Best/Worst Film of 2011

[Dr.Epic]

So as I've noticed, many internet reviewers are posting their top/bottom whatever for 2011, and I figure it's enough topic for these threads. So, what was your (least) favorite film of the past year?

And remember, opinion is subjective so plenty of people will dislike you favorite and like your least favorite.

Okay, I'm gonna actually list all the films I saw (it's only 11) in ascending order of quality:

#11:
Hall Pass
Honestly, I didn't even want to go see this movie. I just wanted to see a movie and played roulette when I got to the theaters in that the first available showtime I would see this movie.

As for why I didn't like it, partly it's a romantic comedy and I just loathe those. There are a few I like. But really, there was nothing interesting in it. The plot is this: You know how on sitcoms a cliche plot is the husband and wife get in a fight and like split up for a bit, the husband might get tempted with another woman, but in the end, he remains faithful? That's this movie, except this plot works best in a half hour time frame with commercials. Stretched to an hour, it doesn't work. It drags on. In the entire thing, there was only really one funny part and that came at the tail end.

#10:
Green Lantern
While not the worst, it was the most disappointing. I wanted to enjoy this. I so did. Even if it was bad, I want this to fill me with some entertainment, but it didn't. The film is cut down to 100 minutes, and it feels chopped. Nothing is really expanded upon. Once something exciting seems to be happening, it cuts to a different scene. If you haven't seen it, I can sum up the movie experience thus: watch Batman Begins and every time something good starts to develop in the film, skip ahead 10 minutes, and just imagine Bruce Wayne is fighting aliens.

Honestly, the only reason this isn't the worst film is because it's of a genre I like that is a superhero film, while Hall Pass is just a generic, bad romantic comedy to me.

#9:
Level Up
Yeah, I know this was a TV film and was only 70 minutes without commercials, but I still felt like listing it. Really, I had a difficult time deciding which was worst: Green Lantern or Level Up. Ultimately, I said this was better because it was shorter, and I wasn't disappointed. With Level Up, I got what I expected. Bad teen acting, generic forgettable characters, writers who don't know how to write geek characters, and a plot that makes no sense. If you don't know the story, Level Up is about MMORPG monsters that enter the real world, and they don't even explain how they enter our world. There's one scene in the beginning where a laser hits a satellite and enters the MMO, and that's it. The reason a computer game became self-aware and can create a vortex to a virtual world is lasers. The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles have a better and more realistic origin story.

The only reason I watched this is because I do like the premise. If done right, it could have been like the Gamers, or the Guild, or Legend of Neil. But it's just Captain N except reversed. And the series that's coming based on this looks awful.

#8
Season of the Witch
I honestly don't know what to saw about this film. I don't really see what point it had. It's Medieval Fantasy, which is probably the only reason it's above all these other films. But there wasn't any real lesson or moral or anything to take away from this. It's short - about 90 minutes. Some of the banter between Nic Cage and Ron Pearlman is amusing, but that's about it. The action isn't too good, and the ending is a real let down. I don't recommend it.

#7
Your Highness
You know what, I actually liked this film. I like it about as much as any other film I give 5.5/10, but I enjoyed it. It's vulgar, and many people just saw it's 90 minutes of f-bombs, but it was kind of a throwback to all the cheesy, old fantasy films. It had a good high fantasy feel to it.

#6
X-Men First Class
This film did have some stuff I didn't like, but I still thought it was a good movie. It really dove into the relationship between Magneto and Charles cementing them as good friends that met with a difficult split. I actually didn't think it would be possible to establish this relationship in one film. Also, the action was pretty good.

#5
Horrible Bosses
This movie was a comedy done right in that equal time was paid to both the humor and plot. I will admit the story isn't great, but towards the end it got really suspenseful, something a lot of comedies don't do - develop plot, try something new, throw the audience a curve ball, and just rely on cliche plot points. Also, the cast was great and they deliver a great performance.

I'm gonna say now, just something about my top 4, they all have an extraterrestrial presence in each.

#4
Super 8
This is just a fantastic throwback to great Spielberg films. Think the Goonies meets Jaws but with an alien. The child actors are great, I love the feel, and I say it's great for all ages. Super 8 is a good coming of age film.

#3
Cowboys and Aliens
Again, I might get some comments about putting this so high or even claiming I like it, but this was a seamless gritty western mixed with a good sci-fi alien movie. The acting and characters are great. Daniel Craig delivers a great performance and this is one of the most intimidating Harrison Ford roles I've ever seen. The action is good, and the characters are gritty and badass like they should be in a western. And speaking of badass, the aliens are actually pretty intimidating.

#2
Thor
Okay, I am a huge fan of viking culture, but I still loved this movie and what it represents. It's a chapter in the Avengers saga, which I'm really excited about. The Avengers will hopefully show what comics book films can be having a broad cast and several major superheroes.

But even disregarding the Avengers hype, I still thought it was a great movie. The action is good. I love the scene when they travel to Jotunheim and kill frost giants. That was just pure Medieval Fantasy at it's best. All the characters seem to represent great archetypes of the genre (the Asgardians that is). Not to mention Chris Hemsworth and Tom Hiddleston really sell their performances. Loki is by far one of the greatest villains in any superhero film, heck, he's one of the greatest comic book villains period. And it really shows in this film, and I'm so glad he's going to be in the Avengers.

#1
Captain America: the First Avenger
This film to me just felt like a superhero film. I know superhero films range in tone and subject matter, but this film seemed to incorporate all the aspects. It had some camp but it was mostly serious. And yeah, I think all superheroes have some camp value, even the gritty ones. They're dressing up in over the top outfits. I don't think that's bad, but it's just something that's there, and they kind of address it in this film with the whole USO shows. Plus, I really liked the character of Steve Rogers. He kind of best illustrates one of the fundamental ideas of a superhero. He's wants to help people. That's his primary concern. Saving people. Also, I thought Chris Evans was great. Best role I've seen him in. And Hugo Weaving as the villain, sold. I am so looking forward to the Avengers.

So there's my best/worst. Now let me hear yours.

[TheEmerged]

Going with the same "stuff I actually saw" rule. That's an important point as one movie I very much still intend to see (Muppets) I've been unable to get to due to repeated interferences and a couple others (Cowboys & Aliens being the most promenient) I meant to see but never got around to,

#1
Captain America. I paid to see this in the theatre 4 times, on two of those occassions paying for multiple other people to see it. In fairness, I pretty much define the target audience for this film, being both a comic geek and a WW2 geek.

#2
Puss In Boots. Back before the Nolan-era Batman films, I used to get in trouble for saying the Adam West Batman movie was a better movie than the four Burton-era films. My stated reasoning was that the Adam West film succeeded at what it was trying to be, and did it well. That's pretty much my take on Puss In Boots as well. Was I cheering in the theatre? No, but I left having enjoyed myself and, unlike #3, I'd probably go see another film in the series without second-guessing the decision.

#3
Kung Fu Panda 2. Two things kept this from being #2. The first was that it fell victim to the "This sequence was clearly designed to be part of the video game" symptom. The second was, well, there was almost no reason for this movie to exist. KFP was an excellent movie that really left only one question unanswered. In fairness, this movie answered that -- and despite the obvious sequel-bait ending, there's no reason to carry this any further. What kept this movie from being #4 or lower was the "Papa Goose" performance. Neither over- nor under-stated, both the script and voice actor nailed this and nailed it well.

#4
Green Hornet. I think going in with tempered expectations allowed me to enjoy thistolerate its flaws and take it for what it was worth. Rather like #1 I'm something of the target audience, having watched this on syndication as a child and listening to tapes of the old radio broadcasts. The main disappointment (this figures into #5 too) is that you can see glimmers of the better movie this could easily have been.

#5
Green Lantern. Once again, I'm probably the target audience, having started buying comics during the Green Arrow/Green Lantern glory days and having an eternal soft spot for these mythos. And that, to paraphrase Yoda, is why it failed. I spent most of the movie begrudging the much better film that was terribly-obviously hiding just beneath the skin. Too many rewrites? Too much interference? Not really understanding what & who these characters are? All of the above, and a few other problems. I tried to temper my expectations, but still left the theatre disappointed.

#X - and thanks to Tyndmyr for reminding me of a movie I'd forgotten I'd seen. Not ranking since I forgot it initially, would be between #3 and #4.
XMen Lingere Edition, er, First Class. This had its charms, I actually liked it more than XMen 3 & Wolverine. It also had some flaws, the most bothersome to me was that it crossed the line into gratuitous. The next worse flaw was that it was pretty clear who the writer considered the hero of the story.

If it wasn't obvious to you, who ends up with all the good looking women in the story on his side and who ends up having to send his girl away?

[Dr.Epic]

Going with the same "stuff I actually saw" rule. That's an important point as one movie I very much still intend to see (Muppets) I've been unable to get to due to repeated interferences and a couple others (Cowboys & Aliens being the most promenient) I meant to see but never got around to,

Yeah, I didn't see a few films I wanted to: Paul, Hugo (heard it was actually quite good), Conan the Barbarian, Priest, Rock 'em Sock 'em Robots Real Steel (I heard these were bad, but still wanted to see them)


#5
Green Lantern. Once again, I'm probably the target audience, having started buying comics during the Green Arrow/Green Lantern glory days and having an eternal soft spot for these mythos. And that, to paraphrase Yoda, is why it failed. I spent most of the movie begrudging the much better film that was terribly-obviously hiding just beneath the skin. Too many rewrites? Too much interference? Not really understanding what & who these characters are? All of the above, and a few other problems. I tried to temper my expectations, but still left the theatre disappointed.

You wait for the post credits scene too?

[Tyndmyr]

Best: Cap America

Worst: Yeah, we'll go with Green Lantern.

Assume I've basically seen every movie I care about over the year so..most of them. Xmen: First class is second best, Thor is third, Cowboys vs Aliens is probably fourth. Would be higher if not for crazy fire chick ex machina.

Green Lantern really really did suffer from the cutting. Ryan Renolds did a decent job, but several of the scenes just felt wildly out of place("at least let me go back to earth? They never said you couldn't. There was no reason to assume otherwise."), Parallax was basically a ripoff of the Fantastic Four rendition of Galactus, the secondary villain was...lame. Nothing was ever seriously explained in such a way that it didn't feel like they were rushing past it. I was just...sad.

Super 8 was...ok. The whole end was pretty terrible. Subplot with kids movie was better than the rest of the film.

[Dr.Epic]

Best: Cap America

Worst: Yeah, we'll go with Green Lantern.

Assume I've basically seen every movie I care about over the year so..most of them. Xmen: First class is second best, Thor is third, Cowboys vs Aliens is probably fourth. Would be higher if not for crazy fire chick ex machina.

I felt that could have been handled better too.

[Zen Monkey]

Conan was just so bland. I'm a big fan of the original stories (to which this claimed to be faithful but wasn't at all), and a big fan of the first film. I'm also up for a good Steven Lang villian with a witchy sidekick and Ron Pearlman. It's not that the film was especially bad, just disappointing. There seems to have been a lot of wasted opportunities.

(You also don't put Nathan Jones and Bob Sapp in the same movie. The only villainous quality either one has is being freakishly large, but when they stand next to each other there's no contrast to highlight their only 'acting' trait. Just a nit-pick..)

[Tyndmyr]

Oh yeah, Conan was rough. I enjoyed watching it, but it wasn't really a great film.

Pet peeve: Why does fantasy/medieval always end up meaning "dark and gritty". I still like contrast and seeing what the hell is going on in fantasy movies. Conan wasn't an especially bad example of this, but seriously, don't be afraid to use a bit of lighting so we can see what the hell the set is.

[Eldan]

I've only seen one movie in cinemas this year that I can remember, which was Cowboys and Aliens. It was thoroughly boring.

I did, however, also see Captain America outside of cinemas. Left me utterly unimpressed and a bit bored.

Hmm. Best. Was Thor this year? Thor was pretty impressive.

[Tyndmyr]

I've only seen one movie in cinemas this year that I can remember, which was Cowboys and Aliens. It was thoroughly boring.

I did, however, also see Captain America outside of cinemas. Left me utterly unimpressed and a bit bored.

What movies do not bore you? If these result in boredom, I can only imagine your reaction to most movies.

[Tragic_Comedian]

Well, looking back I didn't really see that many movies this year. But I can certainly name the worst of 2011/worst I've ever seen in my life:

Thor. Thor was so terrible it was about all I could do to sit through it all the way. There are no characters in Thor, only caricatures. The action is mindless, the plot an excuse. Thor's change in personality is contrived and rush. The movie has no sense of pacing. The stuff that's supposed to funny isn't. And that robot at the end was totally senseless.

I didn't like it.

Now, the best movie I saw this year was easily The Muppets, followed by maybe Captain America.


I've only seen one movie in cinemas this year that I can remember, which was Cowboys and Aliens. It was thoroughly boring.

Cowboys and Aliens was kind of boring in the beginning. And I didn't get why the aliens wanted gold. I thought that was kinda lame.

[Eldan]

What movies do not bore you? If these result in boredom, I can only imagine your reaction to most movies.

Both had a lot of action scenes, but I felt that in both, they started to become dull after a while. My internal thoughts often started to go "sneak, sneak, shoot, shoot, shoot, explosion, explosion. Man, can we get on with this, please?"

As I said, I very much enjoyed Thor. Probably my favourite movie. Going through Wikipedia's list of movies that came out this year I found, I haven't seen any of the highest grossing ten. From the entire list, I've only seen Thor (Cinema in May, seen on DVD), Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (out in May, also seen on DVD), Captain America (out in July, also seen on DVD) and Cowboys and Aliens (out in July, seen in cinema). There's a few on there I might see at some other time, when I find the DVDs for cheap (TinTin I'm very interested in, the comic book hero of my childhood, Rise of the Planet of the Apes looked good from the trailers).

So, ranking those:

1: Thor. Very Good, many enjoyable scenes, tons of good actors.
2: Captain America. Technically well made, good actors pretty much across the board, but overall just didn't grab me much.
3: On Stranger Tides. All seen before, not much new. Overall pretty forgettable. Had an enjoyable scene or two.
4: Cowboys vs. Aliens. Saw it with my brother, we debated going home during the half-time break. There were three other people with us in the cinema in the first half, second half it was us and one other guy. Thoroughly dull, start to finish.

[AtlanteanTroll]

Best: Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows. I'm a huge Robert Downey Jr. fanboy. Nothing more, nothing less. Of course, it was an all around well done film. Not quite being an adaptation of one of Doyle's stories, but drawing from it in obvious ways.

Worst: Captain America. I can never be pleased with a movie made by Marvel unless it stars Downey. :smalltongue: In all seriousness, it just wasn't as good as what people were saying it was. I went in with expectations too high. I also didn't see Thor or the Green Lantern, so they can't be in my ratings.

