Last Movie you Watched?

1185186188190191983

Comments

  • edited November 2014 Posts: 6,432
    chrisisall wrote: »
    This film for me has made Cap the most important character of the current Marvel films.

    More than Stark or Banner?
    Certainly after Winter Soldier, Cap has heart and ideals. Alas I love Superman though I prefer Winter Soldier to Man of Steel because Cap embodies good that Man of Steel should have had. Man of Steel presented Superman well in parts though by end of the film Superman was smashing up to much, and pretty much threatened the general after destroying a 12 million pound satellite. That is not Superman.

    Banner not been developed enough in the current run of films and Stark will be Caps binary opposite in future films. Stark already is to be honest, Stark is most of the time a selfish capitalist.
    Not sure if you have seen the Age of Ultron Trailer though the stand out image from that was Caps shield smashed in half. The image itself resonates on many levels and I think the film makers know it!
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Star Trek V:The Final Frontier.
    After my latest viewing I think this movie could be considered very underrated. It has a few flaws. Mainly the rushed ending, special effects and a few bad jokes. But on the whole I don't think this movie is that bad. There is a lot of good character moments all throughout the movie. Especially in Kirk, Spock and McCoy. I've noticed a lot this time around too that I haven't noticed before. The film is very atmospheric. Sybok's introduction on the horse in slow motion is really cool and almost spooky. I've also notice that a lot of the scene's are lit with pink and red lighting. Which reminds me how The Original Series was often lit. This film also feels the closest to TOS in terms of it's story. I can see some homages to "Where No Man Has Gone Before" and "The Way to Eden." The best scene in the movie in my opinion is where Sybok reveals McCoy's and Spock's inner pain. It's a really moving scene. And Kirk's speech that follows is classic Trek at it's finest.

    It's not the best Star Trek film, but It's certainly not the worst, nor is it as bad as many think it is.
  • Posts: 1,107
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Captain America Winter Soldier
    I need this on BR!
    A must buy, brilliant film. Its bubbling under Superman the movie for me, simply because of the relevance and emotional aspects of the movie. This film for me has made Cap the most important character of the current Marvel films.

    Evans was born to play the role just like Chris Reeve was born to play Superman .
    Steve Rogers is very much an idealized man, more in the vein of DC Comics’ Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman. Those characters are often criticized for being “too perfect” and “untouchable,” traits that Captain America embodies — what man might be — instead of the vulnerable, damaged Man that is (ie, Spider-Man, Hulk). Yet, at the same time, he used to just be some kid who wanted to help people in need.

    This blending of worlds extends beyond Steve Rogers’ personality and into his physicality. The character very clearly has attributes that are above human (despite the fact that Marvel maintains he has no superpowers), but he’s only as strong as a person could be and as fast as someone could be (that “and” is what puts him into superhuman levels, and the fact that he has no lactic acid buildup), so he is still a tactical type of fighter — a guile hero. This means when he’s taking on a spy network, Captain America can be kicking down doors and busting heads, while when there’s an alien invasion, he’s the strategist. The ability to fill both roles allows the character to have wider appeal than if he were either/or. He combines the best of both worlds to be fully representative of superheroes as a whole.

    Really what makes Captain America so great is that he is so full of subversions. He’s a patriot who won’t hesitate to take on his country. He’s a soldier that doesn’t use a gun. He’s a scrawny Brooklynite fighting alongside robots and monsters. He walks the line between humanity and power, man and God. That, really, is what the superhero genre is all about — how people deal with power and the circumstances it brings.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Yeah so I just spent 3 hours watching blue is the warmest colour. Wasn't expecting the movie to be so long but it's a very good film and I expect Lea's skills as an actress to be utilised to full effect for Bond 24.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited November 2014 Posts: 13,978
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    @MajorDSmythe, nice collection of films for October, my good friend. :-)

    Thanks @Dimi. Looking back at the list, I could and tried to fit in more 60's films. Oh well, there's always next year.

  • decided to watch a few DePalma films. The Fury , Obsession and Femme Fatale. Seen them before but this was the first time seeing very good bluray copies of The Fury and Obsession. Always thought DePalma would make an interesting Bond director. Then my wife and I watched David Fincher's The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. I had seen it before but not the wife. As soon as DC entered the frame she remarked how ugly he looks! Great film.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    LUCY

    Pretty original sci fi thriller. Has a little nod to 2001. Did not care for the end, but other than that very enjoyable!
  • edited November 2014 Posts: 6,432
    Dalton12 wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Captain America Winter Soldier
    I need this on BR!
    A must buy, brilliant film. Its bubbling under Superman the movie for me, simply because of the relevance and emotional aspects of the movie. This film for me has made Cap the most important character of the current Marvel films.

    Evans was born to play the role just like Chris Reeve was born to play Superman .
    Steve Rogers is very much an idealized man, more in the vein of DC Comics’ Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman. Those characters are often criticized for being “too perfect” and “untouchable,” traits that Captain America embodies — what man might be — instead of the vulnerable, damaged Man that is (ie, Spider-Man, Hulk). Yet, at the same time, he used to just be some kid who wanted to help people in need.

    This blending of worlds extends beyond Steve Rogers’ personality and into his physicality. The character very clearly has attributes that are above human (despite the fact that Marvel maintains he has no superpowers), but he’s only as strong as a person could be and as fast as someone could be (that “and” is what puts him into superhuman levels, and the fact that he has no lactic acid buildup), so he is still a tactical type of fighter — a guile hero. This means when he’s taking on a spy network, Captain America can be kicking down doors and busting heads, while when there’s an alien invasion, he’s the strategist. The ability to fill both roles allows the character to have wider appeal than if he were either/or. He combines the best of both worlds to be fully representative of superheroes as a whole.

    Really what makes Captain America so great is that he is so full of subversions. He’s a patriot who won’t hesitate to take on his country. He’s a soldier that doesn’t use a gun. He’s a scrawny Brooklynite fighting alongside robots and monsters. He walks the line between humanity and power, man and God. That, really, is what the superhero genre is all about — how people deal with power and the circumstances it brings.

    Very well illustrated, powers don't make the man or superhero. Its the heart of the character. Adversity often brings out the best of any character, its the measure of the man or woman and that's what makes it compelling. Superman is often accused of being a unrelateble character, personally I find Superman one of the most relatable characters because of how much he holds back and strives to do good.

    Watched Superman the movie and Xmen first class tonight two excellent films in that genre.
  • edited November 2014 Posts: 11,189
    Robocop (1987)

    "The future has a silver lining"

    That one phrase sums up the tone of the film. Inherently satirical, mocking and tongue-in-cheek. A time-capsule movie for the 1980s along with Scarface in which all the excessive stereotypes of American society back then were exaggerated even further. Throw in graphic, brutal violence and we get a real cult classic of the period.

    Peter Weller is great as Robocop/Murphy. He makes the inherently ridiculous image of a man walking around in a metal suit look impressive, yet earns the audiences sympathy throughout the film as we follow the literal transformation of his character. His performance however is at his strongest towards the end when he and Lewis are in the scrap yard and the humanity is breaking through. Is it me or does he remind anyone of Daniel Craig?

    Ronnie Cox and Kurtwood Smith have a lot of fun chewing the scenery as the lead villains. Kurtwood in particular is utterly terrifying as Clarence. Sadistic, callous, evil and proud of it.

    Unfortunately (and I know fans have said this) but Nancy Allen felt bland and wooden to me.

    Some of the other highlights were the scenes shot from Murphy's (Robocop's) POV, such as early on when Murphy is dying in hospital (how the hell wasn't he killed flat out?) and later when he (as Robocop) is walking round what used to be his house.

    I haven't seen the remake but, from what I've heard, its poor in comparison to the sharp humorous original.

    8/10

  • edited November 2014 Posts: 1,107
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Robocop (1987)

    "The future has a silver lining"

    That one phrase sums up the tone of the film. Inherently satirical, mocking and tongue-in-cheek. A time-capsule movie for the 1980s along with Scarface in which all the excessive stereotypes of American society back then were exaggerated even further. Throw in graphic, brutal violence and we get a real cult classic of the period.

    Peter Weller is great as Robocop/Murphy. He makes the inherently ridiculous image of a man walking around in a metal suit look impressive, yet earns the audiences sympathy throughout the film as we follow the literal transformation of his character. His performance however is at his strongest towards the end when he and Lewis are in the scrap yard and the humanity is struggling to break through. Is it me or does he remind anyone of Daniel Craig?

    Ronnie Cox and Kurtwood Smith have a lot of fun chewing the scenery as the lead villains. Kurtwood in particular is utterly terrifying as Clarence. Sadistic, callous, evil and proud of it.

    Unfortunately (and I know fans have said this) but Nancy Allen felt bland and wooden to me.

    I haven't seen the remake but, from what I've heard, its poor in comparison to the original, which is sharp, brutal and funny.

    8/10

    One of the best films I saw .

    giphy.gif
  • Posts: 11,189
    Just watched The Parallax View for the first time. Brilliantly tense 70s political thriller with some extremely well timed shocks and atmospheric cinematography.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Finally got round to watching Kickass 2, really enjoyed it. The action sequence with Hit girl and the baddies van is an amazing bit of fight choreography.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Just watched The Parallax View for the first time. Brilliantly tense 70s political thriller with some extremely well timed shocks and atmospheric cinematography.
    First time?? Wow.
    You do know, of course, all of that is true (but the names were changed to protect the guilty...).
  • edited November 2014 Posts: 6,432
    Jurassic Park trilogy, enjoyed the first two movies they both stand up well after twenty years. Part three is a considerable drop in quality, the script is pretty awful. Part threes visual effects look inferior than the previous films.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Part three is a considerable drop in quality, the script is pretty awful.
    Well, actually, it had no script. Seriously.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Many of the best lines from the dinosaurs were cut ! :))
  • Posts: 7,653
    Jurassic Park trilogy, enjoyed the first two movies they both stand up well after twenty years. Part three is a considerable drop in quality, the script is pretty awful. Part threes visual effects look inferior than the previous films.

    The third one is actually the one with the least plotholes and the best monster movie of the three of them. As entertainment goes it is not pretentious at all and a great adventure flic.

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    SaintMark wrote: »
    The third one is actually the one with the least plotholes
    The movie with the least plot has the least plot holes by definition. But yeah, it works well as a cool monster flick.
  • Posts: 7,653
    chrisisall wrote: »
    SaintMark wrote: »
    The third one is actually the one with the least plotholes
    The movie with the least plot has the least plot holes by definition. But yeah, it works well as a cool monster flick.

    And that is what it does well being a monster flick, it has no pretensions otherwise. The other two while being a breakthrough in CGI always leave me with some questions at the end. This one is a very simple tale with a lot of running and screaming all the time when the Dino's come out to play.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    DrGorner wrote: »
    Finally got round to watching Kickass 2, really enjoyed it. The action sequence with Hit girl and the baddies van is an amazing bit of fight choreography.

    Here is hoping there will be a third one.
  • Posts: 2,081
    Interstellar - ahhhh. :)
  • Alan Partridge - Alpha Papa. Big fan of the show have the box set. The film did not dissapoint, Steve Coogan and the great Colm Meany were excellent.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,959
    Tuulia wrote: »
    Interstellar - ahhhh. :)

    I was going to see this after work tomorrow, but 'Nightcrawler' has my buddy and I slightly more interested, so we'll be seeing that, instead. I've missed quite a few films in theaters lately that I've really wanted to see, including 'John Wick.' Still dying to see that after hearing about how incredible the action sequences are.
  • zebrafishzebrafish <°)))< in Octopussy's garden in the shade
    edited November 2014 Posts: 4,341
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Tuulia wrote: »
    Interstellar - ahhhh. :)

    I was going to see this after work tomorrow, but 'Nightcrawler' has my buddy and I slightly more interested, so we'll be seeing that, instead. I've missed quite a few films in theaters lately that I've really wanted to see, including 'John Wick.' Still dying to see that after hearing about how incredible the action sequences are.


    I have just seen Interstellar. To make it short, after all the hype and the various trailers I probably expected a bit too much. If you enjoy a good Science Fiction movie, then it is OK, it certainly ticks most of the right boxes. But it does not have the intensity or even the beauty of Gravity. So here are my (very subjective) thoughts. I am sure some of you may disagree, but these are just my two cents.

    -No spoilers-
    The good: Matthew McConaughey and his in-film daughter deliver believable top acting. There are lovable robots and they look unlike any robot I would have imagined for a SciFi movie, very memorable (and funny)!

    The Bad: Anne Hathaway unfortunately remains a very one-dimensional character, as does the character played by Jessica Chastain (what a waste of talents). Michael Caine again, why do all old wise men have to be played by Michael Caine? I love the guy, but his familiarity takes one out of the movie. The movie looks good when we are in space (even though it is far from outstanding), but Hoyte van Hoytema's camera work did not strike me a aesthetically pleasing as Deakin's in SF. I hope for Bond 24 Hoytema chooses a different path. There were too many close-ups of people's faces with a slightly shaky hand-held camera. Space sequences could have bathed much more in the beauty and wonder of outer space. Cuts were often confusing during action sequences and hard to follow. Cuts frequently switched between the action on earth and in space, interrupting the suspense more than once.

    The Ugly: The scriptwriting leaves a lot to be desired. By the end things really stop making sense, so be advised not to think too deep about the plot. Also, Hans Zimmer's soundtrack is not worth mentioning. Mainly ominous sounds, no discernible themes (in contrast to the brilliant musical theme of "Gravity"), often getting really annoying (and loud) when they manipulate us to get watery eyes in emotional scenes. Luckily, a few action scenes are completely free of music.

    From this experience I can safely say that I don't want Hans Zimmer close to any Bond film, and I hope that Nolan will not be allowed to make one either. Nevertheless, I do not consider seeing it as a waste of time, it had its highlights. But I am convinced now that Chris Nolan is not an exceptional action director (the action choreography was rather poor). He has a lot of money to spend on his films, but much of the storytelling could have been achieved with much less and to better effect.
  • edited November 2014 Posts: 2,081
    Ah well, opinions... :) I thought Interstellar was much better and far more interesting than Gravity (very different anyway, but they have a couple of things in common), and I was actually positively surprised by Interstellar - I'm not a big Nolan fan, and also I hadn't been following any hype (I usually try to avoid stuff about movies in advance... had only seen 1 trailer of this, hadn't really seen, heard or read anything else). And it made quite enough sense to me. :P
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    YES, MAN. Pretty funny, but not among the best Carrey films.
  • Posts: 3,336
    Blackmail (1929)
    The Salvation (2014)
    The invisible man (1933)
    Interstellar (2014)
    Cape fear (1991)
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,157
    Interstellar (2014)

    Interstellar-Walking-Monolith-Robot.jpg

    I'll be frank; I'm a huge Nolan fan. This man has never given me a single film I didn't like. Following, Memento, Insomnia, The Prestige, Inception and the Dark Knight trilogy; one after the other they are superb films in my book. I appreciate Nolan as a storyteller and a photographer even more than I do Michael Mann or David Fincher.
    Next to that, I'm also a Stanley Kubrick fan. His epic 2001: A Space Odyssey is my favourite film of all time. So when I heard that Nolan was going to give us his "2001", I was hooked right away.

    Interstellar is a project I followed with great interest. And today was the day. I won't spoil anything, so by all means read on if you like. ;-)

    Take some Terrence Malick, mix in some Spielberg and Kubrick and heat it all to Nolan degrees. You get a film that starts quietly with a character driven set-up, ignites into heavy visual exposition with some of the best space images I have ever seen, and then flies off into some powerful science fiction, with a strong emphasis on "science". The references to 2001 are obvious. Certain shots are nothing if not a direct homage to the legendary space adventure. Unlike 2001, however, Interstellar works with real human characters with real human emotions. Also, it's not so much the deeper mysteries of space that drive the plot, but a scientific enterprise with a specific if not somewhat uncertain finality. One thing I always like in space films, and both 2001 and Interstellar do it, is when they pull the sound from the movie when floating in space.

    Hans Zimmer's score works very well for this film. As with the Dark Knight movies, Zimmer relies heavily on sound effects rather than melody but such mechanical music serves extremely well for Interstellar. Also, some of the musical pieces end with a stretched organ pipe sound, entirely like 2001's Thus Spoke Zarathustra.

    With good acting, magnificent visuals and some powerful scientific ideas, Interstellar is my kind of movie. I admit, I was ready to love the film going in; I'm that big a Nolan fan. But this is a film made for me. I love this kind of space adventures. But will everybody else? No, certainly not. I can imagine some folks will die from boredom; others will walk away slightly disappointed. This isn't Inception or The Dark Knight. This is a relatively slow-paced, often sentimental film, but incredibly beautiful to look at and for science geeks very intriguing. I can't help thinking about Contact; maybe it's the Matthew McConaughey link, but there's more to remind me of that film too.

    Will it do Inception or Dark Knight numbers? I'm not sure. The problem with films like Interstellar is that they're really not for everybody. But I'm so much part of this film's demographic, I never once zoned out, not even slightly; I was in science fiction heaven.

    interstellar-trailer-07302014-111409.jpg
  • Posts: 2,081
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Interstellar (2014)

    Take some Terrence Malick, mix in some Spielberg and Kubrick and heat it all to Nolan degrees.

    That's beautifully put. =D>
    This isn't Inception or The Dark Knight.

    Well, no, and for me that was a good thing - I enjoyed this more than either of those. :D
    Will it do Inception or Dark Knight numbers? I'm not sure. The problem with films like Interstellar is that they're really not for everybody.

    No film is for everybody.

    In general I very much agree with your review. :)
  • That would be Die Another Day.
    Astonishingly weak last 45 minutes completely destroy strong first 75 minutes.
    Very good up until the invisible car nonsense. Straight downhill from then on.
    Brosnan was given nothing to work with.
Sign In or Register to comment.