The Last Film watched (CONTAINS STAR WARS SPOILERS!!)

First topic message reminder :

I watch two films over the last few days

Seventh Son: Absolute tosh, it felt like a bad D&D film from SyFy

The Wedding Ringer: It was a fun movie, predictable but fun, "Who the hell are these guys, it's like the Goonies grew up and became r@pists"

DAVE667 wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

Mikey, the Revenant is based on the true story of Hugh Glass, who's reported injuries are far worse than the film suggests.

I'll have to look it up but it still sounds unrealistic, particularly at the time. BTW we're just talking about the film here rather than the actual event - I'm catching up on the movie now as we speak and it is still very uninteresting. I think this movie is only going to appeal to Americans wanting to know about their early history.

I got a splinter in my finger a while back and it was very painful even after dabbing it with TCP and putting a plaster on yet we're expected to believe this c*nt survived being mauled by a bear (apparently being ripped to the bone and throat almost torn out) with nothing more than a few dirty rags applied and then eating a few bits of grass, leftover meat from a long dead animal, raw fish and bison liver. Like f*ck he did. Sounds like a tale seanmichaels would tell in his less fanciful moments. All this film needs is Leo eating hot chips of the back of some gorgeous bird with massive t!ts then inventing the i-phone in order to achieve maximum bullsh!t points.

I can vouch for that, came off second best after playing a practical joke on my cat earlier and my right hand is unusable. Would've been hard-pushed to survive the night if I hadn't already eaten.

Knock Knock
----------------------

For a kinky, frustrated old chump like me...The first half where two fit young chicks turn up on Keanu's doorstep late at night when his wife and two kids are away is quality and gives me hope...The scene where he bangs them both in the shower is even better...!!..Unfortunately the second half where they torture him isn't so fantasy inspiring...

Film is a rip off of 70s rare classic ..Death Game (Sondra Locke was one of the chicks)...

Worth a go....

Seen it TRUSS, hated it. Not a fan of Mr Reeves at the best of times and this certainly wasn't one of them! Besides, the idea that two hotties would turn up on the doorstep of a middle aged man and f*ck him senseless quickly made me sad as I knew it would never happen to me (despite my repeated letters to Santa!)

Bridge of Spies. Enjoyable enough stuff. Hanks does his usual decent man in a difficult situation role, that is not a criticism by the way, he is very good at it. Not too many shocks or surprises in the film, but it's pretty gripping and Spielberg and Hanks are a reliable pairing.

Good film that was Rowley, felt Rylance stole the show as Abel.

Agree Rylance was excellent. Hanks was good though, think we get that used to him playing these kind of roles well it is easy to overlook how good he is, but few, if any, do this kind of thing better than him.

Am waiting to watch this film but for the life in me can't find a watchable copy on the interweb thingy (as you'll all be aware, like F*CK am I going to pay to watch anything at the cinema if I can avoid it)

Four flies on grey velvet (1971)
----------------------------

Saw this the other day for the first time in years...........Drummer in a rock band gets stalked.......Fights with his stalker and kills him in a abandoned theater and then looks up to see a masked person taking pictures on a balcony.........Anyway stalker keeps sending him pictures and killing his best friends who figure out who the masked person is !!......Turns out the killer is his Mrs.....

Bit more to the story than that but Dario Argento at his best......and the woman who played the killer was absolutely superb (Mimsy Farmer) wonder what happened to her.....The hero was a very young Michael Brandon....

Great sound track and as atmospheric as ever..

No point watching it now! Haha!

Alistair wrote:No point watching it now! Haha!

Only me and Adam D that seem to watch Giallo's mate..

The Revenant

All the hype surrounding the film has been about Leo's Oscar worthy performance and whilst he's very good in it I just don't see the sensational performance everyone has gone on about. The film itself is needlessly slow and seems to be the same scene repeated over and over with little variations, therein lies the problem with the acting, all Di Caprio does throughout the film is grunt, cough and splutter. Tom Hardy does his best to drag something out of a pretty bland script but it just falls a bit flat.

The raw emotion is impressive but at no point did I feel like I cared what happened to any of the characters, the ending was predictably drawn out, not a bad film just not enjoyable.

6/10

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The Revenant

All the hype surrounding the film has been about Leo's Oscar worthy performance and whilst he's very good in it I just don't see the sensational performance everyone has gone on about. The film itself is needlessly slow and seems to be the same scene repeated over and over with little variations, therein lies the problem with the acting, all Di Caprio does throughout the film is grunt, cough and splutter. Tom Hardy does his best to drag something out of a pretty bland script but it just falls a bit flat.

The raw emotion is impressive but at no point did I feel like I cared what happened to any of the characters, the ending was predictably drawn out, not a bad film just not enjoyable.

6/10

No extra marks for accuracy of title?

Agreed with Hammers completely about The Revenant. Have just finished watching "The Martian" and thinks it's a much better film all round. Of course, this means Leo and his mates will scoop all the Oscars now.

Also, enraged that no-one has seen fit to comment on TRUSS's use of the word "mimsy"

Room

Best film I have seen in the last 12 months, best enjoyed imo without knowing too much about the plot and do avoid the trailer which thankfully I saw post film and gives far too much away. Would highly recommend but be a little patient the plot whilst uncomplicated takes 20 - 30 minutes to unfold. 97% Rotten Tomatoes, 8.3 IMDB.

The Revenant

Agree with Hammersmith, a too long, but a good film nonetheless, disagree however regarding acting, DiCaprio, Hardy & Poulter excellent imo with so little dialogue to work with. Visually a stunning film, very little CGI, apparently filmed each day during a 90 minute slot just to get the right natural light.

Beast wrote:apparently filmed each day during a 90 minute slot just to get the right natural light.

Generally despise pretentious sh!t like that however, they did something similar in the brilliant House of Flying Daggers. There's a fight scene on a lake that could only be filmed at certain times when there was no wind and the surface of the lake was becalmed.

Still don't rate Revenant above The Martian but there we have it.

DAVE667 wrote:CREED - Pointless addition to the already creaking ROCKY franchise. Nothing new added to the tale (it's basically a rehash of the original story with a kid from nowhere getting a shot at the champ), but couldn't care less about the lead character and the training and fight scenes are the same old same old).

The biggest problem I had was that as a fan of Bellew I saw his character as an extension of himself and therefore wanted him to win rather than Creed like the filmmakers want you. There was nothing wrong with it, was surprisingly well acted by all (inc Bellew) but the 'Goodison' crowd cheering the American at the end was both cringeworthy and a gross misrepresentation of the English, we'd be far more likely to boo and bottle him out the ring.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:CREED - Pointless addition to the already creaking ROCKY franchise. Nothing new added to the tale (it's basically a rehash of the original story with a kid from nowhere getting a shot at the champ), but couldn't care less about the lead character and the training and fight scenes are the same old same old).

The biggest problem I had was that as a fan of Bellew I saw his character as an extension of himself and therefore wanted him to win rather than Creed like the filmmakers want you. There was nothing wrong with it, was surprisingly well acted by all (inc Bellew) but the 'Goodison' crowd cheering the American at the end was both cringeworthy and a gross misrepresentation of the English, we'd be far more likely to boo and bottle him out the ring.

Also enjoyed the commentator saying there were 100,000 people in the crowd. Wonder if Bellew will go back to LH to finish what he started with Andre Ward!!

EVEREST
------------

Beautifully filmed and well acted........Just...well......boring !!!.....

Wasn't easy to see which of the characters was which on Everest........Who was struggling and who wasn't.....

A wasted opportunity....no pun intended.

I really enjoyed Creed. Don't really see exactly what Stallone did that was Oscar nomination worthy, but a good film nonetheless.

Force Awakens was a pretty good reboot I thought. Oh its not a reboot you say? It's in fact a sequel? But its the exact same film!!

Stallone is of John Wayne and Eastwood age............Where they feel obliged to reward a stalwart..

Adam Sadler keeps making the same sh!t year in, year out, is he going to get one?

DAVE667 wrote:Adam Sadler keeps making the same sh!t year in, year out, is he going to get one?

I'm hoping he's going to get something..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:Adam Sadler keeps making the same sh!t year in, year out, is he going to get one?

I'm hoping he's going to get something..

I'm stockpiling weapons for that very day

I watched Creed the other day and I didn't find it too bad. Granted it is simply a re-hash of the original Rocky movies, this time with a convenient love-child of Apollo Creed, but it's not all bad. Stallone does no fighting in this film (good job really, given how old they made him look!!) and it doesn't dwell on the previous characters of the franchise, just gives them a nod.

Jordan is good in the role and Stallone is half-decent (not Oscar-worthy, mind...) plus Tony Bellew hams it up rather well as the LHW champ. It's not a great film, but it'll do. There's probably going to be a sequel though, which would be a little pointless. 6/10

As an aside my favourite part of the film was seeing Andre Ward sucker-punched in the face

Halfway through a film call STANDOFF

Thomas Jane (remember him? Thought not) is an ex-military guy whose son had died and his wife has left him. He's drinking heavily and contemplating suicide when he's forced to take in a young girl who's just witnessed a couple of murders. The hitman is played by Lawrence Fishburn who forces his way into the house stating that it's simply business, the girl needs to die as she's seen his face and that Jane will be spared if he sends her out. Jane and the girl are upstairs, Fishburn is downstairs. Both men have been shot and injured. hence the stand-off.

The twist in the tale is that Jane is holding Fishburn at bay with a shotgun but only has one round left and Fishburn is trying to call his bluff.

It's passing the time I suppose, but personally I think Fishburn deserves an Oscar for his performance just because he's a black man. Thomas Jane is white so he'll probably get it instead.

Red Eye.

Decent enough film.
Good performances from McAdams & Murphy.

The Big Short

It doesn't sit well with my film-snobbishness to recommend something that's currently on the circuit but this one was pretty funny.  That funny, in fact, that I chuckled on several occasions.
7.77654 on the TSoCA

Galted wrote:The Big Short

It doesn't sit well with my film-snobbishness to recommend something that's currently on the circuit but this one was pretty funny.  That funny, in fact, that I chuckled on several occasions.
7.77654 on the TSoCA

What sort of sh*t shower of a review is this?

Any t*ts in it?  Any fanny?  Any tanks?  We need a score on the Michaels Scale of T*ts and Violence.

What about long, lingering stares from the leading man?  A ponderous monologue between two achingly self-important characters?  We need a score on the Galted Scale of Cinematic Excellence.

Is there anyone short in it?  Anyone big?  Or am I spectacularly missing the point?  We need a score on the Hammersmith Harrier Scale of Accurate Titling.

Must do better, Galted.  Must do better.

I have seen it Tina. If you understand the financial market, as I know you do as you explained it to me when I read the book said film is based on, the film scores solidly on the HH scale of accurate titling.

Rowley wrote:I have seen it Tina. If you understand the financial market, as I know you do as you explained it to me when I read the book said film is based on, the film scores solidly on the HH scale of accurate titling.

Glad to hear it, Jeff. Would hate to have another divisive 'American Sniper but not really a sniper' incident. No one needs another one of those.

Watched Frank at the weekend (took two goes as I drank 8 bottles of Brewdog and fell asleep at some undefined point during the last 30 minutes). To be Frank, it wasn't as good as the reviews suggested and I'm glad I didn't pay to watch it at the cinema.

TSoCA - not bad - 6.54382

Michaels Scale of T1ts and Violence - no t1ts or fanny that I can recall. Someone does get stabbed though but there's no blood or lingering damage. I'd give it a 2.

GSoCE - the main character has a papier mache head on for almost the entire film so its full of lingering looks and the band also plays avant garde music that no one would listen. However, there is kind of an annoying voiceover/social media update angle to the film which lets it down badly and almost pushes it into Richard Curtis territory and which brings the score down to 7.

HH Scale of Accurate Titling - the main character is indeed called Frank and his name is accurately used by other characters countless times throughout the film. 11/10.

Before I Go To Sleep - made the mistake of letting my wife choose a film to watch. She'd asked me to download it ages ago and I'd forgotten all about it. She read the book and said it was good (it was recommended by Richard and Judy's Book of the Month club and I refuse to take literary advice from a bloated alcoholic and a thief).

Anyway, it's rubbish...really rubbish. I spent most of the film thinking "What the F*CK has Nicole Kidman done to her face?" She used to be very pretty if somewhat bland in a Paltrow-esque manner. Avoid at all costs unless you like watching programmes like "Celebrity facelift disasters" or "My Celebrity Botox Hell"

No boobs or tanks and whilst stuff happened before she went to sleep, it doesn't make the film any more watchable

superflyweight wrote:Watched Frank at the weekend (took two goes as I drank 8 bottles of Brewdog and fell asleep at some undefined point during the last 30 minutes).  To be Frank, it wasn't as good as the reviews suggested and I'm glad I didn't pay to watch it at the cinema.  

TSoCA - not bad - 6.54382

Michaels Scale of T1ts and Violence - no t1ts or fanny that I can recall.  Someone does get stabbed though but there's no blood or lingering damage.  I'd give it a 2.  

GSoCE - the main character has a papier mache head on for almost the entire film so its full of lingering looks and the band also plays avant garde music that no one would listen.  However, there is kind of an annoying voiceover/social media update angle to the film which lets it down badly and almost pushes it into Richard Curtis territory and which brings the score down to 7.

HH Scale of Accurate Titling - the main character is indeed called Frank and his name is accurately used by other characters countless times throughout the film.  11/10.  

That is a f*cking outstanding review, Super.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

superflyweight wrote:Watched Frank at the weekend (took two goes as I drank 8 bottles of Brewdog and fell asleep at some undefined point during the last 30 minutes).  To be Frank, it wasn't as good as the reviews suggested and I'm glad I didn't pay to watch it at the cinema.  

TSoCA - not bad - 6.54382

Michaels Scale of T1ts and Violence - no t1ts or fanny that I can recall.  Someone does get stabbed though but there's no blood or lingering damage.  I'd give it a 2.  

GSoCE - the main character has a papier mache head on for almost the entire film so its full of lingering looks and the band also plays avant garde music that no one would listen.  However, there is kind of an annoying voiceover/social media update angle to the film which lets it down badly and almost pushes it into Richard Curtis territory and which brings the score down to 7.

HH Scale of Accurate Titling - the main character is indeed called Frank and his name is accurately used by other characters countless times throughout the film.  11/10.  

That is a f*cking outstanding review, Super.

If we're going to do these things then they simply must be done properly.

superflyweight wrote:

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

superflyweight wrote:Watched Frank at the weekend (took two goes as I drank 8 bottles of Brewdog and fell asleep at some undefined point during the last 30 minutes).  To be Frank, it wasn't as good as the reviews suggested and I'm glad I didn't pay to watch it at the cinema.  

TSoCA - not bad - 6.54382

Michaels Scale of T1ts and Violence - no t1ts or fanny that I can recall.  Someone does get stabbed though but there's no blood or lingering damage.  I'd give it a 2.  

GSoCE - the main character has a papier mache head on for almost the entire film so its full of lingering looks and the band also plays avant garde music that no one would listen.  However, there is kind of an annoying voiceover/social media update angle to the film which lets it down badly and almost pushes it into Richard Curtis territory and which brings the score down to 7.

HH Scale of Accurate Titling - the main character is indeed called Frank and his name is accurately used by other characters countless times throughout the film.  11/10.  

That is a f*cking outstanding review, Super.

If we're going to do these things then they simply must be done properly.  

Exactly.

Take note, Galted. I am really disappointed in you.

DAVE667 wrote:Before I Go To Sleep - made the mistake of letting my wife choose a film to watch. She'd asked me to download it ages ago and I'd forgotten all about it. She read the book and said it was good (it was recommended by Richard and Judy's Book of the Month club and I refuse to take literary advice from a bloated alcoholic and a thief).

Anyway, it's rubbish...really rubbish. I spent most of the film thinking "What the F*CK has Nicole Kidman done to her face?" She used to be very pretty if somewhat bland in a Paltrow-esque manner. Avoid at all costs unless you like watching programmes like "Celebrity facelift disasters" or "My Celebrity Botox Hell"

No boobs or tanks and whilst stuff happened before she went to sleep, it doesn't make the film any more watchable

L*l out loud.

Difficult to get above 6 on Michaels Scale of T1ts and Violence. I can recommend Starship Troopers (8.5) as one that scores well.

Starship Troopers is a simply fantastic movie

DAVE667 wrote:Yeah, sounds sh!t even after reading your spoiler alert.

Haven't watched any films lately but next on my list is The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas.

A very dramatic film with several high class performances. Recommended.

guildfordbat wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:Yeah, sounds sh!t even after reading your spoiler alert.

Haven't watched any films lately but next on my list is The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas.

A very dramatic film with several high class performances. Recommended.

Also scores very highly on the HH scale of film titling as there is indeed a boy in Striped Pyjamas, also the most depressing ending to a film i've ever seen.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

superflyweight wrote:Watched Frank at the weekend (took two goes as I drank 8 bottles of Brewdog and fell asleep at some undefined point during the last 30 minutes).  To be Frank, it wasn't as good as the reviews suggested and I'm glad I didn't pay to watch it at the cinema.  

TSoCA - not bad - 6.54382

Michaels Scale of T1ts and Violence - no t1ts or fanny that I can recall.  Someone does get stabbed though but there's no blood or lingering damage.  I'd give it a 2.  

GSoCE - the main character has a papier mache head on for almost the entire film so its full of lingering looks and the band also plays avant garde music that no one would listen.  However, there is kind of an annoying voiceover/social media update angle to the film which lets it down badly and almost pushes it into Richard Curtis territory and which brings the score down to 7.

HH Scale of Accurate Titling - the main character is indeed called Frank and his name is accurately used by other characters countless times throughout the film.  11/10.  

That is a f*cking outstanding review, Super.

If we're going to do these things then they simply must be done properly.  

Exactly.

Take note, Galted.  I am really disappointed in you.

Sorry, Tino, but I never went into too much detail to hide the fact that most of the film sailed over my head even though they did a few explanations for halfwits which were quite funny.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:Yeah, sounds sh!t even after reading your spoiler alert.

Haven't watched any films lately but next on my list is The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas.

A very dramatic film with several high class performances. Recommended.

Also scores very highly on the HH scale of film titling as there is indeed a boy in Striped Pyjamas, also the most depressing ending to a film i've ever seen.

I thought it was sh1t, even disregarding the fact that it's crap fiction milking the holocaust.  And if you're not going to bother using the native tongue and subtitles then use accents, none of this posh little schoolboy boll0cks - though it could've worked if it was about the Nazi's having invaded Ingerland and the story happening here.

Ending was funny as f*ck.

I thought The Boy In The Striped Pyjamas was a fine film, but hated the ending for obvious reasons.

I enjoyed the film immensely, appreciate the reasoning for not p!ssing about with German accents etc and I'd have made the ending even better by having the father demand the doors to the gas chamber be opened and then, as the bodies come tumbling out, we have a close up shot of two little hands clasped tightly together as the father and mother scream in anguish in the background...fade to black...end. Well deserved Oscar for Davie boy who then annoys the Academy by mentioning that he's half black and punches someone in the face when they try to take the statue back

Saving Mr Banks

Superb. Great acting, music, and even tears!

9/10

Is it about Gordon Banks legendary England goalkeeper. if so, I can see how it might score highly on the HH Scale of Accurate Titling although I'd suggest the tears would come from just the one eye!

As for the review itself Stella, it's bollox. You may be some sort of artsy fartsy cinematic tossbag who likes this sort of stuff and the rest of us might hate it, especially Sean as it doesn't have any t!ts, tanks, t!ts shaped like tanks or tanks shaped like t!ts...or school dorm gang r*pe scenes.

Try being specific...although if it made you cry, don't f*cking bother as it sounds sh!t

Didn't Gordon lose an eye?

Anyway, no ti.s , r.pe or flange, just good old sentiment.

Give it a go Dave!

Stella wrote:Didn't Gordon lose an eye?

Anyway, no ti.s , r.pe or flange, just good old sentiment.

Give it a go Dave!

Car crash I believe (hence the tears from one eye joke) but if this film is as wishy washy as I fear then Banksy (the keeper not that c*nt of a street 'artist') would gouge his other eye out ratherthan endure another second of mawkish sentimental cinematic bilge

You haven't even told us who the f*ck's in it, not that it matters at this point, the premise sounds so dreadful not even the presence of Gianna Michaels would make me watch it

Emma Thompson and Tom Hanks star in the story of how Disney brought Mary Poppins to the big screen. I wasn't expecting much but it really is a great film.