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
I assume The Burning Sea is the English title of Nordsjøen.
You must be thinking of The Wave (Bølgen) and The Quake (Skjelvet). I love all three.
Those are the other two. I thought it was The Quake, couldn't remember the other one. Thank you!
The Quake is the sequel to The Wave, featuring the same family. The Burning Sea is its own thing.
Excellent, I guess I'll tackle them via release order then, sounds the best option (or The Burning Sea first and then the others in order).
Curious to hear what you think. Hope you enjoy them. I think my favourite is The Quake, partly because it s an environment I know very well, having lived in the area for years and even worked briefly in one of the buildings that really gets it.
It's gotta be pretty surreal to see an area you're personally familiar with getting devastated in a movie. I'm looking forward to them, just need to find an avenue to watch all three. I see one's on Hulu and one's on Roku for free with ads, so that's nice. Nothing yet for The Burning Sea since it's still brand new but I'll keep an eye out.
I used to love this movie, but now I just found it lacking compared to Mike Mignola s comics. Ron Perlman is still much better than David Harbour.
(2006)
This is perhaps del Toro s best film.
The Colour of Money its ok though not a film I revisit often of Martin Scorsese output. Newman and Cruise are kind of passing the baton, Newman shows what a great actor he is and is one of the very best.
The pool scenes are laughable at times, the pockets are ridiculously large. I played snooker and pool at a good standard in my youth played for many teams so certain things in the game play stand out.
In any case, THE COLOR OF MONEY sports a great cast. In addition to Paul Newman and Cruise, you have Forest Whitaker, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, John Turturro and Helen Shaver (I must admit that I was infatuated with her at the time!!!).
Indeed a great cast, I was captivated by Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio very beautiful woman, also great in Scarface. Not many actors have had the screen presence in modern cinema of Newman, Mcqueen and Connery are up there with him.
Its nowhere near the mastery of 'The Hustler' , Newman was brillant in thst as Fast Eddie, and who could forget Jackie Gleason as Minnesota Fats?
It has been decades since I watched The Hustler or any of Newman's early films I need to revisit them. In fact I think of his early films I only own Cool hand Luke on DVD.
Having recently re-watched Skjelvet, I decided to buy and rewatch the first one as well.
aka The House.
Been wanting to see this for a long time, but I found it disappointing.
The batman: omg this is a brilliant film I love it and honestly I am putting this above Casino Royale. It was so amazing
Riding in cars with boys: wife’s choice I feel Drew Barrymore is cute but man this film is well bad jo one here is likeable apart From James Woods but hey when is he not likeable
1. The batman 3/4
2. Casino Royale 2006 (2/1
3. Spiderman: No Way Home (1/15)
4. When Harry me Sally 1/1
5. Casino Royale 1954 1/1
6. Selina 2/5
7. Riding in cars with boys 3/5
(2002)
Twenty years later, I realize a lot of the technology in the movie is well underway, and some of it more or less in place already, even though the movie is set in 2054.
Dystopian for many of us, a utopia for the ruling technocrats. Solid and dark movie, with a couple of attempts at humour that fall flat. Cruise and Von Sydow are both excellent in their parts.
A good film up until the appalling ending.
Needed a director that wasn't afraid of spiralling down to a dark ending, which is what this film needed.
I have the book, but haven t gotten around to reading it yet. Curious to see how faithful the adaptation is.
Agree totally mate! Really enjoyed this up to that ending! There is a point in this movie which is the perfect ending, those who have seen it will know what I'm talking about,but no, it had to go on to a happier finish, and thus was ruined for me! Its always been Spielbergs problem, when he tries to be more hardened in his direction, you never feel its genuine. Maybe 'Munich' might be the exception!
I recall when 'Schindlers List' came out a radio show had a Holocaust suvivor on to give their view, she dubbed it "E. T. goes to Auschwitz!"
Ouch! But I knew what she meant!
(M. N. Shyamalan, 1999)
The surprises of the first watch are gone, but still holds up as Shyamalan s best, the one that caught the public imagination and became iconic. Very clever, and the progression of the story is perfect. The emotional highlight must be the scene in the car towards the end.
My sister says it's not rewatchable because of the twist / mystery being gone, but I disagree. I enjoy it the most for the performances and drama still, and love coming back to it every couple of years or so. Shyamalan's obviously had a ton of duds, but I'm a fan of this one, Signs, The Village, and the Unbreakable Trilogy personally.
The music is ok (and plays into what I thought were some of the script's shortcomings), but I would have been more interested in a non-musical adaptation with this cast and crew, I must say. Two songs work really well, the rest is more forgettable.
I also realized, that I have major Netflix-brain. Structurally, this is quite close to the play even adding little bits and only ommitting a part of the 4th Act, which is just as well, and the thing is 2 hours long, however I still thought multiple times: This is going too quickly. I think that is because I watch more TV nowadays and am used to a character being introduced over a 54 minute episode and not just one scene. Especially the "Look how great of a fighter and poet Cyrano is"-part would have been 2 episodes and probably some more set-pieces throughout in a 10-episode Netflix version, whereas here (and in the play) it's basically the opening act - which is more or less just one long scene - and then we are on to the meat of the story, because we still have four more acts to get through inside 2 hours. So the character development is rather rapid in places and I had a hard time feeling the time spent between the characters. For the finale of Act 4 and then Act 5 to come off, you need to feel the time spent between the four main characters and that didn't really happen here, for me. The setting and direction is the strongest in this section and makes up for it, in a way.
So 8/10 for me.
Agreed, except for one thing: I didn t care much for Glass.
Maybe not the masterpiece some are making it out to be, but it is an excellent film. Pattison is splendid, more so as Batman than Bruce Wayne! Colin Farrell almost steals the show as The Penguin, but the cast are all superb! This most certainly can be viewed as a detective story crossed with a bit of 'Seven' and the visuals, dark ( and I mean DARK!) and all as they are, are stunning! Would have rathered a more low key showdown for the end, but its a minor quibble, and unlike 'Dune' I can't wait for the follow up!
Oh, and yes, the score is excellent!
Batman: The Long Halloween Part One and Part Two.
One of the best DC Animated films I have seen in some time, I will definitely rewatch them both very soon. It is slightly different from the graphic novel though I did not mind the changes, it's a very good story and film.