Rate the last film you watched out of 100 Page 2102

  • Page

    of 2587 First / Last

  • Mola_Ram 6 Feb 2013 03:34:54 6,230 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    Madder-Max wrote:
    Dredd 6/10. Nah. Its ok. A poor mans The Raid.

    The building is too big and the enemies too improbably few.

    Stallone is and always will be THE Dredd.
    ...no, the Stallone one was pretty awful. I confirmed this when I watched it again recently. Even if I don't rate the new one nearly as much as most people on here seem to, it doesn't make the Stallone version any better.

    Edited by Mola_Ram at 03:36:02 06-02-2013
  • evild_edd 6 Feb 2013 09:46:53 2,924 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Life of Pi

    Note: saw it in 'tood' (as Mr Kermode would say), but for the first time almost wished I'd seen it in threed.

    Regardless, it remains a visually stunning film. A masterpiece of cinematography, in fact. Even with the sumptuous visuals, the remarkable achievement was in them making such a coherent film narrative out of such an unwieldy text.

    Personally I would've preferred it to have been a little more brutal. I'm not convinced the chipping away at his morality was conveyed in the same graphic detail as it was in the book (been a while since I read it, but didn't he kill, shell, and eat turtles in the book? That was missing entirely...). I'm sure certification was a key factor in this approach, but it still felt down-played. The only blemish on an otherwise startling achievement.

    Deserves the Best Picture Oscar over Argo, IMHO.

    9/10

    Why look, it's a blog:
    http://www.edwardlaven.blogspot.co.uk

  • nickthegun 6 Feb 2013 09:51:02 55,849 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Madder-Max wrote:
    Dredd 6/10. Nah. Its ok. A poor mans The Raid.

    The building is too big and the enemies too improbably few.

    Stallone is and always will be THE Dredd.
    It is genuinely impossible to overstate how bad your taste in films is.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    He totally called it

  • MetalDog 6 Feb 2013 10:22:42 23,706 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I have to agree with Nick there, Madder-Max. You need to be vigorously slapped with a fistful of 2000ADs - Stallone was a fucking awful Dredd, he didn't even have the right chin for it.

    -- boobs do nothing for me, I want moustaches and chest hair.

  • Mola_Ram 6 Feb 2013 10:24:14 6,230 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    I AM HRNRGH LRRGH
  • kalel 6 Feb 2013 10:35:41 83,875 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    I don't really get why people get their knickers in a twist about whether films like Matrix or Looper or Inception are clever, or not clever, or trying to be clever or make you think they're clever but they're not etc etc.

    They're the very definition of middle brow, and for me that's a good thing. Dumb action films have had their day and the current attempts to bring them back with things like Expendables and Die Hard Whatever are an embarrassment. But at the same time I generally watch an action film to give my brain a bit of a rest and enjoy the spectacle, and while I need a bit more to make me engage than some dude against the world to save a Mcguffin, I can do without proper high brow themes and challenges.

    So yeah, things like Inception and Looper and even Batman are a bit stupid, but not that stupid, and that's all good.
  • graysonavich 6 Feb 2013 10:43:45 6,802 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    It's annoying when it's pandering to the lowest denominator. RE: the spinning top at the end of Inception, Michael Canes "vision" at the end of Batman.

    Take both of those out of those films and they're instantly better and leave the endings relatively open.
  • ram 6 Feb 2013 10:48:16 3,466 posts
    Seen 22 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    er the spinning top does leave it open
  • Deleted user 6 February 2013 10:51:43
    evild_edd wrote:
    Life of Pi

    Note: saw it in 'tood' (as Mr Kermode would say), but for the first time almost wished I'd seen it in threed.

    Regardless, it remains a visually stunning film. A masterpiece of cinematography, in fact. Even with the sumptuous visuals, the remarkable achievement was in them making such a coherent film narrative out of such an unwieldy text.

    Personally I would've preferred it to have been a little more brutal. I'm not convinced the chipping away at his morality was conveyed in the same graphic detail as it was in the book (been a while since I read it, but didn't he kill, shell, and eat turtles in the book? That was missing entirely...). I'm sure certification was a key factor in this approach, but it still felt down-played. The only blemish on an otherwise startling achievement.

    Deserves the Best Picture Oscar over Argo, IMHO.

    9/10
    I thought it was pretty brutal enough as it was. The first section when they are on the boat i think is quite viscreal and made me flinch and sort of made a couple of oh oh oh noises.

    The more i think about htis film the better it gets, top adaptation.
  • LeoliansBro 6 Feb 2013 10:53:11 41,864 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Films that are middlebrow and don't care, like Event Horizon, I dig. Films that are highbrow and let the concept / design do the takling for them, like Primer, I dig.

    Films that think they're highbrow but are schlocky bullshit, like Inception, can do one. Films that are oversimplified popcorn action flicks with pretendings of depth due to an overserious straight face, like TDKR, can do several. Especially as TDKR wasn't even good as a popcorn action flick, for a start it was at least an hour too long.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • kalel 6 Feb 2013 10:53:38 83,875 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    graysonavich wrote:
    It's annoying when it's pandering to the lowest denominator. RE: the spinning top at the end of Inception, Michael Canes "vision" at the end of Batman.

    Take both of those out of those films and they're instantly better and leave the endings relatively open.
    Nolan has that at the end of other films as well. I think it's a signature thing for him as opposed to pandering, although I do agree it's crap.
  • kalel 6 Feb 2013 10:56:12 83,875 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    I really don't think Inception or any Nolan's film have pretentions of being high brow by the way. There really isn't such a thing as a high brow action film, unless perhaps we're talking Kurosawa or something, and even then I don't think they were intended that way. I don't agree Primer is high brow.
  • LeoliansBro 6 Feb 2013 11:01:25 41,864 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    I think we're talking about different things when we say 'highbrow'. I may not be using the best word.

    I'm looking for something that is internally consistent and provocative in its implications, an attempt to create a cohesive environment and put it to the test.

    'What if' scenarios don't work if you change / ignore the rules to make the plot more interesting.

    Edited by LeoliansBro at 11:01:44 06-02-2013

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • Deleted user 6 February 2013 11:08:38
    kalel wrote:
    I really don't think Inception or any Nolan's film have pretentions of being high brow by the way. There really isn't such a thing as a high brow action film,
    Pretty much.

    Inception and using as a similar example, The matrix, worked because they were set in a different world where the rules were different, yet asked questions of our own. One by one the rules were laid out to you and it was up to you to keep up. It asked you for your attention and i don't think theres anything wrong with that. If you invested then it works. For the spinning top - i think there was enough in the film to justify that shot - the film was leading up to that idea. With Batman, not really, i think there was enough shown to confirm that he 'exists'.

    With nolan i think he leaves room for you to take what you want from them, but they more about a cinematic experience rather than being high brow. Its probably why some of his films on second or third viewings do lose there impact because they are designed around a gimmick or twist, but on first showings, his journeys and ideas i think are sublime.
  • kalel 6 Feb 2013 11:09:07 83,875 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    @LeoliansBro

    I think you just don't like Christopher Nolan films :)

    Edited by kalel at 11:09:29 06-02-2013
  • LeoliansBro 6 Feb 2013 11:11:02 41,864 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    There might be some truth to that. Didn't even rate Memento.

    I put him in the same camp as Shalamalamadingdong. One trick pony who isn't as clever or as good as he thinks he is.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • nickthegun 6 Feb 2013 11:12:21 55,849 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Ive said it before but im absolutely positive the alfred on holiday scene is in there because warner wouldnt let nolan explicitly kill batman, rather than him trying to be clever.

    Well, that is trying to be clever, getting around those restrictions, but still..

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    He totally called it

  • kalel 6 Feb 2013 11:17:22 83,875 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    I think the point I'm making is that nobody is going to deconstruct Snakes on a Plane in the same way we might Solaris or La Strada or whatever. But we might start to do that with The Matrix, and I think it's a mistake.

    Things like Matrix/Looper/Inception sit somewhere in the middle. They have a bit of a meaty theme to engage our brains, but they also give us explosions and gun fights and all that stuff. It's a nice mix. I don't think the weighty themes are to be taken too seriously, they just make the action a bit more engaging if you happen to have a brain.

    This doesn't by the way mean I think we shouldn't be slagging of these films, but I just think sometimes people focus on the wrong reasons. Take TDKR for example. It's a flawed film, but mostly because it's boring. That is unforgivable for any film, but especially an action one, whatever "brow" it is. I can forgive plot holes and whatever if it's engaging, which fwiw I thought Inception was, and liked a lot.
  • nickthegun 6 Feb 2013 11:20:23 55,849 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Solaris is so boring *brace yourselves* I actually prefer the Clooney version.

    Stalker is a fucking chore too.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    He totally called it

  • Mr_Sleep 6 Feb 2013 11:21:11 16,247 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    kalel wrote:
    Take TDKR for example. It's a flawed film, but mostly because it's boring. That is unforgivable for any film, but especially an action one, whatever "brow" it is. I can forgive plot holes and whatever if it's engaging, which fwiw I thought Inception was, and liked a lot.
    I think that's an excellent summary.

    You are a factory of sadness.

  • kalel 6 Feb 2013 11:22:52 83,875 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Actual high brow films are kind of allowed to be boring :)

    It's almost like there's some sort of ratio of action to brain food to boringness or something. I think I can see a graph in my head.
  • LeoliansBro 6 Feb 2013 11:26:49 41,864 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    nickthegun wrote:
    Solaris is so boring *brace yourselves* I actually prefer the Clooney version.

    Stalker is a fucking chore too.
    I'm got a lot of time for the Clooney version, although this is because the earlier version is dated by comparison, and is probably the stronger film.

    Putting 'big question' concepts into action films and keeping them consistent isn't that hard. Snakes on a Plane isn't analysed because it doesn't have them. Films like Looper or Inception ask to have their cake and eat it - look at the sophisticated concepts we're playing with, but not too closely or you'll see they're tissue thin.

    Doesn't make them bad films, but it does spoil them a bit. Strangely Terminator 2 gets away with it with its whole 'no fate but what we make'. I'm not sure why, probably because of my own double standards.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • Mr_Sleep 6 Feb 2013 11:27:36 16,247 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I still haven't seen Stalker. It's very much on the the list, are there any good versions out there? Last I read, all the transfers are a bit duff.

    I wonder where the line of highbrow is, is something like Chinatown highbrow? I'd say it is certainly directed in a highbrow manner, as to whether the film itself is, I don't know.

    You are a factory of sadness.

  • Mr_Sleep 6 Feb 2013 11:30:26 16,247 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    LeoliansBro wrote:
    Doesn't make them bad films, but it does spoil them a bit. Strangely Terminator 2 gets away with it with its whole 'no fate but what we make'. I'm not sure why, probably because of my own double standards.
    I'm getting to the point of actively disliking that film, I used to love it but the massive plot holes and annoying child do make it more difficult to accept. It does have the best mullet ever in it though, so I forgive it a lot for that.

    You are a factory of sadness.

  • kalel 6 Feb 2013 11:30:29 83,875 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Criterion versions of Tarkovsky stuff is good if you can do Region 1.
  • Mr_Sleep 6 Feb 2013 11:32:09 16,247 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    kalel wrote:
    Criterion versions of Tarkovsky stuff is good if you can do Region 1.
    Sadly not, no. I did used to have a region 1 DVD player but that thing died about two years ago. I guess I could try and see if that version is available as a download from some helpful internet retailer.

    Edited by Mr_Sleep at 11:32:33 06-02-2013

    You are a factory of sadness.

  • nickthegun 6 Feb 2013 11:33:20 55,849 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    All of his stuff is also on Youtube in reasonable quality.

    http://www.openculture.com/2010/07/tarkovksy.html

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    He totally called it

  • kalel 6 Feb 2013 11:36:41 83,875 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    LeoliansBro wrote:
    Putting 'big question' concepts into action films and keeping them consistent isn't that hard. Snakes on a Plane isn't analysed because it doesn't have them. Films like Looper or Inception ask to have their cake and eat it - look at the sophisticated concepts we're playing with, but not too closely or you'll see they're tissue thin.
    I completely agree, but again, I think this is a good thing. I can't engage with Expendables or Die Hard 5 because I just don't give a flying fuck about why they're doing whatever they're doing, and so the action is meaningless.

    The likes of Looper and Inception give me enough concept to engage in what's happening, but they are still basically action films, and so yes, perhaps you shouldn't be looking so closely to spot the cracks.
  • Mr_Sleep 6 Feb 2013 11:51:01 16,247 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    nickthegun wrote:
    All of his stuff is also on Youtube in reasonable quality.

    http://www.openculture.com/2010/07/tarkovksy.html
    Ta. I'll have a look.

    You are a factory of sadness.

  • LeoliansBro 6 Feb 2013 11:54:02 41,864 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Yeah it's a fair point kalel.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • Page

    of 2587 First / Last

Log in or register to reply