The following films are possibly my four favorite films to come out of this decade. They are relatively close, I know, but are all amazing IMO. BTW, I'm not stating that these four are the better than yours, but I would like to hear your opinions on the following and how you would rank them amongst each other. The below listings are not in any order, here it goes.....
Casino Royale (2006) - Martin Campbell
Watchmen: Director's Cut (2009) - Zach Snyder
Inglorious Basterds (2009) - Quentin Tarantino
The Dark Knight (2008) - Christopher Nolan
I would give each film atleast a 9 on a scale of 10. I have only seen Inglorious Basterds once as I rented not more than two months. I clearly made a huge mistake missing out on it in the cinema. Unfortunately, I can't attest to have seeing Casino Royale either on the big screen. I have seen The Dark Knight three times at the cinema(once in IMAX, the other two in conventional cinemas) and I must say upfront NOTHING will ever top what The Dark Knight was able to do on a first viewing basis in that sold out IMAX screening on July 18, 2008 at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum in Washington D.C. That was a completely riveting experience. I literally left my seat after the end-credits, with pure adrenaline, shocked and in disbelief of what I just saw. Of course, now that 2010 is now here that feeling has well-over worn off and naturally don't get the same feeling when I re-watch the film today, but I can still remember it. I have never read Alan Moore's graphic novel but I was highly anticipating the release of Watchmen. Surprisingly, I left the theater with a sense of confusion of what to think. After having had a few nights to sleep on it I grew to the opinion that I felt it was an amazing film. When I bought the DC for it on dvd my opinion onlly grew for it.
How would you compare the acting done in all of the four films? Story? Music? Action? Cinematography? I believe all of the films end particularly well, atleast for me. They are all also "rather meaty" in their respective run times and each film(with the possible exception of TDK) has a great "lead" in Craig, Haley, and Pitt. Just as each film(with the possible exception Watchmen) have a great "standout" supporting character in Ledger, Waltz, and Green. Some even have more than one as Eckhart's performance rival that of Ledger's. The rest of the casts for each film are stellar and powerful.
I thought each film came with a unique twist of their own somewhere in the film. These four are just unique in my opinion in their ability for you to have fun watching them. They are all well directed, acted, and have a story to boot. They all look wonderful. Do dare my feelings? What do you have to say about them? In what order would you rank them?
If given the chance, there was nothing i would change about 'TDK', except perhaps adding 30 more minutes and completely replacing Maggie Whatsherface.
'Casino Royale' has spectacular moments, the chase scene at the beginning being one of them, but a great deal of the movie was dull. I did however love getting to see a 007 at the beginning of his career. We've never seen the unrefined, sloppy Bond before this, i think it worked well and gave us more insight into what it takes to be a Bond.
Re: Rank these 4 recent mainstream blockbuster films.
You would give each a 9?
Darth Darth, Darth...
It would appear that our movie tastes are absurdly close.
I felt that Inglorious Basterds was more delicious to watch, on the first viewing. It was a very intelligent film, having little gems in it that would necessitate a second viewing, if even just to see some of the delicious acting. I just loved it. It was definitely the best film I had seen in a long while. Some many things were done just perfectly in that film. While it was not a perfect film, it was certainly the best on that list...but I liked The Watchmen, as well. I just remembered how delicious the opening seen was in Inglorious Basterds, and knew that it was my more favored film.
Really? Please elaborate. Not disagreeing, just curious to know why as I'm a Bond fan. One of the lower ratings I've seen for it. What did you not like about it? Maggie Gyllenhaal wasn't the problem, in fact, she was a great improvement over Katie Holmes from Batman Begins. Its Rachel Dawes that's a sort of lacking character. But I thought she was fine here. She isn't the most attractive actress though.
Add 30 minutes to TDK?
You don't think that's pushing it? What would those extra 30 minutes contain? Really? Care to elaborate on which parts, exactly? Are you one of those who finds the poker scenes boring? I would give each atleast a 9/10. They're all spectacular films. Wouldn't you? I think The Dark Knight might be the best on the list. With these films, for me, it's day-to-day. But Inglorious Basterds was certainly the most diverse of the four. It contained great suspense, comedy, action, and a story. Waltz is unbearably good as is Pitt. I laughed out loud FAR more in Inglorious Basterds than I did in the other three. When Pitt speaks Italian it is hilarious. The opening scene is wonderful. It evolves. Nothing more need be said.
Watchmen is easily my least favorite of the 4 (I liked it, but I loved the other 3), and I struggle between Dark Knight and Inglorious Basterds as my favorites of the bunch. At the moment this is what I feel:
I hated (Not really. "strongly disliked") all of them, but if I had to rate them I would say:
The Dark Knight
Casino Royal
Inglorious Bastards
Watchmen
__________________
"The Daemon lied with every breath. It could not help itself but to deceive and dismay, to riddle and ruin. The more we conversed, the closer I drew to one singularly ineluctable fact: I would gain no wisdom here."
I cant chose between them two either,Although slightly favouring The Dark Knight,only beacause It's possibly the best comic book movie ever and it has raised the bar for the rest,for years to come
I gave Casino Royale an 8 out of 10, but it was close to a nine. There really were some boring parts to the film. That's probably because I couldn't care less about "the fate of the world" resting on a card game.
Movie had great acting, some nice action, excellent plot, and REALLY did well to reboot the Bond series with a new Bond.
IMO, Craig looks and acts the closet to Ian Flemmings James Bond. A world class, Spy, Assassin, hacker, etc. etc. That person would look to be in top physical shape, something none of the other bonds have looked. He would also be an expert martial artist and not have fights like Indiana Jones, but more like the Bourne fights or Transporter fights.
Indeed.
I loved the crap out of The Dark Knight. Before it became a huge fad, I saw it. Opening night. I was the second in line. The film was not as delicious as IG, but it was close.
I would say that Casino Royale was the weakest of that group. It just didn't wow me like the other three did.
I found the QoS to be better, in some areas, worse in others. It is hard to say, but I'd say that second entertained me more. I still would give the second an 8 out of 10...
__________________
Last edited by dadudemon on Jul 2nd, 2010 at 12:53 PM
KMC Community Forums
Jul 1st, 2010 09:01 PM
Good joke,That one was funny man
