The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
What a fantastic title, eh? Took all of my imaginative power. Anyway, I bought Empire this month. Not an uncommon occurance. It had inside it a review of 2002. It was OK. Mine will be better. Or at least, I'll chat about films for a while. But first of all:
The best film I will see this year is Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers.
The worst film I've seen this year is Changing Lanes.
Right. 2002 was pretty good for films. Not great for deeply distrubing, beautifully made films. You've got Donnie Darko, sure. But I haven't seen many more. What it was was the year of fun, big budget films, some of which actually had plot twists. But mostly they were just fun, well made films. And I liked this. There were some truly terrible films that I saw, but they were forgiveable. Maybe.
I'm going to say something which will probably get you laughing at me. But never mind. I liked Signs. I really liked Signs. I though M Night Many Letters did a really good job of A) Building up Tension and B) Making me forget Unbreakable. So, yeah, there's the plot hole of water-vunerable aliens invading a 70%+ water planet. But I can ignore that, because it's a good film. And I'm sorry. I also liked Minority Report. Cool plot, good acting, good effects. He chases his own eyeballs down a corridor, which can't be that bad. It created a good future-noir type atmosphere that until now was confined to Blade Runner, IMO. I could be wrong. Star Wars: Episode II. When I first saw it I was raving about it. I think this was because lots of Jedi fought, Sammy L had a purple lightsaber and Yoda fought. Looking back on it, it's still good. Not as good as Jedi or Empire, and perhaps as good as New Hope. But a helluva lot better than Phantom Menace, and thats the main point. Plus they made Jar-Jar resonsible for the Empire. Nice touch. Right, onto more blockbusters that I liked. Spider-Man. Great fun, and Willem Dafoe acted superbly, as normal. The special effects were spot on, and should give LotR:tTT a run for it's money for the Special Effects Oscar. (LotR will still win, of course.)It's fun, if you can ignore the most shameful product placement outside of Bond (Spider-Man jumps onto Carlsberg lorry, poses, jumps off. Camera looks long and hard at a Dr Pepper Can, just to make sure it's really Dr Pepper.) One film that people have raved about was Road To Perdition, aka Tom Hanks Oscar Vehicle #47. I didn't like it, personally. Didn't hate it, just didn't like it. Paul Newman scenes were, of course, excellent, with a surely classic line. "This is the life we lead, the life we choose. And there is only one guarentee. None of us will see Heaven." But mostly it was Tom Hanks and his weepy kid running about weeping. And Jude Law, who I've never forgiven for A.i.
Oh, I refused to go and see xXx. On principle. Vin Diesel is just poor. Really poor. It's Bond for Limp Bizkit fans, and it's still poor for what it tries to be at that. Die Another Day, in contrast, was brilliant. Typical Bond, with modern adjustments as have been occuring throughout the series. One point - invisible car, bit too gimmicky, m'kay? But there were some quality one liners, Brosnan has the attitude, it's all good.
Ben Affleck and Matt Damon spy movies. Two of them. Gay. The Sum of All Fears is Tom Clancy, therefore middle-aged crap for ex-army guys. The Bourne Identity is a brilliant book that was ruthlessly butchered. (No Carlos? Hang on. No Medusa? Erm...) Therefore, I dislike them both when they're not being angels.
Bad remakes? There's always one, apparently. Not having seen Manhunter myself, (I am trying, Goat), I thought Red Dragon was good. But everyone that's seen Manhunter, including my dad, have assured me that Red Dragon did, in fact, suck balls. So thats me told. At least we can safely say that I hate Fiennes'. Both of them.
SODDING OSCARS! BEAUTIFUL SODDING MIND, MY ARRS! RON "The Grinch" HOWARD, MY ARRS!Robbed, we wuz. Lord of the Rings, 13 nominations. Should have got them all. Got 4. It's a crying shame. Let's award the 'troubled genius' film. Bloody hell. Also, if they were trying to make a statement, why didn't they give the Best Actor to Will Smith. Much better in Ali than Denzel was in Training Day. Pah. Scummy awards. If Two Towers doesn't sweep the board in 2003, something is very very wrong.
Dammit, I'm angry now. Oh, I didn't mention Mullholland Dr. or Insomnia, due to lack of me seeing them. I'm sure they're the equal of, or better than, Donnie Darko in the chilling indie-type film. I actually wanted to see Insomnia. Memento guy is supposed to be an ace director and not just a one-hit wonder.
Fellowship was my favourite film at the beggining of the year. Towers will be at the end of year. So, anybody else for best film of the year? I'm sure I've left some out.
The best film I will see this year is Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers.
The worst film I've seen this year is Changing Lanes.
Right. 2002 was pretty good for films. Not great for deeply distrubing, beautifully made films. You've got Donnie Darko, sure. But I haven't seen many more. What it was was the year of fun, big budget films, some of which actually had plot twists. But mostly they were just fun, well made films. And I liked this. There were some truly terrible films that I saw, but they were forgiveable. Maybe.
I'm going to say something which will probably get you laughing at me. But never mind. I liked Signs. I really liked Signs. I though M Night Many Letters did a really good job of A) Building up Tension and B) Making me forget Unbreakable. So, yeah, there's the plot hole of water-vunerable aliens invading a 70%+ water planet. But I can ignore that, because it's a good film. And I'm sorry. I also liked Minority Report. Cool plot, good acting, good effects. He chases his own eyeballs down a corridor, which can't be that bad. It created a good future-noir type atmosphere that until now was confined to Blade Runner, IMO. I could be wrong. Star Wars: Episode II. When I first saw it I was raving about it. I think this was because lots of Jedi fought, Sammy L had a purple lightsaber and Yoda fought. Looking back on it, it's still good. Not as good as Jedi or Empire, and perhaps as good as New Hope. But a helluva lot better than Phantom Menace, and thats the main point. Plus they made Jar-Jar resonsible for the Empire. Nice touch. Right, onto more blockbusters that I liked. Spider-Man. Great fun, and Willem Dafoe acted superbly, as normal. The special effects were spot on, and should give LotR:tTT a run for it's money for the Special Effects Oscar. (LotR will still win, of course.)It's fun, if you can ignore the most shameful product placement outside of Bond (Spider-Man jumps onto Carlsberg lorry, poses, jumps off. Camera looks long and hard at a Dr Pepper Can, just to make sure it's really Dr Pepper.) One film that people have raved about was Road To Perdition, aka Tom Hanks Oscar Vehicle #47. I didn't like it, personally. Didn't hate it, just didn't like it. Paul Newman scenes were, of course, excellent, with a surely classic line. "This is the life we lead, the life we choose. And there is only one guarentee. None of us will see Heaven." But mostly it was Tom Hanks and his weepy kid running about weeping. And Jude Law, who I've never forgiven for A.i.
Oh, I refused to go and see xXx. On principle. Vin Diesel is just poor. Really poor. It's Bond for Limp Bizkit fans, and it's still poor for what it tries to be at that. Die Another Day, in contrast, was brilliant. Typical Bond, with modern adjustments as have been occuring throughout the series. One point - invisible car, bit too gimmicky, m'kay? But there were some quality one liners, Brosnan has the attitude, it's all good.
Ben Affleck and Matt Damon spy movies. Two of them. Gay. The Sum of All Fears is Tom Clancy, therefore middle-aged crap for ex-army guys. The Bourne Identity is a brilliant book that was ruthlessly butchered. (No Carlos? Hang on. No Medusa? Erm...) Therefore, I dislike them both when they're not being angels.
Bad remakes? There's always one, apparently. Not having seen Manhunter myself, (I am trying, Goat), I thought Red Dragon was good. But everyone that's seen Manhunter, including my dad, have assured me that Red Dragon did, in fact, suck balls. So thats me told. At least we can safely say that I hate Fiennes'. Both of them.
SODDING OSCARS! BEAUTIFUL SODDING MIND, MY ARRS! RON "The Grinch" HOWARD, MY ARRS!Robbed, we wuz. Lord of the Rings, 13 nominations. Should have got them all. Got 4. It's a crying shame. Let's award the 'troubled genius' film. Bloody hell. Also, if they were trying to make a statement, why didn't they give the Best Actor to Will Smith. Much better in Ali than Denzel was in Training Day. Pah. Scummy awards. If Two Towers doesn't sweep the board in 2003, something is very very wrong.
