Best & Worst Movies 2012

[jvcarroll]

What were the best and worst films you saw in 2012? ​

these are mine...​

Top 10 Best Films:

1. ParaNorman - Great message, wonderful animation!
2. Skyfall - One of the best Bonds ever!
3. Avengers - Somehow it all fit together beautifully.
4. Amazing Spider-Man - Great cast. This reboot surprised me.
5. Cabin in the Woods - Genius!
6. Dark Knight Rises - Disappointing, but still compelling and wonderfully crafted.
7. Wreck-It Ralph - Nostalgia x 1000000.
8. Magic Mike - Shoestring budget, interesting story and actually good.
9. Chronicle - Good idea well executed.
10. Ted - Rose above its gimmick and was actually funny!

Honorable Mention:

Pirates! Band of Misfits - Great stop motion, fun story.​

Runner Up:

Dredd - A good film made on a tight budget. ​

Guilty Pleasure:

John Carter - Some storytelling problems, but not as bad as people treat it. ​

Runner Up:

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter - Absurd fun as advertised.​

Most Disappointing:

Frankenweenie - There was no need to expand the short film. It was just longer without reason.​

Runner Up:

Prometheus - High expectations. Didn't come close to meeting them.​

Worst:

Rock of Ages - Geriatric Glee. A cynical attempt at cashing in on a trend.​

Runner Up:

Battleship - An absolutely useless cliché. ​

Exempt ones I haven’t yet seen:

Les Misérables, Django Unchained, Lincoln, Flight, Argo​

 

[Drtooth]

I thought you already made a thread like this.

Funny thing is, I liked all the movies I've seen. I still don't get why everyone's so disappointed in Dark Knight. As long as Schulmaker is NO WHERE NEAR the franchise, every film is Oscar worthy. Plus... coming from a long line of terrible super hero/comic book third movies, it's NO where near Superman 3 or Spider-Man 3. Heck, until then, the best 3rd superhero movie was TMNT 3, and that's because the second one was too cartoony and lacked Casey Jones.

I blame the second film, it raised the bar too far. The best stuff in that movie wasn't used in the third film. Dark Knight Rises has the weird distinction of being a more direct sequel to the first movie than the second.

Of course, the big reveal that the woman was really Raj's Daughter would have probably been more of a shock had I not known he had one already via Batman TAS and Brave and the Bold.

I am not really looking forward to the next Batman film franchise. Not so much because Nolan nailed it, but I just don't see how it wouldn't look anticlimactic against this trilogy.

 

[fuzzygobo]

I'm not the biggest moviegoer, but Lincoln was excellent. No CGI, no pyrotechnics, no car chases (no buggy chases either for that matter), no rewriting history, etc. And Daniel Day-Lewis nailed it as Lincoln. He even had a Hensonish spirit about him- telling jokes, offering pearls of wisdom on how to live life to others, caring for all people... if Jim lived 150 years ago, they might have been kindred spirits.

 

[jvcarroll]

I thought you already made a thread like this.

Funny thing is, I liked all the movies I've seen. I still don't get why everyone's so disappointed in Dark Knight. As long as Schulmaker is NO WHERE NEAR the franchise, every film is Oscar worthy. Plus... coming from a long line of terrible super hero/comic book third movies, it's NO where near Superman 3 or Spider-Man 3. Heck, until then, the best 3rd superhero movie was TMNT 3, and that's because the second one was too cartoony and lacked Casey Jones.

I blame the second film, it raised the bar too far. The best stuff in that movie wasn't used in the third film. Dark Knight Rises has the weird distinction of being a more direct sequel to the first movie than the second.

Of course, the big reveal that the woman was really Raj's Daughter would have probably been more of a shock had I not known he had one already via Batman TAS and Brave and the Bold.

I am not really looking forward to the next Batman film franchise. Not so much because Nolan nailed it, but I just don't see how it wouldn't look anticlimactic against this trilogy.

I did a different sort of list. This is more of a top 10 specifically for movies.

Nolan's final Batman film had surprisingly little Batman! In his mythos, Bruce Wayne is only Batman for a year or so, then he retires and returns for one last task. I'd like to see a series of non-origin stories that explore Batman's greatest adventures at all points on the timeline. That's how one works around the popular Nolan franchise. I also like the Arkham Asylum video game's take on the subject matter. There's really a lot of untapped potential outside of the Burton and Nolan universes. I'd like to see some of the classic art direction elements and iconography back too.

 

[Drtooth]

I'm in the camp that actually liked the lack of Batman in that film. I found it a refreshing gamble, since the film was more about Bruce Wayne dealing with his alter-ego.

Plus, face it... Nolan took one of the lamest Batman villains ever, so lame that even in the other film he was in, he was demoted to hired goon, and made him awesome. I never liked Bane, and when I heard the movie was to feature the character, I actually groaned. But he reinvented the character, made him a Knights Templar follower of Raj A Ghoul, and the film was all the more epic because of it. The original plan was to use The Riddler, but I don't think the film would have had the same impact. I could see The Riddler become a cyber terrorist doing something similar to Bane... but then it wouldn't tie in to the first film. Trilogies seldom do, and opt for either copying the first movie or sort of tying into the second. The TVTropes term is Two Part Trilogy and the article lists some examples. Strange part is, it makes the best film in the franchise, the second one, the filler arc!

As for another movie, there are plenty of facets of Batman, and limitless potential for another movie. I want to see some real obscure, unused characters in the rouges gallery next time. I think The Mad Hatter could hold up an interesting plot. But no matter what, it's going to be held up to Burton and Nolan, and no one's going to let it be what it is. That's the part I'm really not looking forward to. So far, I don't know if I should laugh at or be annoyed by the fan boys whining over Jimmy Olsen's genderswap or the fact that Electro in the next Spidey movie isn't going to be a white guy.

 

[jvcarroll]

I'm in the camp that actually liked the lack of Batman in that film. I found it a refreshing gamble, since the film was more about Bruce Wayne dealing with his alter-ego.

Plus, face it... Nolan took one of the lamest Batman villains ever, so lame that even in the other film he was in, he was demoted to hired goon, and made him awesome. I never liked Bane, and when I heard the movie was to feature the character, I actually groaned. But he reinvented the character, made him a Knights Templar follower of Raj A Ghoul, and the film was all the more epic because of it. The original plan was to use The Riddler, but I don't think the film would have had the same impact. I could see The Riddler become a cyber terrorist doing something similar to Bane... but then it wouldn't tie in to the first film. Trilogies seldom do, and opt for either copying the first movie or sort of tying into the second. The TVTropes term is Two Part Trilogy and the article lists some examples. Strange part is, it makes the best film in the franchise, the second one, the filler arc!

As for another movie, there are plenty of facets of Batman, and limitless potential for another movie. I want to see some real obscure, unused characters in the rouges gallery next time. I think The Mad Hatter could hold up an interesting plot. But no matter what, it's going to be held up to Burton and Nolan, and no one's going to let it be what it is. That's the part I'm really not looking forward to. So far, I don't know if I should laugh at or be annoyed by the fan boys whining over Jimmy Olsen's genderswap or the fact that Electro in the next Spidey movie isn't going to be a white guy.

Bane is a much better character in the comics. A very interesting character, in fact. Basing him on Shoemaker's version isn't fair. I was disappointed in Nolan's third installment and really didn't like Levitt's character at all. I hope they're not planning to use him in the future. There was a much more interesting way to tell this final chapter. It looked to me like a film Nolan never really wanted to make. The fact that he wouldn't even refer to Selina Kyle as Catwoman or even let her wear the trademark yellow goggles from the comics demonstrates where my aspirations for the franchise differ from where he ultimately went with it. I liked it, but it could have been so much better.

 

[jvcarroll]

Actually, word is in that they'll push back the 2015 Batman reboot to 2017. I think that's a nice pause to cleanse the palette.

