Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

"Now Showing"

thx said:
What Lies Beneath - The beginning and very end except for a few details is really good and exciting. It was a good thriller overall, nice acting by Michelle Pfeiffer. There was a few details which 'sunk' this movie, that was a bit sad to be honest, as the movie could've been better, but no. 7.2/10
Click to expand...

One of the first films to use CGI subtly to make the direction more interesting. It's something you have to look out for, but things like the door closing on the camera, but the camera follows through it seamlessly. Or the camera pans past Michelle's face as she's on the floor, and actually goes through the floor and you view her from under the floor.

It's a directorial showcase, but not a terribly great film unfortunately. I loved watching it for the first time though as the direction was jaw dropping (then, it's all old hat now).

thx said:
Blade Runner - Great atmoshpere, mood, cinematography. Beautiful movie, which I expected to have more action because of Harrison Ford, but it was still good, definately over average. 8/10
Click to expand...

I love Blade Runner, but it's aged badly. It just doesn't stand up too well today. I watched it back in around 1986 or 87 and it was the most fantastic film I'd ever seen. I loved it. Everything about it was just amazing. One of the most advanced and wonderfully made films ever. It's such a shame that it couldn't keep pace with modern films and their technological advances, but it's not far off still. The biggest issue is pacing. Ridley Scott is very much into a slow, atmospheric pace. His films are a joy to watch in terms of cinematography and direction, but very slow for a modern day audience expecting much more from their films. It's sad that this kind of film has died off now, films just don't have quite as much emotion in them from the director anymore.
 
I went to see The Mist today, and was expecting a lot from it, because I've heard good reviews. Well, I can't say it completely lived up to my expectations, but it wasn't too bad.

SPOILERS (Highlight to read - furie

So, I was interested to see what the things in the mist actually were. It turned out they were pretty much just big bugs. Not too terrifying, but I have to say, forget the bugs taking me and pulling me apart, I'd have had a heart attack if I were attacked by little and big spiders. Literally thousands of little spiders! It was kinda creepy.

The end, wow. I quite liked the end. I'd be soo annoyed if I were in the main character's position! Killing four people including your own kid, and then the mist clears up minutes later. UGH!

No more spoilers

By the way, the old lady! <3

Anyway, I'd give the film about a 6.5/10. It's worth a watch, but not at the overpriced cinema.
 
When I first saw Blade Runner it was ok, but it really didn't grab my attention enough, I think it was too hyped up before I sat down and watched it. I have got the DVD but havn't been bothered to watch it since I had to write an essay several times on the film. I agree with your point Furie where it was amazing in its day but now it can't compare with the next generation of films.


Anyways due to being ill and having no internet access at home yesterday I decided to watch True Lies. I don't care what anyone says, this is one of my favorite films, its so enjoyable to watch, its easy on the eye, its fun, action packed and amusing. The Governator :p was great in this, the chemistry between him and Jamie lee Curtis felt so real at the beginning (relationship falling apart etc). I feel you don't see enough of the annoying daughter to feel sorry for her at the end, but the rest of the film makes up for that.

I urge everyone to watch this great, enjoyable film (probably Arnie's best), I give it about 9 out of 10 :D


P.S. I love how peeps are using my reviews now to explain their views, makes me feel happy :p
 
^ You journalist you

Well have watched a few films recently that I haven't watched in a good long time.

First of which is Liar Liar, the 1996 film with Jim Carrey. As well as the story is another one of his drab repetitive characters the film has few laughs with a terrible performance by Cary Elwes.
Give it about 4/10.

Dumb & Dumber, yes another Jim Carrey film, (doing a FS project on him) this is one of the best modern classics, t is clever in its subtle jokes, some of them ive only recently got, it has slapstick, mild gross out humour.
Lovely comedy duo of Carrey and Daniels.
Better than his other comedies ;) 8/10.

Last one which is a new film, but not a film really is Faranheit 9/11 by Michael Moore, it was deeply thought provoking into how shocking the American goverment changed their minds so quickly and how corrupt they are.
It definatley exploited their weaknesses and how they aren't such a superpower they think they are.
8/10.
 
Lord Kotowa said:
^ You journalist you

Well have watched a few films recently that I haven't watched in a good long time.

First of which is Liar Liar, the 1996 film with Jim Carrey. As well as the story is another one of his drab repetitive characters the film has few laughs with a terrible performance by Cary Elwes.
Give it about 4/10.

Dumb & Dumber, yes another Jim Carrey film, (doing a FS project on him) this is one of the best modern classics, t is clever in its subtle jokes, some of them ive only recently got, it has slapstick, mild gross out humour.
Lovely comedy duo of Carrey and Daniels.
Better than his other comedies ;) 8/10.

Last one which is a new film, but not a film really is Faranheit 9/11 by Michael Moore, it was deeply thought provoking into how shocking the American goverment changed their minds so quickly and how corrupt they are.
It definatley exploited their weaknesses and how they aren't such a superpower they think they are.
8/10.
Click to expand...

Lol, Dumb & Dumber I used to find really funny, rolling on the floor with laughter but now I find it a bit boring, I think I watched it too many times, also on my school ski holiday in 2004 on the coach the teachers put it on the tv and laughed at the most unfunny moments which really put me and my friends off the film.

I enjoyed Faranheit 9/11, I find Micheal Moore films really gripping and watchable, I think some of his theories are flawed but the way he tells the audience his views, you believe his every word.
 
First of which is Liar Liar, the 1996 film with Jim Carrey. As well as the story is another one of his drab repetitive characters the film has few laughs with a terrible performance by Cary Elwes.
Click to expand...

Cary Elwes has crap performances in all the films I've seen him in, especially Saw. His performance in that can be what one might call a dud. Though the movie is great, his acting is just terrible, and I don't think he should have a part as a main character in anything, maybe not even a secondary character.

I didn't think Liar Liar was too special a film though. It was alright, but it wasn't like, amazing.
 
peep said:
When I first saw Blade Runner it was ok, but it really didn't grab my attention enough, I think it was too hyped up before I sat down and watched it. I have got the DVD but havn't been bothered to watch it since I had to write an essay several times on the film. I agree with your point Furie where it was amazing in its day but now it can't compare with the next generation of films.
Click to expand...

Well... Ridley Scott has done a George Lucas... He's remastered the film one last time, and neatened up the effects with some CGI.

I'm not sure I'm convinced by the idea, but "Blade Runner: The Final Cut" it released on Monday.

I may get the BluRay version...
 
furie said:
I may get the BluRay version...
Click to expand...
PS3 owners and their posh DVDs :p.

I didn't think Blade Runner had aged, but then I've not actually seen it properly since ...1995? :D If you ignore the prominent brands that have since gone bust, does it really look old? It may have slow pacing, but that still happens in films.

Speaking of which...saw American Gangster last night. Mostly-true story about a Harlem drug lord and the detective who chases him.

Dare I say it, typical Ridley Scott film - well made but no pacing, and with it being 2.5 hours of not much action that makes it too slow. (Doesn't mean all his films are slow - Black Hawk Down isn't - but they do tend to stick to the same pace throughout).

Good acting (although Russell Crowe's characterisation was a bit inconsistent), good juxtaposition between the two main characters BUT that's also the key problem - it takes nearly an hour before Crowe's detective even knows that Denzel Washington's gangster exists.

With interesting details at the end rushed through as a montage, I think the script focused too much on the early part of the story in an effort to balance the characters, to the detriment of Crowe's character and slowing the film down. 7/10.

Got my tickets for Golden Compass next week, it had better be good...!
 
I saw Hitman earlier this evening, and I haven't played any of the games, so the whole concept was new to me.

A lot of the scenes were excellent, however, the storyline was rather confusing as to who was on who's side and stuff, so that let it down a little. Even my friends who play the games weren't too sure as to what was going on. Besides that, the movie was pretty good.

I think I'd give it 7/10.
 
I watched the new film 'Shrooms' with Ben and a couple of college friends earlier.

It was utterly, utterly crap. Don't bother.

The title is hillarious though...
 
I watched Never Been Kissed last night, which I had seen about twenty minutes of a long time ago but never bothered watching the whole thing. It was a decent chick flick, but follows the whole predictability issue I find with a lot of the movies that fit in the chick flick genre.

I'd give it a 6.9/10.

P.S.- Drew Barrymore is annoying in any film really, so that kinda detracted from this movie a bit also. Never liked her as an actress.
 
Jake said:
I watched the new film 'Shrooms' with Ben and a couple of college friends earlier.

It was utterly, utterly crap. Don't bother.

The title is hillarious though...
Click to expand...

Yeah i saw the trailer and thought "that'll be ****"
 
Lord Kotowa said:
Yeah i saw the trailer and thought "that'll be <img>"
Click to expand...

Lol, same. I don't think I saw a trailer for it, just posters. I'm glad someone else was able to confirm that it was a pile of turd though.


Anyways, on saturday I went to see The Assasination of Jesse James by the coward Robert Ford (and yes, that is the full title :p). This film can be summed up in one word...stunning! Its now one of my fav movies of all time and nearly my fav film of the year!