Dammit, I'm angry now. Oh, I didn't mention Mullholland Dr. or Insomnia, due to lack of me seeing them. I'm sure they're the equal of, or better than, Donnie Darko in the chilling indie-type film. I actually wanted to see Insomnia. Memento guy is supposed to be an ace director and not just a one-hit wonder.
Fellowship was my favourite film at the beggining of the year. Towers will be at the end of year. So, anybody else for best film of the year? I'm sure I've left some out.
Page:
Wow, someone else who didn't think Bond was crap.
Not sure what I've been doing with my movie going this year. I have missed out on a LOT of films: Donnie Darko, Insomnia, MIB 2, Bourne Identity, Road to Perdition.... the list goes on and on. I have been a BAD man, and I promise to atone for my sins in 2003....honest.
Having said that, of the films I have seen, I have to agree with Stryke, lots of good, fun films, but nothing that hits you, and makes you come out of the cinema thinking "GENIUS".
Bond - I think they are beginning to take the mick out of themselves a bit now. Austin Powers has made everyone realise how stupid some Bond stuff is, and they've taken that on board. Invisble Car - Agreed, OTT. Never mind. At least it got them back on track after the horror that was The World Is Not Enough. (You have no idea how many attempts it just took me to type Enough properly)
Spiderman - I liked this film. I think too many people looked past the fact that there was some VERY good acting in this film. For me, they really managed to catch the geeky kid thing, and how a teenager might actually act to getting these sort of powers.
Ali - was this 2002? Not sure, anyway, Smith's best film yet. No doubt. Great film.
xXx - good moving not going Stryke! This was absolutely ATROCIOUS!!!! I laughed all the way through....apart from when they were trying to make jokes. Then I sat there nonchalently. Oh dear.
Red Dragon - As with you mate, haven't seen Manhunter, or read book. But I did like it. Although ending was VERY obvious, i.e. he doesn't kill himself and comes after them again.
Star Wars - I liked it, don't think its quite on a par with the "first" three, but definitely better than Episode I.
Damn it, too many films gonna have to be bought on DVD next year!
Oh yeah, and with LotR, now I know what it must of been like for kids waiting for Star Wars to come out for the first trilogy :-)
Having said that, of the films I have seen, I have to agree with Stryke, lots of good, fun films, but nothing that hits you, and makes you come out of the cinema thinking "GENIUS".
Bond - I think they are beginning to take the mick out of themselves a bit now. Austin Powers has made everyone realise how stupid some Bond stuff is, and they've taken that on board. Invisble Car - Agreed, OTT. Never mind. At least it got them back on track after the horror that was The World Is Not Enough. (You have no idea how many attempts it just took me to type Enough properly)
Spiderman - I liked this film. I think too many people looked past the fact that there was some VERY good acting in this film. For me, they really managed to catch the geeky kid thing, and how a teenager might actually act to getting these sort of powers.
Ali - was this 2002? Not sure, anyway, Smith's best film yet. No doubt. Great film.
xXx - good moving not going Stryke! This was absolutely ATROCIOUS!!!! I laughed all the way through....apart from when they were trying to make jokes. Then I sat there nonchalently. Oh dear.
Red Dragon - As with you mate, haven't seen Manhunter, or read book. But I did like it. Although ending was VERY obvious, i.e. he doesn't kill himself and comes after them again.
Star Wars - I liked it, don't think its quite on a par with the "first" three, but definitely better than Episode I.
Damn it, too many films gonna have to be bought on DVD next year!
Oh yeah, and with LotR, now I know what it must of been like for kids waiting for Star Wars to come out for the first trilogy :-)
What a fantastic title, eh? Took all of my imaginative power. Anyway, I bought Empire this month. Not an uncommon occurance. It had inside it a review of 2002. It was OK. Mine will be better. Or at least, I'll chat about films for a while. But first of all:
The best film I will see this year is Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers.
The worst film I've seen this year is Changing Lanes.
Right. 2002 was pretty good for films. Not great for deeply distrubing, beautifully made films. You've got Donnie Darko, sure. But I haven't seen many more. What it was was the year of fun, big budget films, some of which actually had plot twists. But mostly they were just fun, well made films. And I liked this. There were some truly terrible films that I saw, but they were forgiveable. Maybe.
I'm going to say something which will probably get you laughing at me. But never mind. I liked Signs. I really liked Signs. I though M Night Many Letters did a really good job of A) Building up Tension and B) Making me forget Unbreakable. So, yeah, there's the plot hole of water-vunerable aliens invading a 70%+ water planet. But I can ignore that, because it's a good film. And I'm sorry. I also liked Minority Report. Cool plot, good acting, good effects. He chases his own eyeballs down a corridor, which can't be that bad. It created a good future-noir type atmosphere that until now was confined to Blade Runner, IMO. I could be wrong. Star Wars: Episode II. When I first saw it I was raving about it. I think this was because lots of Jedi fought, Sammy L had a purple lightsaber and Yoda fought. Looking back on it, it's still good. Not as good as Jedi or Empire, and perhaps as good as New Hope. But a helluva lot better than Phantom Menace, and thats the main point. Plus they made Jar-Jar resonsible for the Empire. Nice touch. Right, onto more blockbusters that I liked. Spider-Man. Great fun, and Willem Dafoe acted superbly, as normal. The special effects were spot on, and should give LotR:tTT a run for it's money for the Special Effects Oscar. (LotR will still win, of course.)It's fun, if you can ignore the most shameful product placement outside of Bond (Spider-Man jumps onto Carlsberg lorry, poses, jumps off. Camera looks long and hard at a Dr Pepper Can, just to make sure it's really Dr Pepper.) One film that people have raved about was Road To Perdition, aka Tom Hanks Oscar Vehicle #47. I didn't like it, personally. Didn't hate it, just didn't like it. Paul Newman scenes were, of course, excellent, with a surely classic line. "This is the life we lead, the life we choose. And there is only one guarentee. None of us will see Heaven." But mostly it was Tom Hanks and his weepy kid running about weeping. And Jude Law, who I've never forgiven for A.i.
Oh, I refused to go and see xXx. On principle. Vin Diesel is just poor. Really poor. It's Bond for Limp Bizkit fans, and it's still poor for what it tries to be at that. Die Another Day, in contrast, was brilliant. Typical Bond, with modern adjustments as have been occuring throughout the series. One point - invisible car, bit too gimmicky, m'kay? But there were some quality one liners, Brosnan has the attitude, it's all good.
Ben Affleck and Matt Damon spy movies. Two of them. Gay. The Sum of All Fears is Tom Clancy, therefore middle-aged crap for ex-army guys. The Bourne Identity is a brilliant book that was ruthlessly butchered. (No Carlos? Hang on. No Medusa? Erm...) Therefore, I dislike them both when they're not being angels.
Bad remakes? There's always one, apparently. Not having seen Manhunter myself, (I am trying, Goat), I thought Red Dragon was good. But everyone that's seen Manhunter, including my dad, have assured me that Red Dragon did, in fact, suck balls. So thats me told. At least we can safely say that I hate Fiennes'. Both of them.
SODDING OSCARS! BEAUTIFUL SODDING MIND, MY ARRS! RON "The Grinch" HOWARD, MY ARRS!Robbed, we wuz. Lord of the Rings, 13 nominations. Should have got them all. Got 4. It's a crying shame. Let's award the 'troubled genius' film. Bloody hell. Also, if they were trying to make a statement, why didn't they give the Best Actor to Will Smith. Much better in Ali than Denzel was in Training Day. Pah. Scummy awards. If Two Towers doesn't sweep the board in 2003, something is very very wrong.
Dammit, I'm angry now. Oh, I didn't mention Mullholland Dr. or Insomnia, due to lack of me seeing them. I'm sure they're the equal of, or better than, Donnie Darko in the chilling indie-type film. I actually wanted to see Insomnia. Memento guy is supposed to be an ace director and not just a one-hit wonder.
Fellowship was my favourite film at the beggining of the year. Towers will be at the end of year. So, anybody else for best film of the year? I'm sure I've left some out.
The best film I will see this year is Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers.
The worst film I've seen this year is Changing Lanes.
