|
varsas
3,115 posts
72 months
|
Pesty said: Smiler. said: Does the 2nd "cockney geezer" sherlock holmes improve after 15 minutes? Yes some absolutely stunning scenes. especially the slow mo runnning through the woods. No, it's pretty dull and quite boring and drags on forever.
|
|
|
SWoll
4,431 posts
128 months
|
varsas said: Pesty said: Smiler. said: Does the 2nd "cockney geezer" sherlock holmes improve after 15 minutes? Yes some absolutely stunning scenes. especially the slow mo runnning through the woods. No, it's pretty dull and quite boring and drags on forever. Throuroughly enjoyed it personally, although if you weren't a fan of the first film it is unlikely to change your opinion.
|
|
|
Planet Claire
1,514 posts
79 months
|
On the recommendation of PH we watched Headhunters, a thumbs-ups from us. Last night we watched The Secret in Their Eyes, an Argentinian film. Very good, well worth a watch.
|
|
|
Pulse
8,724 posts
88 months
|
TheHeretic said: Pulse said: LuS1fer said: Not sure I agree. It was far less than the hype. OK for a chick flick though. I hadn't realised there was much hype, as I tend to just go by the synopsis on IMDb. I liked it, and I'd definitely rate it 8 out of 10. Very much a 'Lost In Translation' type film. I enjoyed it. John Carter. As someone who read the books many moons ago, I was dreading this film being a hideous crap feat, but I really enjoyed it. Granted, the cheesy 'John Carter... Virginia' bit, and the sully salutes were a bit daft, but the rest I thought was excellent. You just have to ignore the character you remember from the book. Funnily enough, I have that one stacked up to watch as well. Perhaps we'll watch that tonight then!
|
|
|
im
28,385 posts
87 months
|
Pulse said: TheHeretic said: Pulse said: LuS1fer said: Not sure I agree. It was far less than the hype. OK for a chick flick though. I hadn't realised there was much hype, as I tend to just go by the synopsis on IMDb. I liked it, and I'd definitely rate it 8 out of 10. Very much a 'Lost In Translation' type film. I enjoyed it. John Carter. As someone who read the books many moons ago, I was dreading this film being a hideous crap feat, but I really enjoyed it. Granted, the cheesy 'John Carter... Virginia' bit, and the sully salutes were a bit daft, but the rest I thought was excellent. You just have to ignore the character you remember from the book. Funnily enough, I have that one stacked up to watch as well. Perhaps we'll watch that tonight then!  Its not a bad film at all. Don't know why it was slated so much.
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
TheHeretic
69,425 posts
125 months
|
im said: Its not a bad film at all. Don't know why it was slated so much. It was the same with Conan and Clash of the Titans. Remakes, in which the originals were 'classics', but you were dreading them being utter crud feats. Unfortunately for the 2 mentioned they were. John Carter was excellent. Cannot wait for the second now. 
|
|
|
LuS1fer
28,898 posts
115 months
|
Pirates of the Caribbean - On Stranger Tides
This seemed to get a bit of a roasting which surprised me given how average the whole series was. All I can say is it's quite watchable and no worse or better than any other. Penelope Cruz is bloody irritating but isn't she always.
|
|
|
Cotty
25,076 posts
154 months
|
|
|
TheHeretic
69,425 posts
125 months
|
Cotty said: 9 is brilliant!
|
|
|
KB_S1
5,944 posts
99 months
|
TheHeretic said: 9 is brilliant! I found it very flat. I liked the premise and the storyline but it just didn't seem to get going at all.
|
|
|
Halb
18,105 posts
53 months
|
Deep Impact, jeez what a hopeless horrible s  tty film. This was the serious alternative to Armageddon? That much better and that was kitsch nonsense. KB_S1 said: I found it very flat.
