Recent theatrical viewings

[Raffine]

THE UNBORN - Fairly standard posession horror flick full of cheap shock scares and plot holes aimed at the easily-screaming teen set. I hope Gary Oldman (playing a suspiciously Gentile Rabbi) and Jane Alexander got nice big paychecks.

However: It does get some major kudos from me for having an original Jewish-based take on the whole exorcist plot, and some of the 'haunted by a dybbuk' visuals are effective and unique.

Has there been another Jewish horror film since DER GOLEM (1920)?

[Rev. Powell]

Has there been another Jewish horror film since DER GOLEM (1920)?

YENTL (1983)?

Too obvious? 

[Raffine]

Has there been another Jewish horror film since DER GOLEM (1920)?

YENTL (1983)?

Too obvious? 

Oy vey - so we got a meshuggener comedian already? 

[Jim H]

Just saw Slumdog Millionaire.  Great film.  I highly recommend it.  Only downside is the print I saw had some annoying damage.  I can handle pretty heavy damage, but this had an annoying repeated pattern of rising horizontal lines for about a half hour of the film.

Still, real good film.

[Rev. Powell]

TIMECRIMES [LOS CRONOCRíMENES]:  Fleeing a chance encounter with a bandaged madman in the woods, a middle aged man finds himself inadvertently thrust backwards in time. One of the better plotted time-travel movies, but there's little that's truly cinematic about this four character, one setting movie (which would have made a great short story or play).  One selling point is that Bárbara Goenaga's boobies are a major plot point.  3.5/5.

[InformationGeek]

Very depressing on my count, but the last film I saw in the theaters was The Dark Knight.  I really need to get around to seeing another film in the theaters... maybe Watchmen or Night in the Museum 2?

[Rev. Powell]

Last weekend I took my nephews to see CORALINE:  A petulant little girl finds a parallel universe behind a hidden door in an old house, one where her parents are more attentive, her neighbors more fascinating, and the entire universe seems set up to pamper and delight her. She can stay there forever, but of course there's a catch--one that flips the movie from a fantasy to a genuine horror film in the third act. The art direction and animation is the star here, and 3-D the gimmick, but the story and scares are more than enough to make it more than eye candy for kiddies. 4/5

Edited to add rating

[Wag]

The last film I saw at the cinema was the Friday 13th remake - I wished I hadn't. I paid for a friend too, making my pain even worse.

Before that, it was Dark Knight, which I really liked. I liked it just as much on DVD too, but was sleep deprived on my first attempt at DVD viewing so I didn't make it all the way through.

[Torgo]

WATCHMEN  *** out of **** .  I posted this rating on the recent viewing thread but thought that I would post some actual thoughts here. While I know that this isn't director Zack Snyder's preferred version of the film (the theatrical cut runs 156 minutes while his director's cut to be released on dvd will be 190 minutes) as it stands this is probably the best  film version of the comic book that  we could have hoped for. It though has a bit of a tough time for a little while with finding its own rhythm but the second half finds the film finding its groove.  But that is more due to the strict adherence to the source material than the script itself. There are things and story structure elements that work much better in a novel or comic book in this case that won't work as well in a film.  Maybe once I see the full director's cut on dvd my rating might go up but as it stands Watchmen is a flawed but enjoyable adaptation of a seemingly unfilmable comic.

[Joe the Destroyer]

Just got back from the midnight showing of Watchmen, and all I can say is... wow.  They stayed pretty true to the comic, for the most part.  They made some changes, only one was really drastic, but it all works just the same in the end.  The rest were made to save time, which is fine.  I almost want to watch the movie again, actually.  Either that or read the comic, and since I have the full graphic novel here I may just do that. 

[Rev. Powell]

KNOWING: Astrophysics professor and skeptic John Koestler (Nicolas Cage) comes into possession of a series of numbers scrawled by a little girl 50 years ago that accurately predict major disasters, and only three prediction are left. Basically mindless (though pretentious) popcorn thriller that has a couple of "wow" visual moments, and a preposterous (though predictable) ending.  Roger Ebert gave it four stars, but I think he's either senile or has a serious man crush on director Alex Proyas.  Other critics gave it hell.  Neither camp is right  : the correct rating is 2.5/5.   

[metalmonster]

I Don't Go To Movie Theaters Too Often Because There's Usually Nothing Worth Seeing

But I Went To The Theater On Saturday To See MONSTERS VS. ALIENS

It Was Actually Pretty Good

[Hammock Rider]

I saw Adventureland over the weekend. It was better than I expected. It had some goofiness  but also tried to be kinda thoughtful. It wasn't over the top or excessivley wacky. In terms of balancing the humor found in real moments with teeage zaniness I'd rate it somewhere between oh I dunno maybe A Sure Thing and Breakfast Club.  I give it 3 1/2 out of 5 stars.

[Rev. Powell]

MONSTERS V. ALIENS: Commented on it in its own thread. 3.5/5.

WATCHMEN: In an alternate reality where the cold war rages, Nixon has served five terms and superheroes are integrated into the national security framework, the murder of the retired "Comedian" leads other ex-crimefighters to believe someone is targeting "masks" for extinction. Massively creative, smart, dark and twisted comic book spectacle features adulterous, sociopathic superheroes marauding through an intricate plot, and is definitely not for the kiddies.  4.5/5.  (I hadn't read the graphic novel and had no problem following it.  I was pleasantly surprised; I didn't expect to like it this much).

[MilkManPictures]

The Wrestler and Fast & Furious

Both awesome for different reasons.