Posts from Recently viewed movies. Auto-translated

I'm not interested in the personalities of 13 dwarves; 4 hobbits are enough for me.

But that's what creates the whole atmosphere.

I could barely tell Merry Brandybuck and Pippin Took apart until the end of the third movie.

How can you watch the movies so well?

But that's what creates the atmosphere.

There was nothing to fill 2/3 of the screen time with.

It just has a somewhat lengthy and drawn-out beginning (although I think the book was the same), but everything else is great.

And I watched "The Hobbit." The first thing I noticed was that the theater wasn't nearly as full as I expected, which surprised me. The second thing I noticed was that watching the 3D trailers was really good; it made me want to watch everything right away. The third thing: watching the movie in 3D wasn't great; my eyes and head started to ache, although I got used to it towards the middle of the film.
However: the landscapes are top-notch (who would doubt it?), the plot is decent (the screenwriter had some help, though 😉), the dwarves are charismatic, and the hedgehogs are too. The atmosphere is a bit tense; they could have made it easier, considering it's "The Hobbit," but they created intrigue!
There were a couple of good jokes throughout the movie, which was nice.
The downside: the music. I thought they would compose a new piece, but no, we had to listen to the same background music for the hundredth time, the one that always accompanied us in "The Lord of the Rings."
I would give it a 7/10; I think it deserves it.

For some reason, the cinema wasn't full, which surprised me.

Actually, yes, I was surprised too. I thought the hall would be packed; I bought tickets on Monday for Friday.

I had to listen to the same background music for the hundredth time, which always accompanied us in Lord of the Rings.

The film was made for Tolkien fans, and they would have enjoyed hearing familiar themes from Lord of the Rings.

Added after 19 hours and 27 minutes
I had the chance to go to "The Hobbit" again. I enjoyed it. I noticed the song at the end; it's pretty good. I need to download the soundtrack.

How do you manage to enjoy movies so much?

2 Imaris.
And can you yourself distinguish Meriadoc Brandybuck from Peregrin Took in your avatar? )))

On the left is Merry, on the right is Pippin. They are quite different.

On the contrary. It’s so easy.

Okay, you've convinced me :<

Added 2 minutes later
However, they are still different. In terms of their characters. At the beginning of the first film, they are easily mistaken for each other, but when Pippin starts committing his heroic blunders, Merry looks quite mature in comparison. Then, a clear distinction can be made between them.

Hobbit-eaters, hide yourselves. I watched Blade Runner, and I have to say it's a bit overrated, a retro-futuristic noir, but nevertheless, it's enjoyable because of its atmosphere and setting. In particular, I liked the architecture, which was completely unexpected. The Bradbury Building and Deckard's apartment deserve special praise. I won't talk about the influence and philosophical ideas, or it will sound like stale status updates on VKontakte. Instead, I'll add that young Harrison Ford gave an interesting performance. Overall, it's worth watching. Next, nothing seemed amiss, but to my dismay, I dug up Ridley Scott's Prometheus in his filmography. I had heard unflattering comments about this film before, and I have to say that most of them were justified during the viewing... However, if that was expected, I decided to focus on the directorial choices, after all, it's a sequel to "Alien." But what's even more surprising is that there wasn't much of an "Alien" in it, but rather Lawrence of Arabia! Seriously, I almost choked on my coffee when I realized that the fair-haired, androgynous man was diligently cosplaying this character throughout the film (the thing is, I missed the scene at the beginning where he's watching something about Lawrence). I have to say that this was an unexpected surprise. It remains a mystery whether this android was originally programmed to love the film, which one can guess from the similar appearance. However, in that case, the question arises about the nature of the robot. Was it reasonable to program him to be a movie character so that he would later, out of curiosity, add some unknown substance to the crew's drink? Or is this image of Lawrence something he acquired as a result of human experiences? In any case, I enjoyed watching this character clumsily quoting from the 1962 film. Ridley probably crammed in a bunch of other references that are inaccessible to ordinary mortals, but I was too lazy to look for them against the backdrop of the general gloom. So I turned it off halfway through and went to sleep.

Watched **1+1**, the original title is Intouchables – a French tragicomedy film from 2011, based on real events. I didn't think that a comedy film could be made from a plot about a disabled person. I liked it, although I would have added more time, as some moments didn't get enough attention.

I watched "Tai-Chi Master". The plot is mediocre, I'd give it a three out of five. But the fight scenes, showcasing Jet Li's rather unique wushu style, are impressive.

Twelve Angry Men is a very enjoyable film; I can recommend it to many, although there isn't much to say about it.
Catch Me If You Can is an absolute waste of two and a half hours. I wouldn't call this film bad; in its own way, it's okay, but the story is bland, unoriginal, and predictable. It would be fine for an hour and a half, but you expect much more from a two-and-a-half-hour film than just another "guys become friends, everything is fine, everyone is great, follow the script, and leave no room for reflection." Someone might argue that it was worth watching when it was released, but I don't consider such films to be of acceptable quality. It's very frustrating; I don't recommend it.
The Departed is also two and a half hours long and also features DiCaprio, but I would rate this film at least 8/10; it's simply an excellent film – tense, with a well-developed plot, logical, with vivid characters and an intriguing story, and also with Dropkick Murphys in the soundtrack. I liked it very much.
Dog Day Afternoon (I don't know the Russian title) is a depressing film, and it's drawn out, which, however, is due to the concept of its plot. It's quite good, but only worth watching once, and probably not everyone will be able to handle it.

To posts #762, #763, and #765 on page 51 (I just read them now).
First, a simple piece of advice: before watching a movie, take the time to find out at least the basics about it! Everyone has access to the internet, so why not use it?! I recommend the most authoritative film website in the Russian-speaking internet: Kinopoisk.ru. It's the largest catalog of films with information about them, trailers, ratings, reviews... Why should you do this? To avoid watching a bad movie, wasting your money and time, and ruining your mood for a long time! I always research a movie to decide if I want to watch it. This way, I've saved myself a lot of time. Considering that I have the opportunity to download many different movies, this is really important.
Now, I can provide some clarification about "Prometheus." Here, too, you did yourself a disservice by not finding out anything about the movie before watching it. Information that Scott was going to film a prequel to "Alien" appeared as early as 2009. In early 2012, when the film was already made and in the preparation stage for release, lively discussions began on the internet. Interest in the film grew right up to its premiere; no other film last year was anticipated so much! Finally, it was released – and the forums erupted in flame wars, surpassing all previous ones in scale, including those surrounding "Avatar"! I say this with knowledge, as I participated in the discussion on the Eksler forum. And I have a lot of information about "Prometheus" and the discussions surrounding it.
First of all, the screenplay for the film was initially written by John Spaihts, and it was a "pure" prequel to "Alien." The screenplay was quite good (it's available now), but it required a much larger budget than the one that Fox gave Scott. The plot included underwater scenes in a flooded city, an orbital station, and a terraformed Mars where Weland himself was based. Therefore, another screenwriter was invited – Damon Lindelof, who removed several scenes from the screenplay, keeping almost all the most important episodes, and added a lot of his own, including the mysterious elements that he likes, which remained unexplained.
The main flaws of the film: many questions without answers and illogical behavior of some characters. Some things become clearer from watching the deleted scenes; unfortunately, a key, pivotal moment was ruthlessly cut: the attempt to talk to the last Engineer after he awakens. And there, Weland ordered David to say to the Engineer something like this: "Look at him (David). He is my creation. We are also Creators, we are gods, and gods do not die!" And on this basis, Weland wanted the Engineers to extend his life or even make him immortal; it was for this purpose that he organized this expedition, and the scientists were only "for show"; they were only needed by Weland to find the Engineers. Therefore, the expedition included random people from among the scientists.
The ending of "Prometheus" clearly hints that it will have a sequel. There, we will probably get answers to some of the questions that remained after "Prometheus." It is already known that Lindelof will not write the screenplay, so the next film should be more coherent and logical. All that remains is to wait 2-3 years...

Thanks for the feedback, but does this information change anything? In reality, the film is trash and not worth watching. One can only hope that they will learn from their mistakes.
Personally, I wouldn't recommend Kinopoisk as a platform for preparing to watch movies, as it's full of people who give everything they see a ten out of ten, although in the case of Prometheus, the abundance of contradictory and negative reviews is surprisingly pleasant. And in general, the statement "before watching any movie, don't be lazy and find out at least the basics about it" seems debatable to me. But that's just my opinion.
As for the "heap of questions without answers," I didn't have any questions at all, probably due to the limitations that prevent me from appreciating the depth of this masterpiece. The only question, "who are they and why are they doing this," will be revealed in subsequent parts of this очередная говнотрилогия (another piece of crap trilogy), in order to rake in money (in principle, I can't consider feeding the audience a single storyline bit by bit as intrigue or a mystery), and there are no other thoughts in the film at all.