It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Indeed. He looks away in disbelief when the gang enters the bar haha.
peter Jacksons documentary "they shall not grow old" was a vastly better face of WWI than this Hollywood vehicle. Still it is certainly one to see in the cinema if you are going to see it. In the Netherlands I am not sure how this movie is going to do, we were with six persons during this viewing.
A masterpiece on every level.
I didnt think Deakins could be any better, yet he absolutely excels himself here. The film is a masterpiece of cinematography.
Are there words to describe how bloody awful this film was? I was incredibly disappointed with Prometheus but this was just in another orbit to that film.
I'll be honest I've not trusted Ridley for a while and not felt he has lived up to the legacy of Alien and Blade Runner, yes there has been some moments but he hasn't been what you would call consistent.
Although this film what happened, it is Batman & Robin bad, it is just awful. I remember a friend saying to me it is like Picasso took out one of his masterpieces and urinated on it.
I'd go as far as saying that not only did he no. 1 on it that he also did a big no. 2 and in some kind of demented zeal smeared it all over the canvas.
0/100
Gripping old fashioned storytelling thriller starring Donald Sutherland (always thought he would be an interesting Bond villain!) As the German spy who discovers a secret about the D-Day landings and attempts to get back to the Fatherland are hindered by repressed wife Kate Nelligan and her bitter wheelchair bound husband Christopher Casenove, when he is washed up on their Scottish island retreat.
Richard Marquand (who went on to helm Return of the Jedi) directs tautly, aided by a wonderful score by the legendary Miklos Rozsa. Neat little thriller that was rather overshadowed by big blockbusters such as Chariots of Fire and An American Werewolf in London, not to mention For Your Eyes Only (which cinematographer Alan Hume lensed along with this!)
Saw it last night (and booked a ticket for another showing tonight). For me it will definitely go down as one the all-time great war films. I did very much enjoy Nolan's Dunkirk but IMO 1917 is one of only two post-2000 war films that I would rank alongside Saving Private Ryan (my favorite war film bar-none), Hacksaw Ridge being the other one.
Glad you loved it as well! I liked Dunkirk as well, but 1917 was on another level. I’ve long had a personal interest in WWI history and feel like it doesn’t get enough attention, so that was a big part of my enjoyment along with all the superb technical aspects. Another must-buy whenever it gets a home release.
While it is an excellent movie, have to say I was quite distracted by the technical prowess on show. It tended to overshadow the dramatic scenes. But it is well worth seeing, and should be seen in the cinema!
Mendes, Deakins and Newman are just unbeatable as a Team. All oscar noms well deserved. And I really hope Newman finally wins this time after his previous quazillion nominations, he really shined in this one.
Great movie, well recommended.
And as a Bonus i got to see the NTTD trailer on the big screen. \m/
This is one of the best Tarantino movies, up there with The Hateful Eight. I love the 60s setting, and Cliff Booth may be my favouriteTarantino character. I noticed that he reads Kid Colt, which I also did as a kid."The man With the Golden Spurs" is an issue that springs to mind.
I was afraid this would be speculative and tasteless, but fear not. QT makes his own spin.
Pussycat reminds me of Pippi Longstocking. Lovely girl.
I'm hoping to find the time to watch this one next week!
Milos Foreman's Oscar-winning film about the fictionalised competition between Salieri and Mozart never fails to astonish me. I watched the film for the first time many years ago, and right before I hit play, back then, I dreaded the prospect of sitting through a 3-hour slow-burner set in an era that I find, at best, of mediocre interest to me. Yet as soon as the film began and F. Murray Abraham's fist scenes started playing, I was hypnotised, locked into the film for its entire duration. Tom Hulce's delightful performance as Mozart, Abraham's charismatic take on the role of Salieri and Jeffrey Jones' indulgent deliveries as the Emperor commanded my respect. The cinematography, the wonderfully authentic sets and even the music--I'm more of a Debussy fan than a Mozart fan, to be frank--kept my eyes glued on this film. It surprised me then how much I loved 'Amadeus'.
And I still do. Several viewings later, this film has lost nothing of its appeal. If anything, I continue to build genuine fascination with the film, spotting details I overlooked before, seeing the whole even more for that masterpiece that it truly is. This film's many Oscars were well-deserved.
FORTRESS (1992) and FORTRESS 2: RE-ENTRY (2000)
Stuart Gordon's 'Fortress', for some mysterious reason, managed to find a following and turn in something of a respectable profit. I don't get it. I love me some Z-grade Sci-Fi nonsense like the next guy, but by 1992, this film, in concept as well as in execution, was hopelessly outdated, painfully predictable and exceptionally tedious. I'm always happy when Christopher "there can be only one" Lambert can find work, but even he, Jeffrey Combs, Kurtwood Smith and Tom Towles cannot elevate this film beyond the point of totally ridiculous. And I'm a fan of Stuart Gordon's, mind! Thanks to him, we have at least a few solid if extremely liberal adaptations of H.P. Lovecraft's stories. Either way, this film fails to nest itself even in my "so bad it's good" category. Not a fan.
Even worse is 'Fortress 2', made by Geoff Murphy, the man responsible for, amongst other things, 'Under Siege 2', clearly the better film. For the unfortunate sequel to 'Fortress', the non-descript screenwriters went all the way in collecting the most laughable clichés in the genre, taken straight from the 'Leprechaun In Space' and 'Jason X' playbook, and not in that funny sort of way. TWINE's very own Patrick Malahide goes completely "cartoon villain" and for some reason, '70s beauty Pam Grier gets brought in too; a tragedy, really, as her presence neither does her nor the film any credit. Lambert, whose career had at this point sunk lower than the Bismark, returns unglamorously and even Nick Brimble and a topless Liz May Brice cannot save the day. The soundtrack is one of those Casio Keyboard pre-programmed playlists and the film's poor CGI--strangely lauded by Nathan Shumate of Cold Fusion Video Reviews--doesn't really help either. Reminding me of 'RoboCop: Prime Directives', and that is never a good thing, 'Fortress 2' is nothing if not a joke that's more insulting than enjoyable.
MARTYRS (2008) and MARTYRS (2015)
Taking 'Haute Tension' to the next level, the French Extreme Movement gave us 'Martyrs' in 2008, a polarizing film that had French journalists screaming for censorship upon its release. You won't get comfortable, ever, while enduring pain, madness, torture and horror in the capable hands of filmmakers who understand brutal extremities in ways our more conventional, mainstream cinema fails to deliver. Is that a good thing? Quite possibly not if you reject this type of relentless cruelty. But I can handle some of that, occasionally, and I must admit that I rather like 'Martyrs' and its somewhat farfetched but nevertheless effective story. The aggressive shooting and editing style of the film, along with its narrative structure--keeping you in the dark as long as possible--and very "suffering" performances from its lead cast, make 'Martyrs' a very personal experience for those willing to buy it. I had a--uh--"good" time with the film.
The American remake flattened some of the more extreme elements of the French film out and brought in the more polished Bailey Noble and Troian Bellisario as replacements for the original French actresses. Other than that, the backbone of the original story was kept intact. For obvious reasons, this film was set up for failure. Fans of the genre were going to reject a softer version of the French original, and those not inclined to watch the 2008 'Martyrs' were not going to watch the American remake either. The film was heavily panned as a consequence. And yet, I don't think it's that bad necessarily. Its primal energy and fast pace work well, especially if the intention is to not expose us to the high level of violence of the original film. Furthermore, I love Troian Bellisario. Can't help it. She's absolutely stunning in my opinion. Not that she gets to show much of that in this blood-soaked film, but there you have it. All in all, I wasn't disappointed by 'Martyrs', the remake.
My wife picked this one and I love this one and I feel it’s one of Moore’s better films. I still feel For Your Eyes only eeks it out ever so slightly but still I love this movie
Films in 2020
1. Octopussy
2. Rise of skywalker
3. Casino Royale 1954
4. Little women
5. Journey greatest hits live
Last night my wife and I watched this...mess:
If I restricted my opinion to plot, script, and maybe even direction and acting, I might be tempted to place it well below DAD...which would be saying something, since this is only slightly short of Plan 9 from Outer Space. Those aspects mentioned are just ludicrous. A half-baked story of a supposed Soviet defector pilot (a 23-year old Vera Miles, speaking accent-free American English, wearing tight sweaters while apparently having stashed away her military full dress somewhere in her fighter plane), being allowed to roam freely and fly U.S. planes (the latest technology F-86s when the movie was filmed), falling in love with John Wayne's Air Force colonel (20-some years older), getting married and then together defecting to the U.S.S.R. before fleeing back to America the Beautiful in a Soviet fighter plane, losing Russian pursuers on the way by simply making a turn in the clouds, is really something to behold. It is probably one of the worst scripts ever, and producer Howard Hughes kept it hidden for about seven years, until his company RKO was sold to Universal and the movie released for some reason.
What sort of redeems this - sorry - otherwise complete POS, are the aerial stunts and photography which are brlliant. Hughes meant to showcase the then-current American achievements as best he could, among others showing the Bell X-1 (actually flown by Chuck Yeager) as a Soviet attack plane, and great stunts with those F-86s who also portray MiGs in other places. The cinematography in those scenes is marvelous. You see a lot of other 1950-era planes as well, all in Technicolor. The flying scenes are probably better than those of Top Gun, and come to think of it, when you bring Tom Cruise into the equation, John Wayne wasn't that much worse, even in this turd.
Trouble was, when the movie was finally released, nobody cared any more for the high-tech planes of seven years ago. But for plane buffs it is even more interesting this way. The problem is that one has to cringe through the scenes between the flying scenes.
Scream of Fear 1961 superior mystery horror from Hammer, the ending is extremely good.
Oh no, you have piqued my interest! And that looks terrible enough to be kind of enjoyable!
One point : Vera Miles isn't even in this movie. That was Janet Leigh. No, I didn't see it, but given that her name is on the poster...
Not as big a fan of Westerns, so I don't know whether this is good or bad in the annals of the Western genre. I am, however, a fan of Keach, and I did enjoy Doc. At barely over 90 mins, I wish it had been longer.
Us film fans have our favourite decades, for me since I started to take this medium properly serious in my 20’s it has been the 1970s.
Not only was it a decade where things changed significantly, some of the mavericks and also big players emerged as well as some truly dynamic, exciting films.
While tonight’s choice was at the time for the director not exactly near the beginning of his career, the 70s saw Sindney Lumet produce some real gems and I think for me and my Wife this is his best film.
Of course you have Al Pacino coming off the back of The Godfather and you couldn’t get anymore different from steely machiavellian Micheal Coreleone. His reading of Sonny the main protagonist is truly one of his finest performances and the edgy unpredictable nature of the man is brilliantly essayed by this living legend.
Joined by his Godfather screen brother John Cazale as the understated, quiet but tightly wound Sal, Cazale aptly counterbalances Pacino more commanding character.
Not forgetting a fantastic supporting cast, Charles Durning as the poor cop that has to deal with the whole predicament and Chris Sarandon in his feature debut in a brief but memorable and pivotal role.
Lumet shows the reason he is so revered by other directors and within minutes imbues the film with a palpable tension that slowly ratchets up as the film progresses. This is also not without humour and everyone involved just hits their marks to a tee.
This really is one of the true masterpieces of the 70s and hugely influential piece of work.
I’m not going to go into the plot because if you haven’t seen this you certainly need to rectify that sharpish.
and not forgetting as crazy as this story is just remember one thing it is all true
10/10
You should watch Stacy Keach in 'The Squeeze' (1977). Really good thriller, with a great cast!
The Squeeze is my favourite one.