Films I watched this week
Discussion
Watched AntMan last night. Despite being a comics/superhero movie fan, ive become a bit jaded by the onslaught of Marvel films in the last few years, which increasingly rely on CGI for ever more extravagant scenes which conversely become increasingly forgettable and formulaic, and the inevitable "boss-fight" at the end with an enemy who has the same ability (but more power).
So AntMan should have been the same, because it had CGI in spades and the same final showdown - but I loved it. Lots of humour, characters you cared about, and CGI that was there to add to the story, rather than just bring eye candy. Was as fun to watch as the first Iron Man movie. I still laughed at the toy train scene, despite knowing it was coming from having seen the trailer. 8/10
So AntMan should have been the same, because it had CGI in spades and the same final showdown - but I loved it. Lots of humour, characters you cared about, and CGI that was there to add to the story, rather than just bring eye candy. Was as fun to watch as the first Iron Man movie. I still laughed at the toy train scene, despite knowing it was coming from having seen the trailer. 8/10
Halb said:
It's also one of the few films where the protagonist dies/fails. That ultimately doesn't sit well with audiences. 
Western audiences used to Hollywood films maybe. Films from other parts of the world, especially far-eastern cinema, it really is a lottery, and audiences simply accept that as par for the course. 
Pesty said:
Hmm maybe except for Hugh grant. Not too bad. I doubt Daniel Craig et al would play minor supporting roles.
Anyway I too watched eager sanction again. Good film one of clients best IMO under rated.
Pope I've got to waste you a little. Was a bit surprised at some of the language.
Yeah, some of the language was rather funny. I thought all the Indian stuff was just plain wAnyway I too watched eager sanction again. Good film one of clients best IMO under rated.
Pope I've got to waste you a little. Was a bit surprised at some of the language.
k, and only makes sense now if one knows history. Calling the dog, faggot was odd, but I loved the fight scene at the bar.Hugh Grant is rather similar to Moore, and he can do other stuff outside of his famous 'fop Englishman', he's actually pretty decent at other stuff. He just doesn't do it.
ukaskew said:
vixen1700 said:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2866360/reviews?ref_=t...
Coherence.
Really low budget sci-fi on Netflix.
Excellent and well worth a watch.
Glad somebody else has watched this. Made for $50k and better than most sci-fi films put out by the Hollywood studios.Coherence.
Really low budget sci-fi on Netflix.
Excellent and well worth a watch.
8/10
Hunger games: mocking jay part 2.
The fourth film in the hunger games trilogy. As previously mentioned the underlying fact is that it's a bit boring. As with the latest 007 film the 2 1/2 hour running time is it at least 30 minutes too long. Entire sequences could easily be cut out. They are in there because they're in the the book (yes, I admit that I have read the books) but add little to the story apart from justifying the final instalment is split over two films.
There are a couple of pretty decent action sequences, but they are both roughly in the middle of the film. I won't go into spoilers, but there are a couple of things that really frustrate in terms of timing of events that make you think; what was the point of them going to all the trouble of doing X when y happens 10 minutes after. (Sorry if that's a bit cryptic , but I can't do spoiler tags from the iPad)
The worst crime though is the Lord of the rings style multiple ending that seems to be the norm now for overblown film series.
I had really enjoyed the series up to this point and feel that they could have made the final book into a very good movie instead of two very average ones.
6.5/10
The fourth film in the hunger games trilogy. As previously mentioned the underlying fact is that it's a bit boring. As with the latest 007 film the 2 1/2 hour running time is it at least 30 minutes too long. Entire sequences could easily be cut out. They are in there because they're in the the book (yes, I admit that I have read the books) but add little to the story apart from justifying the final instalment is split over two films.
There are a couple of pretty decent action sequences, but they are both roughly in the middle of the film. I won't go into spoilers, but there are a couple of things that really frustrate in terms of timing of events that make you think; what was the point of them going to all the trouble of doing X when y happens 10 minutes after. (Sorry if that's a bit cryptic , but I can't do spoiler tags from the iPad)
The worst crime though is the Lord of the rings style multiple ending that seems to be the norm now for overblown film series.
I had really enjoyed the series up to this point and feel that they could have made the final book into a very good movie instead of two very average ones.
6.5/10
JustinP1 said:
It Follows
I don't watch modern 'horror' films simply because the genre has become iterative and stale in the last ten years, along with the poor production values that comes along with churning out 'Generic Evil Spirit 4'.
Just watched this also, really enjoyed it, nicely shot and didn't get silly at the end. Much, much better than the torture stuff that passes for horror these days. Solid 7.5/10 for me.I don't watch modern 'horror' films simply because the genre has become iterative and stale in the last ten years, along with the poor production values that comes along with churning out 'Generic Evil Spirit 4'.
Two for the money
http://m.imdb.com/title/tt0417217/
3/10
Crap.
No interest in American football, no interest in gambling = didn't care if the characters lived or died.
Basically, a film about a pair of parasitic salesmen.
http://m.imdb.com/title/tt0417217/
3/10
Crap.
No interest in American football, no interest in gambling = didn't care if the characters lived or died.
Basically, a film about a pair of parasitic salesmen.
Just finished watching this on Netflix: "Out of the Furnace" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1206543/?ref_=nv_sr_1
Absolutely brilliant acting by Woody Harrelson, plays the pshyco nutjob to a tee. Christian Bale was also excellent, but I think Harrelson stole this one
Was expecting the usual "avenge they brothers death" movie where main dude blows everything up on a revenge rampage. This wasn't it. Properly dark.
Absolutely brilliant acting by Woody Harrelson, plays the pshyco nutjob to a tee. Christian Bale was also excellent, but I think Harrelson stole this one
Was expecting the usual "avenge they brothers death" movie where main dude blows everything up on a revenge rampage. This wasn't it. Properly dark.
The spiderwick chronicles - 7/10 A family film including goblins, trolls and mystical creatures. Set a spooky house in the woods. I actually really enjoyed it, its sort of harry potter meets lord of the rings, but the children actors were horrendous, wooden as hell.
Perfect cold sunday film, with or without kids.
Perfect cold sunday film, with or without kids.
moanthebairns said:
Rick_1138 said:
Troll Hunter - - Caught it on Netflix.
Strangely compelling, even the mrs liked it. A good enjoyable hour and a half.
The subtitles did ruin it for me, yes, I come over as an uncultured knob, but I always let a little sigh out when I have to read a film. Strangely compelling, even the mrs liked it. A good enjoyable hour and a half.
I never mind reading a film it means I actually pay attention.
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff