The last movie I saw was...

[sonofsanta]

I did not have a good weekend in movies.

 

Parker starts out as a typical Jason Statham movie--he's the criminal with the strong moral code, gets double crossed and sets out for revenge. He's clever, he's resourceful, and everything moves along at a fast pace for the first 30 minutes. Theeeen Jennifer Lopez turns up and it turns in to some kind of weird romantic comedy, with her checking his bum out and him putting on an atrocious Texan accent in a ridiculous hat, and all this faff about her struggles at work as a nearly-broke divorcee, and omg honestly it's like they cut Maid in Manhattan into the middle of The Mechanic. I have never known a film change character so completely and catastrophically as this one. Don't even bother.

 

And then Zoolander 2 has been the straw on this camel's back when it comes to comedy sequels. Too knowing, too self-referential, trying too hard and shoehorning too many celebrity cameos in with a nod and a wink instead of playing it straight as the first one did (yes, it was ridiculous, but it was internally consistent, and didn't keep going "eh? EH?" at the audience after each joke). There's a couple of good jokes, and it's not the worst of the recent comedy sequels (better than Anchorman 2, which I can't even remember now, and certainly better than Hot Tub Time Machine 2 which oh god why would you do that), but it's just not worth bothering with, frankly.

 

Just going to rewatch the Wolf of Wall Street this weekend. At least I know it'll be good.

[witch]

ARQ

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5640450/

 

Another take on the groundhog day type of issue

It was worth a watch, I thought

Edited September 20, 2016 by witch

[mavhc]

Parker 41% RT, Zoolander 2: 24% RT, it's easy to avoid.

 

Anyway, the latest movie I saw is: The Great Dictator, Chaplin film about Donald Trump. Funny stuff, and also important historically.

[LeMarchand]

National Treasure: Book of Secrets (2007) - IMDb

 

Oh my. This film is so corny but I found this to be a great film to watch. Sure its wacky and its got an all star hollywood style hacker that can do absolutely anything, but if you ever watched Goonies and rooted for the good guys you will like this film.

Its got some very impressive stars like Mr Cage and Helen Mirren. Cant believe I have never heard about this film before now. And its got a prequel ... awesome. Guess im going to be watching that tomorrow

Happy days.

 

To be more accurate, you've watched the sequel to the first film rather than the first film that has a prequel . (I think that makes sense). Channel 4 are doing some sort of remake. The casting is a bit odd, Nic Cage = Robbie Coltrane, Helen Mirren = Julie Walters - only Diane Kruger = Andrea Riseborough seems reasonable (though they've not made her as glamorous).

 

 

 

Parker 41% RT, Zoolander 2: 24% RT, it's easy to avoid.

 

I really hate the way RT ratings are quoted as the ultimate and inviolate arbiter of quality. (Not necessarily by you!)

[mavhc]

You can also see that imdb and metacritic hated it, no worries.

[LeMarchand]

You can also see that imdb and metacritic hated it, no worries.

 

Whilst RT tends to be the one everyone tends to mention, I'm not a great fan of going by ratings aggregation. If I liked the trailer, I find I'll generally like the film. I may be swayed either way by reviews from certain sources if I'm "on the fence" as to whether to make the trip to the cinema (though I'll still make the time when it's on a movie channel), but there are far too many critically-reviled films that I've enjoyed to just go "Low on RT; not worth my time".

 

Plus, critics can change their minds: 10 Great Films Considered Failures in Their Time | PopMatters

[mavhc]

Whilst RT tends to be the one everyone tends to mention, I'm not a great fan of going by ratings aggregation. If I liked the trailer, I find I'll generally like the film. I may be swayed either way by reviews from certain sources if I'm "on the fence" as to whether to make the trip to the cinema (though I'll still make the time when it's on a movie channel), but there are far too many critically-reviled films that I've enjoyed to just go "Low on RT; not worth my time".

 

Plus, critics can change their minds: 10 Great Films Considered Failures in Their Time | PopMatters

 

But the trailer is biased to make you want to pay to see it. If you like popular yet badly reviewed films go with IMDb ratings.

 

Of those 10 films I see "decent reviews" "Only the critics embraced him", A non-director's cut of Bladerunner, "garnered good notices", and one still not considered great. So 5 wrong films in 100 years, not a bad record.

[Sagima]

Watched Victor Frankenstein at the weekend - mainly, i believe, because it has Daniel Radcliffe in it and the other mr sagima has a bit of a thing for him. I don't think I'd have missed anything if i hadn't seen any of the films with him in. (he also has a thing for that bloke who plays moriarty in sherlock and is also in this film and he's not against seeing freddie fox on a saturday night either). He's hopeful Daniel will get the new bond gig - can't see it myself as he seems a little short.

 

Overall not a bad film. I'd give it 6 out of 10.

 

It's the only frankenstein film I've ever watched so I can't really compare it to any of them but the monster could have had a bit more screen time (and the monkey a bit less)

 

A few notes

 

It made me wonder if Frankenstein was a sci-fi novel (it seems a bit old to be but maybe it was an early attempt) - i've never actually read it but in my 6 vodka state the thought did crop up

Charles' portrayal of Frankenstein senior was markedly similar to his tywin lanister (I really haven't seen him in much - he might not act at all and just be like that irl)

A couple of times James (usually in the shouty bits) seemed to have forgotten his character wasn't scottish

[LeMarchand]

But the trailer is biased to make you want to pay to see it. If you like popular yet badly reviewed films go with IMDb ratings.

 

Of those 10 films I see "decent reviews" "Only the critics embraced him", A non-director's cut of Bladerunner, "garnered good notices", and one still not considered great. So 5 wrong films in 100 years, not a bad record.

 

At least the trailer has usually got footage from the film, so you're not relying on someone else's feelings or thoughts, which may be influenced by bribery, personal foibles, wanting make sure that they don't fall foul of various noisome social cliques etc etc.

 

IMDb is too easily gamed (especially early on in the process). As much as I like Game of Thrones, I was appalled by the amount of "10" votes it had based on the trailers alone, and look at the unwarranted hatred for the new Ghostbusters.

 

I think those were the low hanging fruit in that article. I'm pretty sure that if you had access to contemporary reviews of a good many "classics" that you'd find many more changes of critical opinion. Zoolander springs to mind.

 

Watched Victor Frankenstein at the weekend - mainly, i believe, because it has Daniel Radcliffe in it and the other mr sagima has a bit of a thing for him. I don't think I'd have missed anything if i hadn't seen any of the films with him in. (he also has a thing for that bloke who plays moriarty in sherlock and is also in this film and he's not against seeing freddie fox on a saturday night either). He's hopeful Daniel will get the new bond gig - can't see it myself as he seems a little short.

 

Overall not a bad film. I'd give it 6 out of 10.

 

It's the only frankenstein film I've ever watched so I can't really compare it to any of them but the monster could have had a bit more screen time (and the monkey a bit less)

 

A few notes

 

It made me wonder if Frankenstein was a sci-fi novel (it seems a bit old to be but maybe it was an early attempt) - i've never actually read it but in my 6 vodka state the thought did crop up

Charles' portrayal of Frankenstein senior was markedly similar to his tywin lanister (I really haven't seen him in much - he might not act at all and just be like that irl)

A couple of times James (usually in the shouty bits) seemed to have forgotten his character wasn't scottish

 

Harry Potter as Bond? At least it would keep the BondIsNotBlonde crew happy. I quite like DR, but can't see him as Bond at this stage in his career. Saw some pics of Jamie "Billy Elliot" Bell who's on some lists, and I could see him as a successor for Craig (if DC turns down that $150 million).

 

Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (the book, not the Branagh film) is often cited as the first modern SF book. I'm struggling to think of any films where Charles Dance has been much different to his GoT performance.

[mavhc]

At least the trailer has usually got footage from the film, so you're not relying on someone else's feelings or thoughts, which may be influenced by bribery, personal foibles, wanting make sure that they don't fall foul of various noisome social cliques etc etc.

 

IMDb is too easily gamed (especially early on in the process). As much as I like Game of Thrones, I was appalled by the amount of "10" votes it had based on the trailers alone, and look at the unwarranted hatred for the new Ghostbusters.

Well, that's why you go with the aggregate.

 

IMDb could do with more statistics, variance, outlier detection etc.

 

Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (the book, not the Branagh film) is often cited as the first modern SF book. I'm struggling to think of any films where Charles Dance has been much different to his GoT performance.

 

He did play the alien in Childhood's End

[LeMarchand]

He did play the alien in Childhood's End

 

He certainly looked different! Not sure he acted any differently though.

[witch]

Just seen The Magnificent Seven

I liked it very much - yes, it isn't the original but that was made in 1960 so I think a remake is acceptable.

How acceptable a character like Denzel Washington's would be in a Southern State after the Civil War is debatable though

[LeMarchand]

The Dressmaker

 

 

Starts off a bit like Chocolat but set in a particularly unpleasant Australian township c. 1950 but just when you think it's all worked out things swerve off in a direction you think you can see until it all goes a bit High Plains Drifter with fabulous frocks. Although she looks great and possibly the same age as Liam Hemsworth, as we all know Kate Winslet is quite a bit older it's hard to believe that they're school chums. I did quite enjoy it, but wouldn't necessarily recommend it.

[witch]

Free State of Jones (2016) - IMDb

A disillusioned Confederate army deserter returns to Mississippi and leads a militia of fellow deserters, runaway slaves, and women in an uprising against the corrupt local Confederate government.

Not bad and passed the time, if you like this kind of thing it might float your boat.

 

It is based on a true story, apparently. I'd never heard of it but looked it up and it was very interesting

[mavhc]

The Pianist, good, but harsh

[Dos_Box]

I watched The Big Short on Netflix last night.

A great film about guys who saw what was happening to the US housing market in the mid noughties and bet on it to fail.

Based on a true story and there is (surprisngly) quite a bit of soul searching by those players who belived in the US financial system right up until they discovered the huge fraud the US banks were doing to hide the size of the problem.

[LeMarchand]

The Girl With All The Gifts

 

For a film that starts off by trying to make its subject a mystery, it's a shame that the trailer, publicity and pretty much every review gives the game away. I'm going to put a "Spoilers Below" warning when I start mentioning things that it might be best avoiding if you have somehow managed to avoid knowing what the film is about.

 

Anyway, the film starts with a bright, friendly and seemingly normal young girl in a cell. Scared soldiers force her at gunpoint into the sort of wheelchair that they might have used on Hannibal Lecter and she is taken to a class full of similarly bound children. Apart from whatever means that they must be restrained, your teachers would probably kill for a class this intelligent and clever. Just what is wrong? We soon find out, and an attack on the base where the children are kept means that the young girl (Melanie), her teacher, a scientist, the base commander and a few redshirts must venture out into a ravaged London in the hopes of finding a safe haven and possibly a way to reverse the disaster than has fallen.

 

I really enjoyed this, but it's quite bleak. Cautiously recommended, but it was a shame that the cinema was so empty for such a well made British film. It's hard to believe the budget was <£5m.

 

S

P

O

I

L

E

R

S

 

B

E

L

O

W

 

For a film that tried hard for scientific accuracy, I'm not sure that the life-cycle of the fungus at the root of the problem made sense. Also unsure as to how the sole human survivor could last. Some interesting moral dilemmas, and while I can see why they cut the books "Junkers" (violent tribes of humans - too "Mad Max") it made Melanie's decision less sympathetic (to a human). The end reminded me a lot of the book "I Am Legend" (not seen the recent film but the other 2 aren't very close to it).

[sonofsanta]

The end reminded me a lot of the book "I Am Legend" (not seen the recent film but the other 2 aren't very close to it).

 

Don't. Or if you do, turn it off twenty minutes before the end and pretend it ends the way the book does. It, er, ends in a way that means the title doesn't make any sense at all anymore. Top work!

[LeMarchand]

Don't. Or if you do, turn it off twenty minutes before the end and pretend it ends the way the book does. It, er, ends in a way that means the title doesn't make any sense at all anymore. Top work!

 

Aw, hell no!

 

I have read the "great" script that they "should have" used and wasn't impressed, so I've always avoided the film. Intrigued now...

[claireadams]

Myself and one of the senior engineers have a bit of a thing for b movies, especially zombie ones. We watched redneck zombies while at work the other day, was very funny

[sparkeh]

Lucy.

 

No idea what to think of this film. Any help much appreciated.

[LeMarchand]

Lucy.

 

No idea what to think of this film. Any help much appreciated.

 

I'm not sure that you were supposed to think too much about it.

[sparkeh]

With lucy they took the idea and ran with it forrest gump style. Use the full potential of your mind and become godlike.

Yeah... I was kinda enjoying as a bit of a silly romp until it got lost in science babble and she turned into a giant computer, gave Morgan Freeman a memory stick and disintegrated. Wonder whether it disappeared up it's own wosit (if you know what I mean).

 

I'm not sure that you were supposed to think too much about it.

You are probably right

[speckytecky]

Bridget Jones's Baby - loved it. A real hoot.

[elsiegee40]

Bridget Jones's Baby - loved it. A real hoot.

 

Daughter and I have just been to see this.

 

We have to agree; it was very funny.

 

Without giving anything away, the revolving door scene in particular had the whole cinema howling with laughter

Edited October 2, 2016 by elsiegee40