I liked the premise and the storyline but it just didn't seem to get going at all. Yeah I know what you mean, the promise was there, but it never really found it's feet to be great.
|
|
|
Stedman
4,920 posts
62 months
|
The Other Guys 
|
|
|
SWoll
4,431 posts
128 months
|
TheHeretic said: It was the same with Conan and Clash of the Titans. Remakes, in which the originals were 'classics', but you were dreading them being utter crud feats. Unfortunately for the 2 mentioned they were. John Carter was excellent. Cannot wait for the second now. Going to watch it tomorrow and looking forward to it after the positive comments on here. TBH I didnt find COTT too offensive and my son really enjoyed it. Conan on the other hand was bloody awful...
|
|
|
toasty
3,290 posts
90 months
|
2 from opposite ends of the spectrum.
Avengers Assemble - Superheroes, lots of guns and explosions, a couple of funny bits. 7/10
Potiche - French comedy about middle aged trophy wife reclaiming her life with Catherine Deneuve and Gerard Depardieu. 7/10
|
|
|
moanthebairns
4,557 posts
68 months
|
Negative Creep said: The Grey - Liam Neeson versus a pack of wolves in Alaska might sound like another typical action film, but it's more of a drama that's as bleak as the landscape. By using "everyman" blue collar males as the protagonists, it instantly becomes more interesting than the usual crazy college kids schlock. The scenery looks stunning and the director does a good job of keeping you interested throughout, and wondering where the next attack will come from. I also found it very useful for scaring pet cats Watched this last night and I totally agree with your post, apart for the pet bit . I was both gripped and crapping myself throughout the film. I didn¡¦t think it would be that good but it really does play on your primevil fears. Thought Liam Neeson was superb as ever, really recommend this film. 9/10
|
|
|
varsas
3,115 posts
72 months
|
SWoll said: varsas said: Pesty said: Smiler. said: Does the 2nd "cockney geezer" sherlock holmes improve after 15 minutes? Yes some absolutely stunning scenes. especially the slow mo runnning through the woods. No, it's pretty dull and quite boring and drags on forever. Throuroughly enjoyed it personally, although if you weren't a fan of the first film it is unlikely to change your opinion. Maybe if I hadn't seen the first one I would have liked it better, I thought it was basically the same film, so was a bit bored. Too much action not enough sleuthing as well. Almost worth watching for moriarty though, he was superb.
|
|
|
Hammerhead
1,458 posts
124 months
|
The Guard: LOL Irish cop vs some dodgy drug dealers indie filum. Brilliant!
|
|
|
Legend83
Original Poster
6,446 posts
92 months
|
The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo
Slow, like the book, but Fincher's direction kept it interesting. Rooney Mara has a great butt.
8/10
War Horse
I thought this was poor. Not sure if Spielberg was trying to present it as a theatre show within a film or not, but the production values were terrible - blatant CGI and backgrounds, you could hear the echoes coming of the studio walls when people yelled outdoors.
Very scripted, poor acting, fairly boring and apparently every British soldier had a moustache and said "tally-ho" in WW1.
3/10
|
|
|
Smiler.
5,415 posts
100 months
|
varsas said: SWoll said: varsas said: Pesty said: Smiler. said: Does the 2nd "cockney geezer" sherlock holmes improve after 15 minutes? Yes some absolutely stunning scenes. especially the slow mo runnning through the woods. No, it's pretty dull and quite boring and drags on forever. Throuroughly enjoyed it personally, although if you weren't a fan of the first film it is unlikely to change your opinion. Maybe if I hadn't seen the first one I would have liked it better, I thought it was basically the same film, so was a bit bored. Too much action not enough sleuthing as well. Almost worth watching for moriarty though, he was superb. It seemed to me that some scenes in the early part of the film were Lock Stock with mutton chops. All formulaic - and is slo-mo now expected in every single action film? Still, I 'spose there's only so much one can put in a film that hasn't been done a thousand times before.
|
|
|
LuS1fer
28,898 posts
115 months
|
Legend83 said: and apparently every British soldier had a moustache and said "tally-ho" in WW1. Well certainly in the earlier wars, officers had to have a moustache, it was compulsory - or so I read recently. Look at any "working man" photos from that era and you will find nearly everyone DID have a moustache. A photo of some miners from that era I saw recently showed a vast collection of hairy lippage, some akin to a yard broom. Doubt they said "tally-ho" much though I'm sure they didn't utter profanities to anything like the degree our current generation does.
|
|
