The Movie Thread

[potpest]

I've just abandoned Once Upon a Time in Hollywood..... What a load of shite!
I've loved every single one of QT's films but surely he was high or taking the piss when this was made. Feck all has happened after 90 minutes.
My wife and my 20yo both said the same about it. All 3 of us feel let down

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

You turned it off just before it gets interesting...

[gojira]

I've just abandoned Once Upon a Time in Hollywood..... What a load of shite!
I've loved every single one of QT's films but surely he was high or taking the piss when this was made. Feck all has happened after 90 minutes.
My wife and my 20yo both said the same about it. All 3 of us feel let down

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Watch the last 15m, just crazy. I laughed my ass off.


Envoy? de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk

[Stevieboy]

I've just abandoned Once Upon a Time in Hollywood..... What a load of shite!
I've loved every single one of QT's films but surely he was high or taking the piss when this was made. Feck all has happened after 90 minutes.
My wife and my 20yo both said the same about it. All 3 of us feel let down

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

[gojira]

I watched it last week, I thought Sandler acted very well, he portrayed a throughly despicable self centred unsympathetic character with absolutely no redeeming features. Although I watch it through, I nearly turned it of several times as the Sandler character was so unlikeable, I wasn’t sure I wanted to know or really cared what happened to him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He definitely was unlikeable but I believe that was the point of the whole film. Watching him mess everything up and getting pulled into that downward spiral of his own making. And there wasn't a single likeable character in the film. I like films about such characters.

[jerryr]

Just watched Uncut Gems on Netflix with Adam Sandler whom I never really liked. But I have to say that he is really good in this. Great film about a gambler who is quite the looser!

I watched it last week, I thought Sandler acted very well, he portrayed a throughly despicable self centred unsympathetic character with absolutely no redeeming features. Although I watch it through, I nearly turned it of several times as the Sandler character was so unlikeable, I wasn?t sure I wanted to know or really cared what happened to him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gojira]

Just watched Uncut Gems on Netflix with Adam Sandler whom I never really liked. But I have to say that he is really good in this. Great film about a gambler who is quite the looser!

[Emaresee]

Long Shot - modestly quirky middle of the road light hearted romcom

Enjoyed The Irishman he other day, but its been well discussed above... so will say no more.

12 Strong - best part way through it. Kinda cant make my mind up. I think maybe it's a modestly over styled glory pic.... lots of soulful reflection upon the soldier v warrior dynamic... which cmes off as just a touch too glib...

[ha_banos]

Dunkirk persisted with the device of seeing everything through the eyes of the protagonists; hence, for example, we never saw any Germans since the characters didn't. This is fine, but I think there was a missed opportunity to present the scale of the operation (300,000 plus men off the beaches); referred to by Branagh's character but never shown. A simple way for this to have been done whilst maintaining the central conceit of 'first hand' view would have been a view down from Tom Hardy's Spitfire over the beaches. The film could have combined the scale of the event with the intimacy of the individuals' stories. Or am I just thinking too much?!

Thinking? Your not smoking cigars again are you?

[grumpybaldy]

Dunkirk persisted with the device of seeing everything through the eyes of the protagonists; hence, for example, we never saw any Germans since the characters didn't. This is fine, but I think there was a missed opportunity to present the scale of the operation (300,000 plus men off the beaches); referred to by Branagh's character but never shown. A simple way for this to have been done whilst maintaining the central conceit of 'first hand' view would have been a view down from Tom Hardy's Spitfire over the beaches. The film could have combined the scale of the event with the intimacy of the individuals' stories. Or am I just thinking too much?!

[geoffbot]

I do agree that a good story needs you to be invested in the characters. Like saving private Ryan, and 1917. 'that scene' with the plane (to avoid spoilers) where you don't even see the main event, is superbly choreographed But Dunkirk is about the scale of it all which is the other side of war - just a different perspective.

[simwells]

The problem i have with Dunkirk is that it doesn't tell a story. It is effectively a war pastiche. It looks in on moments of the evacuation but never really connects us with the people who are experiencing it. It just flits from one scene to the next without really adding any context. For me that isnt what im looking for in a film about Dunkirk. It should be focussed on the humanity of the situation and this failed to do that for me. Look at the great escape for an example of how to tell a war story.

1917 acheives all that because whilst the cinematography is amazing, it is focussed on one individual and his experience of the war. You develop a connection to him and what is happening. Get to think about what you would do in the same situation. You actually care about what happens to the person and not the conflict in general.

Perhaps this isnt what most people are looking for in a film. Dunkirk got great reviews. I think that perhaps 1917 will be looked back on as a better film but who knows.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Couldn?t agree more, I definitely think 1917 will be looked back on as the better film. Dunkirk I enjoyed but was classic Nolan incredibly tense beautifully shot and the soundtrack or lack of hugely effected you but there was nothing behind all of that.

But then most of my favourite war films don?t actually show much war!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[7kingsguy]

I liked Dunkirk.

The problem i have with Dunkirk is that it doesn't tell a story. It is effectively a war pastiche. It looks in on moments of the evacuation but never really connects us with the people who are experiencing it. It just flits from one scene to the next without really adding any context. For me that isnt what im looking for in a film about Dunkirk. It should be focussed on the humanity of the situation and this failed to do that for me. Look at the great escape for an example of how to tell a war story.

1917 acheives all that because whilst the cinematography is amazing, it is focussed on one individual and his experience of the war. You develop a connection to him and what is happening. Get to think about what you would do in the same situation. You actually care about what happens to the person and not the conflict in general.

Perhaps this isnt what most people are looking for in a film. Dunkirk got great reviews. I think that perhaps 1917 will be looked back on as a better film but who knows.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[geoffbot]

I liked Dunkirk.

[ZomB]

Agreed. Much better than Dunkirk which was completely souless in my opinion.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

I know what you mean by Dunkirk movie being soulless. But I really enjoyed it none the less (watched it on Netflix yesterday). Will definitely check out 1917 esp. if it's better than Dunkirk! Thanks for recommendation.

[7kingsguy]

Agreed. Much better than Dunkirk which was completely souless in my opinion.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk