Rate the last film you watched out of 100 Page 2191

  • Page

    of 2584 First / Last

  • evild_edd 10 Apr 2013 09:56:51 2,924 posts
    Seen 8 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Barry Lyndon

    (Should've been called the rise and fall of...)

    One for the Kubrick lovers, for sure. I consider myself as belonging to that group, but had never made it round to seeing this 3hr drama.

    An epic tragedy, truly beautifully shot (apparently they used special lenses and camera techniques to shoot in low light) with the entire film akin to seeing a painting come to life. Special mention must also go to the Voice Over, which was amusingly droll throughout.

    Like all Kubrick's works, it demands repeat viewings to appreciate it's subtler intricacies. And, like all Kubrick works, feels beyond such mundanities as scores.

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

  • HarryPalmer 10 Apr 2013 10:48:45 2,630 posts
    Seen 10 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Post deleted
  • HarryPalmer 10 Apr 2013 10:53:01 2,630 posts
    Seen 10 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Hypnosis - 7/10

    IMDB

    Japanese horror from 1999. Suitably mental, takes it's time to get going but earns massive kudos for milking terror and suspense from an orchestra- specifically a triangle. The concert sequence is worth the entrance fee alone (granted you probably don't pay an entrance fee to your own home).

    It's camp as anything though.

    Edited by HarryPalmer at 10:54:40 10-04-2013
  • Daddy-Doom-Bar 10 Apr 2013 11:00:01 2,370 posts
    Seen 13 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    The Men Who Stare At Goats WTF/10

    Just...wtf? Interesting and funny, but went nowhere and said nothing, really. Kept me watching for some reason.

    You must be the change you wish to see in the world - Ghandi

  • Daddy-Doom-Bar 10 Apr 2013 11:05:06 2,370 posts
    Seen 13 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    evild_edd wrote:
    Barry Lyndon

    (Should've been called the rise and fall of...)

    One for the Kubrick lovers, for sure. I consider myself as belonging to that group, but had never made it round to seeing this 3hr drama.

    An epic tragedy, truly beautifully shot (apparently they used special lenses and camera techniques to shoot in low light) with the entire film akin to seeing a painting come to life. Special mention must also go to the Voice Over, which was amusingly droll throughout.

    Like all Kubrick's works, it demands repeat viewings to appreciate it's subtler intricacies. And, like all Kubrick works, feels beyond such mundanities as scores.
    I'd really like to write a reply to this but i'm not sure where to start as I'm clearly not intelligent enough to converse with you. Think the word pretentious would have been used a few times.

    You must be the change you wish to see in the world - Ghandi

  • kalel 10 Apr 2013 11:23:28 83,849 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Barry Lyndon is very pretty , however, it doesn't have the tension, or those ZOMG scenes that stay in your consciousness forever like other Kubrick films do.

    It's not one of his best imo.
  • kalel 10 Apr 2013 11:24:52 83,849 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    I also find it odd to come to the conclusion that a film needs several viewings to appreciate its subtleties having seen it once.
  • Load_2.0 10 Apr 2013 11:42:44 18,166 posts
    Seen 4 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Philistine.
  • LeoliansBro 10 Apr 2013 11:45:24 41,863 posts
    Seen 17 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    kalel wrote:
    Barry Lyndon is very pretty , however, it doesn't have the tension, or those ZOMG scenes that stay in your consciousness forever like other Kubrick films do.

    It's not one of his best imo.
    It's an over-literal translation of one of those Victorian three-decker novels. Overlong, meandering, at times incoherent, driven by a million small details and a cast of thousands, and for the modern audience's attention span just boring.

    The gambling shots at night are utterly beautiful though.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • Load_2.0 10 Apr 2013 11:47:49 18,166 posts
    Seen 4 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    I watched it simultaneously on three tv's in four formats, muted, subtitled and at full volume. I bathed in the delicious impalpablility and still only grasped the slightest hints of a deeper meaning.
  • Deckard1 10 Apr 2013 11:49:39 25,387 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    I'd still stay it insists on itself too much.

    Called it

  • Daddy-Doom-Bar 10 Apr 2013 11:50:06 2,370 posts
    Seen 13 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    Load_2.0 wrote:
    I watched it simultaneously on three tv's in four formats, muted, subtitled and at full volume. I bathed in the delicious impalpablility and still only grasped the slightest hints of a deeper meaning.
    +1

    You must be the change you wish to see in the world - Ghandi

  • BinaryBob101 10 Apr 2013 11:55:25 21,966 posts
    Seen 57 minutes ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    It really misses its own message.

    Goose fat is sponsored by:

    Lens Flare

  • graysonavich 10 Apr 2013 11:59:11 6,797 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Spot the people who were first in line to see Transformers at the IMAX!
  • Gambit1977 10 Apr 2013 12:00:43 9,541 posts
    Seen 12 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Dark Skies
    Shit
  • Daddy-Doom-Bar 10 Apr 2013 12:15:36 2,370 posts
    Seen 13 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    graysonavich wrote:
    Spot the people who were first in line to see Transformers at the IMAX!
    Spot the people who think they're super intelligent because they watch black and white movies.

    You must be the change you wish to see in the world - Ghandi

  • Buztafen 10 Apr 2013 12:19:38 15,957 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    So you're a cunt for watching Transformers...and a cunt for watching black and white movies...what happens if you've watched both?

    Gigacunt?
  • kalel 10 Apr 2013 12:21:09 83,849 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    I think my taste in cinema reflects my intelligence, as opposed to justifying it :)

    Transformers represents everything that's shit about the film industry these days, however I'm inclined to agree that suggesting something like Barry Lyndon is somehow "beyond such mundanities" as a simple rating is fucking pretentious.
  • Deckard1 10 Apr 2013 12:21:10 25,387 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    I like watching transformers with the colour turned down.

    Called it

  • Gambit1977 10 Apr 2013 12:21:45 9,541 posts
    Seen 12 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    I like watching transformers with the orange turned down
  • Dangerous_Dan 10 Apr 2013 12:32:24 2,175 posts
    Seen 2 months ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    I prefer it with the contrast and sound turned down - less is more.
  • beastmaster 10 Apr 2013 12:39:04 10,172 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    kalel wrote:
    I also find it odd to come to the conclusion that a film needs several viewings to appreciate its subtleties having seen it once.
    Just like The Dark Knight Rises?

    The Resident Evil films. I'm one of the reasons they keep making them.

  • kalel 10 Apr 2013 12:39:42 83,849 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Eh?
  • beastmaster 10 Apr 2013 12:41:21 10,172 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Never mind.

    The Resident Evil films. I'm one of the reasons they keep making them.

  • evild_edd 10 Apr 2013 14:19:41 2,924 posts
    Seen 8 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Nice. My post inspired some random backlash. I did warn that I consider myself a Kubrick fan. Rereading it, I'll admit that my post did come across as (unintentionally) pretentious, but I'd point out:

    1. This thread regularly gets comments along the lines of "not sure what to make of (Film A)" or "no idea whether it was brilliant or shit" or "no idea what score to give" etc. etc.
    2. Plenty of people also say that they'd need to re-watch to correctly judge a film, and/or admit that they feel they missed things on a full viewing.
    3. Plenty of reviews also don't attach a score, or do a betterthantaken/10 type remark.
    4. A number of those that do score feel as though they've just attached arbitrary, token marks to tick a box in the review - and this is what I meant by the (clearly poorly worded) mundanities.

    I don't think I'd judge the film in a traditional sense as it's an atypical film. LeoliansBro nailed it by saying that it's a very literal translation - the story flowed much like Dickensian novel, without the traditional pacing or layout we've come expect in films - whilst the visuals are like watching a moving painting. It feels very different from other films out there.

    As for LeoliansBro's comment of:

    "Overlong, meandering, at times incoherent, driven by a million small details and a cast of thousands, and for the modern audience's attention span just boring."

    You could argue that not just of Barry Lyndon but pretty much every Kubrick film. I suppose that's the reason why he remains a director who's either loved or treated with indifference (Mrs Evild thinks 2001 the worst film ever made, and found A Clockwork Orange boring). Personally, even as a fan, I need to be in the right mood to watch a Kubrick film.

    Fair point on calling up the snobby/pretentious lingo, though. I'll come back with a more traditional review once I've had the chance to watch it simultaneously on three tv's in four formats, muted, subtitled and at full volume, with the orange and contrast turned down.

    Oh, and I resent being called pretentious by anyone who claims to have enjoyed TWBB ;P

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

  • HarryPalmer 10 Apr 2013 14:25:33 2,630 posts
    Seen 10 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    There Will Be Blood is fucking brilliant.
  • kalel 10 Apr 2013 14:27:27 83,849 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Thackeray would not have appreciated being called Dickensian.
  • disusedgenius 10 Apr 2013 14:33:05 5,140 posts
    Seen 16 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Never Let Me Go - 9/10

    Rather good and not what I expected from my position of complete ignorance, bar the poster. It somehow managed to be the most powerful sci-fi film I've seen since District 9, only with much more twee.
  • Blakester 10 Apr 2013 14:41:48 3,347 posts
    Seen 10 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    disusedgenius wrote:
    Never Let Me Go - 9/10

    Rather good and not what I expected from my position of complete ignorance, bar the poster. It somehow managed to be the most powerful sci-fi film I've seen since District 9, only with much more twee.
    And I would add, likely to leave you in a bleak mood for a number of days.

    I reckon a double-bill of Never Let Me Go and Martha Marcy May Marlene would finish most people off.

    When you can't see the angles on the wall you're in trouble.

  • evild_edd 10 Apr 2013 14:43:31 2,924 posts
    Seen 8 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    @kalel

    Thackeray would not have appreciated being called Dickensian.
    Was there huge animosity between them? I know they were the same era. You know what I mean about the comparison though. This following of a young lad through formative years and tough experiences reminded me a little of David Copperfield, only without the Dickensian happy ending.

    Assume that most of the narrator's words (and probably most of the spoken dialogue) would have been plucked straight from Thackeray's original work...? I've never read any of his stuff. Might have to give Vanity Fair a go one of these days.

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

  • Page

    of 2584 First / Last

Log in or register to reply