Films I watched this week
Discussion
The Girl On The Train.
There's probably a decent thriller there, but the pace is so agonisingly slow coupled with a continuous background of slow whimsical piano music that tells you it's so all melodramatic it just couldn't hold my attention.
To me it's a 30 min story played over 120 so they use the non-linear thing to bulk it out. It's still on now, my Wife is enjoying it.
A non committal 5/10 as someone with a longer attention span might love it.
There's probably a decent thriller there, but the pace is so agonisingly slow coupled with a continuous background of slow whimsical piano music that tells you it's so all melodramatic it just couldn't hold my attention.
To me it's a 30 min story played over 120 so they use the non-linear thing to bulk it out. It's still on now, my Wife is enjoying it.
A non committal 5/10 as someone with a longer attention span might love it.
So I watched Arrival at last.
Thought provoking, well acted by Adams as usual; she's highly compelling.
Sound design was technically impressive but lacked something I felt.
Overall message was just a little twee and trite for my taste (work together yay!). I also take issue with this clumsy trend for engaging the viewer with emotional mechanisms based around the loss of a child, it's a cheap grab straight for the feels that Gravity and Interstellar also both played on but the latter did it 'best'.
It's my kind of film but overall I'd say 6.5/10
Thought provoking, well acted by Adams as usual; she's highly compelling.
Sound design was technically impressive but lacked something I felt.
Overall message was just a little twee and trite for my taste (work together yay!). I also take issue with this clumsy trend for engaging the viewer with emotional mechanisms based around the loss of a child, it's a cheap grab straight for the feels that Gravity and Interstellar also both played on but the latter did it 'best'.
It's my kind of film but overall I'd say 6.5/10
Big Game
Wimpy President Samuel L Jackson, is dumped unceremoniously in the Finnish wilderness, where upon he is hunted by bad guys, and is only hope of survival rests on a local failed hunter teenager.
Reminded me of Cliffhanger, in that the film actually has a bit of heart, but is predominantly a load of "Watch this!" style one liners, big jumps, daft but impressive stunts...
Enjoyable cheese in the strongest of US tradition.
6.5/10.1
Wimpy President Samuel L Jackson, is dumped unceremoniously in the Finnish wilderness, where upon he is hunted by bad guys, and is only hope of survival rests on a local failed hunter teenager.
Reminded me of Cliffhanger, in that the film actually has a bit of heart, but is predominantly a load of "Watch this!" style one liners, big jumps, daft but impressive stunts...
Enjoyable cheese in the strongest of US tradition.
6.5/10.1
Quickmoose said:
Big Game
Wimpy President Samuel L Jackson, is dumped unceremoniously in the Finnish wilderness, where upon he is hunted by bad guys, and is only hope of survival rests on a local failed hunter teenager.
Reminded me of Cliffhanger, in that the film actually has a bit of heart, but is predominantly a load of "Watch this!" style one liners, big jumps, daft but impressive stunts...
Enjoyable cheese in the strongest of US tradition.
6.5/10.1
With Samuel L Jackson I have a rule. Wimpy President Samuel L Jackson, is dumped unceremoniously in the Finnish wilderness, where upon he is hunted by bad guys, and is only hope of survival rests on a local failed hunter teenager.
Reminded me of Cliffhanger, in that the film actually has a bit of heart, but is predominantly a load of "Watch this!" style one liners, big jumps, daft but impressive stunts...
Enjoyable cheese in the strongest of US tradition.
6.5/10.1
Only a film with SLJ as the lead, can be as bad as a film with SLJ as supporting actor is good. There are exceptions of course, but it's a good rule of thumb.
Gods of Egypt.
Strangely fascinating, like watching plane crash videos on you tube. You stumble across it by accident, you know you shouldn't watch it, but something compels you. At least until you fall asleep. I may watch. The last 20 minutes or so tonight to make sure (depends if I feel like a bit of self flagellation)
Less Jamie Lannister and more Jamie and the magic torch.
3-10 cubits
Strangely fascinating, like watching plane crash videos on you tube. You stumble across it by accident, you know you shouldn't watch it, but something compels you. At least until you fall asleep. I may watch. The last 20 minutes or so tonight to make sure (depends if I feel like a bit of self flagellation)
Less Jamie Lannister and more Jamie and the magic torch.
3-10 cubits
Quickmoose said:
So a bad SLJ lead character film is like a good supporting SLJ film....?
In this I guess he is a supporting character... and as a performance, not as good Pulp Fiction, but better than Snakes on a Plane, perhaps on a par with Kingsman...
No, In this I guess he is a supporting character... and as a performance, not as good Pulp Fiction, but better than Snakes on a Plane, perhaps on a par with Kingsman...
I'll try again, it's not very clear.
Generally a film with a SLJ supporting role is pretty good - he's great in smaller doses and can really add something to the film and he can steal the limelight from other actors and in some cases it's just blind luck, but SLJ in a supporting role - usually a good film.
SLJ in a lead role on the other hand... it's a peculiar thing, he doesn't get many lead roles these days and when he does they tend to be straight to DVD s
te. The last decent, well regarded / profitable film he made as the lead was 'Unthinkable' in 2010m the one before that maybe 'Coach Carter'? was 2005 and neither were exactly Blockbusters. There’s exceptions of course, for example he got top billing for Hateful 8, but that’s an ensemble cast if you’d ask me.
P-Jay said:
No,
I'll try again, it's not very clear.
Generally a film with a SLJ supporting role is pretty good - he's great in smaller doses and can really add something to the film and he can steal the limelight from other actors and in some cases it's just blind luck, but SLJ in a supporting role - usually a good film.
SLJ in a lead role on the other hand... it's a peculiar thing, he doesn't get many lead roles these days and when he does they tend to be straight to DVD ste. The last decent, well regarded / profitable film he made as the lead was 'Unthinkable' in 2010m the one before that maybe 'Coach Carter'? was 2005 and neither were exactly Blockbusters.
There’s exceptions of course, for example he got top billing for Hateful 8, but that’s an ensemble cast if you’d ask me.
With all due respect, I think your judgment is somewhat clouded. You've basically just described the best part of all Hollywood lead actors who aren't type cast, throughout the entire history of Hollywood movies to a lesser or greater extent. (Cough Cruise cough)I'll try again, it's not very clear.
Generally a film with a SLJ supporting role is pretty good - he's great in smaller doses and can really add something to the film and he can steal the limelight from other actors and in some cases it's just blind luck, but SLJ in a supporting role - usually a good film.
SLJ in a lead role on the other hand... it's a peculiar thing, he doesn't get many lead roles these days and when he does they tend to be straight to DVD s
te. The last decent, well regarded / profitable film he made as the lead was 'Unthinkable' in 2010m the one before that maybe 'Coach Carter'? was 2005 and neither were exactly Blockbusters. There’s exceptions of course, for example he got top billing for Hateful 8, but that’s an ensemble cast if you’d ask me.
Take a minute to think about it.
Has John Travolta done amazing since pulp fiction? Has Bruce Willis? We think Bruce has, but honestly, anything truly worth a notable nod? The list is endless really and there's a reason for that.
Guess what it is?
Acting (shock horror) is a job that pays for stuff.
Actors fall out of flavour, as Tarantino is so great at spotting to revive their careers but it doesn't necessarily mean that it's a God given right to be involved in top tier productions just because you previously were, regardless.
Personally I think actors in Hollywood such as Johnny Depp are the exception to the rule. He played the game his own way and won. Only then did he consider pirate's. I can't think of another actor privileged enough to enjoy such diversity. Brad Pitt possibly but he owns his production company and plays it relatively safe with his roles. (Admittedly Damn good ones for the most part)
Tell me I'm wrong?
DoubleTime said:
With all due respect, I think your judgment is somewhat clouded. You've basically just described the best part of all Hollywood lead actors who aren't type cast, throughout the entire history of Hollywood movies to a lesser or greater extent. (Cough Cruise cough)
Take a minute to think about it.
Has John Travolta done amazing since pulp fiction? Has Bruce Willis? We think Bruce has, but honestly, anything truly worth a notable nod? The list is endless really and there's a reason for that.
Guess what it is?
Acting (shock horror) is a job that pays for stuff.