Right. 2002 was pretty good for films. Not great for deeply distrubing, beautifully made films. You've got Donnie Darko, sure. But I haven't seen many more. What it was was the year of fun, big budget films, some of which actually had plot twists. But mostly they were just fun, well made films. And I liked this. There were some truly terrible films that I saw, but they were forgiveable. Maybe.
I'm going to say something which will probably get you laughing at me. But never mind. I liked Signs. I really liked Signs. I though M Night Many Letters did a really good job of A) Building up Tension and B) Making me forget Unbreakable. So, yeah, there's the plot hole of water-vunerable aliens invading a 70%+ water planet. But I can ignore that, because it's a good film. And I'm sorry. I also liked Minority Report. Cool plot, good acting, good effects. He chases his own eyeballs down a corridor, which can't be that bad. It created a good future-noir type atmosphere that until now was confined to Blade Runner, IMO. I could be wrong. Star Wars: Episode II. When I first saw it I was raving about it. I think this was because lots of Jedi fought, Sammy L had a purple lightsaber and Yoda fought. Looking back on it, it's still good. Not as good as Jedi or Empire, and perhaps as good as New Hope. But a helluva lot better than Phantom Menace, and thats the main point. Plus they made Jar-Jar resonsible for the Empire. Nice touch. Right, onto more blockbusters that I liked. Spider-Man. Great fun, and Willem Dafoe acted superbly, as normal. The special effects were spot on, and should give LotR:tTT a run for it's money for the Special Effects Oscar. (LotR will still win, of course.)It's fun, if you can ignore the most shameful product placement outside of Bond (Spider-Man jumps onto Carlsberg lorry, poses, jumps off. Camera looks long and hard at a Dr Pepper Can, just to make sure it's really Dr Pepper.) One film that people have raved about was Road To Perdition, aka Tom Hanks Oscar Vehicle #47. I didn't like it, personally. Didn't hate it, just didn't like it. Paul Newman scenes were, of course, excellent, with a surely classic line. "This is the life we lead, the life we choose. And there is only one guarentee. None of us will see Heaven." But mostly it was Tom Hanks and his weepy kid running about weeping. And Jude Law, who I've never forgiven for A.i.
Oh, I refused to go and see xXx. On principle. Vin Diesel is just poor. Really poor. It's Bond for Limp Bizkit fans, and it's still poor for what it tries to be at that. Die Another Day, in contrast, was brilliant. Typical Bond, with modern adjustments as have been occuring throughout the series. One point - invisible car, bit too gimmicky, m'kay? But there were some quality one liners, Brosnan has the attitude, it's all good.
Ben Affleck and Matt Damon spy movies. Two of them. Gay. The Sum of All Fears is Tom Clancy, therefore middle-aged crap for ex-army guys. The Bourne Identity is a brilliant book that was ruthlessly butchered. (No Carlos? Hang on. No Medusa? Erm...) Therefore, I dislike them both when they're not being angels.
Bad remakes? There's always one, apparently. Not having seen Manhunter myself, (I am trying, Goat), I thought Red Dragon was good. But everyone that's seen Manhunter, including my dad, have assured me that Red Dragon did, in fact, suck balls. So thats me told. At least we can safely say that I hate Fiennes'. Both of them.
SODDING OSCARS! BEAUTIFUL SODDING MIND, MY ARRS! RON "The Grinch" HOWARD, MY ARRS!Robbed, we wuz. Lord of the Rings, 13 nominations. Should have got them all. Got 4. It's a crying shame. Let's award the 'troubled genius' film. Bloody hell. Also, if they were trying to make a statement, why didn't they give the Best Actor to Will Smith. Much better in Ali than Denzel was in Training Day. Pah. Scummy awards. If Two Towers doesn't sweep the board in 2003, something is very very wrong.
Dammit, I'm angry now. Oh, I didn't mention Mullholland Dr. or Insomnia, due to lack of me seeing them. I'm sure they're the equal of, or better than, Donnie Darko in the chilling indie-type film. I actually wanted to see Insomnia. Memento guy is supposed to be an ace director and not just a one-hit wonder.
Fellowship was my favourite film at the beggining of the year. Towers will be at the end of year. So, anybody else for best film of the year? I'm sure I've left some out.
Page: