• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

*** Official Film Thread ***

Wes Craven has died. Was a fan of the Nightmare on Elm Street movies, but if I'm honest, I think he was a tad over-rated. Those movies became perfection after a while.

Scream movies were interesting, but don't hold up very well.

I used to like Horror movies a lot, but these days I can't take the stress of watching them. Although recent ones I have seen have been very very good. Insidious was good.
 
Watched the Intouchables the other day, it's now in my top 20 films. Admittedly it came out in 2011 and I missed the boat. Expected nothing being a foreign film but what a brilliant couple of hours it was.

I would highly recommend it to anyone.
 
Superted said:
Wes Craven has died. Was a fan of the Nightmare on Elm Street movies, but if I'm honest, I think he was a tad over-rated. Those movies became perfection after a while.

Scream movies were interesting, but don't hold up very well.

I used to like Horror movies a lot, but these days I can't take the stress of watching them. Although recent ones I have seen have been very very good. Insidious was good.
Click to expand...

I loved the Scream movies when they came out, had to wait until they came out on VHS as I wasn't old enough to see them at the cinema.
 
Jurgen the German said:
Anyone seen Straight Outta Compton?
Click to expand...

Watched it yesterday. If you're a fan of NWA then would def recommend it 8/10

Pretty good acting and well written dialogue.

Only downside for me it's that it's a little bit "clean cut" compared to how Compton must have really been at that time. Also, it portrays Dre as a bit of a hero and skips over his female hitting tendencies.

Otherwise for a fairly niche film it's much, much better than I hoped + lots of great tunes.
 
I saw it last night and have to agree with the above.

Very enjoyable with an awesome soundtrack as you'd expect.

But it was produced by Dre and Cube and both come out squeaky clean where else everyone else is a crook or irrelevant.
 
Two films on the festival scene at the moment I really want to see, Anamolisa - Charlie Kaufman's new stop motion film and Spotlight - immense cast, out in January I think.

Not sure what's out at the minute that's worth a trip to the cinema?
 
Saw Legend a few weeks back (screening)...loved it...Mike Leigh's director of photography is onboard, Hardy is excellent, and if it is possible to add a light touch to a dark subject without watering it down, then here you are. Basically it is a character study in all it;s glory. If you read The Profession Of Violence, then here it is on screen 'Hardy-ised'...
 
thfcsteff said:
Saw Legend a few weeks back (screening)...loved it...Mike Leigh's director of photography is onboard, Hardy is excellent, and if it is possible to add a light touch to a dark subject without watering it down, then here you are. Basically it is a character study in all it;s glory. If you read The Profession Of Violence, then here it is on screen 'Hardy-ised'...
Click to expand...
Have to disagree there mate.

I can only describe it as a film about tossers, made by tossers for tossers.

Its really hard to tell which I find more distasteful, the film itself or the subjects. The whole thing is a lazy pastiche of 60s London with (Hardy aside) hollow acting and an equally hollow plot. Hardy is excellent as Reggie but is as much a cheap caricature when playing Ronnie as the film is in general. He's simultaneously the best and worst actor in the film. Everyone else, without exception, is appalling.

That said, if you're caught up in this nonsense of "What did you expect guvna? I was born poor so I 'ad to be a fackin violent criminal", or if you're one of those that thinks there's something special, other than the smell, of being a roosterney, then you may see some kind of charm in it. Whilst the film sets out to show how sprawling the control of the Krays was, in the cold light of hindsight it shows how small-time their little world was.
 
scaramanga said:
Have to disagree there mate.

I can only describe it as a film about tossers, made by tossers for tossers.

Its really hard to tell which I find more distasteful, the film itself or the subjects. The whole thing is a lazy pastiche of 60s London with (Hardy aside) hollow acting and an equally hollow plot. Hardy is excellent as Reggie but is as much a cheap caricature when playing Ronnie as the film is in general. He's simultaneously the best and worst actor in the film. Everyone else, without exception, is appalling.

That said, if you're caught up in this nonsense of "What did you expect guvna? I was born poor so I 'ad to be a fackin violent criminal", or if you're one of those that thinks there's something special, other than the smell, of being a ****ney, then you may see some kind of charm in it. Whilst the film sets out to show how sprawling the control of the Krays was, in the cold light of hindsight it shows how small-time their little world was.
Click to expand...

There's nowhere really to go from there my friend. Your opinion is pre-determined by your hatred of them, to the point I wonder why you saw it (was it a freebie for you too?)

I have no love or otherwise of the Krays, but theirs is a story. I thought Bruno Ganz was absolutely superlative in Downfall but I think Hitler is one the single biggest clams to walk the Earth!!!

The plot is based on a book, which in turn is based on an account, which in turn would be (at a guess) 70% factual at least. As for the aim of the film, could not disagree more. I thought it was a very simple character study based on the book viewpoints.

I understand hating them/their world/their thing, but to be honest mate, the major criticism I'm seeing from you is based solely on that and not on the actual film!
 
The Wolf Totem...great... and Black Mass was excellent, Depp is a super-creep and it felt like old-world Scorcese. Grim story.
 
thfcsteff said:
There's nowhere really to go from there my friend. Your opinion is pre-determined by your hatred of them, to the point I wonder why you saw it (was it a freebie for you too?)

I have no love or otherwise of the Krays, but theirs is a story. I thought Bruno Ganz was absolutely superlative in Downfall but I think Hitler is one the single biggest clams to walk the Earth!!!

The plot is based on a book, which in turn is based on an account, which in turn would be (at a guess) 70% factual at least. As for the aim of the film, could not disagree more. I thought it was a very simple character study based on the book viewpoints.

I understand hating them/their world/their thing, but to be honest mate, the major criticism I'm seeing from you is based solely on that and not on the actual film!
Click to expand...
Not just them, it was a very lazy film. Just a caricature of London and it's inhabitants.

Some kind of cross between Mary Poppins and Austin Powers without any of either's charm.

The director thoroughly failed to get any kind of performance from all but half of Tom Hardy. I don't blame the cast, if the whole film is a silly pastiche, the dialogue ridiculous, the characters paper thin and the plot empty then it's probably very difficult to put in a serious performance.
 
Last edited:
Just in from seeing Everest. Good visuals but the way story told not great felt vague. But maybe having read the books to do with events would feel that way.
Looking forward to Black Mass as Depp looks back to his best in a serious film rather than all the quirky stuff . Martian looks decent to.
 
scaramanga said:
Not just them, it was a very lazy film. Just a caricature of London and it's inhabitants.

Some kind of cross between Mary Poppins and Austin Powers without any of either's charm.

The director thoroughly failed to get any kind of performance from all but half of Tom Hardy. I don't blame the cast, if the whole film is a silly pastiche, the dialogue ridiculous, the characters paper thin and the plot empty then it's probably very difficult to put in a serious performance.
Click to expand...

An interesting take.
When I see it again (and I will ;-) ) I'll be sure to check for all those observations. I think you've hit the nail with 'caricature' because it is, indeed, a character study of the Krays which certainly veers into caricature. I still think the root of your dislike is dislike of them/the material.
I won't even ask what you thought of the Paddington film (see what I did there?)...
 
Just come out of seeing an advanced preview of The Martian, what a brilliant film, seriously one of the best films I've seen for such a long time, go see it 5/5
 
markysimmo said:
Just come out of seeing an advanced preview of The Martian, what a brilliant film, seriously one of the best films I've seen for such a long time, go see it 5/5
Click to expand...
So pleased to hear that, the book is just fantastic and the way its written with the scientist doing lots of solo talking must of made it easier to be turned into a film.

Will it be worth a big Imax visit?
 
Notmegov said:
So pleased to hear that, the book is just fantastic and the way its written with the scientist doing lots of solo talking must of made it easier to be turned into a film.

Will it be worth a big Imax visit?
Click to expand...
I saw it in 3D and Mars was stunning, an imax showing will be awesome
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back