Guitar Gear Forum

bros i forgot to tell yall, got dragged to the new hunger games. not entirely shitty. better than the first. more adult. same shit though. spoiler: it goes meta and they break out in the end, starting a matrix-esque revolution. but your daughters probably already told yall that shit.

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

The Hobbit: The Forced Inclusion of Legolas
The Hobbit: The Creepy Interspecies Romance
The Hobbit: The Stupid Bird Crap is Still on Radagast's Face
The Hobbit: The Kids of Peter Jackson Are Getting So Big!
The Hobbit: The High Frame Rate Makes Everything Look Like Benny Hill
The Hobbit: The River of Extra Barrels
The Hobbit: The Wheelbarrow of Asbestos
The Hobbit: The Awesome Dragon Took Up Our Whole FX Budget, Sorry About The Other Stuff

Red NEGATIVE 10/10

This movie was Kevin Smith going, "you know what? I've made some decent movies. I even made a couple of pretty good movies. If you liked them, then fuck you. Watch this piece of shit." I can't think of any other explanation.

benjamin801 wrote:The Hobbit: The Wheelbarrow of Asbestos

That angered me far more than it rationally should but it sort of summed up all the awfulness that was Hobbit 2. It was all I could do to not scream in the theater "WHY THE FUCK IS HIS SKIN NOT BURNING OFF???"

nightflameauto wrote:Red NEGATIVE 10/10

This movie was Kevin Smith going, "you know what? I've made some decent movies. I even made a couple of pretty good movies. If you liked them, then fuck you. Watch this piece of shit." I can't think of any other explanation.

Do you mean "Red State?" That sounds like every other review of it I've heard.

ovid9 wrote:

nightflameauto wrote:Red NEGATIVE 10/10

This movie was Kevin Smith going, "you know what? I've made some decent movies. I even made a couple of pretty good movies. If you liked them, then fuck you. Watch this piece of shit." I can't think of any other explanation.

Do you mean "Red State?" That sounds like every other review of it I've heard.

Yeah, that's it. So shitty it wasn't worth the extra word in the title. Although "Red" is actually a pretty fucking amazing movie about a dude that has his dog killed by some bitchy little entitled shits and goes and does some shit about it.

the red i know of is about a bunch of retired operatives, and is good

Y0UNGBL00D wrote:the red i know of is about a bunch of retired operatives, and is good

Yep. I've seen that one too. Good action with decent comedy bits.

But this one is the one I was speaking of.

ovid9 wrote:

JiveTurkey wrote:@Ovid and Arab;

I loved the original trilogy and was on pins and needles waiting for the next installments in the mid 2000s. I am not a nerd for LOTR in the least but really dug the last round of films. I watched the Hobbit here when it came out on video and was completely underwhelmed. Just could not get into it. I didn't like the seven drawfs vibe whatsoever and I was really disappointed with it. I rewatched it here a week or so ago, perhaps in anticipation of the next installment? I have to say I was just as bored shitless this go around as I was the first time. Sounds like it will be more of the same in Smaug

I loved the LOTR and I enjoyed The Hobbit. Did I think the Hobbit was great? No, but I was entertained.

This movie I wasn't even entertained much. I wanted to be, but I was mostly bored and/or trying not to get angry at how stupid they were making it.

However Tauriel.......

Is that a clitoris under her armpit?










Still would!

The Wicker Man. 1973 original version, not the abortion of remake with Nic Cage. Solid 8/10. Never seen it until last night.

Independent George wrote:The Wicker Man. 1973 original version, not the abortion of remake with Nic Cage. Solid 8/10. Never seen it until last night.

Wasn't there a remake with Kevin Bacon?

Fuck. Because everybody thinks the remake phenom is a new thing.

nightflameauto wrote:

Independent George wrote:The Wicker Man. 1973 original version, not the abortion of remake with Nic Cage. Solid 8/10. Never seen it until last night.

Wasn't there a remake with Kevin Bacon?

Fuck. Because everybody thinks the remake phenom is a new thing.

According to IMDB, there's only the two versions.

Plus the original has lots of nudity.

Independent George wrote:

nightflameauto wrote:

Independent George wrote:The Wicker Man. 1973 original version, not the abortion of remake with Nic Cage. Solid 8/10. Never seen it until last night.

Wasn't there a remake with Kevin Bacon?

Fuck. Because everybody thinks the remake phenom is a new thing.

According to IMDB, there's only the two versions.

Plus the original has lots of nudity.

Found what I was thinking of. Hollow Man. Artificial see thru penis joke and all.

Independent George wrote:The Wicker Man. 1973 original version, not the abortion of remake with Nic Cage. Solid 8/10. Never seen it until last night.

anchorman2 6/10

ovid9 wrote:

JiveTurkey wrote:@Ovid and Arab;

I loved the original trilogy and was on pins and needles waiting for the next installments in the mid 2000s. I am not a nerd for LOTR in the least but really dug the last round of films. I watched the Hobbit here when it came out on video and was completely underwhelmed. Just could not get into it. I didn't like the seven drawfs vibe whatsoever and I was really disappointed with it. I rewatched it here a week or so ago, perhaps in anticipation of the next installment? I have to say I was just as bored shitless this go around as I was the first time. Sounds like it will be more of the same in Smaug

I loved the LOTR and I enjoyed The Hobbit. Did I think the Hobbit was great? No, but I was entertained.

