Films I watched this week

[walm]

james_tigerwoods said:

I watched "Now you see me" last night (the first one) - Thoroughly enjoyed it and I didn't expect to. It made me thing of Oceans 11 a lot too.

Ah excellent - started it on +1 last night but had to go to bed.
Will finish it now.
Amazing cast: Mark Zuckerberg, Alfred, Borat's wife, The Hulk and God!

[droopsnoot]

james_tigerwoods said:

I watched "Now you see me" last night (the first one) - Thoroughly enjoyed it and I didn't expect to. It made me thing of Oceans 11 a lot too.

I watched that as well, was on Film4 last week I think. Reasonably good way to pass a couple of hours. I keep meaning to get around to watching the Oceans stuff too, have them all recorded somewhere but never got around to watching them.

[SWoll]

droopsnoot said:

james_tigerwoods said:

I watched "Now you see me" last night (the first one) - Thoroughly enjoyed it and I didn't expect to. It made me thing of Oceans 11 a lot too.

I watched that as well, was on Film4 last week I think. Reasonably good way to pass a couple of hours. I keep meaning to get around to watching the Oceans stuff too, have them all recorded somewhere but never got around to watching them.

Thought it was OK but badly paced and rather silly.

If you're going to give the Oceans films a go I'd suggest just doing 11 and 13, 12 is f*****g awful.

[Halb]

The walking story.
Best to read or watch it first?

[Nom de ploom]

Vocal Minority said:

Antony Moxey said:

jbudgie said:

Antony Moxey said:

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.

Matters to me.

If you don't read books then you are missing out on a lot.

Like I said earlier, we like what we like. I don't enjoy reading so I'm not missing out at all. To you I am because it's something you enjoy, but I don't so I'm not.

I think we are all missing the point MASSIVELY with walk in the woods. MASSIVELY.

The real point we should be discussing is how does Bill Bryson....a man who looks like this.....



...get Robert Redford to play him?!

Whatever way you cut it - Bryson landed on his feet there


(I love the book, haven't seen the film - I'm not sure it would translate terribly well as there is a minor narrative to the book in the background, but most of it is a bit of a history/geography/sociology lesson)

As I said on the book thread, Redford flatters Bryson and its kind of a nice film. notle is Katz, no question but someone like zak galifikanis could have played bryson and frankly done a better job. thompson phones in her performance but she gets no favours from the script and you don't get any of the charm or charisma of the book really.

it does however have a lovely soundtrack and there are some laugh out loud moments

6.5/10

[james_tigerwoods]

SWoll said:

droopsnoot said:

james_tigerwoods said:

I watched "Now you see me" last night (the first one) - Thoroughly enjoyed it and I didn't expect to. It made me thing of Oceans 11 a lot too.

I watched that as well, was on Film4 last week I think. Reasonably good way to pass a couple of hours. I keep meaning to get around to watching the Oceans stuff too, have them all recorded somewhere but never got around to watching them.

Thought it was OK but badly paced and rather silly.

If you're going to give the Oceans films a go I'd suggest just doing 11 and 13, 12 is f*****g awful.

Agreed, it was very silly

[Antony Moxey]

popeyewhite said:

Antony Moxey said:

I don't need specific knowledge of a specific book to be able to compare it to the film version because,

Is this a wind-up?

You need some knowledge of one thing in order to compare it to another. That's what a comparison is

*sigh* No, because I won't need to make comparison because I won't be reading a book.

Jesus why is it so hard for some people to understand I don't enjoy reading? This all started off because I mentioned how often people say about a film that it isn't as good as the book and that if you're not interested in books then what does it matter.

[Cotty]

Halb said:

The walking story.
Best to read or watch it first?

There were two walking films I posted A Walk in the Woods and The Way. The first people are saying read the book but don't watch the film, the second not based on a book so jump into the film.

Edited by Cotty on Friday 8th July 16:41

[popeyewhite]

Antony Moxey said:

*sigh* No, because I won't need to make comparison because I won't be reading a book.

Then you can't claim one is better than the other, can you? Like you did here:

Antony Moxey said:

I know a movie will be better - for me, not necessarily everyone - because I don't enjoy reading.

Truthfully the sentence doesn't actually make sense, perhaps if you did some reading...?

[popeyewhite]

ClockworkCupcake said:

popeyewhite said:

No it's not. He hasn't read the book, therefore can't make a comparison. compare: verb estimate, measure, or note the similarity or dissimilarity between.

Well, I actually do have a nut allergy and I don't need to try a dish with nuts in it to know that a dish without nuts in it would be better for me.

Then you know the dish has nuts in it! If the poster doesn't read the book he has no idea what's in it, therefore can't compare it to something else.

[Halb]

Cotty said:

There were two walking films I posted A Walk in the Woods and The Way. The first people are saying read the book but don't watch the film, the second not based on a book so jump into the film.

Edited by Cotty on Friday 8th July 16:41

Walk in the Woods based on the Bryson book. I expected the film to complement the book's story, but from reading above, it's a different story? I am now curious for those who have experience of both, which would be best to experience first.
The Way sounds good too, never heard of it before!

[VEA]

I've not read the Bryson book, but I thorougly enjoyed the film.

[Vocal Minority]

Halb said:

Walk in the Woods based on the Bryson book. I expected the film to complement the book's story, but from reading above, it's a different story? I am now curious for those who have experience of both, which would be best to experience first.
The Way sounds good too, never heard of it before!

I have not seen the film - but the book isn't a story per se - the narrative of hiking with Katz is sort of the framework they hang the content off of.

It's about the trail, history and American culture. It's a travel book as much as a story.

But it's a brilliant read - but I love Bryson, light and humorous

[patmahe]

popeyewhite said:

Antony Moxey said:

*sigh* No, because I won't need to make comparison because I won't be reading a book.

Then you can't claim one is better than the other, can you? Like you did here:

Antony Moxey said:

I know a movie will be better - for me, not necessarily everyone - because I don't enjoy reading.

Truthfully the sentence doesn't actually make sense, perhaps if you did some reading...?

I don't like horror movies, I know there are some people that do but I don't. I base this on the fact that of the ones I have seen, I didn't enjoy them.

I think it's perfectly rational to decide for yourself that you don't like something and then not do it anymore. Same goes for reading in the case above. Why would it bother you if he reads it or not.

[Antony Moxey]

popeyewhite said:

Antony Moxey said:

*sigh* No, because I won't need to make comparison because I won't be reading a book.

Then you can't claim one is better than the other, can you? Like you did here:

Antony Moxey said:

I know a movie will be better - for me, not necessarily everyone - because I don't enjoy reading.

Truthfully the sentence doesn't actually make sense, perhaps if you did some reading...?

Well I can because no matter how good avid readers think reading is I don't share their passion. So I know I won't enjoy reading a book, so by default because I know I won't enjoy reading I know I'll enjoy a film more. It's not really that complicated is it? I don't need to read every book that's subsequently been made into a film to know I'll enjoy the film more because I don't enjoy reading enough for the story to prevail over the fact I don't enjoy reading.

[Pesty]

The nice guys

Really don't see how this got good reviews. What am I missing? Not a patch on kiss kiss bang bang or the last Boy Scout both excellent kkbb being particularly under rated.

I'm ready to admit it must be me because how could it not be? Everybody else raves about Ryan gosling and he can't fkng act, his face never moves, he's the worst movie drunk ever and comedy? His breathless talking when he found the dead body Jesus titty fking Christ. Ps that whole bit didn't make sense as they hung around for the cops anyway like they had all through the film.

[Hoover.]

I watched two films this week,

1) Whiskey Tango Foxtrot......... This film kept my attention all the way through, starting like this type of a film a lot 7/10

2) Nice Guys......... Not as good as I was expecting, But well worth watching and kept me amused and chuckling throughout 7.5/10

[coopedup]

Watched 2 terrific films this week....

August: Osage County with Meryl Streep and Julia Roberts, among many others

Snowcake with the late great Alan Rickman and Sigourney Weaver.

Dusty at times for both films.

[skeeterm5]

Spectre - I watched this last night. Easily the weakest of the modern Bond films with poor plot and not even saved by good action bits because they weren't.

Really disappointing, 3/10 for me.

[ClockworkCupcake]

skeeterm5 said:

Spectre - I watched this last night. Easily the weakest of the modern Bond films with poor plot and not even saved by good action bits because they weren't.

Really disappointing, 3/10 for me.

First Bond film since The Spy Who Loved Me that I didn't bother to see at the cinema. And still haven't got round to seeing yet even though it is now out on DVD/BD.