Has any one else seen Rise of the Planet of the Apes yet? I wound up really liking it. I was a fan of the original series, though. I'm wondering also if anyone who never saw the originals has seen Rise.

The original version was pretty good.

The second one ran out of gas half-way through.

The 3'd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th sequels sucked balls.

The 2001 remake sucked ass.

I won't be bothering with this one.

(August 6, 2011 at 11:24 pm)Minimalist Wrote: The original version was pretty good.

It's one of my favorite oldies.

(August 6, 2011 at 11:24 pm)Minimalist Wrote: The 2001 remake sucked ass.

I couldn't agree more.

(August 6, 2011 at 11:24 pm)Minimalist Wrote: I won't be bothering with this one.

I think modern movie making tech made it worth watching. I am interested to see where they will go with it. I'm also hoping that any sequels will adhere more to the original, especially when they hit the part that handles the "Planet of the Apes" plot. Caesar is quite different. The story is entirely different than Conquest, which is good, given that the plot of Conquest is a little generic.

Modern movie making is the same car exploding nine times from different camera angles.

(August 6, 2011 at 11:39 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Modern movie making is the same car exploding nine times from different camera angles.

In some cases, I would agree with you. In this case, I do not. I'm pretty sure no cars exploded, despite their being a fight scene involving many cars. Most of the movie was cerebral or regarding emotion. By modern movie making, I mean the computer graphics that made the apes more real.

The last movie I went to see was The Kings Speech and only because my wife dragged me.

Before that, I guess, it was Religulous.

(August 7, 2011 at 12:35 am)Minimalist Wrote: The last movie I went to see was The Kings Speech and only because my wife dragged me.

Before that, I guess, it was Religulous.

I thought about watching The King's Speech, but I heard it was ridiculously inaccurate, as in did not happen remotely the way they portray it. I kind of figured it would be, considering the real story is not compelling enough for film.

I go to the movies a lot, but I don't watch a lot of television, so I guess it balances it out. I took my nephews to see the new Transformers movie a few weeks ago and I went to see the last Harry Potter film not long after. I make a decent chunk off of some movie reviews, so it works out. At the very least, I make my money back.

Quote:I thought about watching The King's Speech, but I heard it was ridiculously inaccurate, as in did not happen remotely the way they portray it. I kind of figured it would be, considering the real story is not compelling enough for film.

I've seen it, twice. I loved it. The three principals (Colin Firth, Geoffrey Rush and Helen Bonham Carter) are wonderful.


Could not care less if it's true or complete fiction,it's an excellent film. Four stars from me.

(August 7, 2011 at 2:15 am)padraic Wrote: Could not care less if it's true or complete fiction,it's an excellent film. Four stars from me.

I'll have to give it a try then. It's difficult for me to watch something that is based on real life, but it is inaccurate, if I know the true story. However, I love fiction and at least decent historical fiction. I knew they would have to make the story more intriguing, so I'll give it a try. I liked "The Last King of Scotland," even though the main character was fictional in a cast of non-fiction characters and events, so if The King's Speech is good, I won't knock it for being incorrect. I was just hesitant.

Quote:but I heard it was ridiculously inaccurate, as in did not happen remotely the way they portray it.

The same could be said of The Ten Fucking Commandments.