[Zen Monkey]

The Thing prequel was a little disappointing too. The involvement of the space ship was unnecessary and the cgi monsters were substantially inferior to the visceral puppetry that's now nearly 30 years old. The suspense of who was or wasn't a mimic didn't have the same level of uncertainty that it should have.

Granted, the most popular version did set the bar fairly high.

[Dr.Epic]

Cowboys and Aliens was kind of boring in the beginning. And I didn't get why the aliens wanted gold. I thought that was kinda lame.

The beginning was AWESOME! That film had me at the first scene when Daniel Craig brutally beat three guys to death after being threatened at gun point.

And the gold made sense. It is a valuable for its application and it very rare.

[Tyndmyr]

Best: Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows. I'm a huge Robert Downey Jr. fanboy. Nothing more, nothing less. Of course, it was an all around well done film. Not quite being an adaptation of one of Doyle's stories, but drawing from it in obvious ways.

Pretty sure that was a 2010 movie. Great movie, obviously, but I don't think it's best of 2011.


Worst: Captain America. I can never be pleased with a movie made by Marvel unless it stars Downey. :smalltongue: In all seriousness, it just wasn't as good as what people were saying it was. I went in with expectations too high. I also didn't see Thor or the Green Lantern, so they can't be in my ratings.

Ah. I suggest watching Green Lantern purely for comedy.

The Thing was a decent movie. I think it could have been better, but I enjoyed it.

Yes, gold does make sense, tbh...We use it pretty heavily today in electronics. It's pretty likely that an advanced culture would want it.

[AtlanteanTroll]

Pretty sure that was a 2010 movie. Great movie, obviously, but I don't think it's best of 2011.
Uh, no. The original (in the series) was a 2009 movie. A Game of Shadows is a 2011 movie.


Ah. I suggest watching Green Lantern purely for comedy.
Sometime maybe. I do prefer DC to Marvel anyway.

[Dr.Epic]

Ah. I suggest watching Green Lantern purely for comedy.

Not even for comedy. It was just so much of nothing. If it was at least entertaining, I'd probably rank it higher. But the scenes were so brief and quick, it didn't have time to develop atmosphere or even come of as unintentionally comical.

[GolemsVoice]

But even disregarding the Avengers hype, I still thought it was a great movie. The action is good. I love the scene when they travel to Jotunheim and kill frost giants. That was just pure Medieval Fantasy at it's best. All the characters seem to represent great archetypes of the genre (the Asgardians that is). Not to mention Chris Hemsworth and Tom Hiddleston really sell their performances. Loki is by far one of the greatest villains in any superhero film, heck, he's one of the greatest comic book villains period. And it really shows in this film, and I'm so glad he's going to be in the Avengers.

I really liked Thor, the only problem I had was that Loki's actor kinda upstaged Thor, but that's not a big complaint.

[Tragic_Comedian]

The beginning was AWESOME! That film had me at the first scene when Daniel Craig brutally beat three guys to death after being threatened at gun point.

And the gold made sense. It is a valuable for its application and it very rare.
You know what went through my head during that scene? "Who is this man? I don't really care that he's beating up these people."

Yeah, to people on Earth. You'd think aliens, aliens with starships, no less, would've discovered something better. It's just lame and cliche.

[Dr.Epic]

You know what went through my head during that scene? "Who is this man? I don't really care that he's beating up these people."

A badass guy you don't mess with.:smallwink:

Seriously, is the name really important? I think the persona is, and that scene displayed his character. It was very intense and had an emotional effect. Not to mention, he didn't even know who he was. So we found out as he did.

Also, it was literally the first scene of the movie. You'll find out who he is. Not ever movie tells you the name of the main character the moment you see him.


Yeah, to people on Earth. You'd think aliens, aliens with starships, no less, would've discovered something better. It's just lame and cliche.

No. It's valuable regardless of home planet. It can be applied to science and technology in very important ways. I'll admit it's not completely original, but it's still something and wasn't that bad.

[Tragic_Comedian]

No. It's valuable regardless of home planet.
You know this how? :smalltongue:

[Liffguard]

2: Captain America. Technically well made, good actors pretty much across the board, but overall just didn't grab me much.


This is pretty much exactly the way I feel about this move. It's a very proficient piece of film-making. Good acting, excellent visual design, excellent score, well-paced. But it just never really pulled me in, I never particularly cared about the characters or the stakes. It was a good movie, just missing that certain something.

Now compare with Iron Man (or, sticking with 2011, Thor). Both are, IMO, much more flawed films in most categories, but much more interesting for all that. It's probably no coincidence that that's how I feel about the characters themselves.

[Dr.Epic]

You know this how? :smalltongue:

I've seen scientific documentaries/know about the elemental properties of gold. It's a valuable metal.

[Tragic_Comedian]

I've seen scientific documentaries/know about the elemental properties of gold. It's a valuable metal.
Yeah, unless your home planet is made entirely of it.

[Zen Monkey]

I didn't see Cowboys vs. Aliens, but the premise of aliens invading Earth for gold has already been done by possibly the worst sci-fi movie ever made. When having any comparisons with Battlefield Earth, your movie can only come out looking better.

[TheEmerged]

You wait for the post credits scene too?

Unless the movie torqued me off bad enough that I leave in the middle (which I've never done in the theatre), I make it a point to stay for the credits as a matter of courtesy to the people that worked on the movie. So I never miss those post-credit scenes.

And yes, this means the guys cleaning up have politely told me there's nothing after the credits a few times :smallbiggrin:

In terms of that particular post-credit scene... yes it was part of the disappointment for me. I joked before the movie came out that if they were daring they'd keep Sinestro a good guy as long as possible so his betrayal mattered instead of "Wow, with a name like Sinestro... whodda thunk it?" :smallsigh:

[Dr.Epic]

Yeah, unless your home planet is made entirely of it.

No. It's good to carry a current, is light, is easy to work with and mold, and has several other valuable characteristics in industrial use.


Unless the movie torqued me off bad enough that I leave in the middle (which I've never done in the theatre), I make it a point to stay for the credits as a matter of courtesy to the people that worked on the movie. So I never miss those post-credit scenes.

And yes, this means the guys cleaning up have politely told me there's nothing after the credits a few times :smallbiggrin:

Funny thing was there was. And I do kind of hope there is a sequel but they really have to avoid all the mistakes in the first to pull it off.

[Eldan]

Yeah, unless your home planet is made entirely of it.

Our planet is mostly iron, but we still mine it. And gold is rare pretty much every where. That's just how elements work.

[Tengu_temp]

I'll list all the movies I saw in 2011 from best to worst.

...

Well, that was fast!

[Tragic_Comedian]

Our planet is mostly iron, but we still mine it. And gold is rare pretty much every where. That's just how elements work.
But say, just for the sake of argument, that somewhere in the far reaches of the universe there's a planet made almost entirely of solid gold, and populated by a species that lives on foam. So they spend many hours of labor chipping through the gold until they find foam deposits on which to feed their villages.

Now that would be a good movie.

Anyhow, I liked Cowboys and Aliens, it just started off boring and they needed a better excuse for the aliens to be there.

[Eldan]

Still doesn't explain how that life developed. You'd need a pretty complex mixture of elements for that. I can believe a lot in chemical composition of life, but not gold-based. Just not reactive enough. Plus, the gold would go to the bottom of whatever planet it was on, not the crust.

[Dr.Epic]

I really liked Thor, the only problem I had was that Loki's actor kinda upstaged Thor, but that's not a big complaint.

I think there was an even balance. Thor was shown as an arrogant, strong, warrior at the start, but went through a character arc becoming a selfless, cunning leader. Also, I loved how he used his hammer to immobilise Loki was great!:smallbiggrin:

[Tyndmyr]

Uh, no. The original (in the series) was a 2009 movie. A Game of Shadows is a 2011 movie.


Sometime maybe. I do prefer DC to Marvel anyway.

Oh, the sequel's out? I'd been planning to see that. Fantastic!

Sadly, in movies, Marvel is currently winning. Not sadly for Marvel, sadly for DC, who is failing epically trying to catch up.


Not even for comedy. It was just so much of nothing. If it was at least entertaining, I'd probably rank it higher. But the scenes were so brief and quick, it didn't have time to develop atmosphere or even come of as unintentionally comical.

I think I inadvertently watched it three times for various reasons. I know, I'm sorry too. By time #3, it was all comedy. Not good comedy, perhaps, but the kind where you make chicken noises when the avian green lantern steps on screen.


You know what went through my head during that scene? "Who is this man? I don't really care that he's beating up these people."

Yeah, to people on Earth. You'd think aliens, aliens with starships, no less, would've discovered something better. It's just lame and cliche.

Char development happened. It was just spread through the movie. It's a perfectly reasonable writing choice, and not uncommon. Introduction of a char in an action scene is pretty normal for an action movie.

What would they have discovered? That's not how elements work. Stars function via the same rules everywhere, and kick out the same end matter. Physics being the same everywhere else, gold has the same desirable properties everywhere.


Yeah, unless your home planet is made entirely of it.

We've located hundreds of planets...a planet being made of gold is...not only completely hypothetical, extremely unlikely due to stellar star formation happening the way it does, and the extreme unlikelihood of life developing out of nothing but a ball of gold.

Seriously, it's a rare, valuable element across the galaxy.

[Dr.Epic]

Still doesn't explain how that life developed. You'd need a pretty complex mixture of elements for that. I can believe a lot in chemical composition of life, but not gold-based. Just not reactive enough. Plus, the gold would go to the bottom of whatever planet it was on, not the crust.

Elemental Plane of Gold maybe...?:smallwink:

[Eldan]

Wasn't there an article about a possible diamond planet, though? I seem to remember that.

[Tragic_Comedian]

Seriously, it's a rare, valuable element across the galaxy.
Until we discover foam based technology, and all of the foam has been used up because we thought it was worthless. :smallfrown:

Elemental Plane of Gold maybe...?:smallwink:
They probably have a real problem with alien invasion.


Wasn't there an article about a possible diamond planet, though? I seem to remember that.
Now that you say it I think I remember it.

Has anybody seen War Horse? It looks really good.

[Dr.Epic]

Oh yeah, Conan was rough. I enjoyed watching it, but it wasn't really a great film.

Pet peeve: Why does fantasy/medieval always end up meaning "dark and gritty". I still like contrast and seeing what the hell is going on in fantasy movies. Conan wasn't an especially bad example of this, but seriously, don't be afraid to use a bit of lighting so we can see what the hell the set is.

I don't know. Plenty of Medieval Fantasy films have a light tone:

-Willow
-Krull
-the Princess Bride

[Tyndmyr]

No. It's good to carry a current, is light, is easy to work with and mold, and has several other valuable characteristics in industrial use.

While you are otherwise correct, gold is not light at all.

Also, the Princess Bride, is, of course, epic.

[Tengu_temp]

I don't know. Plenty of Medieval Fantasy films have a light tone:

-Willow
-Krull
-the Princess Bride

All of which are recent movies.

[TheArsenal]

Things that bugged me about capain america was

A: Why Hydra? NAZIS! WE NEED NAZIS
B: No cool WW2 steampunk creations that could make sense. Why just with the wierds overtly high tech stuff?
C: It falls apart in the end and becomes realy shlocky.
D: Captain America: The first avenger and his international support group.

Seriouly, just make it about frigging AMERICA!

[Dr.Epic]

All of which are recent movies.

All those movies are like 20 years old. I don't know what you're talking about.

[Tragic_Comedian]

Things that bugged me about capain america was

A: Why Hydra? NAZIS! WE NEED NAZIS
B: No cool WW2 steampunk creations that could make sense. Why just with the wierds overtly high tech stuff?
C: It falls apart in the end and becomes realy shlocky.
D: Captain America: The first avenger and his international support group.

Seriouly, just make it about frigging AMERICA!
Hydra was in the comics.

All those movies are like 20 years old. I don't know what you're talking about.
Sarcasm? Though, on a cosmic scale, it is rather recent.

EDIT: I change mine. Rise of the Planet of the Apes goes after The Muppets.

[pita]

Favorite movie of this year... I guess it would be Mission Impossible 4... Not a great year for movies overall, and MI had me in it's grips perfectly, though the end kind of pissed me off (the villain throwing himself and the suitcase over the ledge when he could have thrown the suitcase alone...).
Sucker Punch isn't only the worst movie of the year, it's the worst movie I've ever seen. It's not only offensively stupid, it also has the pretension to claim it's going for something intelligent. It marked, simply, how Zack Snyder has reached what success he's reached purely with good source material, and no natural talent. When a girl facing three samurai, each one armed with a different weapon, is boring, you're doing something wrong. I hated hated hated hated hated that stupid pathetic excuse for a film, and I absolutely despise pretension. Unwarranted pretension even more so.
EDIT I just remembered the last Harry Potter movie came out this year. Despite terrible source material, awesome film. Dunno if it's better than Mission, but I did enjoy it. Since I'm adding to Best, I'll add the new Sherlock Holmes to Worst. Not because it's that bad a movie, more because it was a disappointment. It had none of the air of mystery the previous film had.

[TheArsenal]

Hydra was in the comics.


Yes I know, but its freeking WW2! It feels like they just wanted to use nazis but where scared for some reason.

[The Glyphstone]

Cowboys and Aliens would have been outright perfect if they had just gone whole-hog cheesy and made the aliens cattle rustlers. Stealing/mutilating cattle is a staple of B-movie aliens, which this unabashedly was whatever its actual budget.

[Tyndmyr]

Sucker Punch was cinematographicly and musically fantastic. Yknow, that might even edge out Thor. Tough call.

[Tengu_temp]

All those movies are like 20 years old. I don't know what you're talking about.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-gvm0_Fg4YsU/TeIX9GcfxiI/AAAAAAAAANs/MxLDGmlUHmw/s1600/sarcasm_detector.jpg

[pita]

Sucker Punch was cinematographicly and musically fantastic. Yknow, that might even edge out Thor. Tough call.

Accept. Music was good. Some pretty shots.
I actually considered saying those, but figured it might undermine my point. I also have no complaints with the acting, and I think there are actually a few decent minutes there (The Jon Hamm bits).
It's just a bit of a crime against films, with those exception.

[Eldan]

Cowboys and Aliens would have been outright perfect if they had just gone whole-hog cheesy and made the aliens cattle rustlers. Stealing/mutilating cattle is a staple of B-movie aliens, which this unabashedly was whatever its actual budget.

Yeah. In my opinion, if they had cut back the stupid drama massively, upped the action into almost-silly territory and made the aliens just a bit more over the top, it could have been funny.

And perhaps a more relatable main character. He was also pretty boring.

In fact, if the aliens are stealing cattle, make it about cattle baron Ford defending his herd.

[Velaryon]

I had forgotten that Your Highness was 2011. It seems like so long ago that I saw that movie. It was good for what it was, which was a rather dumb but enjoyable medieval comedy.

Anyway, my favorite 2011 movie is probably Captain America, narrowly beating out X-Men: First Class. Both were very enjoyable, and I give the edge to Captain America more because of faithfulness to source material (inasmuch as it's not using characters created in the 2000's for a movie set in the 1960's) than anything else.

Restricting it to movies I've actually seen, I give my worst pick to Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides. While it had its moments, the whole film felt like there was something missing. So many people trashed Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightley in the previous movies, but I felt like they did a nice job of carrying the plot while Johnny Depp got to just entertain people as Captain Jack. Making Jack Sparrow carry the narrative as well as be his usual amusing self just didn't work very well. There were other problems with the film, but that was the main thing that struck me when I watched it.

Mind you, I'm quite certain that there are many movies from 2011 worse than Pirates 4. It's just that I didn't see them. I know my tastes, and I can usually tell from a movie trailer whether or not I will like the film. As such, I avoided movies like Transformers: Dark of the Moon, Sucker Punch, Fast Five, or The Smurfs that I'm quite sure I would have hated.

Also, I skipped out on Thor. Given the quality of Marvel's films lately, it's probably good. It's just that I don't care about Thor at all. I'm hard-pressed to think of a Marvel character I find less interesting. I will probably watch it at some point if only so that I understand where his character is coming from when I see the Avengers movie, but I don't particularly care about it other than that.

[Dr.Epic]

Yeah. In my opinion, if they had cut back the stupid drama massively, upped the action into almost-silly territory and made the aliens just a bit more over the top, it could have been funny.

And perhaps a more relatable main character. He was also pretty boring.

In fact, if the aliens are stealing cattle, make it about cattle baron Ford defending his herd.

I don't know what you're talking about. The action in that film was great. Especially that final battle. And the aliens were beyond intimidating. Their design was like a cross between the orges and trolls in the 3.5 Monster Manual. They were menacing. I'm glad they handled it seriously and didn't make it silly. The premise is surreal enough. We've done over the top westerns: did you really want this to turn into Wild, Wild West or Jonah Hex?

Also, Jake Lonergan was great and badass. Real intimidating. I don't know what you're talking about. He was plenty relatable.

[Eldan]

I don't know what you're talking about. The action in that film was great. Especially that final battle. And the aliens were beyond intimidating. Their design was like a cross between the orges and trolls in the 3.5 Monster Manual. They were menacing. I'm glad they handled it seriously and didn't make it silly. The premise is surreal enough. We've done over the top westerns: did you really want this to turn into Wild, Wild West or Jonah Hex?

Also, Jake Lonergan was great and badass. Real intimidating. I don't know what you're talking about. He was plenty relatable.

I had pretty much the opposite opinion. Lonergan was just... not doing much, from what I remember, outside the action scenes. The aliens were, I guess, not badly designed, but as roaring monsters, I didn't find them intimidating at all. The action, I thought, was pretty forgetable too. Nothing that stood out as particularly impressive.

[Pokonic]

Cowboys and Aliens would have been outright perfect if they had just gone whole-hog cheesy and made the aliens cattle rustlers. Stealing/mutilating cattle is a staple of B-movie aliens, which this unabashedly was whatever its actual budget.

Even better: the aliens seeded the cows on earth thousands of years ago, and now need them to study there bodys to combat some unnamed threat. After the humans blow up all the aliens that where trying to get the cattle,the final shot of the movie would be a evil-overlord like minotaurish alien send the order for invading earth.:smallbiggrin:

[The Glyphstone]

Even better: the aliens seeded the cows on earth thousands of years ago, and now need them to study there bodys to combat some unnamed threat. After the humans blow up all the aliens that where trying to get the cattle,the final shot of the movie would be a evil-overlord like minotaurish alien send the order for invading earth.:smallbiggrin:

Justification, smushtification. The aliens are stealing cows because that's what aliens do.:smallsmile:

[VanBuren]

Pretty sure that was a 2010 movie. Great movie, obviously, but I don't think it's best of 2011.

Considering that it's been in theaters for no more than two weeks, I can only assume that you're some kind of time traveler. Fear not, 2011 was pretty much just 2010 but more so.

Oh, and Steve Jobs is dead.


Things that bugged me about capain america was

A: Why Hydra? NAZIS! WE NEED NAZIS
B: No cool WW2 steampunk creations that could make sense. Why just with the wierds overtly high tech stuff?
C: It falls apart in the end and becomes realy shlocky.
D: Captain America: The first avenger and his international support group.

Seriouly, just make it about frigging AMERICA!

Considering that WWII is the backdrop, it makes more sense that Captain America would be working closely with British soldiers as well. It fits the character too, as Captain America is uber-patriotic in the sense that he embodies the ideals of the country more than nation itself, and wouldn't really care too much about someone's nationality in particular. He's basically Marvel's version of a Paladin.

Also, isn't steampunk a bit outdated for the 1930s/1940s?

EDIT: Forgot my movies. Bleh.

Best:

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2

A great conclusion to the series, frankly. Very beautiful visually too.

13 Assassins

A remake of the 1963 film, filled with great action and with a great sense of style.

Midnight in Paris

Not Woody Allen's best, but sweet and charming.

Tucker & Dale vs Evil

It's got Alan Tudyk, so you should already love it for that (He was the best thing about Dollhouse, and I didn't even like that show). It's a great horror/comedy and it plays its premise to the bone and wrings every last opportunity out of it for laughs and scares, but it's also amazingly sincere.

Worst:

Just Go With It

I want that part of my life back.

Dream House

I'll be honest, I liked the premise that the movie set up. Only problem? It finishes too early (soml) and then has to find an excuse to faff about for the rest of the movie. Despite how quickly it gets through its major twist, it still manages to be slow. That's an amazing trick, but not really a useful one.

[Pokonic]

Justification, smushtification. The aliens are stealing cows because that's what aliens do.:smallsmile:

Is the sequal hook!:smalltongue:

[Eldan]

Part 2: Rangers vs. Minotaurs.

I'd watch it.

[Newman]

Adventures of Tintin is my fave. Then Sucker Punch.

Captain America was boring and workmanlike, though I love the concept, and the hero is adorable. I liked Smith, I mean Schmidt, and his flat, cold, rutheless, pragmatic evil. But "take over the world just because" sux as a motive. Thor was really fun and cozy. Mission Impossible was all kinds of stupid, in oh so many ways. You want a spy movie where the government drops you like a hot potato, watch Syriana, or play Metal Gear.
Carribean was fun, but Jack is better as a Spanner In The Works than as a Reluctant Hero.

[Tragic_Comedian]

Cowboys and Aliens would have been outright perfect if they had just gone whole-hog cheesy and made the aliens cattle rustlers. Stealing/mutilating cattle is a staple of B-movie aliens, which this unabashedly was whatever its actual budget.
I would've liked that better.

[Jaros]

Am I the only one here that saw Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy? That would definitely be my favourite of the year. Would also put 127 Hours and Black Swan up there (I saw them in 2011, and I think they were both released in the UK this year too).Thor too.

[Starwulf]

I'll list all the movies I saw in 2011 from best to worst.

...

Well, that was fast!

Wow, here I was thinking that me and my wife might possibly be the only ones to have not seen any movies that came out this year. Just no money to watch movies in movie theaters, and don't go into town enough to make use of a Redbox. 2012 SEEMS like it might be a bit better on the pocketbook, so we might go see a movie for our Anniversary this year, and maybe even Valentines Day(well, not ON valentines day. We both agree there is no point in going out on V.Day just because of how monstrously over-crowded things are).

[Zevox]

I only saw four movies this year, so for me, this really isn't hard.

The best was easily X-Men: First Class. This is easily my favorite X-Men movie, and has displaced Iron Man as my favorite superhero movie in general. Magneto has always been my favorite character from the X-Men, and this movie got him pretty much spot-on. I had a few complaints, but nothing too huge, outside of the uncomfortable aspect of the only black guy in the movie being killed off in the middle and then never mentioned again. Let me just say that I'm not much of a movie watcher, and there are very few movies I'll actually want to buy and own on DVD/Blue-Ray/whatever is current when I move out to live on my own, but this is one of them.

Second place was Thor. Pretty darn good superhero movie, quite entertaining. Could've used more action, but damn if the action it had wasn't good, especially near the start. I do still wish Loki had used more magic and illusions in his fight with Thor though, just seems like that would've been the logical thing.

Third was Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides. Not a fantastic movie, but pretty entertaining for what it was. Seeing Jack Sparrow be, well, Jack Sparrow, is always nice, and some of the other characters were enjoyable as well, plus there was a decent adventure in there.

Worst was Green Lantern. And you have no idea how much I hate saying that, since the Green Lanterns are my favorite superheroes, but it's true. It isn't one of the worst superhero movies by any stretch, but it's just so much wasted potential. You don't even need to have read Green Lantern: Secret Origin to see that this could easily have been so much better, and if you have, the contrast between that comic and this movie is just depressing. The best part of the movie was the training sequence with Kilowag and Sinestro, and that was far too short. Sinestro especially needed a bigger role - hell, much of the heart of Secret Origin was Hal and Sinestro's relationship, so for him to barely have a role in the movie was a terrible change. I do hope that any sequels do much better, but it's hard to be optimistic since I doubt they'll overhaul the writing team if and when that happens. Such a terrible pity.

Zevox

[Dr.Epic]

OH! Two other films I didn't see but wanted to were Tintin and Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.

[Tyndmyr]

I'm glad they handled it seriously and didn't make it silly. The premise is surreal enough. We've done over the top westerns: did you really want this to turn into Wild, Wild West or Jonah Hex?

You skepticism indicates that you have insufficient experience in the field of mechanology. Please report to the giant robot spider for further training.

[Dr.Epic]

I had pretty much the opposite opinion. Lonergan was just... not doing much, from what I remember, outside the action scenes.

He was plenty intimidating. He didn't take any gruff from anybody. Plus, once we learn his backstory, he does get sympathetic.


The aliens were, I guess, not badly designed, but as roaring monsters, I didn't find them intimidating at all.

They were like 10 feet tall, could tackle horses easily, had massive claws, and blasters on their wrists. Guys were friggin' scary!


The action, I thought, was pretty forgetable too. Nothing that stood out as particularly impressive.

Battle at the end was great. Like something out of one of the LotR films. Also all the scenes the aliens abduct people. Plus, it was so much about action as initial fear. We see the tangible threat of these advance beings all throughout the film.

[paddyfool]

This year... drat. I only got to the cinema twice, and only saw X men and Tintin. (X men wins, for all of its brass-based silliness and other minor quibbles).

On aliens and gold, though: it makes no sense. Asteroid mining should be a massively more effective way to get hold of gold than going to an Earth-like planet once you're good enough at space travel to move between solar systems. Gold is rare on Earth because so much of the metal is sitting around in the core and the mantle; a great deal of what is available is reckoned to have come from stuff that hit us after the Earth itself and its metal-poor crust were formed, with some other stuff brought up via volcanic activity. Once we get to space, it should become much, much, more commonplace.

Aliens would only come to the Earth for metal if they intended to strip off the crust and harvest the core. But then, a movie about us meeting that kind of alien would just be a case of "OMFGBBQ", unless it focused on what happened after (the future of a human civilization living in some kind of alien zoo, refugee camp, or rehoming project, for instance).

EDIT: I haven't seen the movie, however. It might make some sense if they had ended up crash-landing on earth, and thus didn't have access to asteroid mining etc.

[The_Admiral]

Here's a theory, the aliens are criminals, mining inhabited systems for gold. Since the space mining technology they use is easily detectable, they have to mine it the old fashioned way. In atmosphere GASP!

[Dr.Epic]

On aliens and gold, though: it makes no sense. Asteroid mining should be a massively more effective way to get hold of gold than going to an Earth-like planet once you're good enough at space travel to move between solar systems. Gold is rare on Earth because so much of the metal is sitting around in the core and the mantle; a great deal of what is available is reckoned to have come from stuff that hit us after the Earth itself and its metal-poor crust were formed, with some other stuff brought up via volcanic activity. Once we get to space, it should become much, much, more commonplace.

Aliens would only come to the Earth for metal if they intended to strip off the crust and harvest the core. But then, a movie about us meeting that kind of alien would just be a case of "OMFGBBQ", unless it focused on what happened after (the future of a human civilization living in some kind of alien zoo, refugee camp, or rehoming project, for instance).

EDIT: I haven't seen the movie, however. It might make some sense if they had ended up crash-landing on earth, and thus didn't have access to asteroid mining etc.

You're overthinking the plot point of aliens and gold. Cowboys and Aliens is to a certain degree a popcorn film. I'd say it's a little bit more than that, but it's not an entirely legit film. Really, don't overthink such small matters. It's still a badass, gritty western mixed well with cool sci-fi stuff.

[Tyndmyr]

This year... drat. I only got to the cinema twice, and only saw X men and Tintin. (X men wins, for all of its brass-based silliness and other minor quibbles).

On aliens and gold, though: it makes no sense. Asteroid mining should be a massively more effective way to get hold of gold than going to an Earth-like planet once you're good enough at space travel to move between solar systems. Gold is rare on Earth because so much of the metal is sitting around in the core and the mantle; a great deal of what is available is reckoned to have come from stuff that hit us after the Earth itself and its metal-poor crust were formed, with some other stuff brought up via volcanic activity. Once we get to space, it should become much, much, more commonplace.

Aliens would only come to the Earth for metal if they intended to strip off the crust and harvest the core. But then, a movie about us meeting that kind of alien would just be a case of "OMFGBBQ", unless it focused on what happened after (the future of a human civilization living in some kind of alien zoo, refugee camp, or rehoming project, for instance).

EDIT: I haven't seen the movie, however. It might make some sense if they had ended up crash-landing on earth, and thus didn't have access to asteroid mining etc.

Eh, there's NEVER a reason to go down into a gravity well, realistically. At least, not for mere materials. So, this one makes about as much sense as any.

[Mauve Shirt]

Things I loved:
X-Men: First Class
Captain America
Sherlock Holmes Game of Shadows
War Horse

Things I thought were pretty OK:
Thor
Cowboys and Aliens
POTC: On Stranger Tides

Things I lament:
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2

Things I didn't see but probably would have liked (and still want to see):
The Adventures of Tintin
The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo (need to read the books first)

Things I didn't see but probably wouldn't have liked:
Green Lantern

[Newman]

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2

I thought it wrapped things up nicely. Still, the best movie isn the series IMHO is Prisoner of Azkaban.

[Mauve Shirt]

I thought it wrapped things up nicely. Still, the best movie isn the series IMHO is Prisoner of Azkaban.

AGH! This isn't a topic for this thread, I could go off on both of these movies so much. :smalltongue:

[Dr.Epic]

You skepticism indicates that you have insufficient experience in the field of mechanology. Please report to the giant robot spider for further training.

Sure thing. Right after you listen to the rap numbers from that film for a good 10 hours in a row.:smallannoyed:

[grolim]

Wasn't there an article about a possible diamond planet, though? I seem to remember that.

Not planet, but star remnant iirc. The solid carbon/diamond core of a star several thousand miles in diameter.


Tucker & Dale vs Evil

It's got Alan Tudyk, so you should already love it for that (He was the best thing about Dollhouse, and I didn't even like that show). It's a great horror/comedy and it plays its premise to the bone and wrings every last opportunity out of it for laughs and scares, but it's also amazingly sincere.

Not just that, but it was one DOOZY of a day.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Well, time runs short, because I'm off to bed soon, but a quick recap...

The Best:
Thor, Captain America, X-Men First Class, Tintin, I just saw Rise of the Planet of the Apes, and I think that's it...but maybe I'm forgetting something.

The Worst:
Green Lantern

[VanBuren]

Not planet, but star remnant iirc. The solid carbon/diamond core of a star several thousand miles in diameter.


Tucker & Dale vs Evil

It's got Alan Tudyk, so you should already love it for that (He was the best thing about Dollhouse, and I didn't even like that show). It's a great horror/comedy and it plays its premise to the bone and wrings every last opportunity out of it for laughs and scares, but it's also amazingly sincere.

Not just that, but it was one DOOZY of a day.

I tell you, that kid had some serious problems.

[turkishproverb]

Yes I know, but its freeking WW2! It feels like they just wanted to use nazis but where scared for some reason.

It probably had something to do with the fact they couldn't put out nazi Toys in europe. Same reason the Indiana Jones line a couple years ago had super-generic "German soldier" figures.


Until we discover foam based technology, and all of the foam has been used up because we thought it was worthless. :smallfrown:

...

Did you just reference ALF? :smallconfused:


On Melmac, The Most Valuable Thing Is Foam

Favorite film I saw that was new this year: The Muppets. Best film I saw in the theater this year, Bar the re-release of Ghostbusters. Touching, well written, well structured.

Least Favorite: Transformers Bark of the Moon. Didn't even see it in the theater. Saw it at a friend's. ugh. Continuing a proud tradition of crap.

[SDF]

I think I ended up enjoying Sucker Punch most... Saw all the Marvel movies too.

[Lateral]

Hmm. Best movie:
The Muppets. It definitely had its flaws, and the gotcha ending was irritating, but overall it was a great callback to the older Muppet movies while not being so close to them that it was stale.

Worst:
Super 8. I hated that movie. The monster was lame, the plot was predictable and uninteresting, the monster's backstory was that the evil military was doing eeevil science experiments on it, the ending was overly sappy, and the characters were boring at best. It was like they were trying to make a (slightly toned-down) monster horror flick in the beginning, then decided they wanted to make it an E.T ripoff halfway through and kept switching between elements of the two using clichés to string them together. AARGH. The worst part is that it was directed by J.J. Abrams and was produced by Steven Spielberg. It had no right to be that tired.

I... actually, I don't remember watching any other movies this year.

[Aotrs Commander]

Considering that WWII is the backdrop, it makes more sense that Captain America would be working closely with British soldiers as well. It fits the character too, as Captain America is uber-patriotic in the sense that he embodies the ideals of the country more than nation itself, and wouldn't really care too much about someone's nationality in particular. He's basically Marvel's version of a Paladin.

I wondered if Cap's team was Nick Fury's Howling Commandoes. *checks* It was, at least in part, so they were drawing from established Marvel characters of the period.

I don't know much about them aside from the name, but when I saw the film (on DVD, we actually missed it at the cinema as it was on for only a very short time while we were away), I though they looked more like a Team of Named Characters and the Howling Commandoes were the only ones I know about during that phase of Marvel Earth.



I tend to be pretty easy to please, really, within my narrow band of expectations - I liked Green Lantern, First Class, Thor, Cap... I've found I've been spilt for choice this year with movies, wih them, Transformers, HP 7p2, Johnny English - there was a stage where I was going once a week. Heck, we even didn't go and see one or two films we might have otherwise done in isolation (Pirates 4, the Musketeers) on the basis that we'd got plenty to watch.

I think probably as for "worst" would be Transformers, on the basis it was the only film I saw that at any point made me bored (funnily enough, the entirely superflous Witwicky scenes at the start and the unwelcome return of his fraktarded parents).

I think Johnny English deserves special mention, as me and Mum both said we'd not laughed that hard at a film in ages, and I just know my Dad's gonna do himself a mischief when we get it on DVD...

[Tragic_Comedian]

Did you just reference ALF? :smallconfused:

Possibly. :smalltongue:



There's foam in them thar hills!

[veven]

I thought Drive and Girl with the Dragon Tattoo were both excellent. You should be informed there is a pretty disturbing rape scene in GwtDT but it is worth seeing. Rooney Mara does an awesome job is Lisbeth.

One i didn't like was Captain America. He is one of my favorite comic book heroes and for some reason I can't quite put my finger on I felt the movie didn't do him justice.

[Bhu]

Going by what I've actually seen my top 10 faves for the year would be (In no particular order): Shiver, the Black House (Korean version), Trollhunter, Rare Exports, Winnebago Man, Unconscious, The Last Circus, Tucker and Dale vs Evil, Timecrimes, and True Grit

Biggest disappointments would be Super, Paul, Conan the Barbarian, Black Death, Rubber, Operation: Endgame, Sucker Punch, Shadow, The Informant, and Red State. Given what I had heard of them I was expecting better.

[Dacia Brabant]

Wow, here I was thinking that me and my wife might possibly be the only ones to have not seen any movies that came out this year. Just no money to watch movies in movie theaters, and don't go into town enough to make use of a Redbox. 2012 SEEMS like it might be a bit better on the pocketbook, so we might go see a movie for our Anniversary this year, and maybe even Valentines Day(well, not ON valentines day. We both agree there is no point in going out on V.Day just because of how monstrously over-crowded things are).

Nope, you're not the only ones, though for me it was more that I had better options for my entertainment dollars than anything that was released in theaters. I will watch the new Sherlock tomorrow however, so I guess there's that, but during the summer blockbuster months, well, I'd rather be golfing.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

The last Harry Potter was really good. I enjoyed that movie loooaaads. I went in expecting super-big-action-with-magic, and that's what I got. Count me happy.

Sucker Punch also surprised me. I went in expecting action and fan-service, and I got all of that, plus some quite decent cinematography, which I was only half-expecting, and an epic soundtrack that I actually had to go out and buy, that's how good it was.

I haven't seen any of the super-hero movies, not my thing. But, I do aim on seeing Tintin and the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo at some point, and Sherlock Holmes 2 as well.

I saw Pirates, because Pirates. I got Pirates. I left sated. Was it as good as the first? No. But the first was brilliant, so. It wasn't as bad as some of the other Pirates though.

Other than that, nothing of note.

[Avilan the Grey]

I have watched too many movies to remember this year, but these are some that stands out, from worst to best.

Too awful to get a score: Mars Needs Moms
It sucks.

10. Hall Pass
I got to see this one for free. Which was good. Not Horrible, but I am not really a fan of Kringe-comedies (my wife is, which is a source of problems when picking movies). At least it had a fairly large heart, which helped in the end. 3 / 10

9. Thor
This one didn't impress at all. I must admit he never was one of my favorite superheroes to begin with, but I found this movie utterly, UTTERLY boring. The fighting was boring, the dialogue in Valhalla was Hammy-And-Annoying and the romantic plot tumor was... that. And all scenes on Earth was sleeping pills. 4 / 10.

8. Your Highness
Well... There was Natalie Portman and stuff. I can't remember anything about the stuff though, only Natalie Portman... 4 / 10.

7. Cars 2
This one was awful for being a Pixar movie. That means I rank it as 6 out of 10 on a scale to well... 10. The biggest problem was the genre shift and the focus on the one character I DIDN't like from Cars. 6 / 10

6. Green Hornet
Quite fun, and with the COOLEST. CAR. EVER. Seriously, the rest of the movie was average comedy meeting average action, but the car... Can I haz?? NOW!!! 6 / 10

5. Paul
This one was a pleasant surprise. Occasionally truly funny, and entertaining all the way through. Plus, you know, all the shout outs and lampshades you need. 7 / 10

4. X-Men First Class
I am awfully hard to impress when it comes to Prequels. This is no exception, although I find the casting excellent and the whole 60ies thing awesome. Over all 7 / 10.

3. Kung Fu Panda 2
Not nearly as good as the PURE AWESOMESAUCE-DIPPED AWESOME that is the first one, it is still not bad, and especially not bad for being a cartoon sequel (Cars 2, I am looking at you!). Still more character development and... Will we see some Piger or Tanda-kids in the future? :smallbiggrin:. Great fight scenes, as always. 8 / 10.

2. The King's Speech
I absolutely LOVE this movie. Just like "The Queen", btw. The acting is superb, the writing is superb, and Barbosa Mr Rush is hillarious...9 / 10.

1. Rango
Definitely the best movie of the year for me. EXTREMELY well-done characters, deeply funny yet quite spiritual. Oh and Johnny Depp as... well a chameleon. What more can you want? 9 / 10.

[Killer Angel]

I think I ended up enjoying Sucker Punch most...

Really? ...it's probably at the lowest bottom of my list.

[Kato]

Tucker & Dale vs Evil

It's got Alan Tudyk, so you should already love it for that (He was the best thing about Dollhouse, and I didn't even like that show). It's a great horror/comedy and it plays its premise to the bone and wrings every last opportunity out of it for laughs and scares, but it's also amazingly sincere.


Oh, I remember that! I missed lots of good movies this year, or at least movies I'd have liked to watch but didn't get around to but Tucker and Dale was reallly great, not only because of Tudyk. As grolim said, it's just an awesome take on the horror movies. Definitely worth a watch, imo.

That said, Guess I really need to go watch these Marvel movies... and probably the other super hero stuff, too...

Something else i recall seeing was King's Speech. It was okay but... it's just not my type of movie. I'm too stupid to enjoy something like that as much as a more shallow comedy.

[Jahkaivah]

Worst film of 2011: Hobo with a Shotgun.

Best film of 2011: Hobo with a Shotgun.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

Oh, I forgot about the King's Speech! That one is also near the top, I loooooved it!

[Newman]

Sucker Punch was downright great, I just felt it was kinda redundant. It had a strong aftertaste of "it's been done".

Hobo With A Shotgun was absolutely awesome. And not exactly in a So Bad It's Good way. The acting was downright fantastic, especially the lead. And the aesthetic choices were very appropriate.

[H. Zee]

Personally, I haven't seen many films this year. Of the ones I have, the best were:

1) Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows. What a great film! I quite liked the first one, but didn't think it was amazing or anything. Then I saw this, and well, it blew the first one right out of the water. It also played into the actual Sherlock Holmes books in a spectacularly satisfying way, although I won't list why here due to it being a massive spoiler.

2) X-Men: First Class. An excellent film which single-handedly redeemed the faltering X-Men franchise. And the actors who played Magneto and Professor X were great.

3) The Adventures of Tintin. As a big fan of the comics, I think they got it just about right. My only complaint would be about the trite speech given by Haddock to Tintin at the end, and its ultimate pay-off; it was both cheesy and out-of-character for Haddock and for Tintin.

The worst film I saw in 2011 was Sucker Punch. It was, purely in my opinion, a mysogynistic pile of infantile crap which not only failed to engage my interest on any level but actively alienated me. Particularly heartbreaking as I really enjoyed Zach Snyder's interpretation of Watchmen.

I can't recall seeing any other films that bad, though.

[Karoht]

Capt America:
My only complaint was that the actions scenes needed to be dialed up a notch. Maybe even as little as half a notch. The action scenes we saw didn't really pitch that the guy was a super hero or even had super powers, merely a guy with a penchant for heroic stunts. That said, I was rather impressed by
the fight with Red Skull in the cockpit of the plane. It had a very comic book feel to it, something I thought other live action comic book movies have sort of lacked or done poorly in the past. This one was just right IMO.

Cowboys and Aliens was a bit of a let down for me, I went in expecting something just off the hook. The aliens just didn't feel alien to me, the gold thing was a minor sticking point, and the only character I was really interested in the entire time was Harrison Ford as Dollarhide. I felt he was more complex than really anyone else there.


@Suckerpunch
The film was Misogynistic? Bwah?
Misogyny "is the hatred or dislike of women or girls."
The entire film was exemplifying the girls (Charlies Angels meets Kill Bill), and tiptoed around sexualizing them too far, and did so rather cleverly. How is that misogyny?
It's also set in a time period where treating women as objects was considered the norm, and female empowerment of any kind was exceptional. Just saying.

[Terraoblivion]

What movies do not bore you? If these result in boredom, I can only imagine your reaction to most movies.

Because action is inherently entertaining? Not everyone thinks that, you know. In general looking at the things I like, action is a fairly low priority compared to character interactions and portrayals. Of course, Hollywood is awful at that and has been quite effective in strangling the rest of the movie industry in all of the west, but that doesn't change the principle. Which is also a big part of why I don't watch many movies, there are few that cater to what I like without being awful and bad at it.

Now I know it isn't the case in Eldan's opinion about them, but it's still a valid point to make. Some people, like me, just don't like action movies and superhero movies and would prefer to not be considered weird for it.

[Bhu]

The film was Misogynistic? Bwah?
Misogyny "is the hatred or dislike of women or girls."
The entire film was exemplifying the girls (Charlies Angels meets Kill Bill), and tiptoed around sexualizing them too far, and did so rather cleverly. How is that misogyny?
It's also set in a time period where treating women as objects was considered the norm, and female empowerment of any kind was exceptional. Just saying.


I'm assuming you know some of this but I'll go ahead anyway. Everything is grounded in reality till Baby Doll enters the 'orphanage', i.e. the asylum. Beginning right at that point you enter a fantasy world which everyone assumes is Baby Doll's. The fantasy action sequences are definitely hers during her 'dances' (which most people interpret as her voluntarily being raped by the staff to allow the other girls to get the items necessary for escape). But there are thoughts that the orphanage fantasy is actually Sweet Peas or even the orderlies (because if you're designing a fantasy world to escape how bad your current life is, why glorify and give power to a scumbag like oskar?). It's also been considered Baby Doll and Sweet Pea are the same person, she just has multiple personality disorder, that half the girls don't exist at all, etc. But in interviews with the director it's been mentioned the film is an indictment of geek subcultures view of women. The idea being that no matter how superpowered they are, or how socially empowered they may appear to be, the archetypes they represent are just a male sexual fantasy. In other words the ability to kick ass and stand up for themselves is an illusion because they can only do so in a way that appeals to the male audience that comic books are written for. It was a way of displaying his revulsion for the anime/cosplay/comic book subculture openly in a way he hoped would appeal to the very audience he was insulting.

[Axolotl]

I'm assuming you know some of this but I'll go ahead anyway. Everything is grounded in reality till Baby Doll enters the 'orphanage', i.e. the asylum. Beginning right at that point you enter a fantasy world which everyone assumes is Baby Doll's. The fantasy action sequences are definitely hers during her 'dances' (which most people interpret as her voluntarily being raped by the staff to allow the other girls to get the items necessary for escape). But there are thoughts that the orphanage fantasy is actually Sweet Peas or even the orderlies (because if you're designing a fantasy world to escape how bad your current life is, why glorify and give power to a scumbag like oskar?). It's also been considered Baby Doll and Sweet Pea are the same person, she just has multiple personality disorder, that half the girls don't exist at all, etc. But in interviews with the director it's been mentioned the film is an indictment of geek subcultures view of women. The idea being that no matter how superpowered they are, or how socially empowered they may appear to be, the archetypes they represent are just a male sexual fantasy. In other words the ability to kick ass and stand up for themselves is an illusion because they can only do so in a way that appeals to the male audience that comic books are written for. It was a way of displaying his revulsion for the anime/cosplay/comic book subculture openly in a way he hoped would appeal to the very audience he was insulting.So it was essentially a film version of Wanted? Interesting.

I quite liked Sucker Punch overall, but not as much I had hoped to, it felt a bit style over substance but without enough style to really carry it, i mean I felt it had some substance but it kept hiding as much as possible, sort of like a Lynch film but they focus on the weirdness instead of just covering it with action.

The best film (or at least my favorite) is easily Immortals, partly because it's a check list of things I like but also it was just a great film with great action and superb visuals.

The only other films I've seen this year are Cowboys and Aliens, True Grit, Cave of Forgotten Dreams and Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy. So I don't really have a worst film of the year.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

3) The Adventures of Tintin. As a big fan of the comics, I think they got it just about right. My only complaint would be about the trite speech given by Haddock to Tintin at the end, and its ultimate pay-off; it was both cheesy and out-of-character for Haddock and for Tintin.

Ahhh agreed! When the speech came out, I was like, "Bleh. Torn right out of the Hollywood formula book."

[Raistlin1040]

I'm probably forgetting a bunch, since I see a LOT of movies. Skimming through all the movies released this year
I liked Rango
I liked Sucker Punch (despite its flaws)
Arthur was very bland but decent
Scream 4 was better than 3 and about on par with 2
African Cats was excellent
Thor was good
Bridesmaids was good
Pirates was decent
X Men was decent
Super 8 was technically good but very "seen it before"
Green Lantern was pretty bad
Transformers was pretty bad
Harry Potter was great
Captain America was good
Crazy, Stupid, Love was excellent
The Change-Up was meh
The Ides of March was one of the best I've ever seen
The Muppets was excellent
The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo was one of the best I've ever seen.

So either Ides of March or GwtDT for best movie. I thought about it for a while and I decided the latter, and here is why.
David Fincher is one of my favorite directors. His gritty, stylish visual aptitude in movies like Fight Club and Se7en is sort of his calling card, but he's recently begun to move away with it. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button had a very nostalgic, golden age of Hollywood sort of feel, and The Social Network was very slick. Fincher has worked with action movies, he's worked with thrillers, he's worked with movies that are basically just about people.

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo is the ultimate blend of everything he's done since starting out. It's thrilling. It's got action. The writing (coming from someone who hasn't read the book) is excellent. It has the violence and sexual themes of Fight Club and Se7en, but is less exhibitionalist about it(and I love both of those movies). Visually, it's the perfect mix of slick beauty (the title sequence), gritty realism (scenes at Lisbeth's overseer's house), and low-fi, character driven visuals (scenes at Mikhail's cottage).

The movie is basically a "whodunit" (I hate the term, but that's what it is). It's a style of movie that is hard to pull off, and generally works best in a more comedic setting (See Clue with Tim Curry for an example). It's a stale premise for a movie, but The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo is quick, never letting up with tension. It's a long movie at 2 and a half hours, but my friends and I were entertained the entire time. It really is an "edge of your seat" type film.

Special mention should go to the music. Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross might be unconventional composers, but they fit Fincher's style perfectly. Drafting Karen O of Yeah Yeah Yeahs to sing the cover of Immigrant Song for the title sequence was an excellent decision, and the movie's minimalist score is SO effective at conveying the mood. You may not walk out of the theater remembering a specific overture or hook, but if you pay attention to the music, you will hear the effect it has on the movie.

However the best thing about the film is the acting. Everyone shines in the cast. Christopher Plummer deserves acclaim for his role, and Yorick van Wageningen plays a disgusting, horrible man that the audience hates so completely, he has to be commended for his acting. Robin Wright stops by for a few decent scenes. Daniel Craig is at his best, playing a smart, understated character with a lot of emotional nuance. Maybe I hadn't seen enough of his work, but after his Bond work (Casino Royale was good, Quantum of Solace was not) and Cowboys vs Aliens, I didn't think much of his acting ability and was happily proven wrong here.

Easily the best actor of the film is Rooney Mara as Lisbeth Salander. She doesn't do any traditional acting tricks to get the audience to like her, or to seem relatable. She doesn't look at the camera or even really at the person she's talking to, she's emotionally cold and would be a very unlikable character if Rooney Mara didn't know what she was doing. What I got from watching her performance was that Lisbeth is both very cold and distant, as well as very vulnerable. It's easy to see most of her actions as the former, but the way she uses her eyes to convey feeling, the slight hesitation she gives some of her lines, the ability to soften or harden her features at will, it's all excellent acting that adds so much depth to the character. You believe everything she does and can't help but like her. There are a lot of things I like about The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, from the cinematography, to the music, to the writing, but Rooney Mara's performance is what pushes it up to Movie of the Year status.

[Tengu_temp]

I'm assuming you know some of this but I'll go ahead anyway. Everything is grounded in reality till Baby Doll enters the 'orphanage', i.e. the asylum. Beginning right at that point you enter a fantasy world which everyone assumes is Baby Doll's. The fantasy action sequences are definitely hers during her 'dances' (which most people interpret as her voluntarily being raped by the staff to allow the other girls to get the items necessary for escape). But there are thoughts that the orphanage fantasy is actually Sweet Peas or even the orderlies (because if you're designing a fantasy world to escape how bad your current life is, why glorify and give power to a scumbag like oskar?). It's also been considered Baby Doll and Sweet Pea are the same person, she just has multiple personality disorder, that half the girls don't exist at all, etc. But in interviews with the director it's been mentioned the film is an indictment of geek subcultures view of women. The idea being that no matter how superpowered they are, or how socially empowered they may appear to be, the archetypes they represent are just a male sexual fantasy. In other words the ability to kick ass and stand up for themselves is an illusion because they can only do so in a way that appeals to the male audience that comic books are written for. It was a way of displaying his revulsion for the anime/cosplay/comic book subculture openly in a way he hoped would appeal to the very audience he was insulting.

This just reminds me of Joss Wheddon. People praise him for how progressive and feminist his works are for having strong female characters... But, really, he just has a fetish for teenage girls kicking ass (while still looking like waifs, mind you), so he puts that into his shows a lot. Nothing feminist about that. And, in fact, when he says things like "I consider Summer Glau's feet to be a separate character" (because he has a foot fetish too), it comes off as a little creepy more than anything.

Note: I still like Firefly. I just don't worship its creator.

[Surrealistik]

I honestly thought Captain America was by far (arguably now that I reflect on Transformers) the worst movie of 2011, and one of the worst movies I've ever seen; formulaic cliche plagued with puerile, embarrassingly bad writing and implausible contrivances.

The best part was Tommy Lee Jones, and his screen presence totalled probably less than 10 minutes.

[H. Zee]

@Suckerpunch
The film was Misogynistic? Bwah?
Misogyny "is the hatred or dislike of women or girls."
The entire film was exemplifying the girls (Charlies Angels meets Kill Bill), and tiptoed around sexualizing them too far, and did so rather cleverly. How is that misogyny?
It's also set in a time period where treating women as objects was considered the norm, and female empowerment of any kind was exceptional. Just saying.

It's not the most mysogynist film out there, but it's insidious because it tries to come across as empowering. Basically, just read this (http://www.slashfilm.com/sucker-punch-2/).

[Avilan the Grey]

I'm assuming you know some of this but I'll go ahead anyway. Everything is grounded in reality till Baby Doll enters the 'orphanage', i.e. the asylum. Beginning right at that point you enter a fantasy world which everyone assumes is Baby Doll's. The fantasy action sequences are definitely hers during her 'dances' (which most people interpret as her voluntarily being raped by the staff to allow the other girls to get the items necessary for escape). But there are thoughts that the orphanage fantasy is actually Sweet Peas or even the orderlies (because if you're designing a fantasy world to escape how bad your current life is, why glorify and give power to a scumbag like oskar?). It's also been considered Baby Doll and Sweet Pea are the same person, she just has multiple personality disorder, that half the girls don't exist at all, etc. But in interviews with the director it's been mentioned the film is an indictment of geek subcultures view of women. The idea being that no matter how superpowered they are, or how socially empowered they may appear to be, the archetypes they represent are just a male sexual fantasy. In other words the ability to kick ass and stand up for themselves is an illusion because they can only do so in a way that appeals to the male audience that comic books are written for. It was a way of displaying his revulsion for the anime/cosplay/comic book subculture openly in a way he hoped would appeal to the very audience he was insulting.

All of this summarizes exactly why I never saw this movie; as soon as I realized the scenes actually shown in the trailer was fantasies etc... No thank you. :smallannoyed:

[SDF]

Really? ...it's probably at the lowest bottom of my list.

I don't know what anyone was expecting from this movie. It gave you EXACTLY what it advertised. It was a fun popcorn flick and if you took it too seriously you are doing it wrong. It isn't going to win any awards, but considering the rest of the films that came out this year it was the one I got the most enjoyment out of. Dragon Tattoo is a remake of a movie I've already seen, and I can't even think of many other narrative films from this year. It was mostly comic book characters and comedies. I found the comparison of Sucker Punch's protagonist to Faye Valentine (of all the fictional examples you can think of really?) in that article to be beyond flimsy. Not all films need to be deconstructed using feminist theory, certainly not Sucker Punch.

I totally get not liking the movie for what it was, but many of the arguments against it I've seen (like the posted article) are laughable to me.

[Killer Angel]

I don't know what anyone was expecting from this movie. It gave you EXACTLY what it advertised. It was a fun popcorn flick and if you took it too seriously you are doing it wrong.

I totally get not liking the movie for what it was, but many of the arguments against it I've seen (like the posted article) are laughable to me.

Well, if it can help, I didn't like it not for analysis like the ones in that article, but 'cause i was hoping in a fun popcorn flick, but to me it wasn't funny, neither entertaining, just boring.

edit: take Cap. America and Green Lantern. You watch 'em with the same expectations, but the results are different.

[Feytalist]

Thor was pretty good. I'm a fan of Kenneth Branagh, and I think the movie would've been lessened without his bombastic and slightly camp sensibilities.

The King's Speech was pretty darn good. I like low-key character studies, and both Firth and Rush were brilliant.

I wish I could hate The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. I generally hate remakes, and I enjoyed the original, but I must admit I liked this one as well. I appreciated that they stayed so close to the original film (not as much the book). I enjoy Fincher's style, and I adore Reznor and Ross, so the whole movie was just made to please me. And it did. Still like the Swedish-language original more, though.

Limitless was probably my favourite of the year. I dunno why, I just liked the premise, the pacing, the visuals. Oh, and Bradley Cooper. Of course.

Least favourite was Hesher. I usually like these kinds of meaningless, directionless movies, which is why I saw this one. But it did nothing for me. In fact, the whole movie's apathetic tone just irritated me.

[Maelstrom]

Worst film of 2011: Hobo with a Shotgun.

Best film of 2011: Hobo with a Shotgun.

Sooo...

Only film seen in 2011: Hobo with a Shotgun


?

[Tyndmyr]

Because action is inherently entertaining? Not everyone thinks that, you know. In general looking at the things I like, action is a fairly low priority compared to character interactions and portrayals. Of course, Hollywood is awful at that and has been quite effective in strangling the rest of the movie industry in all of the west, but that doesn't change the principle. Which is also a big part of why I don't watch many movies, there are few that cater to what I like without being awful and bad at it.

Now I know it isn't the case in Eldan's opinion about them, but it's still a valid point to make. Some people, like me, just don't like action movies and superhero movies and would prefer to not be considered weird for it.

I presume it isn't hatred of the genre...there's nothing wrong with that, but it's a bit odd to choose to hit up movies from the genre you hate.

It's like Sucker Punch. I saw the trailer, and it had awesome music while a WW2 bomber had a dogfight with a dragon. I realized I had to see that movie. Plot? Hell, nothing about that trailer said I needed to see it for the plot. I went there expecting awesome action scenes and great music. Got exactly what was advertised, and was happy. I'm more annoyed by trailers that promise things they don't deliver on(EVERY MOVIE WITH EVERY FUNNY LINE IN THE TRAILER, I HATE YOU).


I'm a bit tempted to change my best movie to Rango, and worst to Red State. Forgot about both of these movies, and both are...well deserving of the position.

[SlyGuyMcFly]

I'm assuming you know some of this but I'll go ahead anyway. Everything is grounded in reality till Baby Doll enters the 'orphanage', i.e. the asylum. Beginning right at that point you enter a fantasy world which everyone assumes is Baby Doll's. The fantasy action sequences are definitely hers during her 'dances' (which most people interpret as her voluntarily being raped by the staff to allow the other girls to get the items necessary for escape). But there are thoughts that the orphanage fantasy is actually Sweet Peas or even the orderlies (because if you're designing a fantasy world to escape how bad your current life is, why glorify and give power to a scumbag like oskar?). It's also been considered Baby Doll and Sweet Pea are the same person, she just has multiple personality disorder, that half the girls don't exist at all, etc. But in interviews with the director it's been mentioned the film is an indictment of geek subcultures view of women. The idea being that no matter how superpowered they are, or how socially empowered they may appear to be, the archetypes they represent are just a male sexual fantasy. In other words the ability to kick ass and stand up for themselves is an illusion because they can only do so in a way that appeals to the male audience that comic books are written for. It was a way of displaying his revulsion for the anime/cosplay/comic book subculture openly in a way he hoped would appeal to the very audience he was insulting.



Sucker Punch isn't only the worst movie of the year, it's the worst movie I've ever seen. It's not only offensively stupid, it also has the pretension to claim it's going for something intelligent. It marked, simply, how Zack Snyder has reached what success he's reached purely with good source material, and no natural talent. When a girl facing three samurai, each one armed with a different weapon, is boring, you're doing something wrong. I hated hated hated hated hated that stupid pathetic excuse for a film, and I absolutely despise pretension. Unwarranted pretension even more so.


I don't know what anyone was expecting from this movie. It gave you EXACTLY what it advertised. It was a fun popcorn flick and if you took it too seriously you are doing it wrong. It isn't going to win any awards, but considering the rest of the films that came out this year it was the one I got the most enjoyment out of. I found the comparison of Sucker Punch's protagonist to Faye Valentine (of all the fictional examples you can think of really?) in that article to be beyond flimsy. Not all films need to be deconstructed using feminist theory, certainly not Sucker Punch.

I totally get not liking the movie for what it was, but many of the arguments against it I've seen (like the posted article) are laughable to me.

I'm endlessly amused by the differing views on Sucker Punch. Me, I left the cinema having enjoyed the movie and yet feeling vaguely dirty about having enjoyed it. So I suscribe to the "action-slash-SFX-porn flick that judges you for enjoying it" view (i.e. what Bhu said) and say that Snyder did a very daring thing by making it. It's movie with depths that apparently a lot of people never even glimpse.

Then again, at other times I wonder if it really is as shallow as it initially looks and I'm just grasping at straws and seeing hidden depths where there are none.

However, I don't think it can be called bad. The variety and intensity of responses it elicits certainly suggest some degree of quality, and whichever way you slice it, the action scenes are gorgeous.

[Terraoblivion]

I presume it isn't hatred of the genre...there's nothing wrong with that, but it's a bit odd to choose to hit up movies from the genre you hate.

To a degree, but it's not uncommon to do so out of politeness or a desire to spend time with friends, even if the movie itself doesn't appeal that much to you. So at least in my experience it's not really that rare to watch movies you don't care that much for, simply because the social circumstances are what you're going for.

[comicshorse]

Best Film: Tinker, Tailor, ( yes its long and slow but its a slow burn of a movie with tension racking up. Plus a wonderful sense of place, an intelligent plot, a great script and a host of great actors all giving it their very best)

Honourable Mentions: Limitless, Black Swan and True Grit ( and its a re-make, miracles will never cease)


Worst Film :Priest ( you expect bad characterization in an action movie but one where the action scenes are terrible too. Absolutely nothing in this to redem it)

Dishonourable Mentions: The Thing, Columbiana and The Eagle

[SlyGuyMcFly]

Worst Film :Priest ( you expect bad characterization in an action movie but one where the action scenes are terrible too. Absolutely nothing in this to redem it)

I entirely agree. Absolutely terribad.

[HFool]

The Best? Probably Drive.

The Worst? Absolutely Hobo with a Shotgun.

[Karoht]

I'm assuming you know some of this but I'll go ahead anyway. Everything is grounded in reality till Baby Doll enters the 'orphanage', i.e. the asylum. Beginning right at that point you enter a fantasy world which everyone assumes is Baby Doll's. The fantasy action sequences are definitely hers during her 'dances' (which most people interpret as her voluntarily being raped by the staff to allow the other girls to get the items necessary for escape). But there are thoughts that the orphanage fantasy is actually Sweet Peas or even the orderlies (because if you're designing a fantasy world to escape how bad your current life is, why glorify and give power to a scumbag like oskar?). It's also been considered Baby Doll and Sweet Pea are the same person, she just has multiple personality disorder, that half the girls don't exist at all, etc. But in interviews with the director it's been mentioned the film is an indictment of geek subcultures view of women. The idea being that no matter how superpowered they are, or how socially empowered they may appear to be, the archetypes they represent are just a male sexual fantasy. In other words the ability to kick ass and stand up for themselves is an illusion because they can only do so in a way that appeals to the male audience that comic books are written for. It was a way of displaying his revulsion for the anime/cosplay/comic book subculture openly in a way he hoped would appeal to the very audience he was insulting.
So, he's making fun of men. Not women. Still not misogyny. Just pointing that out.

I rather liked how he skirted around overly sexualizing them. They intentionally never show off 'the dance' but just demonstrate that the audience that witnesses it is awestruck. That was clever. It was a lot of 'hint at but do not show' details, and I'm pretty sure that most audiences missed the point of such details.

Just more of my useless opinion under the spoiler.
I saw rather a lot of empowerment squeezed into a terrible nightmare of a scenario. Yes, it's fantasies, but aren't most fantasies empowering? Isn't that mostly the point? If they are other people's projections onto them and still empowering, that makes a statement, both about the empowerment and the projections. However, it makes a secondary statement about the kind of projections and the kind of empowerment. Sure she's fighting zombie soldiers all by herself, outnumbered and outgunned, but she's doing it in a highly sexualized (mostly by popular fetishism) outfit rather than something more appropriate or functional.

And if the whole thing is in her head?
The fantasies are an extrapolation of what the world expects her to be when positive, the asylum is an extrapolation of what the world expects her to be when negative (or punished).

Priest
I didn't realize it came out 2011. Yes, I have to agree, that film was bloody aweful. Karl Urban as a badass daywalking superpowered vampire villian ALMOST makes the film worth watching on it's own. But I've been a Karl Urban fan since LoTR so... make of that what you want.

[VanBuren]

I don't know what anyone was expecting from this movie. It gave you EXACTLY what it advertised. It was a fun popcorn flick and if you took it too seriously you are doing it wrong. It isn't going to win any awards, but considering the rest of the films that came out this year it was the one I got the most enjoyment out of. Dragon Tattoo is a remake of a movie I've already seen, and I can't even think of many other narrative films from this year. It was mostly comic book characters and comedies. I found the comparison of Sucker Punch's protagonist to Faye Valentine (of all the fictional examples you can think of really?) in that article to be beyond flimsy. Not all films need to be deconstructed using feminist theory, certainly not Sucker Punch.

I totally get not liking the movie for what it was, but many of the arguments against it I've seen (like the posted article) are laughable to me.

Just because a movie desires to be good on a shallow level (and I don't agree it even managed that. I don't remember the last time I was so bored) doesn't mean it cannot be disturbing on a much deeper level.

[Newman]

What's there not to like in Hobo With A Shotgun? It's an instant classic!

Also, I like how nobody cares about Super 8. I was all like "It was good. NEXT.". Formally perfect. Completely not-memorable.

[Karoht]

What's there not to like in Hobo With A Shotgun? It's an instant classic!

Also, I like how nobody cares about Super 8. I was all like "It was good. NEXT.". Formally perfect. Completely not-memorable.

When I heard that Super 8's ending was the biggest "well duh" in movie history, that kind of put me off.
I'll watch it some day, it's on my to-watch list. But it isn't exactly high priority right now.

[Axolotl]

It's not the most mysogynist film out there, but it's insidious because it tries to come across as empowering. Basically, just read this (http://www.slashfilm.com/sucker-punch-2/).Wow, there really isn't much to "get" about Sucker Punch but the writer of that article managed to miss it. Seriously it reads like someone argueing that We was pro-communism.

[Bhu]

So, he's making fun of men. Not women. Still not misogyny. Just pointing that out.


Is he not making fun of women? The girls own fantasy world they use to escape reality still forces them to participate in it as male sexual fantasies and they play along willingly, meaning they either enjoy being debased, or they fall back into the category of the female innocent who is anything but and willing to use sex as a weapon. Neither of those is a particularly positive portrayal of the female gender. I thought he was insulting the male audience for seeing women as nothing more than objects, but I also thought he was equally insulting the female characters because they so easily and willingly participate in something that demeans them by becoming those objects.

In a roundabout way he basically said we're all either whores or whoremongers regardless of gender. Either we're sadistic enough to be a victimizer, or we're placid enough to be a victim without there being much of a middle ground. The girls fighting in the action scenes are willing puppets in a show. If they want to continue living or avoid even worse treatment they have to allow themselves to be abused daily, and treated as less than human, implying they see rape as less horrifying than death. Whether or not the director realizes it he's implied that if you're a 'good' person, you lack willpower and become abused, and it's your own fault for allowing yourself to be taken advantage of because you could be an abuser yourself if you only had some guts. You're no longer 'good' because you were willing to cede morality for the enslavement necessary to ensure your survival.

But he clearly delineates the lines of power along gender lines. All of the films men are abusive in some way, except maybe the Wise Man, and he's dishonest in telling the girls to kill their opponents because they aren't human. The animated tie-in shows that their opponents used to be human, didn't willingly become what they were, and only participated hoping to die because it was their only escape. So you basically have a male father figure telling the girls it's okay to kill men, because with the exception of the mother dragon and the robots (who appear male anyway) all of their opponents are or were men. All of the women are portrayed as victims of some sort, even Dr. Gorsky. It takes her forever to build the nerve to report Blue, even though she's a doctor and he's just an orderly. She knows what he does to the girls. Blue also directly implies that Baby Doll is different than the others implying she's not just a victim, meaning he possibly recognizes a fellow predator. There are no 'good' people in this film.

[Karoht]

There are no 'good' people in this film.Making fun of both genders, of all members of the cast and audience, isn't misogyny specifically. He vilefies men FAR more than he does women. The men are mostly slimes with the exception of the Wise Man, the Wise Man empowers them to fight back, the women are victems who are striking back at (mostly) male enemies. Males and their actions are actively respulsive, not glorified, and some measure of vengence is extracted.
Sorry, maybe I'm missing a majorly key detail here, but females resisting males and resisting abuse from males and getting revenge for abuse doesn't exactly scream misogyny to me.

Warning: Contains trace amounts of misogyny
-might be more accurate a description.

[The Dark Fiddler]

Now, I can remember seeing all of three movies in theaters this year, so this is going to be a very easy decision for me, and I suppose the results aren't very surprising.

Worst Movie: The Tree Of Life Maybe this says more about me than the movie, but this was absolute garbage. I suppose some parts were visually well done (the... uh... creation of the universe scene), but the movie never explain anything. This wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing if it wasn't so obtuse and confusing for the sake of trying to be artsy (again, the creation of the universe scene: what felt like a half hour of pretty visuals and the dinosaurs). I didn't get what the movie was trying to tell me, I didn't feel enlightened, and, hell, I barely enjoyed making fun of it with my friend. Terrible all around.

Best Movie: The Muppets What could I possibly say about this movie? It was all but perfect. Now, until this movie, I'd never seen more than bits and pieces of Muppets anything, unless you count Sesame Street, so I didn't go in expecting anything in particular. And I came out amazed. It made me feel for the characters (yes, the Muppets), it tugged at my heartstrings (Pictures in My Head, anybody), and almost all of the jokes were spot-on. Combine all that with some catchy songs and you have a can't lose movie. The only thing I really would even consider complaining about is the ending; I really think the way they set it up to end was much better than the sudden happy ending out of nowhere.

Honorable Mention: The Lion King: 3D I didn't know whether to count this or not, since it's technically not a 2011 movie, but it would have gotten a pretty solid second place anyway. I mean, it's all but a classic, which is pretty impressive considering its age, and for a pretty good reason.

[VanBuren]

Making fun of both genders, of all members of the cast and audience, isn't misogyny specifically. He vilefies men FAR more than he does women. The men are mostly slimes with the exception of the Wise Man, the Wise Man empowers them to fight back, the women are victems who are striking back at (mostly) male enemies. Males and their actions are actively respulsive, not glorified, and some measure of vengence is extracted.
Sorry, maybe I'm missing a majorly key detail here, but females resisting males and resisting abuse from males and getting revenge for abuse doesn't exactly scream misogyny to me.

Warning: Contains trace amounts of misogyny
-might be more accurate a description.

He doesn't vilify the women, but he certainly doesn't empower them either, which is basically the core of this discussion.

[Bhu]

Making fun of both genders, of all members of the cast and audience, isn't misogyny specifically.

True. But directing hate at the male gender doesn't mean you aren't a misogynist as well. The enemy of your enemy is not necessarily your friend to paraphrase. Plus as a director/writer it allows you to later claim you aren't a misogynist by saying you insulted everyone equally. It's trying to have your cake and eat it to by deciding 'this could go either way and piss people off, so I may as well set myself up to have an out when that happens.' The violent revenge against men is supposed to be reassuring to make the audience believe it's a moral tale while cynically flaunting the idea that the easiest way for women to empower themselves is to go out and violently confront their opponents in an amoral stereotype of male behavior.



He vilefies men FAR more than he does women. The men are mostly slimes with the exception of the Wise Man, the Wise Man empowers them to fight back, the women are victems who are striking back at (mostly) male enemies. Males and their actions are actively respulsive, not glorified, and some measure of vengence is extracted.

There are really only three male characters with any development. The man who commits Baby Doll is a plot device meant to introduce the story more than he is a person. So that leaves us with the High Roller, the Wise Man, and Blue.

We'll start with the Wise Man, the only figment in the fantasy that moves from Baby Doll to Sweet Pea, which is why some believe they are one and the same person (or that his appearance at the end implies it's still a fantasy world). Watching the film it's not as obvious, but if you watch the animated tie-in's, it's quite obvious the Wise Man is either uninformed, misinformed, or a lying bastard. Their opponents aren't just faceless nothings they can mow down guiltlessly. The obvious explanation for that (which could be wrong since it is obvious) is that he's a facilitator. The audience wants to see the victim get some measure of revenge, and the faceless hordes are perfect stand-in's. You just have to get the girls (and the audience) to believe murdering them is okay because "they aren't human". This allows them to murder guilt-free, and allows the audience to indulge it's fantasies (revenge by proxy on male victimizers for the women, scantily clad sex objects kicking ass for the men). And who is it that tells the girls it's okay to murder? Who is it that allows them to empower themselves by acting out as fetish archetypes that appeal to men? A man. Whether or not the director intends it he has implied two things:

1: The girls needed male help to become empowered because they couldn't do it on their own.

2: The girls are hopelessly naive in believing the first man they run across who seems to know what he's talking about and tells them what they want to hear.

In other words it's saying women are gullible and easily manipulated if you just know what to say. If the Wise Man is willing to lie to get them to kill, he's taking advantage of them as much as the orderlies are, just in a different way. But he has no orphanage world opposite. He lives in Baby Doll's head. Which means in real life the one prompting the other girls to act out the sexual fantasies of other men for her own benefit is Baby Doll. Assuming there are other girls and she doesn't just suffer from multiple personality disorder. If that's not the case and there are other girls, it's saying that sex is a weapon women willingly use against men by default, and men need to consider them enemies because of it. It's excusing mistreatment of women by saying "well hey, they were gonna screw me over eventually anyway so why not get mine before they kill me?" Cynically implying all human beings are at least selfish, if not actively evil, and that SweetPea/Baby Doll is taken to safety by the Wise Man as a reward for participating in the events that allowed the other girls to be used and discarded by men. If Baby Doll and Sweet Pea are the same person, SP living while Baby Doll sacrifices herself may be interpreted as her symbolically leaving that part of herself behind out of guilt, and hoping to start over. Or maybe just hiding it away in hopes she doesn't have to use it again.

Blue: Blue is glorified in his own sadistic way. He wears the best clothes, has the best lines, seems to have power over everyone he comes in contact with, and can pretty much do whatever the hell he wants with no repercussion. He's shown as having all the money, power, and control he wants and surrounded by beautiful women he pimps out at his whim, which is why some believe the orphanage is Blue's fantasy world to distract himself from what a powerless cringing scumbag he really is. Because really, if it's Baby Doll or Sweet Pea's fantasy, and Blue is the villain, why portray him as confident and powerful? Why not portray him as the petty fearful nobody he is in real life instead of a pimp in a fab suit? Blue also offers the only clues as to occasionally whats really going on via his comments, and seems to be the only one who realizes Baby Doll isn't an innocent waif, and in her way may be more dangerous than he is. Blue is just a small time predator who takes advantage of whatever comes his way who will eventually be squashed by a bigger or smarter predator. Baby Doll may be a psychopath, which is just enough to draw him in while simultaneously making him keep his distance because he isn't quite sure yet he has as much power over her as he supposes.

The High Roller: The High Roller coming to visit is simultaneously described as coming to take Baby Doll's non existent virginity, and the death of her soul via lobotomy. Depending on your point of view he's either her savior because she really has no other way out of this, or her damnation meant to coerce her into accepting her fate. Which still implies she needs a man to save her because she can't do it herself, or she can do it but might not be smart enough to do so if 'the right guy' comes along and tricks her.

Misogyny is usually defined as hatred of women, but it can also be defined as contempt, or a belief that women are inherently less capable of decision making or need male help in certain instances because they can't get by on their own. It doesn't have to be overt or obvious, and it should also be noted that it is not solely a male attitude. Women can be misogynists as well. If Baby Doll sees the others as pawns to be manipulated in a manner similar to the men around her, she's pretty much the same immoral creatures they are, she's just willing to sacrifice the girls for her own benefit as opposed to molesting them.

To sum it up, if you were a director and wanted to take a condescending shot at women, this film would be the perfect vehicle. It's vague, and very much open to interpretation, and deliberately contradicts itself no matter which interpretation you choose to believe, meaning you could be as misogynistic as you wanted to while simultaneously claiming otherwise because you weren't insulting just one gender and claimed you were instead insulting a subculture traditionally accused of mistreating said gender. Sort of like giving everyone on all sides the finger while apologizing to them all at the same time and saying 'no, no, I'm only insulting those people, it just looks like I'm insulting you because I used some misdirection.'

So whether or not it's mysoginist really kind of depends on several things, and I doubt the director will be honestly explaining them anytime soon.

My apologies for the wall o' text.

[Newman]

^That was a GOOD wall-o-text. The trouble with moral issues is that you often don't notice them until someone points them out, especially if you're in a position of privilege. As a male, I tend to not-notice things that retrospectively were right in front of my head the whole time.

But why "non-existent virginity"? How do you know that?

And why should those girls be male fetish fantasies? I mean, what's the appeal of the Action Girl, as opposed to the Action Hero? Why are the "amoral violent conflict-resolution methods" male-specific (http://thepunchlineismachismo.com/archives/84)?




In a roundabout way he basically said we're all either whores or whoremongers regardless of gender. Either we're sadistic enough to be a victimizer, or we're placid enough to be a victim without there being much of a middle ground. The girls fighting in the action scenes are willing puppets in a show. If they want to continue living or avoid even worse treatment they have to allow themselves to be abused daily, and treated as less than human, implying they see rape as less horrifying than death. Whether or not the director realizes it he's implied that if you're a 'good' person, you lack willpower and become abused, and it's your own fault for allowing yourself to be taken advantage of because you could be an abuser yourself if you only had some guts. You're no longer 'good' because you were willing to cede morality for the enslavement necessary to ensure your survival.


Think of changing the following variables:

Flip the genders of the orderly, the doctor, the cook, the Wise Man... in any combination you like
Add some characters who refuse to be vilified no matter the cost, and who keep their integrity to the end.
Add some characters who refuse to vilify others, and are willing to pay the price for that.

[Bhu]

^That was a GOOD wall-o-text. The trouble with moral issues is that you often don't notice them until someone points them out, especially if you're in a position of privilege. As a male, I tend to not-notice things that retrospectively were right in front of my head the whole time.

But why "non-existent virginity"? How do you know that?


Blue calls attention to it as do several other things. Baby Dolls 'dances' imply one of two things, both of which are sexual acts, only one of which is consensual (which I wont get into here because I obviously can't), and she's supposed to be good enough at it that it literally hypnotizes anyone in the room. That implies skill, which implies experience.

Her stepfather is an abusive pedophile who goes after her younger sister. That Baby Doll knows he's a pedophile implies he's likely at least tried to previously molest her whether he was successful or not.

It's implied Blue has molested several of the girls in the asylum, all of whom may be separate personalities of Baby Doll. He even makes remark about the fact that everyone gets to play with his toys except him, lamenting the fact that he doesn't get to make use of the girls he pimps out as often as he'd like too. The idea of Baby Doll's virginity being saved for the High Roller is a red herring. She's being left untouched because she's high profile, and Blue can't afford for his little operation to be exposed. Plus he suspects Baby Dolls true nature and while that attracts him it simultaneously repels him because he realizes she has multiple personalities from her abuse by the orderlies and their customers, and she may be a psychotic whose gone past the point of no return. He wants her, but until she's been lobotomized she isn't safe.


There's also another theory but it's so twisted I have a hard time giving it any credence and there's no way i could discuss it on gitp.


And why should those girls be male fetish fantasies? I mean, what's the appeal of the Action Girl, as opposed to the Action Hero? Why are the "amoral violent conflict-resolution methods male-specific" ?

The first 2 questions I can't really answer without specifically going into a sexual fetish (es), which isn't gonna happen here (at least not without the mods clubbing me like a baby seal).

Amoral violence is a stereotype of male behavior in fiction which never used to be applied to female characters. It was used at times to imply men were more savage than women, but also that women were 'weaker'. "Kill them all and let God sort them out" was a response that appealed to some men because it was a revenge fantasy which allowed them to break the rules of society. Somebody wronged you? Go on a massive killing spree to get revenge taking out the bad guy and virtually everything in your path. Since bad girls became big in 90's comics, female characters suddenly began displaying this archetype as well, all of them sexually provocative, most of them designed to appeal to men, not women. Bloody revenge fantasies with dozens of corpses do not appear to appeal to the female mindset (or at least they haven't in the past) based on one important criteria: Nobody's been able to sell it to them. The majority of the audience by far for violent revenge films are men. And most revenge tales have little to do with conventional morality. They imply that murder and torture are acceptable and justifiable when someone has done something to you or a loved one, and that using them doesn't make you as much of a monster as the person you're fighting.

Crap its 7 am. I gotta go, I shouldve been asleep hours ago.

Will maybe try taking this up again later.

[Avilan the Grey]

And why should those girls be male fetish fantasies? I mean, what's the appeal of the Action Girl, as opposed to the Action Hero?

Because they are "girls"? To me the answer is so obvious I have a hard time understanding the need for the question?

Heck I love action girls. If you notice my preferred comic book reading it is 95% female super heroes.

[Krazzman]

Worst 4 in no particular order:
The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 1 (could rant all time about fairies...sucked although)
Green Lantern (although better dan CA:TfA)
Captain America: The first Avenger
Conan the Barbarian

Best 3 in no particular order:
Thor
X-Men: Magneto Wins (better title than first class...)
The Three Musketeers

Other good movies:
Season of the Witch
Drive Angry
Sucker Punch (genious Soundtrack)
Priest (too less action)
Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides
Real Steel

[Newman]

Blue calls attention to it as do several other things. Baby Dolls 'dances' imply one of two things, both of which are sexual acts, only one of which is consensual (which I wont get into here because I obviously can't), and she's supposed to be good enough at it that it literally hypnotizes anyone in the room. That implies skill, which implies experience.

Er, nope, no it doesn't. Heath Ledger plays a mesmerizing serial killer, doesn't mean he's got any experience slashing folks. It's called acting.


Her stepfather is an abusive pedophile who goes after her younger sister. That Baby Doll knows he's a pedophile implies he's likely at least tried to previously molest her whether he was successful or not. Whoever said he was a paedo? I thought he just wanted to kill them to have the inheritance for himself?


It's implied Blue has molested several of the girls in the asylum, all of whom may be separate personalities of Baby Doll. He even makes remark about the fact that everyone gets to play with his toys except him, lamenting the fact that he doesn't get to make use of the girls he pimps out as often as he'd like too. The idea of Baby Doll's virginity being saved for the High Roller is a red herring. She's being left untouched because she's high profile, and Blue can't afford for his little operation to be exposed. Plus he suspects Baby Dolls true nature and while that attracts him it simultaneously repels him because he realizes she has multiple personalities from her abuse by the orderlies and their customers, and she may be a psychotic whose gone past the point of no return. He wants her, but until she's been lobotomized she isn't safe.

I am getting very confused between Bordello Blue and Hospital Blue. I think they only overlap in very tiny ways.

Baby Doll isn't a psychopath, she's just incredibly stupid, and so are her friends. Then again, she's very young (eighteen?) and young people tend to be stupid and impulsive, regardless of IQ.


Amoral violence is a stereotype of male behavior in fiction which never used to be applied to female characters. It was used at times to imply men were more savage than women, but also that women were 'weaker'. "Kill them all and let God sort them out" was a response that appealed to some men because it was a revenge fantasy which allowed them to break the rules of society. Somebody wronged you? Go on a massive killing spree to get revenge taking out the bad guy and virtually everything in your path. Since bad girls became big in 90's comics, female characters suddenly began displaying this archetype as well, all of them sexually provocative, most of them designed to appeal to men, not women. Bloody revenge fantasies with dozens of corpses do not appear to appeal to the female mindset (or at least they haven't in the past) based on one important criteria: Nobody's been able to sell it to them. The majority of the audience by far for violent revenge films are men. And most revenge tales have little to do with conventional morality. They imply that murder and torture are acceptable and justifiable when someone has done something to you or a loved one, and that using them doesn't make you as much of a monster as the person you're fighting.


I dunno, ever heard of "The Girl With The Dragon Tatoo"? Yeah, girls like her a lot. The thirst for violent retribution exists, it's just that it hasn't been expressed to girls in terms they think are supposed to apply to them.


Because they are "girls"? To me the answer is so obvious I have a hard time understanding the need for the question?


I mean "isn't it the same when girls are all drooling over the muscly oiled action boys? Don't you know what the main appeal of 300 was, for the girls? Nay, for everyone? Hint: it wasn't the persian orc samurais.

How far can we go talking about sex, sexual fetishes, etc. here?

[Avilan the Grey]

Er, nope, no it doesn't. Heath Ledger plays a mesmerizing serial killer, doesn't mean he's got any experience slashing folks. It's called acting.

In this case I definitely agree with Bhu; we are talking about different kinds of "experience" here.

[Newman]

Experience is still experience. You don't need to have ****ed with anymeone to understand, and express, the emotions of sensuousness, pain, desire, shame, disgust, violence, lust, hunger, fear, tenderness, melancholy, and such that make the ebb and flow of sex.

At the very least, you could say that "Yeah, but that's why they invented masturbation. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFgvBMhfSA0)"

[Avilan the Grey]

Experience is still experience. You don't need to have ****ed with anymeone to understand, and express, the emotions of sensuousness, pain, desire, shame, disgust, violence, lust, hunger, fear, tenderness, melancholy, and such that make the ebb and flow of sex."

Actually, sex tends to become much MUCH better with experience.

[Tyndmyr]

I think you're reading too much into it. The dance scenes are clearly in the fantasy, and people frequently see themselves as more experienced/badass/whatever in their fantasies.

Drawing conclusions based on that is fairly suspect...

[Maxios]

Best Superhero Fillm: Captain America
Worst Superhero Film: Green Latern

Best Comedy Film: Tough choice between Hangover 2 and Just go With it.
Worst Comedy Film: Well, the only comedy movies I've seen from this year were the two above, and they were both good...

[Newman]

Actually, sex tends to become much MUCH better with experience.

We're talking about dancing here.

As for the fantasy, it's not clear whose fantasy it is, nor what elements of that reality correspond to what elements from level zero reality. Heck, even level zero seems waaay too nightmarish and blue-filetered to look actually-real. I suspect a Matrix. As a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery.

http://cdn.bytequeeugosto.com.br/2009/03/smith-300x300.jpg

I SEE THIS THREAD HAS WILD VARIATIONS IN TASTE HERE.

Amazingly enough, most of the films we're dissing sold well enough. I haven't heard of any one that bombed. They takin' safe bets?

[AtlanteanTroll]

Screw the misogyny (hah!), Sucker Punch was bad because it ruined Sweet Dreams. I mean ... Yuck.

[Bhu]

How far can we go talking about sex, sexual fetishes, etc. here?


If we dont mind being banned we can discuss it all we want :smallsmile:





Er, nope, no it doesn't. Heath Ledger plays a mesmerizing serial killer, doesn't mean he's got any experience slashing folks. It's called acting.

Remember the dancing is considered to be a euphemism for sex. Either everyone is staring because it's non-consensual, or they're staring because she's over the top good at it. Both of these instances mean she's no longer a virgin. There's a third possibility resulting in her possibly keeping her virginity but it's too explicit to discuss here.




Whoever said he was a paedo? I thought he just wanted to kill them to have the inheritance for himself?

Did you watch the cut or the uncut version?





Baby Doll isn't a psychopath, she's just incredibly stupid, and so are her friends. Then again, she's very young (eighteen?) and young people tend to be stupid and impulsive, regardless of IQ.

She's 20. Her being a psycopath depends on which of the many interpretations of the film are true. If she is the Wise Man, and she's willing to manipulate others into committing murder for her, or doesn't consider other people to be 'human' and therefore okay to murder she fits one of the the classic psychopath definitions.

If she has multiple personality disorder (or at least a split personality with sweet pea), it's quite possible she's a psychotic instead. Because if the other girls aren't real they're hallucinations, the explanation for which is most likely psychosis.




I dunno, ever heard of "The Girl With The Dragon Tatoo"? Yeah, girls like her a lot. The thirst for violent retribution exists, it's just that it hasn't been expressed to girls in terms they think are supposed to apply to them.

You'll remember what i said about violent murderous women being a more recent trope. Before the 90's you don't see it nearly as much, and the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is from the 2000's. Preferred fantasies vary from one generation to the next, and as gender lines continue to blur a little, women can now be free to indulge in a taste for violence more without there being societal prejudice against them for doing so. When I was a kid in school people would have reacted in horror to such a thing (or maybe it's just because i live in the midwest).




I mean "isn't it the same when girls are all drooling over the muscly oiled action boys? Don't you know what the main appeal of 300 was, for the girls? Nay, for everyone? Hint: it wasn't the persian orc samurais.

Women having sexual fantasies over men who are bad for them is a classic trope, and the reverse is the same for men. But they aren't lusting after the men/women because they are out getting revenge and murdering people (okay some arent), the appeal lies in the inherent danger of associating with such an individual.


We should prolly quit here before we get into trouble or distract the thread any more than it already has been. We could try it elsewhere like the BG forums if you want.

I do like the matrix comparison tho...

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

Man, I love the Eurythmics, and I thought their version of Sweet Dreams was awesome. Took a good song, and made it distinct from the original.

[Avilan the Grey]

Man, I love the Eurythmics, and I thought their version of Sweet Dreams was awesome. Took a good song, and made it distinct from the original.

Didn't hear this version, but my favorite version of Sweet Dreams is Manson's.

[SDF]

The one where Daisy Berkowitz absolutely rips off the riff from Crazy Train? I can't stand that one.

[Raistlin1040]

He's playing the same riff from the original Eurythmics song, just in a different octave and slower. If anyone ripped off Crazy Train, it was Eurythmics, not Marilyn Manson. Besides, the placement and tempo change the feel of the song significantly, otherwise you could argue that Feeding Fingers ripped off Coldplay just because they have some of the same notes. There's a difference between being kind of similar in terms of notes and being the exact same song (Compare Dani California with Mary Jane's Last Dance).

[thompur]

Best(in no particular order):

X-Men: First Class
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
The Debt
Moneyball
Melancholia
Hugo
The Artist

Worst:

Green Hornet
Battle: Los Angeles
Red Riding Hood
Young Adult

[Karoht]

@Green Hornet
I had a fun time with it, but I expected very little. I loved the campy Batman show from the 60's and the crossover episode with the Green Hornet was one of my favorites. So I expected camp and craziness, and mostly got what I expected.
That said, I'm not a fan of Seth Rogan, I've yet to find him funny, except for maybe a moment or two in Green Hornet.

I personally think an early 1900's-1930's interpretation of the Green Hornet could be really cool, but that is a whole other discussion.


@Green Lantern
I found myself intrigued, but not entertained. Pacing just felt slow. Action wasn't impressive, visuals were okay (Helicopter race car track thingy I thought was cool) but not great and not consistant. As someone who knew virtually nothing about Green Lantern other than a quick wiki search prior to seeing the film, I was really interested in how the Lantern Corps would play out. That's why I was intrigued, rather than entertained, and probably why I wasn't bored with it.


@Superhero Movies
The potential is there for them to not suck. In fact the potential is there for them to be really really cool if they could just ditch some of the hollywood formula/trope that some of them have. I think that's why I liked Captain America so much. There wasn't some cheesy speech at the end by Capt right before the final battle, about what it takes to be a real hero or something equally cliche. They'd made the point all the way through the movie, and did it largely without being preachy about it. So when Capt faces the impenetrable fortress of doom, there's no speech. There's a smirk (sorta) as he gets an idea, and bang, it cuts to the action.
I wasn't a Captain America fan at all. And then I saw the film.


@Avengers
Oh man, do I ever hope it doesn't suck. I think it has great potential, I really hope that potential is well utilized.
If they can make a film that makes Captain America cool to a non-fan,
If they can make Hawkeye into a decent looking character AND possibly even make him relevant alongside Iron Man and Thor and Cap, as both combat relevant and as a modern super hero,
If they can make the entire cast have the presence that Capt had in his film, that Thor had in his film, that Iron Man had in his film, both in combat and out,
Then it really might turn out well.
They made one heck of a flying leap.
Here's hoping Marvel Films/Disney can stick the landing.

[Cen]

Really, noone in this thread watched 'Drive'?

Because it's really the very best of what 2011 had to offer

[Zen Monkey]

I loved the campy Batman show from the 60's and the crossover episode with the Green Hornet was one of my favorites

Isn't that where Burt Ward's Robin fought Bruce Lee and came out ahead?
Blasphemy!

[The Glyphstone]

My list of 2011 films I saw, in order of enjoyment:

-Thor
-Harry Potter 7.2
-Real Steel

[Karoht]

Isn't that where Burt Ward's Robin fought Bruce Lee and came out ahead?
Blasphemy!
What? Bruce Lee lost a fight to Burt Ward? I'm going to have to check that out.


@Real Steel
Holy smokes, how could I forget that film. Yeah, definately in my top 10 for the year, maybe my top 5.

[Keld Denar]

I'm gonna take this time to go back and say that Drive was the worst highly rated movie of 2011. It was bad. 5 minutes of action, 85 minutes of awkward stares punctuated by about 5 lines of dialogue. Bad. I dunno why it was rated so high. If you want the full rant, check back through this archive for the thread.

Best movie? I'd almost have to say Harold and Kumar, simply because NPH is freakin epic.

[Bhu]

Really, noone in this thread watched 'Drive'?

Because it's really the very best of what 2011 had to offer

Not yet, I did think the lawsuit over it not being an action film was darn funny tho...

[Keld Denar]

Bhu, I'd be interested in what you and Dr Epic have to say about Drive. I personally throught it was miserable (in case you missed my post above, or the thread I posted my review in). Did I just miss something? I understand that the purpose of the movie was "dramatic tension", but it was just too mundane and awkward. It wasn't dramatic, it was choppy and boring. ESPECIALLY the elevator scene. I mean, where the heck did that come from?

I'll go dig up my old post on it, it was a lot more concise.

EDIT: Thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=216475)

Highlights:


Yea, I have this bad habit of going to really bad movies. This one was particularly bad. You could cut the awkward silence between characters with a knife. This movie was twice as long as it was required to be to tell the story, the rest of the time was just spent on emotionless closeups of the characters faces interspersed with 3 whole driving scenes and a couple of ridiculously gory and rather senseless moments. Really Ryan Gosling? I thought you were a better actor than this. I have totally lost respect for you in this movie. You were TERRIBAD.

One non-sequiter after another, long pauses in dialong, characters that make little sense and have unrealistic personalities. It seemed like they were trying to channel Crash, but failed because all of the characters were flat, the dialogue was flat, the plot was flat (not to mention full of holes), and even the rather sparse action was flat. Its like the movie couldn't decide what it wanted to be, and suffered from an identity crisis throughout the whole movie only to peter out with a whimper. Fail.

How did this movie get a 92 on Rotten Tomatoes? BLECH! (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/drive_2011/)


But...the awkward staring and silences. How do you explain that? There were so many moments where the camera image was simply held a little too long. Me and the 2 girls I saw it with couldn't help but laugh at the incredible emotionless awkwardness of it all. I get that they were trying to convey his character as someone who thinks thoroughly before he acts and all that, but it just drug out WAY too long.


I also made the mistake of watching this movie. I am in agreement with Keld that it was pretty awful. I like movies that take their time, like Westerns for instance. Movies filled with little to no dialogue and long shots to illustrate desolation. This was turned to 11 for no apparent reason beyond either filler or making me question if Gosling's character was supposed to be dimwitted. The people praising it must have watched a version either half as long or filled with characters doing... something, anything. Sitting in a car and staring off into space isn't doing something, it's wasting time.

This movie was one giant emotive pause.


And yet they portray him as supremely confident at the start of the movie. The way he handles himself over the phone. The whole "I'll give you a 5 minute window. Whatever happens in that 5 minute window, I'm yours. I don't carry a gun. You won't be able to reach me on this phone after this."

Its like something out of a spy movie. It just screams saavy, understanding, and proficient. And then the movie actually starts and we see timid, unsure, and ignorant. I think they swapped the first 5 minutes from another movie and forgot to tell the audience. It just doesn't fit.

Also, there is no character developement. The Driver doesn't learn. Doesn't devolope, doesn't triumph his awkwardness. The crap hits the fan. He tries to fix it. That makes it worse. He TRIES TO FIX IT AGAIN THE SAME WAY. Einstien once explained insanity as doing the same thing multiple times and expecting differing results.

I'm sorry. I see what they were TRYING to accomplish with this movie. I just think that they failed. Badly. And apparently I'm of the minority that thinks that this movie genuinely sucks. Its just so...bland.

[Triscuitable]

The best was Scott Pilgrim, the worst was the Green Lantern.

Scott Pilgrim was so awesome, it comes out every year in my head.

[Bhu]

Hi Keld. I haven't seen it yet. I've been thinking of it but so many people have told me how godawful it is I keep passing it up :smallredface:

My netflix queue also never seems to get below 500 movies too, so that may have a lil something to do with it...

[DraPrime]

1. I think my favorite movie of this year is the Ides of March. It doesn't bring especially new ideas to the table (who would have thought that politics can corrupt people?), but it cheered my cold cynical heart. It was an outstanding depiction of a person's downfall from an idealist to an utterly terrible person. I wish I could get more into it, but forum rules inhibit greater discussion of this movie.

2. A close second is Rise of the Planet of the Apes. The part where Caesar first yells "NO!" was awesome, and probably the high point of the movie. Overall, very well done. I hope many sequels are made.

3. The worst was undoubtedly Immortals. My goodness, was that a load of garbage. I'm willing to accept someone messing around with the myth of Theseus, and to make movie only loosely based on Greek mythology, but I really hated the visuals of this movie. I get that the director was trying to get a "unique" look going, but it just was an eyesore, and just came across as pretentious. Also, some of the things just ended up looking silly. Hyperion's weird helmet with some sort of lobster claw thing on top was downright goofy, as was the rebar being chewed by the Titans.

The gods also looked pretty preposterous. Zeus and Athena weren't too bad. The bigger problem was with Ares and Nepture. Ares...what is that strange sword-mohawk that you have on your head? And why do you look so effeminate when you're the god of war? You're supposed to represent the brutal and physical aspect of war. A pretty boy wearing weird headgear does not represent the brutality of war. Poseidon also was pretty ridiculous too. He had some sort of weird fish shaped thing constructed out of wire on top of his head.

Then there is the "romance". Theseus and the oracle really don't seem to have that much chemistry. They meet, do a couple things together, and then decide that now is a great time to break the oracle's vow of celibacy. They don't even feel like they like each other that much throughout the rest of the movie. A few people accuse them of being together, but no one seems to care that much that the oracle is no longer celibate, even though this is made to be a big deal earlier in the movie.

Finally, the battle underneath that huge wall. I don't get it. If I remember correctly, the bad guys come charging at the defenders as a rather messy and disorganized mob. "Cool", I thought, "the guys defending will probably form a phalanx or something to compensate for their smaller number, and use the bottleneck that the enemy has been forced into." Nope, the good guys also become a disorganized mess and meet the enemy on their own terms. How. Incredibly. Dumb.

I could rage on and on about this movie, but I think it suffices to say that it is just plain bad.

[Devonix]

She knows what he does to the girls. Blue also directly implies that Baby Doll is different than the others implying she's not just a victim, meaning he possibly recognizes a fellow predator. There are no 'good' people in this film.

The idea that doctor Gorski was involved in helping blu was just in Babydolls mind because she didn't belive that anyone was on her side except for people she made up in her own head.

But She doesn't know. part of whats going on is that babydoll lacks trust enough to tell the doctor whats going on. The moment she finds out she calls the athorities on him. At any time if Babydoll had said Anything to her then it would have been fixed.

Remember that the doctor was talking about how she hoped she could help her but Babydoll never opened up to her about ANYTHING

[Nomrom]

Well movies are 4 bucks here in town, so I saw a lot of them last year. I'm having a hard time remembering them all, but this thread has helped me out some.

Best
My favorite movie of the year was Warrior. I loved the story, thought the whole thing was shot very well, and the fighting was really good.

Second favorite was probably Hugo. Another very good story (well kinda story since it was based on a true story), and made even better by the fact I took a film history class last semester and learned all about that guy.

Worst

Every superhero movie not about the X-Men. I was excited about both Thor and Captain America and thought both were very disappointing. I didn't even expect Green Lantern to be good and was still disappointed.

[Brumski]

I can't believe so many people want to discuss SuckerPunch. My simple review

SuckerPunch = BOOOOOOOO!

[Liffguard]

Best
My favorite movie of the year was Warrior. I loved the story, thought the whole thing was shot very well, and the fighting was really good.

Yeah, Warrior was really good. I'm not sure if it was my favourite of the year, but definitely very good. It's a shame it didn't receive more attention than it did, especially since it seemed to garner good reviews.

[Bhu]

http://www.tarantino.info/2012/01/14/exclusive-quentin-tarantinos-favorite-films-of-2011-more/

tarantino's pics


Obviously he was on heavy drugs when he watched some of these...

[Jenna Garcia]

Best: Real Steel :smallcool:

Worst: Captain America :smalleek:

[Karoht]

Yeah, Real Steel was Real Good. I must have made that pun over 100 times now, and this will be my last. I swear.

[Surrealistik]

Worst: Captain America :smalleek:

Finally someone else agrees with me. Felt like I was taking crazy pills (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DVAsmrwdtQ), Mugatu style.

[Reverent-One]

Finally someone else agrees with me. Felt like I was taking crazy pills (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DVAsmrwdtQ), Mugatu style.

You still are, it's just that Jenna is too. :smallwink:

[Avilan the Grey]

I saw the trailer for Real Steel and stayed the heck away from it.

Captain America was GREAT, though. :smallsmile:

[Karoht]

I saw the trailer for Real Steel and stayed the heck away from it.

Captain America was GREAT, though. :smallsmile:
I saw the trailers and thought Real Steel was going to be not good.
I had to drag friends to see it because no one believed me that it was worth watching.
All of them left the theatre wondering if they had seen the same film that the trailers had advertised.

The final fight could have used a bit more action/excitement and a bit less trading of blows, but otherwise the film was very very enjoyable.