• Xenforo is upgrading us to version 2.3.7 on Thursday Aug 14, 2025 at 01:00 AM BST. This upgrade includes several security fixes among other improvements. Expect a temporary downtime during this process. More info here

Movie Review Club.

BloodyWolverine

Superhero
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
5,492
Reaction score
1
Points
31
Ok here is a fun little thread i thaught of every 2-3 days i will select a movie and in the thread people wil post and rate or review the movie or give there opinion of it weither they liked or hated the film.
This is no tourny just a way to review old and newly released movies. I am open for movie suggestions any time. PM if wanna movie selected for SHH re or rereview.

Spiderman.

spiderman-movie-poster.jpg



At fist i didn't like the movie but over the years grew too be one of my most watched dvds and i simply think its one of the better movies in the last 20 years. Many say Spiderman 2 was teh best one but i say original still is pretty great. Anways i must say Raimi may have dropped the balle in Spiderman 3 but he has made a new comic classic like Burtons Batman.
8.5/10.
 
I fell in love with this movie the day I saw it in the theatres and went back 2 more times. Spider-Man is my favorite superhero so I may be a bit biased but I think Sam Raimi did a good job setting up the trilogy with this movie. Although, the CGI was a bit shoddy in some places and great in others. It also had some spectacular practical scenes along with Raimi's pioneering of the spider cam for swinging scenes. Wilhelm Dafoe easily stole the show with every scene he was in. All of that with a great score to boot makes this film a must see for anybody and one of the best superhero origin movies and franchises to date.

8/10
 
God, this was THE MOVIE of 2002 (well, at least until "The Two Towers" came out later that year). Hard to believe it was almost seven years ago. It's still one of the best superhero movies out there. Spider-Man is one of my favorite superheroes, and this movie really did the character justice. Raimi, Maguire, Dafoe, and even Dunst did a great job on the first one. The special effects were especially great. As far as how it stacks up against its sequel, I enjoy it just as much as the second one. Maybe even a little more just because this one started it all.

9/10
 
9/10. Sam Raimi could do no wrong.




fast forward 4 years later....

:(
 
9/10. Sam Raimi could do no wrong.




fast forward 4 years later....

:(

I still think "Spider-Man 3" gets unfairly **** on. Take away the dancing emo parts and you've got a decent movie.
 
Never liked this movie...

6-6.5/10...Just for Willem...
 
I remember I was a senior in highschool when this came out, what can I say. For the time, the effects were very good, the storyline followed the comics (even though they discarded the webshooters). The action was pretty cool, I would say this film pretty much raised the bar for Marvel films.
 
Without Spiderman and X-Men there would not be slews of comic book movies. In a way Iron Man wouldn't have gotten off the ground. Batman Begins and The Dark KNight could have happened for DC is a totally differant thing really but for Marvel and smaller comic bool films Spidy and X-men were pioneers.
 
It was okay. Spider-man has always been my favorite hero, but I can't stand the movies. Spidey never joked around enough, and I just hated the cinematography/colours used. The whole GG thing was real hokey - and it's a shame, since I think Dafoe is perfect casting. On that note, I hate tobey macguire - Topher Grave would have been much better. Macguire's lame, but not the right kind of lame. I never found myself rooting for him, just feeling ashamed that he was spidey. and for some reason he just looks really stocky and not lean enough.

That said, it's not terrible. It kept my attention and I don't hate it at all. It's been a while since I've seen it but a 7/10 seems about right.
 
The movie America needed after the gut punch of 9/11.
 
I really liked this movie: the effects, the performances and the story just came together beautifully for me, and to this day i enjoy watching it.

8.5/10
 
I'd give the movie 7/10

I liked the story, but there are things which bring it down. In consistant effects is one. Some things look like video games (reflections in Spidey's lenses), while other things look cartoony (bouncing on balloons). It's a shame, because shots like him dodging projectiles in the fire are top-notch.

Another thing which brings it down is flubs on the part of the director. There's a bit too much overacting, particularly from Kirsten. I always point to the converstion between Mary and Peter as an example. This blame should lie on Sam Raimi, not the actors. Another example is a lot of material with Norman Osbourn going insane.

Finally, there are some elements of the movie which just make me groan out load. Unity Day Festival? That had to be the lamest thing I've ever seen in a movie.

These things don't ruin the movie for me, but they certainly bring it down from a 9/10.
 
We can pretty much agree we loved Spiderman 1. I will select a new movie to review tomarrow. But we can also agree wasn't exactly perfect film.
 
I like this idea :up:

Spider-Man is a great movie and I still think one of the top 5 comic movies of all-time (I shift it and BB from 4th and 5th all the time...depends on my mood). Love Spider-Man's costume, the effects look great minus one or two shots, tells Spider-Man's origin very well, well acted, and just well done.

The only real complaint I have with the movie structurally is that after GG kills the board members of Oscorp, he has no real motivation. He wants power he says. He already has Oscorp again to himself. What is this power he's talking about? Criminal underworld boos? King of the world? I don't get it. However, Dafoe's Goblin makes me not really care about this flaw as I watch the movie. Cause he is just so awesome as the GG. Also, the NYers saving Spider-Man is kind of cheesy, but I get it.

It is a 10/10 for me on the enjoyment scale :up:
 
I liked it overall, I didn't particularly like the whole "This is my gift, this is my curse, this is my summing up of the movie for all the stupid people in the audience who might have missed thepoint" ending.

It was my favourite superhero movie ever... for two years.
 
8/10 A great film to start the franchise, shame Spider-man 3 damaged it.
 
Good start to the series, with some great moments and action. CGI is weak in places but overall the movies holds up with great performances and an awesome score by Danny Elfman. I don't like it nearly as much as SM2, although it beats the hell out of SM3 (which I'll hopefully never have to watch again).

7.5
 
Spiderman 4 gives me some hope of a proper spiderman ending.Its pretty clear Spiderman is well liked . I know its not been 3 days but i think i will select a new movie. Its easy to review a movie like spiderman for its was well liked but how easy is it to review a movie when people have mixed feelings about liking it or hating a film. Those make for much fun reviews and debates.


Star Wars Episode 1 Phantom Menace.


episodeI.jpg


Combat20C3A0203.jpg


Ok this movie i liked for this was this first movie i had seen at my local theator we had never had a movie theator until then. It last 10 years and was closed due to down sizing in theators and i go too the next theator over but its hold special memorys of my local area where i lived cause first theator experiance. Onto the movie its self it did not hold the magic of the other pervious films but i really liked the characters especiall QUI Gon. My real complaint is Darth Maul was not used enough for he could have been a good villian too kill of in AOTC at the begining. Also i did not like the look or a juice looking yoda so mt rating is 8/10 for entertainment value 7/10 film overall wise.
 
Last edited:
Oh the nerds were in a frenzy for this film. Star Wars Episode I marked the return to the beginning after a lengthy hiatus. This film tries to explain the origin of the classic baddy, Darth Vader, from the previous 3 installments. However, it doesn't do a very good job at it. The special effects weren't spectacular to me and it just oozed a sense of over doing it that was quite the opposite of the previous films. The stars of this movie were obviously Darth Maul and Qui Gon but unfortunately both were killed off. Darth Maul could have been the recurring villian for the next 3 films like Vader was in Episodes 4-6 but they instead chose to make Anakin's other side the true villian in Episodes 2 and 3 with various side villians like Dooku, Palpatine, and Grievous.

6/10
 
Last edited:
Only good scene was the fight...

5.5/10
 
Lucas may have problems as a director and writer, but I've always thought that those flaws are balanced by his great storytelling ability. The problem with "The Phantom Menace" is that he simply has no story to tell. The film merely adds an introductory chapter to a story that has already been told, and stretches it out into a two-hour movie. It is no accident that prequels of this kind are rare. They are very difficult to make properly. And apparently he's just not a sophisticated enough filmmaker to pull it off.

For one thing, this project is limited by the fact that anyone familiar with the first trilogy knows the story's outcome, and it therefore lacks some of the suspense associated with a gradually unfolding saga. More importantly, however, this situation leaves Lucas with very little freedom as a storyteller. It also encourages him to gloss over key events; because their outcome is a foregone conclusion, he forgets to bring them to life. Some could argue that the prequel trilogy is more about the destination...which I can understand. But I'm not so sure if that's enough to sway me.

For example, we know there will eventually be a romance between Anakin and Padme. So Lucas has the two characters meet here and--surprise, surprise--they seem to like each other. Their developing friendship isn't portrayed that clearly, and their motivations for becoming close aren't explained. Because Lucas fails to make scenes like these believable, we can't help being conscious of how he's manipulating the plot in his effort to connect the two trilogies. Another good example of this problem is Anakin's portrayal as a potential Jedi. There doesn't appear to be anything about this kid remotely out of the ordinary, even though the other characters keep talking like there is. Our only reason for thinking he's special is that the plot requires it.

If the story fails to be engaging, it is because we never see the important events. Lucas makes a fatal error in not showing what's happening on Naboo, the small planet whose capture is the focus of the plot. Numerous atrocities are supposedly being committed against the planet's inhabitants, but we only know about this because the characters on screen refer to the events, usually rather woodenly.

The deadpan performances are a problem in themselves, but they only highlight our lack of involvement in the story. Think of Han Solo sweating in fear, then think of the emotional vacuums passing for characters in this film. Whenever any of the characters do express emotion, as in the scene where Anakin and his mom part, it still seems awfully restrained. Somehow, Lucas manages to keep the emotional reactions of his characters to a minimum, which gives the film an almost mechanical feel.

It's true that "A New Hope" never showed Alderaan's inhabitants, but we still could feel the tragedy of the planet's destruction through the horrified reactions of Princess Leia and Obi Wan. Moreover, there were many other involving events which we witnessed directly, such as the slaying of rebels at the beginning; the capture and torture of the princess; and the murder of Luke's foster parents. Furthermore, the major plot elements were intriguing in and of themselves. They weren't there merely to show us how they were to be linked to later events, which seems to be the case with the prequels in abundance.

I suspect that Lucas was not as concerned in the first trilogy with what had to happen later in the story and was therefore able to focus his attention on the events at hand. The weakest segment was "Return of the Jedi," which had the task of bringing the story to an end. Only then did Lucas start to show signs of forcing plot points. In "The Phantom Menace," he gets so bogged down in the task of bringing his story from point A to point B that he ends up with only the bare bones of a plot, and none of it comes alive.

This is especially true of the characterization. In the old trilogy, characters like Yoda and Han reveal distinct personalities in their first few minutes on screen. The prequels go for more than two hours a piece and the characters, including the familiar ones, come off vague and nondescript. We aren't given much of a chance to experience their personalities in the way they interact. We must take Qui Gon's word for it when he describes Obi Wan as "headstrong." What's most odd is that the cartoons seem better developed than the humans. The scenes where Qui Gon negotiates with the birdlike slave-owner Watto are amusing and well-done--probably the movie's best scenes aside from the stunning action sequences--but they can't hold a candle to the constant interactions throughout the first trilogy.

One of the biggest reasons for this, I feel, is that with the original trilogy the outcome of success wasn't a certified thing. The actors felt the need to question Lucas (and Kershner and Marquand by extension) and they were able to humanize themselves as a result.

But with the prequels, which already had an established box office draw, the actors instead decide to follow Lucas' vision like drones.

One thing I cannot do is accuse the film of lacking creativity. The design of the creatures, the technologies, and the planets is impressive. Watching the film is sort of like reading a children's book that isn't very good but abounds with beautiful illustrations. There is certainly a "wow" factor in the movie's visuals, but the effect of it is short-lived.

I get irked when I hear fans talk as though the "Star Wars" movies were never about anything beyond special effects. While the inventive visuals are part of what made the originals so revolutionary, they're not what made the films so fun to watch. And in no way can they explain the trilogy's continuing popularity today. After all, many of the original effects look primitive by today's standards, and their novelty has certainly worn off. Only an enduring and compelling storyline could have allowed the first three films to become the classics they're almost universally acknowledged to be.

----

Wow, that was a little long in the tooth lol...I'll do my best to make these shorter with future films.

In short:

(5.5/10)
 
Storywise, this film is inconsistant with previous installments in the series. Qui-Gon training Obi-Won? I thought that was Yoda.

I think the Sith are a good idea. I thought the movie's effects and scenery were outstanding. The fight scene with Maul, Obi-Won, and Qui-Gon is fantastic. These make parts of the movie watchable.

However, the film is riddled with plot holes, poor dialogue, Jar Jar Binks, and annoying love between a child and a teen that is borderline creepy.

3.5/10...mostly cause it looks nice.
 
Darth Maul and Qui Gon werre amazing characters. Lucas should have Started 1,2,3 to start with a and used greater effects for 4,5,6 But tooo be honest likd the effects from 4,5,6 so i would liked them if used for 1,2,3.
Thats why 7/10 for me over all for the misuse of Qui Gon and Lord Maul.
 
Storywise, this film is inconsistant with previous installments in the series. Qui-Gon training Obi-Won? I thought that was Yoda.

I loved it when Kevin Smith addressed this via the 'Clerks' animated series when Randall questioned Lucas on the stand...:hehe:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"