Films I watched this week

[walm]

popeyewhite said:

How much more generic superhero rubbish can the studios chuck out?

Answer - a LOT.
Light at the end of the tunnel? Yes - Deadpool and Suicide Squad potentially.

[cirian75]

walm said:

popeyewhite said:

How much more generic superhero rubbish can the studios chuck out?

Answer - a LOT.
Light at the end of the tunnel? Yes - Deadpool and Suicide Squad potentially.

hopefully and 2nd Karl Urban Dredd as well.

[walm]

cirian75 said:

walm said:

popeyewhite said:

How much more generic superhero rubbish can the studios chuck out?

Answer - a LOT.
Light at the end of the tunnel? Yes - Deadpool and Suicide Squad potentially.

hopefully and 2nd Karl Urban Dredd as well.

Oh and on topic, I watched the Fantastic Four (2015) last night.
Dross.
4/10 and all four points for Kate Mara just being Kate Mara.

[james_tigerwoods]

Jader1973 said:

Finding Dory.

Very good.

9/10.

The short at the start (Piper I think) was stunning. It actually looked real. Pixar at the top of their game.

10/10

Woah woah. Wait. What? Where. How?

[PH XKR]

Bit of a strange one this, technically not a film but.... Voyager the end episode. 1hr 40 minutes of epic tv film.

Sadly I missed it originally due to nearly being killed and spending months in hospital. Found it on Netflix and wow, what an ending!

I wont spoil it but its well worth watching even if you didn't follow voyager.

[Antony Moxey]

jbudgie said:

Halb said:

Cotty said:

A Walk in the Woods
Comedy/adventure tale of two friends hiking the Appalachian Trail. It was ok, couple of laughs 5/10
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1178665/?ref_=fn_al_tt...

Really wanted to watch that at the flicks.

I wouldn't bother, not a patch on the book.

Does that matter? You assume everyone who watches a film automatically reads the book if that's what it's based on. Having the attention span of a goldfish I haven't read a book since O level English Lit so couldn't care less how faithful a film is to a book and take the film on its own merits.

[PH XKR]

I don't read which means I enjoy films so much more than my book snob mates.

Is the book over in an hour and a half? Does the book have epic sound and visuals?

I treat films as a standalone event, never comparing to a book is advantageous, in my book.....

[chris watton]

I bought The Witch from Sky Store yesterday. Wish I hadn't....

[Quickmoose]

PH XKR said:

I don't read which means I enjoy films so much more than my book snob mates.

Is the book over in an hour and a half? Does the book have epic sound and visuals?

I treat films as a standalone event, never comparing to a book is advantageous, in my book.....

I think a lot of the argument for the book is based on the reader using their 'imagination'...the audio and visuals are down to what you create in your mind... because your mind can't wander, you eyes are locked to the page rather than glancing at your phone or out the window, the immersion is arguably greater..

I mean I'm not going to argue that, because I don't read enough either, but that's an argument that could be made...I imagine.

[Blaster72]

PH XKR said:

I don't read which means I enjoy films so much more than my book snob mates

You're probably right, I've seen a whole load of films that are great in their own right but somehow dulled by reading the book beforehand.

The Martian is a good example, a really enjoyable film on its own but having read the book there was just so much missing and it seemed to lose a lot of small but key sections of the story.

So hard to compare books and films, it's almost not worth trying to.

[bingybongy]

chris watton said:

I bought The Witch from Sky Store yesterday. Wish I hadn't....

You mean The VVitch utter dross.
I lasted 15 minutes.

[chris watton]

bingybongy said:

chris watton said:

I bought The Witch from Sky Store yesterday. Wish I hadn't....

You mean The VVitch utter dross.
I lasted 15 minutes.

Yes, that's the one. I will have the DVD arrive next week, too, as I bought the Buy and Keep option on Sky, bloody idiot!

[PH XKR]

Quickmoose said:

PH XKR said:

I don't read which means I enjoy films so much more than my book snob mates.

Is the book over in an hour and a half? Does the book have epic sound and visuals?

I treat films as a standalone event, never comparing to a book is advantageous, in my book.....

I think a lot of the argument for the book is based on the reader using their 'imagination'...the audio and visuals are down to what you create in your mind... because your mind can't wander, you eyes are locked to the page rather than glancing at your phone or out the window, the immersion is arguably greater..

I mean I'm not going to argue that, because I don't read enough either, but that's an argument that could be made...I imagine.

Understand the book side of things, I guess I should have explained I struggle with imagination and concentration to read following head injury. But the benefit for me now is every film is enjoyable whereas my missus is always "oooh the book was better".

I hold nothing against readists but they need to realies one thing. Hollywood will never compare to the book so why bother bloody comparing? Instead, go in and enjoy it without any preconceptions.

[Jader1973]

james_tigerwoods said:

Jader1973 said:

Finding Dory.

Very good.

9/10.

The short at the start (Piper I think) was stunning. It actually looked real. Pixar at the top of their game.

10/10

Woah woah. Wait. What? Where. How?

At the cinema (in Australia).

Isn't out in the UK yet?

[ashleyman]

Now You See Me 2.

Not as good as I was hoping for it to be. The original felt like a film about magic then ended up about theft. NYSM2 was the total opposite and ended up just being another heist movie with a little bit of trickery.

Not terrible, but not great.

6/10

[Quickmoose]

PH XKR said:

Hollywood will never compare to the book so why bother bloody comparing? Instead, go in and enjoy it without any preconceptions.

100% agree

[Speckle]

Watchman said:

I watched the 3-hour "ultimate" version last night.

It was... OK. But there were issues with people's motives I couldn't really understand.

1. Why do prisoners kill other prisoners with "bat" branding?
2. Why did Superman want to shut-down Batman's activities? Why would he care in the context of everything else going on in the world?
3. Superman didn't try hard enough to stop Batman from trying to kill him. He only needed to hold him while he convinced him they should work together
4. I know there's a WW film coming next year but her motivations weren't explored at all
5. Why did the senator's aide/jr help Lex?
6. Why was there even a programme built into the Kryptonian ship to create a monster? What purpose would that have served?

It was a bit like a typical forum-post. A contributor writes his stream of consciousness and then presses "send" without reading what they've written. A simple proof-read enables their point to be reviewed - what story they want to tell. It's so much more than spelling and grammar. Someone at DC needs to proof-read what's written.

The Man of Steel film was much more coherent. Within a 3-hour film, you'd like to think the characters could be explored a bit more. I've sometimes wondered what being Superman on a day-to-day basis might be like - when he's not fighting to save the world. Those moments were explored a bit better with Christopher Reeve, and even Brandon Routh (to a point).

And Batman... his story has been told so often - to the point where I failed to understand why his "origin" was portrayed yet again. It was a waste of time.

Overall, it was a bit hit-and-miss, which is a shame. All for the lack of someone reading the script with a more critical eye.

5/10

I found myself asking a lot of the same questions. The first time I tried watching it, I was struggling to relate to various character's motivations and, actually switched it off after an hour or so, writing it off as cr@p.

I gave it another try a week later and was glad that I did. Switched my brain off and just enjoyed the spectacle of it all. Being generous, I'd give it a 6.5/10

[bingybongy]

chris watton said:

bingybongy said:

chris watton said:

I bought The Witch from Sky Store yesterday. Wish I hadn't....

You mean The VVitch utter dross.
I lasted 15 minutes.

Yes, that's the one. I will have the DVD arrive next week, too, as I bought the Buy and Keep option on Sky, bloody idiot!

Thanks for bringing a smile to my face on this miserable afternoon.

[james_tigerwoods]

Jader1973 said:

james_tigerwoods said:

Jader1973 said:

Finding Dory.

Very good.

9/10.

The short at the start (Piper I think) was stunning. It actually looked real. Pixar at the top of their game.

10/10

Woah woah. Wait. What? Where. How?

At the cinema (in Australia).

Isn't out in the UK yet?

No! Bah....

[Vocal Minority]

PH XKR said:

Understand the book side of things, I guess I should have explained I struggle with imagination and concentration to read following head injury. But the benefit for me now is every film is enjoyable whereas my missus is always "oooh the book was better".

I hold nothing against readists but they need to realies one thing. Hollywood will never compare to the book so why bother bloody comparing? Instead, go in and enjoy it without any preconceptions.

A book will afford you greater depth of plot and development - as you can allow an infinite amount of time to consume the art form- 500 pages, 1000 pages - whatever you need (obviosuly you can go to far) but 7,8,9 hours can easily be consumed by a book.

In a film you have to get the same content over in 2-3 hours.

But as you say there can be a much great visual and aural impact.

Swings and roundabouts isn't it?