Now Jesse James is not something I have looked into before but I was intrigued by the sound of the film (rave reviews, good plot etc). Jesse James is played by the phenominal (sp?) Brad Pitt who can change his character's emotion so quickly yet in such a way that it can scare you. Although most people will see this film because of his performance you really have to appreciate the other actor's performances too, they somehow create a sense that its very real, which is great because it gives the film an edge that most films can't achieve. Now this film is not for everyone, it has a very slow pace and although advertised as a Western it is more of a drama with very dark tones. My sister and I both believe that the slow pace of the film really added to the tension and when, for instance, someone is shot, you really feel like you have been shot too (something I have never experienced when watching a film).

I still can't believe how powerful that film was, never seen anything like it before, awesomes. Rating 5/5 :D
 
Double post, sorry guys.


The other night I for some strange reason watched High school musical 2 with my sister. It is so cheesy you could smell it from a different room. The songs arn't as catchy compared to the first film which is good as I find the occasional random moment of Status quo running through my head or something. The acting was better I suppose but they all seem like 4 or 5 years older than when they were in the first film which I found strange. I have to say the storyline was ok, had a nice structure to it. Some parts went too far like the lanterns near the end, next time we see them they will be leaving a funfair in a flying pink car.

Meh, somehow I strangley enjoyed it, 3/5
 
Saw The Golden Compass last night.

I'm a fan of the books, but I'll try and put that to one side as much as I can (if I can). In other words, I'll try not to rant *too* much...this is going to be long though, I need to get this off my chest!

NO SPOILERS btw (unless you've already read the book).

It's common (and often necessary) for book adaptations to streamline the story, so that it works better as a film.

But in this case they've compressed it so much, I think they've ruined it. 400 pages into 100 minutes just doesn't fit.

Only the main character Lyra is given any depth, all the other characters have been turned into empty cyphers to push the story on, which is a big shame as characterisation is a strength of the book.

They've dramatically altered the flow of events, mostly to keep the drastic pace up but sometimes just for effect (e.g. to have a nice big fight at the end). Some of the decisions are quite smart, but generally they look highly contrived.

They've cut the last few chapters entirely, which is a very weird decision since they were in the trailer, are still hinted at during the film, and now the ending just hangs there not offering much.

Because of all this squeezing, Daniel Craig and Nicole Kidman are barely in it and are given nothing decent to work with, making Kidman's performance in particular look a bit off-key.

Consequently Dakota Blue Richards as Lyra is left to carry the entire film. She's much better than I feared so kudos to her, but struggles at times with consistency and delivery (I blame the director for that, this is Richards' first film).

The score is disappointingly bland and insipid, the photography varies from good to average, the direction is ropey, but the effects are usually pretty good, although not always convincing with the daemons.

Good job it's not called Northern Lights any more, since we hardly see any. And yes all mention of religion has been jettisoned to appease the American creationist loons.

Oh, Ian McKellen as Iorek Byrnison! IAN ****ING MCKELLEN!!! That's right, give the physically toughest character in the film to a CAMP THESPIAN LUVVIE!! WHYYYYYY? (alright he's not camp in this but he IS a luvvie).

Rant...building...must...control...*deep breaths*

I could go on but I've bored you enough.

In summary, it's far too rushed, looks contrived and clumsy, has very little sparkle, and is probably confusing for those that haven't read the book. Disappointing. 5.5/10.

*goes to cool off in a dark room*
 
On Monday I saw The Descent on channel 4. Now for a recent western horror, it is extremely good. Neil Marshall is a genius! All his shocks are played out very well and they come in great quantity too. The Descent explores all possible forms of terror that could ever be had in a cave. I was little dissapointed with whats actually down there and it could have done with a bit of dialog lubrication in some places. But Neil Marshall manages to make it thrilling.

Overall, its a superb peice of thrilling horror, 4/5.
 
The Descent is an odd film. I didn't quite know what to make of it. I think the fact that I hated all the characters put me off a little. Like Blair Witch, I was desperate to see them die so that I could celebrate not having to put up with the whining little bitches any longer.

However, the film has stuck in my brain, and I sometimes think about some of the direction and stuff, and it seems quite good in retrospect. I think that it was probably a brilliant film, utterly ruined by annoying characters. :)

Off to see The Golden Compass on Sunday Slayed - you've made me want to see it so much now. At least it'll be a good way to deal with a hangover! :lol:
 
On Monday I saw The Descent on channel 4.
Click to expand...

I watched that like, a year and a half ago or so, and I didn't think it was that great. There were a few scares here and there, and I'll admit that I'd be freaked out if I were the one down there, but I agree with Furie about the characters. Annoying as heck, and it made it so that the viewer wasn't sad when they died.

I'd give it like, 6/10 or around there.
 
furie said:
Off to see The Golden Compass on Sunday Slayed - you've made me want to see it so much now.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I wanted to like it! It's just my ubercritical view, everyone else will probably enjoy it :p.

I loved The Descent, yes the characters were whiny and annoying but the film was just great fun. Looking forward to his new one, Doomsday, it's nearly ready.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top