What's the last movie you watched 2012

[Steven L Jordan]

Up
Been on a Disney/Pixar kick lately (still am, admittedly), so I picked up Up cheaply. Wow, that blew Brave away by a country mile. What an awesome film. As our Rob knows, I didn't quite manage to cry, but it is still an emotional ride. I really cannot... SQUIRREL!

My wife thought the opening sequence of UP was the saddest thing she'd seen in years.

Computer animated features have been great recently. The Ice Age and Madagascar series have delighted me for years.

[Loerwyn]

The first 20 minutes (or so) are some of the saddest I've seen. Pixar executed them beautifully. Ice Age? Well, yeah. Loved the first, second and third were pretty good (I think I've forgotten the second, but I did like the third quite a bit). Not seen the fourth yet, rather obviously. But I have got my mum a copy of it for Christmas. Madagascar, on the other hand? Seen the first, it was good but I've not sought out the second nor any of the related shorter films. Heard the third has a very unencouraging moment, but I'll probably get the boxset at some point. Oh, never seen Kung-Fu Panda. Really, I haven't.

As for continuing the Disney kick, I watched Mulan for the first time tonight. It wasn't quite as... progressive as I'd been lead to believe, but Mulan definitely is a progressive film for Disney. Protagonist of colour, no central focus on a love interest (though the end completely forgets that), rather worrying lyrics to some of the songs... I wasn't particularly pleased about some aspects, but on the whole it is a good film and it's good to see the trend continued, giving us Tangled and The Princess & The Frog, two films I have quite a bit of love for.

Now to wait for my Toy Story 1-3 boxset to arrive...

[Triceratops]

I really loved Tangled and thought is was done very well. The frying pan and the loyal horse stole the whole thing for me

[Loerwyn]

Pixar kick continued.

Toy Story 1, 2 & 3
Amazing series of films, even if they are let down a little by the continual redemption arcs that Woody goes through (one each film, at least). First is possibly the weakest, as the addition of Jessie really boosts the appeal and enjoyment of the films (at least for me). Thing is, the animation/lighting quality is poorest in the first yet it has absolutely no real impact at all. Second does some things that aren't really necessary or are overly convenient, third is... kinda dark. Yet I loved all three, especially the third (which I've seen just once now), which is SO sad and heartbreaking, yet optimistic. Oh, and it has the best intro ever (okay, maybe a close second to Up).

One thing I noticed was the supremely healthy selection of toys that Andy (and in the third, Bonnie) has. In a time where toys are marketed extremely strongly based on arbitrary gender barriers, it's so refreshing to see a boy with some "not boy" toys (Ms. Potato Head, a Bo Peep lamp, though that's arguably Molly's?), and in the third to see Bonnie playing equally happy with action figures and dolls.

Oh, they're amazing films

[Teresa Edgerton]

The Hobbit! I wasn't so obsessive that I staggered out of bed at an early hour to see the first showing, but my husband and I did buy advance tickets for this afternoon.

I've been telling myself that I would just view it as another story and not let myself be upset by any changes. It turned out, that wasn't a problem. There were changes, but I was OK with them.

There were a number of places where they spoke lines that were straight out of the book (although not always in the book straight out of that character's mouth) and of course I loved that. Loved the scenery, loved the sets (some of which were familiar). The acting was good. The 3D was very well done. The 48fps was wonderful; everything looked so clear and real. The music was largely taken from LOTR (Hobbit themes, Elves, moth and eagles), but there was a nice theme for the Dwarves.

All of this sounds pretty lukewarm, but putting it all together I had a very good time.

[Siberian]

I didn't expect much from the Hobbit. I'm far from Tolkien purist. I liked FOTR but really hated TTT and ROTK for all the stupid and unnecessary changes to the plot and characters. So the first part of The Hobbit ended up closer to FOTR for me but too damned long. A lot of scenes dragged and connections to LOTR felt tacked on. The battles felt like a video game and lacked tension. Playing up Thorin as a standin for Aragorn didn't really work for me.

On a plus side, Martin Freeman is great as Bilbo (unlike Elijah Wood as Frodo) and dwarves as a whole was a good bunch - but did they need to make a comic relief out of them again?

The major failing of the entire undertaking is that they desperately tried to make it as epic as LOTR instead of concentrating on Bilbo's journey - which is an emotional core of the book and the reason why it's still relevant today after so many decades. No offense to the screenwriters but they just can't write as well as Tolkien. All they can come up with is Hollywood cliches.

[Loerwyn]

but did they need to make a comic relief out of them again?

I could be wrong, but that was part of their purpose in The Hobbit.

Anyhoo, I've just watched one of the biggest sci-fi films of 2012 - Prometheus

It's 50% good, 50% WHY SERIOUSLY WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON WHY. It starts off with some brilliant acting by Fassbender, then we have some good build up and stuff, but after the halfway mark we go back to some sort of hybrid of Alien and The Thing, including the Obligatory Lady Running Around In Her Undies scenes. At times it seemed to be violent and 'gross' just for the shock factor, and... yeah. I don't know. It's like Ridley Scott and the other filmmakers were replaced by Wes Anderson, because all the 'action' scenes seemed to just be swaps from the early Resident Evil films. And there were times where I was almost shouting at the screen because it was So Obviously Faked For Dramatic Effect But They REALLY Didn't Consider How It Would Look (there's a certain scene towards the end which is almost like an Indiana Jones film - it's that scene that really got me). I think a few things were overlooked, too, which made aspects unbelievable or just look sloppy, and someone really needs to stop with the phallic imagery.

The casting? Mostly great. Mostly. Guy Pierce was a complete miscast, though. The Old Man Make-Up SUCKED, it didn't fit in at all, and yeah. He might have moved correctly, but his face gave everything away. And Idris Elba really needed to drop that bloody awful accent. But I mean there was that guy who played Prime in an episode of The IT Crowd, he was good, Theron was alright, the geologist was kinda cool, Fassbender was excellent and I think Rapace stole the show, even if there were moments where redubbing was a little obvious.

As a brainless watch, it's pretty good. But I think the more you look into it? Eh, maybe not. It's like it should have been made in the '70s.

[Siberian]

I could be wrong, but that was part of their purpose in The Hobbit.

I'm referring to their table manners. Or, rather, lack of them. I'm pretty sure that's not what Tolkien had in mind.

[Teresa Edgerton]

The major failing of the entire undertaking is that they desperately tried to make it as epic as LOTR

I agree with you there. I'm resigned to the fact that they think they have to, but it's never going to happen unless they throw out most of the story and write dozens of new scenes, and I don't imagine for a second that they will go that far.

[Loerwyn]

I'm referring to their table manners. Or, rather, lack of them. I'm pretty sure that's not what Tolkien had in mind.

What Tolkien had in mind isn't really important, because - as is discussed in this link by our own Werthead - Tolkien wanted people to interpret it their own way. In the movies, we see Peter Jackson's interpretation, and I think that's what Tolkien would have wanted, whether he would have enjoyed them or not.

[Siberian]

What Tolkien had in mind isn't really important, because - as is discussed in this link by our own Werthead - Tolkien wanted people to interpret it their own way. In the movies, we see Peter Jackson's interpretation, and I think that's what Tolkien would have wanted, whether he would have enjoyed them or not.

Making polite guests into comic reliefs who act like d-bags is just poor taste that can't be excused by "interpretation" (same goes for dwarf tossing and other crap like that in LOTR).

[algernoninc]

I prefered Cloud Atlas to the Hobbitt for this evening outing. I loved it, despite a lot of changes to the original story. I understand how difficult it was to translate such a complex, concept driven story, and it was generally a success. I wonder though if the message was clear enough for people who haven't read the David Mitchell story. My only major complaint is about the Somni-451 segment, which was full of car chases, gun fights and explosions, and as a general observation I wonder what it says about the attention span of the modern viewer that the six stories were broken into about 50 pieces each instead of the 2 halves that were chosen for the book.

Other movies discussed here that I have recently watched, but left me lukewarm in praise were Skyfall and Prometheus - both fair entertainment but more concerned with special effects than story.

I saw some trailers in the opening of Cloud Atlas, they look good and I might check them out : Les Miserables musical, the new Die Hard and a black comedy with a shih-tzu and seven psychos.

[Loerwyn]

Other movies discussed here that I have recently watched, but left me lukewarm in praise were Skyfall and Prometheus - both fair entertainment but more concerned with special effects than story.

Can't speak for Skyfall, but that definitely seemed the case with Prometheus - and they weren't even that good. It looked stupid more often than not.

[DurzoBlint]

Wife and I went and watched The Hobbit this morning. Not a fan of Tolkien's books but I do enjoy Jackson's films and I think that The Hobbit was even better than LoTR. I don't like the fact it is split into 3 movies for pure profit, but I plan on finishing the series as they come out as the first one was a lot of fun. Think we say the 24fps 3D film.

[Loerwyn]

Rio

After watching quite a few good films, it was natural that I'd come across a bad one. And, well, Rio is the bad one. A very recent animated film, it's about a bird who gets... ah, sod it. It's Generic Story Flavour #15, with heaps of stereotypical situations and recycled jokes. On top of that, the main casting choices don't really work (sorry, but Jesse Eisenberg is not a great voice actor) or they white-wash (Anne Hathaway as a bird that's never left Brazil), and with the 'bad bird' the voice and visuals don't match though both fit in with the film. Except for the fact he's voiced by an actor from New Zealand, so go figure.

The plot is boring, the setting is boring (we'll set it in Brazil, more specifically Rio. What happens there? Oh, it's ALWAYS Carnivale, isn't it?), the characters are stereotyped and generic, and there's a rather dodgy race element with the humans (good guys = white/lighter skinned (except the kid), bad guys = darker skinned). It tried to be Pixar, it tried to be Dreamworks. But it had none of the soul, none of the talent, none of the... passion. It was, really, a Build Your Own CGI Film release. Oh, and wasn't the only one to notice that there's a bit too much detail in the animation at one point in the film.

It also caused the cancellation of a Pixar title, which is a sin.