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"

Point Blank - French thriller where a male nurse saves the live of a criminal after a hit goes wrong, his pregnant wife is kidnapped and he's forced to hand the criminal over or she dies. Very good indeed. Few little twists and turns but doesn't disappear up its own hole and certainly no more far fetched or overblown than its Hollywood counterparts. 7.5/10

The Legend of Tarzan - Charts something or other about Tarzan using occasional flashbacks, substandard plot that doesn't warrant having a film made in the first place, Christophe Waltz is the clichéd bad guy who does his best with what he's given, Samuel Jackson plays himself...again and there's a father seeks revenge subplot that is wholly unsatisfactory. On the flip side, it has Margot Robbie...on the downside, she remains fully clothed. 5/10

Magnificent Seven (2016)

Not the worst remake i've ever seen and stayed fairly true to the 'original', the plot is pretty much the same, the ending is the same with the addition of a Gatlin Gun and the characters are very similar too. 6/10

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Magnificent Seven (2016)

Not the worst remake i've ever seen and stayed fairly true to the 'original', the plot is pretty much the same, the ending is the same with the addition of a Gatlin Gun and the characters are very similar too. 6/10

ie, keep watching the original?

No remake is going to get an Eli Wallach in full flow better than the origin of the species.

SecretFly wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Magnificent Seven (2016)

Not the worst remake i've ever seen and stayed fairly true to the 'original', the plot is pretty much the same, the ending is the same with the addition of a Gatlin Gun and the characters are very similar too. 6/10

ie, keep watching the original?

No remake is going to get an Eli Wallach in full flow better than the origin of the species.

Who IS the bad guy btw? One hopes it's not Christophe Waltz who seems to be Hollywood's go to guy for baddies these days

I don't actually know.  But yeah, I don't know why Waltz has taken up the slack as go-to 'seriously intense bad guy'.  To me, I can see his acting legs peddling so clearly under the surface and always wonder why others can't seem to see the same....
oh well..............................  I'm crazy me so I should know

went to see Bad moms the other night with the missues, starring Mila Kunis...knew it was gonna be funny, but even more funnier than i thought it would be...great film!!

Hmmm... I'm suspicious wisden. And you're absolutely sure it's not simply that Mila Kunis was in it?

lol why are you supsicious? haha having Mila Kunis in it was an added bouns :P

Thought so.

Watched the new Ghostbusters. Given some of the comments on more exciteable parts of the internet I was expecting the worst film ever made. Can't say I'd agree. Was not brilliant but was no terrible, coulple of funny lines here and there. Hardly a classic but no better or worse than the bulk of summer CGI affairs.

Also watched Louis Theroux's My Scientology Movie. Alex Gibney's Going Clear is far superior. If you haven't seen either watch the latter. Unless you're either a huge Theroux fan or obsessed by Scientology I'd struggle to think why you'd watch this over Gibney's film.

Did you star in this version of ghost busters as well Rowley?

No, Melissa McCarthy has trimmed down. She like former Emmerdale cow stand-in, Lisa Riley these days and definitely couldn't be confused with Rowley.

Was talking about that giant stay n puft actually

I knew that, I just wanted to make another fat person joke

The Purge - Election Year.


Sh1te.

Tattie Scones RRN wrote:The Purge - Election Year.


Sh1te.

Dunno why you'd be surprised by this. I watched the first one and thought it was utter boll*cks, Genuinely can't believe they've made three. It's not even Sharknado bad/good

Yeah I watched the first one, thinking there was an interesting idea there, but it turned out to be rubbish. Haven't bothered watching the next two.

Hadn't watched the first one so went in blind. Liked the bit where the wee bitches got run over by the bus but switched off about 5 minutes after that.

Have to say that it's a great concept.

Tattie Scones RRN wrote:Hadn't watched the first one so went in blind. Liked the bit where the wee bitches got run over by the bus but switched off about 5 minutes after that.

Have to say that it's a great concept.

No it isn't

I thought you'd have loved the idea of purging Dave no?

Tattie Scones RRN wrote:I thought you'd have loved the idea of purging Dave no?

I'd have a lot of sh!t to get through in just the one night, much better to spread it out through the year

Finally got around to watching Suicide Squad.

You know, I wanted to like this film. The trailers looked (overall) great, and I think at times the critics are a bit unfair on some of the DC offerings. Indeed, I sometimes wonder if they have decided that a "good" superhero movie is one that's made by Marvel: simple-ish plot, plenty of wisecracking, not taking itself too seriously, and some nice action scenes thrown in. For instance, I thought there was plenty to like about Batman vs Superman (extended edition), and, while it might be a less "polished" film than say, the Avengers, in some ways it was more interesting.