This movie I wasn't even entertained much. I wanted to be, but I was mostly bored and/or trying not to get angry at how stupid they were making it.

However Tauriel.......

isn't that kate from Lost?

major hottie shes not only hot but a really good actress as well.

The Hobbit (the newest one) 7/10.... fun movie, great fight scenes etc... the scene with Bilbo and Smaug was awesome... but... you felt like they were realllllly stretching the movie out... at some points you just wanted to say... oh come on get on with it.... I can't really comment on the stuff that's in the movie and not in the books since I read the book when I was 9

The Wolf of Wall Street...7/10. It's really well acted, directed, etc., but I felt like I needed a shower within 15 minutes to wash the slime off me, and the movie goes on for 3 hours. Really depressing and disturbing. Even numerous gorgeous nekkid hotties and copious amounts of hookers and blow couldn't redeem it.

Anchorman II: 6/10

Funnier than the original in some places, but not nearly as quotable. It could have been a much better movie if the story lines tied together a bit more and if it was a half hour shorter.

Especially if it was a half hour shorter

Rush - 8.5/10. Highlights the heated rivalry between F1 drivers James Hunt and Niki Lauda. Great movie, plenty of drama, nice eye candy, and pretty brutal and gruesome in some places. You don't have to be a gear head to enjoy it. It's kind of hard to tell just who this movie is about though at times, whether it's Hunt or Lauda, the movie switches points of view quite often.

This all happened before my time but man, Niki Lauda is one tough son of a bitch, that guy literally went through hell, and came back to race after only a few weeks with half a face. I can't even begin to imagine the amount of pain he must have been in.

_ej_ wrote:Anchorman II: 6/10

Funnier than the original in some places, but not nearly as quotable. It could have been a much better movie if the story lines tied together a bit more and if it was a half hour shorter.

Especially if it was a half hour shorter

did you LOVE the first one or just sort of dig it? this is the first review ive heard, trying to find where you're coming from.

Y0UNGBL00D wrote:

_ej_ wrote:Anchorman II: 6/10

Funnier than the original in some places, but not nearly as quotable. It could have been a much better movie if the story lines tied together a bit more and if it was a half hour shorter.

Especially if it was a half hour shorter

did you LOVE the first one or just sort of dig it? this is the first review ive heard, trying to find where you're coming from.

I'd say I really like the first. And the second is hilarious, just too long and disjointed.

"Only God Forgives" -3/10

This movie is an absolute wreck. Brought to you by the geniuses who gave the world "Drive" it succeeds in lowering the standards for shitty non-sensical movie making by adding lots of weird pointless "art" shots.

I still don't totally understand what it was about, but I don't care.

There can't be more than 10 minutes of total dialog in the entire movie.

Its horrible. HORRIBLE.

^That movie sucked beyond balls, even -3 is too high of a rating


The hobbit dos: I really don't know what to say about this one, I was fairly entertained (although it should have been way shorter) but it was such an utter bastardization of the book I don't know where to begin. Especially after being impressed with the first one

spawnofthesith wrote:^That movie sucked beyond balls, even -3 is too high of a rating


The hobbit dos: I really don't know what to say about this one, I was fairly entertained (although it should have been way shorter) but it was such an utter bastardization of the book I don't know where to begin. Especially after being impressed with the first one

The reviews on IMDB are hilarious. They are almost 100% split between normal people and "cinema" fans. Normal people hate it because its sucks balls. "Cinema" fans want to ooh and ahh over how its rehashes EVERY artsy cliche ever!

Cryptic/nonexistent storyline? Check.
Practically no dialog? Check.
Random things happen that have nothing to do with the tiny plot there is? Check.
Totally over the top set piece scenes? Check.
Atmospheric score? Check
Interesting colors and cinematography? Check.

None of that is new and none of it is used in this movie in an interesting way. The movie is boring, cliche (for "artsy" type movies) and completely pretentious.

I don't know how much Ryan Gosling got paid for it, but man, he STOLE that money. He didn't have to do anything except have the same expression the entire movie and yell twice.

I'm glad you were entertained by Hobbit 2: People Running Over Bridges. Words cannot truly describe how much they mangled the storyline on it though, you are correct.

spawnofthesith wrote:^That movie sucked beyond balls, even -3 is too high of a rating


The hobbit dos: I really don't know what to say about this one, I was fairly entertained (although it should have been way shorter) but it was such an utter bastardization of the book I don't know where to begin. Especially after being impressed with the first one

My bro's are hobbit fans & said the same thing about not following the book ... the love interest apparently didn't even exist in the book. Me not being a hobbit fan thought it was entertaining - the 3D thing was kind of overdone in areas. The talking dragon just seemed to fail ...