 

[Sgt Floyd]

I REALLY wanted to hate the Lorax. I wanted to be able to cry and complain that it "ruined" my childhood...my brain decided it had other ideas. I mean, the Once-ler is just too adorkable to hate. But the movie did seem kinda confused at what message it was trying to get out. I liked the style of the movie though. Not sure if I would buy the movie itself, but I want the soundtrack...

*dodges flames*

Paranorman...I had high hopes for. I didn't realize it was going to be a zombie movie of all things. But I thought it was a great movie, definitely one of the best movies I've seen in a long time. Now that one I'm glad I got the blu-ray. It looks amazing in HD.
*dodges flames* So many movies seemed to try to get the same message across and failed. The design of the movie is very Tim Schaffer-ish, reminding me a lot of Psychonauts, which is a good thing. The animation is great, I'd say it was a step up from Coraline, which had some amazing animation to begin with.

Rock of Ages I watched simply because I could stream it from my campus's on demand service. I had zero hopes for it. The singers could not sing (well, they couldn't sing the songs. They just weren't a right fit), the acting was atrocious, and overall, I found myself laughing at it for all the wrong reasons. I sort of want to see Beavis and Butt-head shred the movie, since they already seem to not like hair metal

Chernobyl Diaries (if that was 2012...don't remember)...it was...meh. No different from all the other "scary unknown thing is trying to kill us" movies. It got silly real quick when they showed the "monsters." If they just kept it unknown, it might have been a tiny bit better. The only movie that really did "stranded in the middle of nowhere and zombies are trying to kill us" thing right was Doghouse, which was a COMEDY. But I digress...

 

[Drtooth]

Bane is a much better character in the comics. A very interesting character, in fact. Basing him on Shoemaker's version isn't fair.

I didn't care for his cartoon appearances either. I'm sure he's good in the comics, but the other villains are much more interesting over all. The disappointing bit for me is the closest we'll get to Nolanized Batman villains that weren't seen was The Batman. While they went a completely different direction with The Joker's personality, it's eerily similar to what Nolan had in concept. A crazy guy who's in it for the lulz. And I really liked that version of The Riddler. Robert Englund did a superb job. I'd hire him to do a live action version if I had a say in a film.

But as long as we didn't get Emo Peter Parker or Richard Pryor... EEEK! Seriously, I'm glad they rebooted Spider-Man. The first two original movies were great, but so much meddling from Sony and the Toy companies to get so many villains into the film and edging out a far better plot that focused on the Vulture. I'd almost swear Raini made a bad film on purpose. I'm sure a Spidey 4 would have tried to turn things around, but a reboot refreshed the franchise beautifully. It's a shame that all these Marvel films are broken up by different film contracts. I'd love to see Spidey swing on by in The Avengers 2 and interact with Nick Fury and Agent Coulson. At least the new Spider-man cartoon has that. AND it has the same actor playing Coulson as well.

I REALLY wanted to hate the Lorax. I wanted to be able to cry and complain that it "ruined" my childhood...my brain decided it had other ideas. I mean, the Once-ler is just too adorkable to hate. But the movie did seem kinda confused at what message it was trying to get out. I liked the style of the movie though. Not sure if I would buy the movie itself, but I want the soundtrack...

I hear mixed things, and I kinda wanted to see it, at the very least because it has Danny Devito in it. It looks like they want to tell the movie's story, but get sidetracked (as these movies are want to do) in kiddy film stuff to pad the story out. It looks beautiful as far as the animation is concerned. If I had a way to rent it, I would. But then again, the whole fact that "We're too good to release Happy Meal toys, but we'll sponsor an SUV that isn't even a hybrid" bit leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

 

[Sgt Floyd]

The Lorax really didn't play much of a part in the movie at all. Devito did do a good job though. I was half expecting the Lorax to be well...more Danny Devito-ish than he was. The Once-ler really was the "star" of it. The love story bit didn't really amount to anything. The whole Oxygen conglomerate thing...that part I didn't get. It wasn't needed.

Thankfully, there were no fart jokes that I can remember.