neilmc Posted May 28, 2015 Posted May 28, 2015 Finally got to see Avengers: Age of Ultron last night. Although missed the first 5 mins because a friend wanted to go for a pint before hand. Thought it was a good movie.
LeMarchand Posted June 1, 2015 Author Posted June 1, 2015 The Other Woman Made me laugh with reasonable regularity; it's not the greatest film ever, but a pleasant enough watch. San Andreas Surprisingly tense disaster flick. If this sort of thing interests you, get thee to a cinema. Didn't even regret paying full price!
witch Posted June 1, 2015 Posted June 1, 2015 Watched "World War Z" last night Utterly different from the book - you couldn't have made a film like the book but they didn't even follow the story. Why they even bothered to call it that is beyond me. Very unsatisfying film - no real characterisation, the people seemed to skip about from continent to continent with no trouble, and I am glad I never went to the cinema to see it.
unixman_again Posted June 1, 2015 Posted June 1, 2015 Last Woman on Earth which was surprisingly good. FilmOnTv screened Plan 9 from Outer Space last Saturday evening. I'd forgotten just how funny it is.
MrMat Posted June 1, 2015 Posted June 1, 2015 So i watched Predestination the other night...ARRRGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH my brain!! Interesting film to say the least. Need to watch it again to try and understand it. 1
Quackers Posted June 1, 2015 Posted June 1, 2015 Spy, was funny, comes out general cinema release Friday.
CHR1S Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 Ex-Machina Another cracker. The lead character (can't remember his name) is not great but doesn't detract from the film too much. Plays on some interesting ideas around artificial intelligence and the concept of whether AI can feel human emotions etc (alot of the ideas are actually based on books written by Alan Turing). Each to their own but I hated it.... Watched - "the boy next door"... what utter drivvle (spoiler Jennifer Lopez gets her kit off) "Kingsman" ... was ok, didnt get why people rated it so highly "Unbroken" ... long winded but rewarding movie, I enjoyed it, missus didnt. "The Terminal" ... second time of watching it and still enjoyed it, not Tom's best film but still good. "The Money Pit" ... another of Tom's B movies, killed an afternoon.
tmcd35 Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 So i watched Predestination the other night...ARRRGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH my brain!! Interesting film to say the least. Need to watch it again to try and understand it. The last time I watch a movie based on a forum recommendation... ...I need some Aspirin! I worked out the major plot twists well ahead of time (let's face it, they are sign posted) - but still, trying to untangle resulting paradox - arrggghhhhh!!!!!! Great film, kudos, thank you. 1
LeMarchand Posted June 2, 2015 Author Posted June 2, 2015 "the boy next door"... what utter drivvle (spoiler Jennifer Lopez gets her kit off) I'm sold! Seriously, when I heard about this I was thinking that it sounded a bit of an icky subject for J-Lo. Then I saw the trailer and realised that the "Boy" in the title made it a case for Trade Descriptions. 1
CHR1S Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 I'm sold! Seriously, when I heard about this I was thinking that it sounded a bit of an icky subject for J-Lo. Then I saw the trailer and realised that the "Boy" in the title made it a case for Trade Descriptions. You get the impression it started off a little more risque, underage child, school teacher and then they saw sense and changed it to a 19 year old redoing a year. haha
witch Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 Just been to see "San Andreas" and was very pleasantly surprised! I really enjoyed it - there was quite a lot of suspense and Dwayne Johnson was not bad at all. Some of the lines were a bit cheesy but that wasn't his fault. The girl who played Blake was really weird looking - her eyes are so large that she looks like a cartoon character!
Iain.Faulkner Posted June 3, 2015 Posted June 3, 2015 I watched the third of the Hobbit Films last night (Battle of the 5 Armies), I'm a big fan of the LOTR series and the Hobbit as well, and enjoyed the film (pretty much as I would expect in one of these in all honesty) up until the very end when they seemed desperate to try and tie the end of the Hobbit Films in with the beginning of the LOTR films. Legolas is sent off to meet Stryder in the North (ok fine)....however, my issue is that in the Fellowship of the Ring, Bilbo Baggins is celebrating his 111th birthday. In the Hobbit films Bilbo is clearly a much much younger hobbit so there has to be a significant passage of time between the end of the third hobbit film and the Fellowship of the Rings. This isn't an issue for the Elves who live for many centuries, or the Hobbits who also live a decent amount of time....but for Stryder...he is a man! So for him to be the age he is in the Fellowship of the rings, surely he wouldn't have been born at the end of the Hobbit film? Even if he had, he would have been approaching pensionable age when the fellowship starts? I could be wrong on the timelines, but it all felt a bit unbelievable to me. Rant Over
LeMarchand Posted June 3, 2015 Author Posted June 3, 2015 The girl who played Blake was really weird looking - her eyes are so large that she looks like a cartoon character! I thought both her and her "mum" had very striking eyes.
tmcd35 Posted June 3, 2015 Posted June 3, 2015 Decided to pay for Sky Movies on my Sky Now subscription (can't find much to watch on Netflix at the moment), and found - A Millions Ways To Die In The West. Absolutely brilliant comedy! Seth McFarlane (Family Guy) is a genius.
sonofsanta Posted June 3, 2015 Posted June 3, 2015 (edited) I watched the third of the Hobbit Films last night (Battle of the 5 Armies), I'm a big fan of the LOTR series and the Hobbit as well, and enjoyed the film (pretty much as I would expect in one of these in all honesty) up until the very end when they seemed desperate to try and tie the end of the Hobbit Films in with the beginning of the LOTR films. Legolas is sent off to meet Stryder in the North (ok fine)....however, my issue is that in the Fellowship of the Ring, Bilbo Baggins is celebrating his 111th birthday. In the Hobbit films Bilbo is clearly a much much younger hobbit so there has to be a significant passage of time between the end of the third hobbit film and the Fellowship of the Rings. This isn't an issue for the Elves who live for many centuries, or the Hobbits who also live a decent amount of time....but for Stryder...he is a man! So for him to be the age he is in the Fellowship of the rings, surely he wouldn't have been born at the end of the Hobbit film? Even if he had, he would have been approaching pensionable age when the fellowship starts? I could be wrong on the timelines, but it all felt a bit unbelievable to me. Rant Over Aragorn is a Dúnedain, the Old Blood, and lives to something daft like 210 in the books. He is the age of a pensioner in the LotR films, he just doesn't look it. I'm sure he mentions his age at some point in the LotR films, in conversation at Rivendell. The actual error is that the One Ring is meant to stop Bilbo aging, so at the start of Fellowship when he celebrates his eleventy-first birthday, he's meant to look the same as he did 60 years before when he first obtained the Ring, when he was the Hobbit equivalent of 20-something (33 is their coming of age, equivalent to 18, so 51 is probably mid-to-late twenties). So it should have been Martin Freeman playing Bilbo in the original films, until he gives the ring up at least. Always bugged me, that. Edited June 3, 2015 by sonofsanta
pcstru Posted June 3, 2015 Posted June 3, 2015 Weirdly perhaps I hated LOTR as a book (an almost endless succession of wierd names washing over me, in one eye and out the other) but thought the films were brilliant. The hobbit was quite the reverse - I loved the book but the films were meh - they just feel like milking a cash cow.
LeMarchand Posted June 3, 2015 Author Posted June 3, 2015 but for Stryder...he is a man! So for him to be the age he is in the Fellowship of the rings, surely he wouldn't have been born at the end of the Hobbit film? Even if he had, he would have been approaching pensionable age when the fellowship starts? He was 87/88 in LotR. His lineage means that he's more long-lived than normal humans.
LeMarchand Posted June 3, 2015 Author Posted June 3, 2015 Decided to pay for Sky Movies on my Sky Now subscription (can't find much to watch on Netflix at the moment), and found - A Millions Ways To Die In The West. Absolutely brilliant comedy! Seth McFarlane (Family Guy) is a genius. I know! Can't understand the hate! He was 87/88 in LotR. His lineage means that he's more long-lived than normal humans. Too slow, again!
Mako Posted June 3, 2015 Posted June 3, 2015 but for Stryder...he is a man! So for him to be the age he is in the Fellowship of the rings, surely he wouldn't have been born at the end of the Hobbit film? Even if he had, he would have been approaching pensionable age when the fellowship starts? Relevant. The extended editions of all the films are just superior due to the additional scenes.
Garacesh Posted June 3, 2015 Posted June 3, 2015 The actual error is that the One Ring is meant to stop Bilbo aging, so at the start of Fellowshipwhen he celebrates his eleventy-first birthday, he's meant to look the same as he did 60 years before, when he was the Hobbit equivalent of 20-something (33 is their coming of age, equivalent to 18). So it should have been Martin Freeman playing Bilbo in the original films, until he gives the ring up at least. Always bugged me, that. They did touch on that, though. Gandalf says "You haven't aged a day" or something to that nature. And I believe it is noted that 111 is old for a hobbit. And then when they find him in Rivendell he does look older (especially Scary Bilbo.. shudder.. But then again reddit has made that worse for me.. do not ask me about what I mean if you don't already know, it will scar you for life!) But then again I've never read the books, nor have I seen any of the Hobbit films, so maybe it makes more sense to me as I don't have the whole picture.
tmcd35 Posted June 3, 2015 Posted June 3, 2015 The extended editions of all the films are just superior due to the additional scenes. *waits very patiently for extended edition UHD six-pack BluRay collection*
sonofsanta Posted June 3, 2015 Posted June 3, 2015 That's the scene I'm thinking of @Mako, cheers They sort of worked in older Bilbo, but original Bilbo at the start of Fellowship wasn't young enough looking for what the Ring should have done. But I suppose it's one of those things that just needs a bit of suspension of disbelief on my part, because switching actors would have been confusing to everyone who wasn't a LotR nerd I thought the LotR films were staggering works of genius, and the Hobbit films were bloated works of money making. Enjoyable enough, but unlike LotR where I wanted the Extended Editions for more film, with the Hobbits I want it editing down into a single 3-4 hour film. I think someone's already made a first stab at just that, in fact. 1
Sagima Posted June 3, 2015 Posted June 3, 2015 I thought the LotR films were staggering works of genius, and the Hobbit films were bloated works of money making. Enjoyable enough, but unlike LotR where I wanted the Extended Editions for more film, with the Hobbits I want it editing down into a single 3-4 hour film. I think someone's already made a first stab at just that, in fact. Couldn't agree more
Iain.Faulkner Posted June 3, 2015 Posted June 3, 2015 Brilliant, I knew there'd be an explanation :-)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now