Official RAZZIE® Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > FORUMS on 30th RAZZIES Choices > TWILIGHT SAGA: NEW MOON
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: a.k.a. I Was a Teen-Aged Were-Hunk...
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

a.k.a. I Was a Teen-Aged Were-Hunk...
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
movieman View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 23 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 220 		Post Options Post Options   Quote movieman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: a.k.a. I Was a Teen-Aged Were-Hunk...
    Posted: November 27 2009 at 10:32am
I just didn't get G.I. Joe. I didn't get its sense of humor, the story line,
none of it. I've heard from reviews that it helps to be familiar with the
whole world of G.I. Joe. Fine, I can accept that as an excuse. That still
doesn't justify the lame dialogue, flaccid acting, lame visual effects, and
cheap art direction.

So did I need to see it before viewing Watchmen and not after to
have a better mindset? I mean G.I. Joe doesn't even come close to
Watchmen, or even Trannies Too, because as much as I put down
Transformers, it at least wasn't boring. G.I. Joe is boring. In fact, if it
weren't for the fact that I saw G.I. Joe in theaters with the loud speakers
and stuff, I probably would have fallen asleep. At least that would have
have been more productive.
Back to Top
Michaels View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 12 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2848 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Michaels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 26 2009 at 11:44am

I also have a theory -- that "GI Joe" was like a puzzle that put together with pieces from several different puzzles. There were bits from a serious back-story, and characters, and bits from an action movie, and campy bits that were winks and nods to all the old slogans like "knowing is half the battle," "a real american hero," and "life-like hair and kung-fu grip." The filmmakers get an "A" for effort, for trying to make their film "somewhat" better than "Trannies 2" (at least there's no giant robot with testicles in "Joe") but the mixing and matching of all those pieces from different puzzles didn't make for a good final product...

"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)
Back to Top
saturnwatcher View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: July 14 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2577 		Post Options Post Options   Quote saturnwatcher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 26 2009 at 3:14am

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: I have this theory that the script for JOE was concocted by strapping a dozen monkeys into screening room chairs, forcing them to watch every cliche'd action movie of the last 20 years, and then turning those same twelve monkeys loose in a room full typewriters...although blaming them for that script may cast unfair aspersions on monekys' creative abilities!

 

It is even harder for the average ape to believe that he has descended from man.--H.L Menken
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken
Back to Top
Julianstark View Drop Down
Berry Important Member
Berry Important Member


Joined: October 14 2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 74 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Julianstark Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 25 2009 at 6:59pm

The CGI in both G.I. Joe and New Moon was horrible.

In the Joe, it looked like something from a PC game of the late 1980s/early 1990s. In the Moon, the CGI looked like a cut-and-paste job from a desktop computer-animated film!

 
For Your 2010 Razzie Consideration: The Bounty Hunter and Leap Year --
Check out my blog! Movies and Other Things
Back to Top
Michaels View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 12 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2848 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Michaels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 25 2009 at 2:41pm

Would you say the CGI in this was worse than the crap that "GI Joe" was trying to pass as quality CGI? Because GI Joe's CGI was on par with Gamecube graphics!

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Sadly, crappy though it was, the CGI wasn't the worst element of G.I. JOE, a movie which will definitely be listed all over our Nominating Ballot this year.

I have this theory that the script for JOE was concocted by strapping a dozen monkeys into screening room chairs, forcing them to watch every cliche'd action movie of the last 20 years, and then turning those same twelve monkeys loose in a room full typewriters...although blaming them for that script may cast unfair aspersions on monekys' creative abilities!

 
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)
Back to Top
moviewizguy View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: January 23 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2136 		Post Options Post Options   Quote moviewizguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 25 2009 at 11:00am

I thought they did a great job with the CGI. The bigger budget certainly helped this picture a lot.


Originally posted by deadguy76

I know I'm the only one who defends video games. I haven't seen the movie but I have seen the horrible CGI of Jacob turning into a giant wolf. UGHH!!! I've seen better graphics on Playstation 3 games!
Back to Top
deadguy76 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: July 15 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 905 		Post Options Post Options   Quote deadguy76 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 25 2009 at 9:38am
I know I'm the only one who defends video games. I haven't seen the movie but I have seen the horrible CGI of Jacob turning into a giant wolf. UGHH!!! I've seen better graphics on Playstation 3 games!
"Woody Allen, whatever his failings, does not make movies for morons. Most directors do. Of course, most directors are morons."

- Joe Queenan

http://www.myspace.com/deadguy76
Back to Top
Michaels View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 12 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2848 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Michaels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 25 2009 at 3:34am

Ah, see, he finally admits it!   

Originally posted by moviewizguy

Originally posted by Michaels

I'm pretty sure MWG's rating system is not of 1 to 10, but a 6 to 10 rating. That would explain A LOT.

Wow. That really would.

 
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)
Back to Top
saturnwatcher View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: July 14 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2577 		Post Options Post Options   Quote saturnwatcher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 24 2009 at 4:49pm

Evidently there are a dozen or so people, with a dreadfully immature sense of humor, who REALLY like this video.  

Originally posted by moat

Here's a You Tube LINK to watch video of a "Twi-Hard" reacting to the trailer for NEW MOON. The counter sez it's been viewed over 450,000 times...

 
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken
Back to Top
moviewizguy View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: January 23 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2136 		Post Options Post Options   Quote moviewizguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 24 2009 at 3:05pm

Wow. That really would.  

Originally posted by Michaels

I'm pretty sure MWG's rating system is not of 1 to 10, but a 6 to 10 rating. That would explain A LOT.
Back to Top
Michaels View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 12 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2848 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Michaels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 24 2009 at 1:47pm
I'm pretty sure MWG's rating system is not of 1 to 10, but a 6 to 10 rating. That would explain A LOT.
Back to Top
moat View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: January 10 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 117 		Post Options Post Options   Quote moat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 24 2009 at 10:23am

Here's a You Tube LINK to watch video of a "Twi-Hard" reacting to the trailer for NEW MOON. The counter sez it's been viewed over 450,000 times...

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Just to clarify -- While the person in the video does over-react (sometimes quite amusingly) the official RAZZIE position regarding the insulting responses posted below the video on You Tube is that we exist to make fun of bad movies...not to make fun of fans of bad movies. The "die fat cow/bitch" comments are over the top and un-necessarily vicious...

 
Back to Top
moviewizguy View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: January 23 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2136 		Post Options Post Options   Quote moviewizguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 24 2009 at 10:01am

I am "CAPABLE of rating a movie less than 6." I just don't post them here, since I'm limited to movies listed on this site. 

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Actually, moviewizguy, you are not limited to discussing (or bringing up for discussion) only movies already listed as Forum subjects. Here's a LINK to the appropriate place on our Forum to post your thoughts on movies other than those already listed.

Given your track record of defending the most heinous drek week-after-week, I must say: I look forward to seeing exactly WHAT you post...


 
Back to Top
dEd Grimley View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: July 31 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2024 		Post Options Post Options   Quote dEd Grimley Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 24 2009 at 8:34am
I truly wonder whether MWG is CAPABLE of rating a movie less than 6. And if he tries to say he thinks that Watchmen was less than a 6 to prove a point, I'm going to shoot a Hadoken across the country and pop him one in the chest.
-Iron helps us play-
Back to Top
Michaels View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 12 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2848 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Michaels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 23 2009 at 2:32pm
 MWG review ... no comment.
Back to Top
moviewizguy View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: January 23 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2136 		Post Options Post Options   Quote moviewizguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 23 2009 at 10:12am
After Bella recovers from the vampire attack that almost claimed her life, she looks to celebrate her birthday with Edward and his family. However, a minor accident during the festivities results in Bella's blood being shed, a sight that proves too intense for the Cullens, who decide to leave the town of Forks, Washington for Bella and Edward's sake. Initially heartbroken, Bella finds a form of comfort in reckless living, as well as an even-closer friendship with Jacob Black. Danger in different forms awaits.

I have to admit it. I enjoyed the first film, TWILIGHT, very much so. I'm a sentimental guy so I was swept away easily by the romance between Edward and Bella. To make it clear for anyone of you out there, the TWILIGHT series are not vampire movies. Instead, think of them as a ROMEO AND JULIET story WITH vampires. Some people like these kinds of things. Others don't. I'll try to refrain from saying only teenage girls would love this movie because when I went to see this movie, there were people between the ages of 2 months and 65 years old, half split with males and females. I guess the stereotype wasn't true after all.

You can automatically feel a huge difference between this and the first film. This film is definitely much more slower paced. While never boring, it's quite a drag since it's over two hours long. Although it starts off slow, the ball does get rolling after Edward leaves Bella by herself. Unfortunately, it's also much more moodier, but I guess teen relationships are like that, aren't they? On top of that, the story isn't really all that interesting. After all, it's mostly about Bella being depressed when Edward leaves her. The finale seemed a bit rushed too with little payoff.

However, all is not bad. Director Chris Weitz does a much better job in here than Catherine Hardwicke, giving the film a distinctive look in the title sequence alone. If you may remember, I complained that the first film had too low of a budget to make it look like a blockbuster like it is. However, the problem is quickly fixed since the budget is twice as large as the first, which helped make the film look less like a CW TV show than before. The special effects are put to good use here, especially for the werewolves, an addition that makes the story much more interesting. The score by Alexandre Desplat is really fantastic. See how much a bigger budget can help a movie?

Kristen Stewart does a great job in here as always. I think she grounds the movie to reality. Although Robert Pattinson is underused here, along with most of the case, he's good with the small amount of screen time he has. Taylor Lautner gets a much bigger role in here, which is fortunate not only for the Twihards out there but for everyone else too, because he makes the movie more interesting. As stated before, many of the cast members are underused. Remember Rachelle Lefevre, playing Victoria, the villain, who was part of the cliffhanger ending in the first film? Well, we see her for brief moments in here, totaling up her screen time for only seconds.

The story is much more moodier and less interesting in here, in my opinion, compared to the first. The characters are in here mostly to mope and be depressed because of a such complicated relationship. However, the technicality is much improved, from the cinematography to the score. Director Chris Weitz does his best here, along with the rest of the cast. It's a decent sequel to a good movie but it could have been much better. Maybe the screenwriter should cut out some unnecessary bits from the novels to make it more interesting. A little action wouldn't hurt, would it? Don't you just hate it when someone you love turns out to be a vampire? I think Bella needs a break. 6/10
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down