Bad Films I watched this weekend

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

Negative Creep

24,977 posts

227 months

Tuesday 17th February 2015
quotequote all
JonRB said:
chris watton said:
I haven't watched it yet, but intend to very soon, but I have heard many complain about a Sherman slugging it out with a Tiger - and winning.

Only in Hollywood...
I can't speak for the film because I haven't seen it, but there were incidents in WW2 of Shermans taking out Tigers. But it wasn't "slugging it out" - it was firing at close range into the thinner side armour of the Tiger. Face on, a Sherman didn't have a chance against a Tiger - its main gun was unable to penetrate the Tiger's frontal armour.

(I happened to be watching 'Famous Tank Battles' on the Discovery Channel the other day and it was about just such a battle)



Edited by JonRB on Tuesday 17th February 09:22
They do show the Shermans initially attacking head on and the shells bouncing off the front. I thought it was a well made film and looked really good, especially the use of tracers, and touched on a part of WW2 we don't often see, but the characters were all very clichéd. It did bug me how it went instantly from day to night in the final battle, and how the grenade that finally killed Brad Pitt seemingly did no damage to him or the inside of the tank

JonRB

74,537 posts

272 months

Tuesday 17th February 2015
quotequote all
Negative Creep said:
They do show the Shermans initially attacking head on and the shells bouncing off the front.
Yes. Apparently the sloped frontal armour of the Tiger not only increased the effective thickness but also caused shells to deflect rather than penetrate. I didn't know that until that aforementioned Discovery Channel programme (although I did know that sloped armour increases effective thickness. I'd just never made the connection with it also deflecting. paperbag )

Also, apparently a Tiger could take out a Sherman with just one shot before the Sherman's main gun was even in range. Which is a bit scary. eek

Edited by JonRB on Tuesday 17th February 19:00

FourWheelDrift

88,506 posts

284 months

Tuesday 17th February 2015
quotequote all
Is it a Tiger II then that is used in Fury. There's only one original runner left in France - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwdxCqLxNSU

Ah, no just seen the clip. It's a Tiger I, frontal armour on that isn't sloped but it is 105mm thick. smile They used the Bovington Museum runner for the film. - Tiger 131 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_131

If it was a Tiger II Brad Pitt wouldn't have stood a chance, short movie. hehe

JonRB

74,537 posts

272 months

Tuesday 17th February 2015
quotequote all
FourWheelDrift said:
Is it a Tiger II then that is used in Fury. There's only one original runner left in France - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwdxCqLxNSU

Ah, no just seen the clip. It's a Tiger I, frontal armour on that isn't sloped but it is 105mm thick. smile They used the Bovington Museum runner for the film. - Tiger 131 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_131

If it was a Tiger II Brad Pitt wouldn't have stood a chance, short movie. hehe
Ah. Ok. I take back everything I have been wittering on about then in that case. paperbag

Asterix

24,438 posts

228 months

Saturday 21st February 2015
quotequote all
Just watched 'Lucy'. I'm a big fan of Luc Besson but he really did crawl up his own arse with this one!

Ovaltine

58 posts

110 months

Saturday 21st February 2015
quotequote all
QRecorded Rollerball the other day, was on late in the week. Watched it last night, thought it was the original, didn't know they had done a remake. They shouldn't have bothered, it was woefull. No idea how it ended, but the girl had nice tits, even if she couldn't act! smile

The_Burg

4,846 posts

214 months

Saturday 21st February 2015
quotequote all
50 Shades, utter bilge. My excuse the wife paid and there might have been benefits. There wasn't.

irocfan

40,429 posts

190 months

Monday 23rd February 2015
quotequote all
mystic blade - some interest but by and large very disappointing 20% with piss poor acting

Watchman

6,391 posts

245 months

Tuesday 24th February 2015
quotequote all
Northmen: A Viking Saga

An empty film with little/no story and no real ending. The whole film is one of those "run from the bad guys" type. Rubbish. I only watched it because I'm enjoying the TV series "Vikings" and hoped for something extra between episodes. It failed.

American Heist

Young Darth Vadar fails to energise a limp script (he can be good in some films - he smoulders well). Adrian Brody overacted. Script was thin. I gave up watching and surfed PH instead.

Let's Kill Ward's Wife

The film seemed to want to set the characters up for a clever story about plotting to kill Ward's wife, the act itself, and then how they got away with it. Instead, they talked about "what if", then accidentally/opportunistically did the deed, then got away with it by accident. The characters didn't react to the event in a way you actually understood either.

Just odd.

renmure

4,242 posts

224 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all
Late to the party here with FURY, but really... what a lot of dross.
I am no film critic, but I am struggling to see how anyone could rate that as better than poor.

Asterix

24,438 posts

228 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all
ash73 said:
Asterix said:
Fury is a middling and ultimately disappointing War film.
Middling? Jeez some people are hard to please, bunch of moaning minnies biggrin

I can understand criticisms of the ending, more so the Vietnam-like morality, but it's anything but mediocre.
The problem is, it's trying to be a serious war film and it's a hotchpotch of lots of bits of stuff.

It's an OK film but let's itself down in a way that Band of Brothers, Das Boot and even Saving Private Ryan doesn't.

toasty

7,472 posts

220 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all
Bad Neighbours - Utterly cringeworthy. Seth Rogen vs Adam Sandler in terms of film sttiness? It's a tough call.

RESSE

5,701 posts

221 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all
Before Midnight.

108 minutes of my life wasted.

Don't bother wasting your time watching it as the story never gets going.


jack01825

1,898 posts

158 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
"Men, Woman and children" 2014 - What a load of old tosh!!

With a 6.1 rating and Adam Sandler and Jenifer Garner I thought it might be quite humorous being a drama comedy.

No story line and a lot of toing and throwing it is a film you just cant get into!

coopedup

3,741 posts

139 months

Thursday 5th March 2015
quotequote all
toasty said:
Bad Neighbours - Utterly cringeworthy. Seth Rogen vs Adam Sandler in terms of film sttiness? It's a tough call.
Fully agree, turned it off after about 15 minutes, total and utter crap

Jader1973

3,989 posts

200 months

Friday 6th March 2015
quotequote all
Tammy.

Susan Sarandon plays Melissa McCarthy's grandmother.

SS is 68, MMcC is 44.

Utter, utter, utter, ste.

1/10.

Tiggsy

10,261 posts

252 months

Friday 6th March 2015
quotequote all
Kingsman - Cringe worthy. No idea what it's trying to be and ends up nailing "rubbish" How I didnt walk out during the head fireworks I have no idea (prob in shock)

Mafffew

2,149 posts

111 months

Friday 6th March 2015
quotequote all
Lucy. Starts off ok, then it all goes to censored


Legend83

9,978 posts

222 months

Friday 6th March 2015
quotequote all
Tycho said:
Pretty accurate if you ask me.... The only Sandler film I like is Happy Gilmore.
The ONLY mainstream Adam Sandler film I have ever enjoyed is Reign Over Me, which was excellent.

james_tigerwoods

16,287 posts

197 months

Friday 6th March 2015
quotequote all
There's a good Adam Sandler film?
TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED