes', hence the drinking age and a few other unmentionables. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to disagree, it was hilarious and by far better than anchorman.

500 Days of summer - 8/10

Inglorious Basterds - 10/10

Avatar - 6/10 (it got a 6 only for the effects)

As far as comedies are concerned there is nothing better than Anchorman, it makes me laugh every time that I watch it. There is something new to laugh at every time! So many stupid little jokes within jokes. Wil Farrell is a comedic genius! Unique New York!

"we're on the air now, like right now?....I DON'T BELIEVE YOU!"

I have yet to watch 500days of summer.

Inglorious Basterds is awesome, right from the title to the end, I was laughing out loud when they we're shooting Hitler over and over with machine guns, it is so fake but you know that that was the intention, Quintin Tarantino is my favorite director/producer of all time, I own just about every movie that he was involved in!

Avatar, well, since it took me three different sessions to get through it-1/10 but then I hooked up my Apple TV to my big screen and had full surround with better picture....it gets about a 4/10 for effects and animation but the story was so done before....anyone remember Fern Gully?

Overall I give Avatar a 8/10 on visual stimuation, a 0/10 on story (2.5 hours of predictable garbage and zero substance), a 1/10 on casting, seriously does Sigourney Weaver have to be in every movie about Aliens? Plus her opening scene when she gets out of her pod and she yells at someone to get her a cigarette is sooooooo unconvincing and LAME! Who does Cameron hire to write his script, it was brutal!

So disappointing!

Avatar: 0/10

One of the worst movies I've ever seen in my life, nearly if not just as bad as Episodes II and III of Star Wars.

I agree with you for the fourth time ever, lol!

High Fidelity: 6/10

Ah man, I thought that High Fidelity was excellent, more like a 8.5/10 for me!

Edited by Habsfan4eva
Link to post
Share on other sites

Recent views:

Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day - nothing compares to the first one but it's still worth a watch! 6/10

Public Enemies - 8/10

Usual Suspects again - 8/10

Link to post
Share on other sites
i was just coming into the thread to see if anyone had seen kick-a. nice to hear it's living up to hype. is it too violent though? i'd like to see it with a friend who hates violence.

as for the rating, you shouldn't be surprised. qc is always more liberal in its 'tastes', hence the drinking age and a few other unmentionables. ;)

It definitely is a very violent movie, no doubt about that. We're not talking Tarantino-violent here but it certainly goes in that direction.

You're right about QC being more liberal in general but PG-13 is still a joke IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It definitely is a very violent movie, no doubt about that. We're not talking Tarantino-violent here but it certainly goes in that direction.

You're right about QC being more liberal in general but PG-13 is still a joke IMO.

thanks. i actually thought it was a kids movie... :lol:

too bad. now i have to find something else because i really don't want to get stuck seeing the back up plan... <_<

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey, its fine - i was just teasing you. I havent seen the remake, so I cant say for sure, but I just dont understand it. I mean the original british version was brilliant - and only made like 3 years ago, so remaking it seems so completely stupid... On the other hand, Roger Ebert (who I actually tend to agree with on most films) gave the remake 1/2 a star more (31/2 vs 3) than the original. So even though the idea of remaking a movie only a couple of years later seems ridiculous, I will give it a look at some point. ;)

well if you love comedy, ITS HALARIOUS!! its a joke but its soo funny! chris rock is great! :lol::P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Iron Man 2 7/10 [i thought the first one was much better.]

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) 7/10 [The first half of the film was pretty rushed; There were just too many nightmare sequences, one after another after another after another. Thankfully, the movie slows down after a couple of teens get killed off in the middle mark. From there on, the movie actually gets better and the final act is just refreshing and thrilling. Of all the leads, only Kyle Gallner (quentin) manages to bring some personality and humor to the proceedings. Gallner single-handedly makes the third act interesting. And, unlike many people, I actually liked the lead character, Nancy. So overall, it was an okay movie but like I said the final act was really good and the quentin guy was exellent, two reasons why the movies worth seeing]

Edited by jagh55
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...