So yes, I really wanted to like Suicide Squad. But in the end I just couldn't. It's just too confused. The first hour or so is very good. You get introduced to the characters quickly and efficiently, so you don't waste too much time on it (one of my worries going into the film, with so many characters to introduce), but not in a way that feels rush. The premise is set nicely. But the second half is just a muddle. Too many things happening, so it feels rushed, with quite a bit of it unnecessary for the development of the main arc. Then some generic CGI action (this time overly long) to finish. Except it doesn't finish, and we get two more "twists" (and of course the obligatory mid-credits scene to set up the future Justice League movie).

More specific gripes:

Spoiler:

The actors overall give solid performances: Will Smith is pretty decent, as was Viola Davis, Margot Robbie excellent, Joel Kinnaman was also very good I thought, while Jared Leto's take on the Joker was interesting enough that you felt it should have been explored further (not in this film though, see above!). Not enough to save the film though from the muddle it finds itself in.

3/10

3/10, ouch... I haven't seen it yet. I think if these movie producers actually concentrated on making a good movie rather than a prerequisite for a much bigger movie further down the line then we might get some decent films. Hollywood needs to be careful here as this isn't the first time (Age of Ultron ).

Look, the Superhero filmmakers are like a bunch of kids in a crèche with lots of toys.  In the old days we were more serious with our toys, because that's all we had - no video games or net.  So cowboys never mixed with soldiers - and neither soldiers nor cowboys every went near our farmyards!

Now, these young moviemakers just make movies like modern kids... throw the lot in there and have the farmer eaten by Billy DeathRay from Planet V, and have Batman jump in to save Sindy from Postman f**king Pat who has all of a sudden become a sadist, and who has joined forced with a disillusioned Superman, who now wears one of Sindy's dresses across his shoulder because his cape was lost in the Zylon wars last weekend!


Actually........................ good movie idea.  Must write up the script.

I get a better kick out of watching a series these days. Game of Thrones, The Walking Dead, Vikings and Black Sails are my favourites.

Remember the old joke "I went to a fight and a football match broke out"?

Nowadays it's "We've brought out this range of uber-expensive toys and games and made a feature length movie to go with it!"

Having watched Captain America - Civil War (my views on it are irrelevant, I lost track of what the f*ck's going on a few films ago) and watched the extended fight scenes I wonder how they can justify aiming a bunch of toys at kids when the levels of violence are in excess of what we'd expect from our children. They're selling Hawkeye's bow and arrow IN THE F*CKING DISNEY SHOP!!!! That used to be for soft toys and princess dolls. What the hell is going on?

Just you "getting on" DAVE

Probably...but even an old fart like me knows that Olaf didn't have a flick knife in "Frozen" but they've still seen fit to sell them in the Disney shop.

It does rather feel like we've reached "peak" superhero films. I quite enjoyed some of Civil War, but having missed Age of Ultron I was a bit confused by these new characters: Vision - who's that? Scarlet Witch - where did she come from? etc. You get the feeling the Studios think they need to make every film "bigger" than the previous one in some way: the world is under threat? Screw that, in the next film it'll be the Universe? Then Time itself? The Multi-verse??

Xmen Apocalypse rather went the same way, though it was a very meh effort from a franchise that's beginning to feel tired. In fact many similarities between it and Last Stand in that way.

The trouble is, the films make loads of money. Even when they're trashed by critics, they're still successful at the Box Office, so it's a sure return on investment. When a franchise becomes tired, reboot! Origins films!

Don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed plenty of the films: The Dark Knight is superb, Avengers Assemble is great fun, and The Winter Soldier is a very good film in its own right. Guardians of the Galaxy was also really enjoyable. But the recent films have been a bit of a let-down, and to me it speaks of a genre becoming a bit tired.

Have started watching the new Mel Gibson flick, "Blood Father". Not sure when I'll reach the part that has had critics raving about it. It's OK, if somewhat formulaic. Guy with chequered past but currently on straight and narrow has to go back to his old life to help out his estranged daughter.....ok!

Am still waiting for the film that knocks it out of the park. The one that has you going straight back to the box office for another ticket/hitting play on the remote control. Where's THAT film. Maybe after a you reach a certain age, you've pretty much seen everything in one guise or another and nothing is original anymore.

DAVE667 wrote:Have started watching the new Mel Gibson flick, "Blood Father". Not sure when I'll reach the part that has had critics raving about it. It's OK, if somewhat formulaic. Guy with chequered past but currently on straight and narrow has to go back to his old life to help out his estranged daughter.....ok!

Am still waiting for the film that knocks it out of the park. The one that has you going straight back to the box office for another ticket/hitting play on the remote control. Where's THAT film. Maybe after a you reach a certain age, you've pretty much seen everything in one guise or another and nothing is original anymore.

Yeah......  that's it.  And you're at the right kinda age for it to be kicking in  Welcome.

DAVE667 wrote:Have started watching the new Mel Gibson flick, "Blood Father". Not sure when I'll reach the part that has had critics raving about it. It's OK, if somewhat formulaic. Guy with chequered past but currently on straight and narrow has to go back to his old life to help out his estranged daughter.....ok!

Am still waiting for the film that knocks it out of the park. The one that has you going straight back to the box office for another ticket/hitting play on the remote control. Where's THAT film. Maybe after a you reach a certain age, you've pretty much seen everything in one guise or another and nothing is original anymore.

Barton Fink is that film.

Galted wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:Have started watching the new Mel Gibson flick, "Blood Father". Not sure when I'll reach the part that has had critics raving about it. It's OK, if somewhat formulaic. Guy with chequered past but currently on straight and narrow has to go back to his old life to help out his estranged daughter.....ok!

Am still waiting for the film that knocks it out of the park. The one that has you going straight back to the box office for another ticket/hitting play on the remote control. Where's THAT film. Maybe after a you reach a certain age, you've pretty much seen everything in one guise or another and nothing is original anymore.

Barton Fink is that film.

Idiot!

Watched The Girl on the Train last night.....not a bad watch at all, a typical who-dunnit, which becomes somewhat obvious after the first 30 mins. Lets give the official scoring a go....


Tino Scale of Cinematic Achievement - 7.2145/10
Galted Scale of Cinematic Excellence - 5/10. quite dull and gritty, seen through the eyes of a p*sshead!
Michaels Scale of T*ts and Violence - 5/10 - some T*t on show (no nipple though, for all you areola connossieurs, bit of backside, and some mild violence, nothing more than you see on your average episode of Emmerdale.)
Hammersmith Scale of Accurate Titling - 6/10 - She was on a train for appx 11 mins of the movie, but the her being on the train didnt define her....More accurately should have been call The Girl on the P1ss

Fantastic bit of scoring Scott!!

Good to see it done properly.

That is a top notch review Scott. everything I want to or would ever need to know about the film.

I'd give it a 9/10 on the Superfly scale of film review (would have been worthy of a 10 if you'd confirmed who gets their jubblies and bum out - particularly if its Emily Blunt as her voice alone is usually sufficient to cause an electric tingling in my testicles).

superflyweight wrote:That is a top notch review Scott.  everything I want to or would ever need to know about the film.  

I'd give it a 9/10 on the Superfly scale of film review (would have been worthy of a 10 if you'd confirmed who gets their jubblies and bum out - particularly if its Emily Blunt as her voice alone is usually sufficient to cause an electric tingling in my testicles).

Unfortunately from what i can remember, Blunt doesnt get any form of breasticle out (maybe a flash of side boob) but its mostly down to Haley Bennett (Who plays Megan....) who in my opinion is the only one worth seeing in a state of undress in this...Blunt resembles a post-apocolyptic Anna Friel in this film. Scrubs up ok for the last 10 mins, but most the time, i would touch her with Dave667's Porksword!

Watched a few recently.

The Dressmaker.
A 2015 Australian film, possibly best described as a black comedy film but is a bit of a mix of genres TBH. Revolves around "Tilly", who was forced to leave her hometown in the Australian outback as a child, and now returns as a glamorous dressmaker. From there, it all kicks off. I loved this film, very funny if you like darker humour, and the stellar cast who all give fine performances (Kate Winslet, Hugo Weaving, though my personal fave is Judy Davis who plays the main character's rather crazy mother). Highly recommended.
9/10

I, Daniel Blake.
I'll be accused of being a luvvie leftie, but to me this is a powerful, deeply moving film, and a damning indictment of what we've allowed society to become.
9/10

Doctor Strange.
I spoke in a previous post of superhero film tiredness, and this IMO rather emphasises it. Visually stunning, but otherwise lacking. Character development I found average, villain is pretty poor (to a degree a problem with Marvel films in general, Loki excepted), and the plot is just so generic. The chemistry between the actors isn't great either, which means the (obligatory in a Marvel film) one-liners fall rather flat. Tildon is good as the Ancient One, by far the most interesting character. Cumberbatch isn't bad, but feels at his best when he's playing the Doctor before the accident, and the rest of the cast are forgettable, albeit with limited (or in Benedict Wong and Rachel McAdams's cases, downright poor) material. As I said, the visuals are brilliant, the bending of reality, etc. looks great, but for me not enough to save this movie. Surprised it's got such good reviews.
4/10

Watched Downfall last week on iplayer. The actor who played Hitler was brilliant.

nadeem2099 wrote:Watched Downfall last week on iplayer. The actor who played Hitler was brilliant.

He has a whole other career now of course on Youtube.

Yeah those parodies on youtube are everywhere. There must be at least a million different versions.

Every non-historian on the planet, who knows absolutely nothing about WW2, now knows that Jodl and Kreps were in the bunker with Hitler.

Nocturnal Animals

F*cking dreadful.  It's about a woman reading a book and contains lots of shots of the woman reading, looking pensive, looking knackered and looking upset, and lots of scenes from the book which is also dreadful.  Plus a few hints of "is she losing it?" to which the answer would be "who gives a f*ck?"

Can't be arsed to rate it on the TSoCA or the GSE.  Scores low on the HH scale as there aren't any nocturnal creatures to be seen, there is a vague reference to an owl.  Scores highly on the michaels scale of t*ts and violence: some violence, some implied violence, loads of obese t*ts and gash and a bit of decent arse.  Saw it at the Greenwich Picturehouse which has cheap Mondays (14 quid for 2, plus I got undercharged for the popcorn) so the evening rated hightly on the Rowley Scale of Northern Thriftiness.

Arrival;

Uummm, bit of a mixed bag for me, very very well made and acted, interesting and certainly one to think about post film. It is intriguing but sends fairly simple messages which arguably could be done in a quarter of the time some plot lines did not wash for me, so some I suspect won't be impressed. Action fans don't bother this is a slow burner, 0/10 on the Michaels T&V.

Not IMO the Sci-Fi Masterpiece some are suggesting but a damn sight more interesting than the generic Super Hero boredom being churned out every couple of months 7.5./10 with .5 for the HH Titling accuracy as aliens do indeed arrive.

Arrival

Started off quite well, different take on the Alien contact theme but lost it's way towards the end, got the impression that the writers didn't have a clue where to go with it and rushed it. The disappointment of the ending made the film a complete waste of time. 3/10

Arrival.

What a roundabout weird-assed way of telling a really basic story with very little satisfaction at the end.

Well acted, interesting take on the aliens. Everything else was rushed, unnecessarily confusing and slow-paced. Yes it made sense to me, but I had sussed out what was going on half an hour before the end.

I imagine that the Director thought it might be the next Interstellar. Nope. Not even remotely close. 4/10

Just tell me - was this 'Alien' movie just another cover-story for a sickly sweet examination of inter-personal relations when joined to the challenges that women in the workplace have to overcome in a male dominated society?

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Arrival

Started off quite well, different take on the Alien contact theme but lost it's way towards the end, got the impression that the writers didn't have a clue where to go with it and rushed it. The disappointment of the ending made the film a complete waste of time. 3/10

But presumably there is an arrival, so the title is sh1t hot accurate?

Hell or High Water - I enjoyed it a lot, it makes its point about poverty and the lack of economic opportunities in America's rust belt a bit heavy handedly, particularly at the start of the film, but overall it is a good film. It looks absolutely amazing, and Ben Foster and Chris Pine are both excellent as the leads. Jeff Bridges is as brilliant as ever as the grizzled Marshall on their tale. It looks amazing as well, the long sweeping shots make the Texas countryside look stunning.

It scores poorly though on the HH Scale of titling accuracy though. There is neither any hell or high water, in fact I can't remember any water at all, it's pretty dry throughout. Was it called Two brothers robbing banks to pay off a mortgage on a house this would be a truly great film, as it is, it's just alright, but better than Spectre.

Got through a number of films this weekend:

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them: Absolutely loved this film. Should preference this by saying I was a huge Harry Potter fan growing up so may be biased. Saying that I enjoyed this more than most of the Potter films, mainly because I had no pre-conceived notions about what should happen, which meant I could just sit back and enjoy rather than pick holes in it. Special effects were great, story good, quite funny and a nice little twist in it. Would definitely recommend. 9/10

Concussion: Good show. Based on a true story about the NFL and you guessed it, head injuries. Will Smith puts in a good performance (Although not worthy of all the fuss that he/his wife kicked up about not getting an Oscar nomination for the role). 7/10

Star Trek Beyond: Was a good film with pretty much all the ingredients you would expect with the rebooted star trek franchise. Great special effects, good comedy and a villain who comes out of nowhere to f*ck sh*t up! Have to say though it is my least favorite of the rebooted franchise. Partly because I don't think the villain was quite as good as the previous 2 efforts. Still, good show and any sci fi fans will definitely enjoy it. 7/10.

X-men Apocalypse: Was quite disappointed by this as I had relatively high expectations. Seemed quite rushed to me. Not to the same standard as the previous couple of installments. Also the girl from GOT who plays Jean Gray just isn't a great actress in my eyes. (And i'm a huge GOT fans). Anyway, ticks all the boxes you expect from a big budget superhero film without really doing anything overly memorable. 6/10.