Rate the last film you watched out of 100 Page 2212

  • Deleted user 30 April 2013 11:36:12
    @Mola_Ram

    Oh yeah, me dur...
  • nickthegun 30 Apr 2013 11:36:48 73,520 posts
    Seen 8 minutes ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I think Raiders is pretty much the perfect action movie. Its absolutely non-stop but it doesnt wear you out, it has great characters, a good story and is well acted.

    I cant think of a single fault with it, really.
  • Mola_Ram 30 Apr 2013 11:49:07 17,727 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    I do quite like Temple of Doom (big surprise there). But I definitely agree with the "little bit racist" sentiments. The pulp novels that it probably draws from were likely a bit racist too, but that doesn't really excuse it.

    I think Crusade is the weakest of the original three (not even mentioning 4 here), but the bits with Connery were marvelous.
  • nickthegun 30 Apr 2013 11:50:27 73,520 posts
    Seen 8 minutes ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Its one of the few series that go 1>2>3, although 3 is no slouch.
  • Deleted user 30 April 2013 11:51:46
    nickthegun wrote:
    Its one of the few series that go 1>2>3, although 3 is no slouch.
    Isn't that the most common sequence?

    I guess it's usually 1>>>>2>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>3.
  • Dangerous_Dan 30 Apr 2013 11:56:09 2,390 posts
    Seen 3 years ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    It's pointless to argue anyone's personal preference, but I'd strongly disagree with describing Raiders as "the weakest". In what sense?
    I wouldn't say it's pointless to argue about personal preference. That's often what it comes down to. What one values more or less in a movie, compared to somebody else.

    From a detached point of view the first one is probably the best. That's not the reason why and how I rate a movie in this thread though, my personal view ofc.
  • JuanKerr 30 Apr 2013 11:56:45 37,708 posts
    Seen 3 months ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I used to like 2 when I was younger, but I watched it again recently and it hasn't aged very well at all. Also, Kate Capshaw is FUCKING annoying.
  • b0rk 30 Apr 2013 11:57:01 7,672 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Indy movies in order of awesomeness 3 > 1 >

    Temple of Doom doesn't even qualify because it is utter shit.
  • Dougs 30 Apr 2013 11:59:50 85,454 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 15 years ago
    1>>>>>>>>>>>>>>3>>2 imo. I agree that LC is essentially a hammy remake, but it does it bloody well. TOD has some great moments, but as JK says, it hasn't aged very well. Not much in between 2 and 3 though.
  • craigy Staff 30 Apr 2013 12:03:49 9,296 posts
    Seen 13 minutes ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    "Sheesh a naashee. Shee talkshh in her schleeep"
  • Mola_Ram 30 Apr 2013 12:05:21 17,727 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    "He schlipped on hish tea"
  • Deleted user 30 April 2013 12:06:15
    Dangerous_Dan wrote:
    It's pointless to argue anyone's personal preference, but I'd strongly disagree with describing Raiders as "the weakest". In what sense?
    I wouldn't say it's pointless to argue about personal preference. That's often what it comes down to. What one values more or less in a movie, compared to somebody else.

    From a detached point of view the first one is probably the best. That's not the reason why and how I rate a movie in this thread though, my personal view ofc.
    I'm not saying you can't argue opinions, but that's not quite the same as a personal preference. An opinion can be rationalised and swayed. A preference can be totally irrational.
  • Mola_Ram 30 Apr 2013 12:07:48 17,727 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Was that kid from The Goonies ever in anything else?
  • Mola_Ram 30 Apr 2013 12:08:22 17,727 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    LeoliansBro wrote:
    Mola_Ram wrote:
    "He schlipped on hish tea"
    That's Red October O_o
    I know. I just thought we were doing hilarious Sean Connery quotes in general.
  • Mr_Sleep 30 Apr 2013 12:21:57 21,689 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 16 years ago
    LeoliansBro wrote:
    Oh, and Temple of Doom is the weakest, partially because Nazis are better baddies.
    You should set about making a FPS to prove this truism.

    Edited by Mr_Sleep at 12:22:05 30-04-2013
  • nickthegun 30 Apr 2013 12:36:16 73,520 posts
    Seen 8 minutes ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    kalel wrote:
    nickthegun wrote:
    Its one of the few series that go 1>2>3, although 3 is no slouch.
    Isn't that the most common sequence?

    I guess it's usually 1>>>>2>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>3.
    I dunno. Its usually the difficult second album in a trilogy is the weakest.

    But all I can think of, ottomh, is BTTF and LOTR. Im sure there are more..
  • Deleted user 30 April 2013 12:39:08
    Wait, you think BTTF 3 is better than 2? Seriously??
  • Deleted user 30 April 2013 12:42:05
    Also slightly mental, but ok.
  • Dougs 30 Apr 2013 12:42:24 85,454 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 15 years ago
    I do, I love BTTF3. 2 was a bit OTT. And more T/FLAs in a sentence.
  • nickthegun 30 Apr 2013 12:43:41 73,520 posts
    Seen 8 minutes ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Yeah. BTTF 3 is a great western. BTTF 2 is a few half baked ideas and a eventually a retread of the first one. Three is much better than two by almost any yard stick.
  • Mola_Ram 30 Apr 2013 12:44:12 17,727 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    I thought 2 was the best of the BTTFs. Which doesn't seem to be the common opinion, but I thought it was absolute genius how the final action sequence was integrated with the first film. And I loved Future Biff.
  • Deleted user 30 April 2013 12:47:47
    I think BTTF2 is absolutely superb, but it doesn't end, which is a pretty significant fault. It basically can't be viewed in isolation, and that means 3 is effectively the second half of 2, and it's pretty shit in comparison.

    Alos BTTF2 has an unbelievably massive plot flaw even for a comedy time travel film, which I can never get over (the entire plot is grounded in a totally pointless exercice - "fixing" something that hasn't happened yet).

    The first is like Raiders a nearly perfect film. I can't fault anything about it.
  • Deleted user 30 April 2013 12:52:26
    Deckard1 wrote:
    You're right, two perfect 80's films.
    Spielberg is really a 70s director at heart though. That's why he was able to make quality films that bucked the trend of others in the 80s.
Log in or register to reply

Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.