carefully constructed contribution!
Printable View
carefully constructed contribution!
Sertainly!Quote:
Originally Posted by Wheeze
And the Scottish game/house keeper bloke played by Albert Finney a) should have had a Scottish accent b) should have been played by Sean Connery and c) should have turned his torch off!Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Breeze
...and they should have been covered in Midge bites :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Stolly
Seven Psychopaths
That “difficult second…” applies to the world of cinema as much as to albums or novels. Some achieve: Welles with the sublime The Magnificent Ambersons or Mike Nichols with The Graduate; but how does writer/ director Martin McDonagh follow the brilliant In Bruges?
Well this time lightning has not struck twice but Seven Psychopaths is like no other movie I have seen, and well worth a look.
After a brilliant start (evocative of Sam Fuller) the movie moves to pinball machine mode-you never quite know where it will go next- and the mood changes are staggering. Blood yes, but laugh out loud jokes as well and perhaps even profundity.
Clever? Yes. Too clever by half? Probably. But better than going running in the rain? Certainly!
Erm,....getting a little soft in your post-chair are we??
Really wanted to enjoy In Bruges but somehow it just didn't grab me as much as I hoped. And I adore Bruges!
Will give this one a look though.
But for gritty realism, I had an unexpected dose of it last night. I have occasionally stumbled on bits of 'Get Carter' but never managed to see the film right through. Put that right last night. What a tough little film. Simple enough story. London hood goes to Newcastle to investigate death of brother and exact revenge and gets dragged through a grubby hinterland of vice, corruption and plain nastiness....which triggers the same reactions in him until its gets personal. Shakesperean ending. The cinematography is great, often setting scenes with characters working at long range in crowded places to increase the sense of detachment....or again in wide open spaces to enhance the desolation of the story and place. Caine is great, colouring the wide boy alfie facet with a genuinely nasty psychopathic tint. But the denouement is great. Truly bleak and miserable
OK it sounds like a downbeat movie, and it is. But it captures the seamy underbelly of the dying 60's dream as it turned sour in the 70's to perfection. I loved it!
Well you are wrong about In Bruges. So try The Guard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wheeze
Despite my intense dislike of Caine; Get Carter (1971) is one of the best British films ever made.
So good the Americans made an execrable version, set in Seattle, in 2000.
Did they? Bast*rds! Always copying and ruining our crown jewels! Witness Italian Job! Arrggghh! I mean, they don't have to. They can do their own so well. Dog Day Afternoon for example. Now thats a cracking little movie. Again, simple story well told with believable characters.
I saw the Hobbit yesterday at Bradford Imax in 3D (but haven't a clue whether it was 24 fps or 48 fps :) ). As a self confessed Lord of the Rings geek and expert I'll firstly say here and now that I did not like the LOTR films very much in that they cut too much of the story completely, glossed over too much, mispronounced key characters names, changed the story for the worse in a number of key places, completely ruined what the Ents were really (:) ) about and got the orcs all wrong in pretty much every way possible.
So going into The Hobbit I was expecting the worst. But..... it was brilliant :thumbup:
Casablanca (1942 dir Michael Curtiz)
The Daily Telegraph suggests that this will be the best film to be shown on TV during the holiday. Well as a timeless, flawless masterpiece it will be.
Like the Mona Lisa or the Taj Mahal it suffers from an apparent over-familiarity but, like them, it needs unjaundiced eyes (and ears) to appreciate its wonders. People may remember the perfect performances of a stellar cast-Bergman, Bogart, Lorre, Veight, Greenstreet- or As Time Goes By- but a great film starts with a great script and in this case Warner Brothers paid 75% of the total fees paid to all the actors for the original play and to the script writers.
And what they got in return is one of the most quoted film scripts in cinema history and a film of perfection.
.Graham I saw it a long time ago and have forgotten most of it. Like most films though I keep a mental note of my conclusion so I can return to them later to see if I feel differently. After all the hype about Casablanca being one of the greatest films ever I was left feeling that it was just above average. Yes there are aspects of greatness in there but if the story doesn't ingnite one's passions then it just doesn't work. 'The African Queen' was a much more enjoyable film from my perspective. The lead roles starting out with contempt for one another fall in love through a difficult struggle. The expression on Bogart's face when he had to manoeuvre through the leeches was memorable. I'd give Casablanca 6/10 and The African Queen 9/10.Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Breeze
So would I :)Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher leigh
I would give 'Treasure of the Sierra Madre' a 9.5/10. One of my favourite films and definitely my favourite Bogart film :thumbup:
Well we won't all like the same movies but I was amused to re-read of The African Queen "...hardly the great classic it's often claimed to be. Bogart hammier than usual..."Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher leigh
Time Out Film Guide (which I like because the reviewers usually agree with me!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=JNc4SnXr1hA
This film is a work of Art. We went to see it yesterday, all three of us and were the only ones in the cinema, what a strange experience. It is 3d so we put on our goggles, found the best seats in the house and enjoyed. For anyone who has read the book, it does it justice, Richard Parker is awesome.
Rod :thumbup:
May have to go to see this, read and enjoyed the book an age ago, read it around the same time as The Lovely Bones which on first viewing didn't think did justice to the book, watched this again the other week and enjoyed it, probably because the memory of the book has faded.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr H Tool
I saw Life of Pi yesterday and visually it was utterly stunning. It may be the best use of 3D in a film I've seen thus far too - as with the Hobbit it now looks like film directors are finally starting to use 3D far more subtly and cleverly, rather that just throwing things at you out of the screen. I haven't read the book so can't comment on the way the story was told in that but it was especially well done in the film with a great cast. Richard Parker acted his stripes off :)
I saw Life of Pi with Stolly and have read the book. It is a brilliant film and does the book justice I reckon. I just can't get over how lifelike Richard Parker is. Totally amazing effects and visually stunning. I was having flashbacks in my dreams last night.
On a side note, Gerard Depardieu has really gone to seed!! He made a great evil chef though.
The Hobbit = WOW
Last film I saw at the cinema was Avatar.. So glad I went to see this earlier.
:thumbup:
Blade Runner
After 30 years I thought I ought to take a look at Blade Runner (The Director’s Cut) which Time Out describes as a master piece and David Thomson rates highly.
On the other hand Monthly Film Bulletin felt it had a “narrative so limp as to be in need of a wheelchair”.
Quite.
So, never mind Time Out and DT; is it any good?Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Breeze
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derby Tup
Not the part I watched before I remembered I may not have many years left and should cherish every moment.
It's very much like 2001. It is of its time and has been copied so much by others that watching it now, it seems cliched.
BUT...you had to be there. Genuinely ground breaking when it came out and a truly atmospheric film. Think of it more as Film Noir rather than science fiction.
I love it but probably because I was there and it was at a great time in my life. Would be very interested to hear what a young reviewer who's never seen it makes of it. Me and Graham.... too old, hoary and stuck in our ways to be truly objective about it.
I recognise that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wheeze
I have paid my dues to cinema and most of the fine arts. I have seen all Eisenstein's films and the classic great silent films and everything Bergman made and so on because everything in life is context and relative. You can only understand Woody Allen if you know Bergman.
And yes I knew what I was watching would have been breathtaking in 1982 but in 2012 I was listening to the dialogue thinking "OK I've got the picture. Do I care enough to watch all 112 minutes of this?" The visual impact at the time of, say,The Seven Samurai or Citizen Kane or A Bout de Souffle might have been equally breathtaking (ha ha!) but I think because those films are character driven they retain their interest even though their revolutionary film techniques have subsequently been endlessly plagiarised.
Because I go to the cinema I see a lot of film trailers and I am struck by the viscerality of cinema today; but my favourite film of 2012 was A Royal Affair- character based with an intelligent script and an interesting and partly factual story.
But I am old.
Blade Runner is stunning and the effects for the time it was made are as good as anything seen today (in my opinion) maybe 'Pi' has gone further but then it is a different genre. The soundtrack by Vangelis is one of the best. I think the scene where Daryl Hannah is retired is brilliant (she actually hit Harrison) and was given a nod to in 'Kill Bill'. Oh yes and Roy handling Tyrells head still gets my heartrate up as much as running up Kinder Edge. The film has a very dark edge and doesn't rely on effects to make it good.
:thumbup:
Commiserations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Breeze
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubbintooth
Oh I don't know. I think one was a comedy.
Or what passes for a comedy in Sweden.
I used to count Wild Strawberries as one of my all time favourites, but last time I watched it I couldn't handle the relentless bleakness and pessimism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubbintooth
Ah well, Fanny & Alexander is still watchable.
After watching Virgin Spring last year I might give it a while..Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Breeze
The Wizard of Oz has just been on. That's how we laugh the day away in the merry old land of Oz
I too think that Blade Runner hasn't stood the test of time. Watching it recently I thought that it was slow and plodding a lot of the time. Ridley Scott's best films remain Alien, Thelma and Louise, Gladiator and Black Hawk Down all of which were and still are brilliant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr H Tool
Wow!
Well we should like different things.
I have now watched the rest of it. There is a Hollywood expression that the money must appear on the screen (not necessarily the same thing as 'the money shot') and I suppose with the impressive monsoon special effects by Dalton Trumbo it does but...pity about the story. Style over substance?
It was originally released in the UK in September 1982. With what else? Diva directed by Jean-Jacques Beineix which I did go to see and have seen again since. And it has a nice soundtrack, notably Catalani and Gounod.
Brilliant!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Breeze
Glad to have persuaded you Mr B.Quote:
Originally Posted by mr brightside
looking forward to alice in wonderland :D bbc3
Despite some bad reviews I really enjoyed Bourne Identity. Worked well with the other films and its got me wanting more.
Has anyone seen Scorsee's Kundun?
Problem is, the story is hacked about a bit and, depending on which version you watch, the film is chopped,tarted and sanitised for US audiences. If you watch the directors cut (i.e. without the crap Marlowe style overdubs and the pathetic ending tacked on from outtakes of The Shining) then you at least get something where the ambiguity of Deckard is handled really well. Don't forget, this movie predates the Terminator and is probably the first feature length film to base a story around the philosophy of real versus synthetic life forms. OK, you have to be sympathetic to a Science Fiction narrative rather than a classic narrative so you will inevitably feel differently about the characters. But I can't agree that the story is second rate. I do agree that the presentation CAN be rubbish if you watch the wrong version.Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Breeze
And, thank you Dr Tool...Roy Battys destruction of his creator is one of the great moments of existential angst!
Blast! You've just reminded me that I lent Kundun to a friend before I'd watched it myself...that was about three years ago and I haven't got it back. I'll let you know what I think when I do!:sneaky:
Quote:
Originally Posted by The devil's own
holidays over but the movies just keep on coming on tv, after Tim Burtons fantastic adaptation of Alice in wonderland last night, tonight it was Avatar, great :thumbup: