What was told to me, was that in Looper there's almost two story lines that end up happening, it makes the movie feel like it goes on for way too long instead of ending (also disjointed), and the newly important characters aren't given enough development for you to care at all for them.

Basically, why the f**k would you they send future Looper back to be killed by themselves in the past? Why not just send the now to be executed Looper to some random guy and just put the gold ingots on the last kill anyway? The entire time travel plot just seems messy and sloppy to me. Doesn't stop it from being an entertaining movie, it just feels like it tried a bit too hard to pull off the whole "we're so clever" Inception thing :P

I thought it was really good. The premise is kinda illogical, and as far as I could tell there were a couple of major flaws in the concept (particularly towards the end), but it had me intrigued throughout and was thoroughly entertaining.

PROMETHEUS

This movie visuals, graphics, CGI is insane and beautiful, theme is amazing, sound design is great, OST is good, not great but gets the job done, Noomi, Fassbander, Theron, Elba acting were from decent to great.

As for the movie itself it was a mess all around and left me with more questions than answers.

I still love the movie for a reason I still don't know and maybe in repeat viewings will find out, it makes me think, is mesmerizing for some reason.

Skyfall

I hate Daniel Craig.. he is just shit, not just as Bond either he sucks at life.. miss cast of the century

Clive Owen SHOULD of had this role, he is fucking awesome /discussion

But this film aint that bad, its better than his last two bonds (and that in no way means it is good, just it's his least shit movie, it is still shit just higher up the shit scale)

On a higher note i watched Iron Sky and that shit just made me laugh so much :D no where near as good as say the other great recent b movie troll hunter, but still fucking ace.

Yes!!!

He was a better 007 in Pink Panther than Craig in bond movies lols.

lol you watched the new pink panther o.0 i miss sellars :(

Diary of a wimpy kid - dog days. Thought it was funny as hell. I also don't know how good the new James Bond is. Yea, it's a good movie, but best bond in forever stuff? I don't know. Goldeneye still strikes me as superior, and so does Casino Royale, and a number of oldschool bond flicks I can list.

Dude i meant it was Daniel craigs best bond... i rate her majesty secret service a thousand times higher than the last 3 movies.

Lincoln proves Daniel Day is probably the best living actor there is

Better than Tracey Morgan? You are out of your mind! Joking obviously :) Daniel Day Lewis has always been one of the best actors out there.

I remember watching the Crucible in high school, Daniel Day Lewis was in it, and he quite shit.

That said, he didn't have much to work with.

On the note of Daniel Craig which I have resisted responding to since I've been away at the folks for Thanksgiving.

Daniel Craig has taken the Bond franchise out of it's crypt and revived it successfully. Anyone who is capable of that probably deserves more credit than what manthat is giving him.
He's better than Brosnan and is at the head of one of the best action series we have in film right now.

That is not Daniels doing that's the director and script writers doing, he is just a bad actor in great hands.

Clive Owen would of made it stuff of legend.

No indeed

Brosnan in Goldeneye will always have a special place as one of my favorite bond movies of all time, but as good as Skyfall is, it somehow still feels lacking in some majorly significant way for a movie that is considered one of the best bonds of all time. It's lacking in a way that I feel Goldeneye wasn't, that I feel Casino Royale wasn't, or that I feel Goldfinger or From Russia With Love and a host of other bond movies weren't. For a movie that is considered one of the best bond movies ever, Skyfall when you really analyze what actually happened in that movie, and how it was carried out, may just be the most overrated and undeserving of its praise bond movies ever.

I think it made a clever play on stepping its way closer to what many bond fans would consider to be the historical norm, such as with Moneypenny, introducing Q, and separately digging a bit more into Bond's life, having the guts to do something few thought they had the guts to do kill M, and even giving that classic bond car the kind of special significance that they did. I don't think that elevates it as much as some would like to believe, however. And when I stop and think about it some more, with regards to Silva, I think they tried pretty hard to make him a parallel to Batman's joker in Dark Knight, and it may have worked if not for the fact that it was so blatantly transparent in retrospect. If the way Silva escaped wasn't enough of a tip off, then the way Silva attempted to publicly take M's life dressed as a cop, and then the way he was conducting himself at Bond's childhood home certainly cemented this impression.

And I'll concede that Craig has to be in the discussion as one of the best bonds, but certainly not on the basis of all three of his bond movies. He deserves the honor from just one, and one alone, Casino Royale. Quantum of Solace, on the other hand, is quite frankly one of the worst bond movies I have personally ever seen. In fact, it's the worst bond movie I can recall ever watching. It was so ridiculous and terrible in its execution that I don't even know where to start. I have strong reservations about the fact that it even has the classification as a bond movie in the first place.

And Craig is by no means a bad actor. He's a very good actor, but only one of the bond movies really make him appear as larger than life, and that one movie is Casino Royale.

Quantum came when MGM was going down the tubes. It's why it was rushed and poorly made.
It was still leagues better than most of what followed Goldneye.

Also it's overrated because people were stupid enough to call it "best ever" in a franchise that's been around so long

I also agree though that Casino Royale is one of the best I've ever seen. I've yet to see Skyfall but am excited to

Don't get me wrong, skyfall is good, it just seems to be lacking that larger than life vibe that even some much lesser bond movies seem to do a pretty good job of capturing even while turning out to be rather inferior films compared to skyfall. What I feel is that skyfall tried to capture that vulnerable, more personable side of James Bond that we got a nice glimpse of in Casino Royale, and it does it somewhat, but the same interest, excitement and edge of your seat feeling didn't carry for me.


There are times when you feel the movie is right there on the verge of something potentially great, and that some of it may really stick with you for the long haul, but it never quite sticks, and then when a day or two passes it doesn't get much better, you can't help coming to the realization that you liked Casino Royale and some other bond movies far more even in spite of what Skyfall did fairly well.


Another way to view it is to say that Casino Royale is the first Mission Impossible, and Skyfall is Ghost Protocol. If you thought Ghost Protocol, as some reviews suggested, was at the level of the first Mission Impossible, then you will probably love Skyfall. If, however, you felt that the same magic wasn't quite there with Ghost Protocol despite all the impressive set pieces, then you'll probably like Skyfall and definitely feel it's an improvement over what came immediately before it, but you won't shower it with the same, almost legendary praise it is receiving, and will come away feeling Casino Royale isn't just better, but much better. The opening really made you suspect that what you were about to see was going to be far better than what you actually got.


At some point after you've seen this the first time you may actually think to yourself, "Wait, is there anything at all that I might have missed while watching the movie?" At least, this is the impression that you will get if you find yourself not entirely agreeing with the praise this movie has gotten.

That said, I do advise to not be discouraged by what I or anyone else might think though, and just see it for yourself and perhaps you'll have a different view. I'm a firm believer in the fact that only one reviewer is right, and that's yourself. Nobody can tell you what you like better than you can.

Disagree all you want, clive owen would of been vastly better.

How the hell did Halo come into subject of "movie thread"? lol

LOL, its getting silly tbh.