Actors fall out of flavour, as Tarantino is so great at spotting to revive their careers but it doesn't necessarily mean that it's a God given right to be involved in top tier productions just because you previously were, regardless.
Personally I think actors in Hollywood such as Johnny Depp are the exception to the rule. He played the game his own way and won. Only then did he consider pirate's. I can't think of another actor privileged enough to enjoy such diversity. Brad Pitt possibly but he owns his production company and plays it relatively safe with his roles. (Admittedly Damn good ones for the most part)
Tell me I'm wrong?
Bruce Willis has had a pretty good career after Pulp Fiction. Since then he's been in Armageddon, Die Hard 4 and 5, Sixth Sense, Unbreakable, Looper, Sin City, The Expendables etc which were all box office hits. Depp got lucky with the first Pirates movie and then used the same routine in almost everything sinceTake a minute to think about it.
Has John Travolta done amazing since pulp fiction? Has Bruce Willis? We think Bruce has, but honestly, anything truly worth a notable nod? The list is endless really and there's a reason for that.
Guess what it is?
Acting (shock horror) is a job that pays for stuff.
Actors fall out of flavour, as Tarantino is so great at spotting to revive their careers but it doesn't necessarily mean that it's a God given right to be involved in top tier productions just because you previously were, regardless.
Personally I think actors in Hollywood such as Johnny Depp are the exception to the rule. He played the game his own way and won. Only then did he consider pirate's. I can't think of another actor privileged enough to enjoy such diversity. Brad Pitt possibly but he owns his production company and plays it relatively safe with his roles. (Admittedly Damn good ones for the most part)
Tell me I'm wrong?
DoubleTime said:
P-Jay said:
No,
I'll try again, it's not very clear.
Generally a film with a SLJ supporting role is pretty good - he's great in smaller doses and can really add something to the film and he can steal the limelight from other actors and in some cases it's just blind luck, but SLJ in a supporting role - usually a good film.
SLJ in a lead role on the other hand... it's a peculiar thing, he doesn't get many lead roles these days and when he does they tend to be straight to DVD ste. The last decent, well regarded / profitable film he made as the lead was 'Unthinkable' in 2010m the one before that maybe 'Coach Carter'? was 2005 and neither were exactly Blockbusters.
There’s exceptions of course, for example he got top billing for Hateful 8, but that’s an ensemble cast if you’d ask me.
With all due respect, I think your judgment is somewhat clouded. You've basically just described the best part of all Hollywood lead actors who aren't type cast, throughout the entire history of Hollywood movies to a lesser or greater extent. (Cough Cruise cough)I'll try again, it's not very clear.
Generally a film with a SLJ supporting role is pretty good - he's great in smaller doses and can really add something to the film and he can steal the limelight from other actors and in some cases it's just blind luck, but SLJ in a supporting role - usually a good film.
SLJ in a lead role on the other hand... it's a peculiar thing, he doesn't get many lead roles these days and when he does they tend to be straight to DVD s
te. The last decent, well regarded / profitable film he made as the lead was 'Unthinkable' in 2010m the one before that maybe 'Coach Carter'? was 2005 and neither were exactly Blockbusters. There’s exceptions of course, for example he got top billing for Hateful 8, but that’s an ensemble cast if you’d ask me.
Take a minute to think about it.
Has John Travolta done amazing since pulp fiction? Has Bruce Willis? We think Bruce has, but honestly, anything truly worth a notable nod? The list is endless really and there's a reason for that.
Guess what it is?
Acting (shock horror) is a job that pays for stuff.
Actors fall out of flavour, as Tarantino is so great at spotting to revive their careers but it doesn't necessarily mean that it's a God given right to be involved in top tier productions just because you previously were, regardless.
Personally I think actors in Hollywood such as Johnny Depp are the exception to the rule. He played the game his own way and won. Only then did he consider pirate's. I can't think of another actor privileged enough to enjoy such diversity. Brad Pitt possibly but he owns his production company and plays it relatively safe with his roles. (Admittedly Damn good ones for the most part)
Tell me I'm wrong?
Find me a Samuel L Jackon film where he plays the lead in the last - I don't know - 15 years that's any good? Equally find me a film in which he plays a supporting role in the same timeframe that's unwatchable?
My rule of thumb works most of the time - supporting role, good film, leading role, bad film.
I've a bit of a thing for Kristen Bell so I watched Hit and Run again, which is a brain out film co-starring her (now) husband Dax Shepard, and Bradley Cooper. It's where a guy's past catches up with him as he attempts to live out his life in WitSec. Easy watching - 50%
I've never played the game so I started to watch Assassin's Creed with a little scepticism however it was actually OK. The ending was rather rushed but maybe they were setting up a sequel. The effects were good and the story reasonable, but although I normally like Fassbender, he appeared to be slightly disengaged - in the same way Ed Norton was in the American version of The Italian Job. Another 5/10
I was surprisingly disappointed by Underworld: Blood Wars. Surprisingly-so because I went into it with low expectations and it didn't even meet those. The first two in the series were decent-enough but each time they presented a new and more powerful entity in the story, he/she was beaten by someone else. Now that Selene is the most powerful entity in her universe, she shouldn't be struggling against an even-more powerful foe. It's all a bit blah blah now. Not even Kate Beckinsale can save it - in fact although it's definitely worth watching for her leather-wearing loveliness - it only gets a total fail rating.
Something prompted me to re-watch Wild Things again (possibly jumped out at me on the "downloads" listings). Now, apart from the obvious reason(s) to watch this film, and they are obvious and they are immensely worthwhile, it's actually a pretty decent story. Of course, I knew what to expect which sort of dampens it a little but I enjoyed it nonetheless. Definitely an A minus, even though I've seen it at least twice previously.
I like the Marvel CU but I admit to being disinterested in Dr Strange as a character. I admit that it was a well-told story, with good actors and great effects, but it's almost certainly a film I wouldn't watch again which is quite unlike many of the other MCU films. I'll give it **/***** and will concede that when they bring Dr Strange into stories that involve other characters, it might raise the score a little.
I've never played the game so I started to watch Assassin's Creed with a little scepticism however it was actually OK. The ending was rather rushed but maybe they were setting up a sequel. The effects were good and the story reasonable, but although I normally like Fassbender, he appeared to be slightly disengaged - in the same way Ed Norton was in the American version of The Italian Job. Another 5/10
I was surprisingly disappointed by Underworld: Blood Wars. Surprisingly-so because I went into it with low expectations and it didn't even meet those. The first two in the series were decent-enough but each time they presented a new and more powerful entity in the story, he/she was beaten by someone else. Now that Selene is the most powerful entity in her universe, she shouldn't be struggling against an even-more powerful foe. It's all a bit blah blah now. Not even Kate Beckinsale can save it - in fact although it's definitely worth watching for her leather-wearing loveliness - it only gets a total fail rating.
Something prompted me to re-watch Wild Things again (possibly jumped out at me on the "downloads" listings). Now, apart from the obvious reason(s) to watch this film, and they are obvious and they are immensely worthwhile, it's actually a pretty decent story. Of course, I knew what to expect which sort of dampens it a little but I enjoyed it nonetheless. Definitely an A minus, even though I've seen it at least twice previously.
I like the Marvel CU but I admit to being disinterested in Dr Strange as a character. I admit that it was a well-told story, with good actors and great effects, but it's almost certainly a film I wouldn't watch again which is quite unlike many of the other MCU films. I'll give it **/***** and will concede that when they bring Dr Strange into stories that involve other characters, it might raise the score a little.
Passengers
Really dull and surprisingly not very good acting from the cast. Spent my time waiting for it to really kick in, but just had the lead lady wandering around with a perplexed look on her face! Turned it off after enduring 30 minutes of my life I won't get back...
... though there was nothing set in space, an airline bloke just kept appearing, and seemed to be all about an air crash!
2/12
Really dull and surprisingly not very good acting from the cast. Spent my time waiting for it to really kick in, but just had the lead lady wandering around with a perplexed look on her face! Turned it off after enduring 30 minutes of my life I won't get back...
... though there was nothing set in space, an airline bloke just kept appearing, and seemed to be all about an air crash!
2/12
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff