Netflix - Film Recommendations *READ FIRST POST*

noodler

AlanS181824 wrote: »

Still making my way through Prison Break, still really enjoying it :pac:

Roquentin wrote: »

its really good. the series in panama is immense

Gave up halfway through season 2.

Was getting awful.

Bozo Skeleton

Eamo71 wrote: »

Trees Lounge is a minor classic. Saw it back in the day when it came out. Watched it again on TV some time back and its aged well. Glad to see it getting some love here.

In The Soup is another great indie movie starring a young Steve Buscemi. It's not on Netflix, so I'm a bit off topic, but the talk of US networks insisting a colour version of Nebraska was available reminded me of it. The original version is in black and white, and it's marvellous. Seymour Cassel is brilliant in it, and Jennifer Beal is great in it too. There's a colour version as well, which the director wasn't too happy about having to do. I've seen it, and it's good, but the original black and white version is the far better way to see it.
So, um, it's not on Netflix, but I recommend it, the black and white version.

deisedude

noodler wrote: »

Gave up halfway through season 2.

Was getting awful.

I actually liked season 2. Season 3 was awful though as was most of season 4

Warper

noodler wrote: »

Gave up halfway through season 2.

Was getting awful.

Watched the first season and it was good. Then it got really silly. It takes an exceptional series to last more than 1 series as the options start getting limited storywise

Beefy78

Prison Break was great in year one. It lost steam in year two and the third season in Panama was preposterous (and not in a good way). Just genuinely rubbish television.

The final season starts with an episode which I thought at the time was one of the single worst episodes of any show I'd found myself invested in that I can remember (I don't think that's a spoiler...) BUT looking back with hindsight some of the things which annoyed me at the time actually work to set up the story of that final year and I think they kinda pulled it around during that last season.

Ultimately it was a one-season concept.

stuchyg

Watched the first eps of Luther and The Shield last night, that's me sorted for the next while

Mousewar

Beefy78 wrote: »

Ultimately it was a one-season concept.

That's the problem with a lot of TV series. They have a concept which is good for one season but if it's successful they try to milk it for as long as they can and the show breaks down. Essentially, they should be films rather than TV series.
Homeland is the quintessential example of this for me. The idea of a captured US soldier being turned into a terrorist is a decent concept for a film but it's just not a concept to sustain a TV show for years and years. See also, Lost, Orphan Black.

The flip side of that is shows like The Shield, The Sopranos, Breaking Bad - shows with superb characters that we can watch grow and develop over the years and ones that don't rely on a gimmick concept to sustain them.

Mickeroo

Separate threads for film & TV

Oz the Great and Powerful is up on the Swedish site.

Beefy78

Mousewar wrote: »

That's the problem with a lot of TV series. They have a concept which is good for one season but if it's successful they try to milk it for as long as they can and the show breaks down. Essentially, they should be films rather than TV series.
Homeland is the quintessential example of this for me. The idea of a captured US soldier being turned into a terrorist is a decent concept for a film but it's just not a concept to sustain a TV show for years and years. See also, Lost, Orphan Black.

The flip side of that is shows like The Shield, The Sopranos, Breaking Bad - shows with superb characters that we can watch grow and develop over the years and ones that don't rely on a gimmick concept to sustain them.

I'm watching Homeland at the minute. I'm getting towards the end of the first season. I'd assumed at the start that each season would be a self-contained story (like 24) because I didn't see how they could stretch the single original premise into several subsequent seasons but I've seen the other day that that is exactly what they have done.

Don't really agree with you on Lost. I rewatched it recently and it definitely has a lot of problems but I don't think it was a one season concept. They couldn't have tied that story off in a year.

Mousewar

Beefy78 wrote: »

Don't really agree with you on Lost. I rewatched it recently and it definitely has a lot of problems but I don't think it was a one season concept. They couldn't have tied that story off in a year.

I'm sure you're right - I never actually watched Lost past the first episode. I didn't think they had a concept to get them past one episode let alone one season.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Separate threads for film & TV

Beefy78 wrote: »

I'm watching Homeland at the minute. I'm getting towards the end of the first season. I'd assumed at the start that each season would be a self-contained story (like 24) because I didn't see how they could stretch the single original premise into several subsequent seasons but I've seen the other day that that is exactly what they have done.

I think Homeland managed to get 2 decent seasons out of the one premise but the second half of season 2 was nowhere near as good as the first half and then the less said about season 3 the better.

Roquentin

Mousewar wrote: »

That's the problem with a lot of TV series. They have a concept which is good for one season but if it's successful they try to milk it for as long as they can and the show breaks down. Essentially, they should be films rather than TV series.
Homeland is the quintessential example of this for me. The idea of a captured US soldier being turned into a terrorist is a decent concept for a film but it's just not a concept to sustain a TV show for years and years. See also, Lost, Orphan Black.

The flip side of that is shows like The Shield, The Sopranos, Breaking Bad - shows with superb characters that we can watch grow and develop over the years and ones that don't rely on a gimmick concept to sustain them.

homeland becomes a farce alright. Stopped watching half way though the second series.

Agent Coulson

Separate threads for film & TV

Homeland should have ended after one season.

They didn't have the balls to do it when they the ratings came in and they saw what a cash cow it became.

Mickeroo

Separate threads for film & TV

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Homeland should have ended after one season.

They didn't have the balls to do it when they the ratings came in and they saw what a cash cow it became.

Does season one have conclusive enough ending? I don't know if I want to watch it otherwise considering how much I keep hearing the quality drops off afterwards.

Agent Coulson

Separate threads for film & TV

Mickeroo wrote: »

Does season one have conclusive enough ending? I don't know if I want to watch it otherwise considering how much I keep hearing the quality drops off afterwards.

The first season is well worth watching no matter to be honest.

The ending was there and they made just a slight chance(but still a major one) so the could go into a second season.

Mandy Patinkin really is worth watching. He steals the show for me as he does in everything.

Birneybau

stuchyg wrote: »

Watched the first eps of Luther and The Shield last night, that's me sorted for the next while

Not going to watch the rest?

Been watching the Shield as well, up to the end of the first series but been busy so will have to start watching again. Good show.

Mickeroo

Separate threads for film & TV

Yeah I finished Season 1 of The Shield last night, it seems to be improving as it goes on though I'm not quite addicted yet.

irishejit

If Dirty Wars hasn't been mentioned its well worth a watch. It's a documentary about covert ops carried out by the USA that have supposedly gotten out of control.

Unhung Me is good for a bit of a giggle as well

RosyLily

Watched Afternoon Delight. Enjoyable film.

Wish Kathryn Hahn got more lead roles; she was really good!

Mousewar

Mickeroo wrote: »

Yeah I finished Season 1 of The Shield last night, it seems to be improving as it goes on though I'm not quite addicted yet.

I found myself pretty gripped by Season 2 which is where I am now.
It's an excellent series but there's one potential flaw I can't get my head around. As I can't see anywhere else to ask this, let me do it here.

Vic is obviously an anti-hero. He's a bent cop but there's a lot of morality to him at the same time. He's not an evil cruel lunatic but a cop who sees the need to bend the rules to uphold the law and also takes the opportunity to help himself out by taking a cut when he can. So much so good.

Yet, this concept of the honourable but corrupt cop is largely underminded in the very first couple of episodes. He knows that Terry has been placed in his team to spy on him. And so he kills him? He kills a cop for no other reason than that he 'might' be used to gather evidence against him. He murders him in cold blood.

Despite numerous other possibilities - he could freeze him out, he could frame him for a crime that gets him fired or just transferred. Hell, he could just say he knows he's undercover and kick him out. But no, he shoots dead a completely innocent man. I don't know - that's just an incredibly evil thing to do and goes against Vic's character which is deeply flawed but not downright rotten as this act suggests.

Mickeroo

Separate threads for film & TV

Mousewar wrote: »

Yet, this concept of the honourable but corrupt cop is largely underminded in the very first couple of episodes. He knows that Terry has been placed in his team to spy on him. And so he kills him? He kills a cop for no other reason than that he 'might' be used to gather evidence against him. He murders him in cold blood.

Despite numerous other possibilities - he could freeze him out, he could frame him for a crime that gets him fired or just transferred. Hell, he could just say he knows he's undercover and kick him out. But no, he shoots dead a completely innocent man. I don't know - that's just an incredibly evil thing to do and goes against Vic's character which is deeply flawed but not downright rotten as this act suggests.

Yeah I agree, it was a great way to get me hooked

at the end of the very first episode but It particularly undermined his actions towards the end of the series when he teams up with the Captain to take down whatshisname. Particularly when whathisname shot the gang member Vic had convinced to co-operate, considering Vic's actions in episode 1 I don't see why he thought the other guy was so out of line. it's kind of gotten to the point that I find it very hard to accept Vic would shoot that cop in the first place.

Stone Deaf 4evr

Separate threads for film & TV

Mickeroo wrote: »

Yeah I agree, it was a great way to get me hooked

at the end of the very first episode but It particularly undermined his actions towards the end of the series when he teams up with the Captain to take down whatshisname. Particularly when whathisname shot the gang member Vic had convinced to co-operate, considering Vic's actions in episode 1 I don't see why he thought the other guy was so out of line. it's kind of gotten to the point that I find it very hard to accept Vic would shoot that cop in the first place.

Stick with it, it gets better with every season, IMO its a tv show that doesn't get the full recognition for how good it really was.

Agent Coulson

Separate threads for film & TV

With The Shield there is an episode in a later season,If I remember right it's season 2 called Co-Pilot which explains things a bit better I felt.

The one thing I loved about The Shield was there is a beginning middle and an end.

Agent Coulson

Separate threads for film & TV

irishejit wrote: »

If Dirty Wars hasn't been mentioned its well worth a watch. It's a documentary about covert ops carried out by the USA that have supposedly gotten out of control.

Dirty Wars is very eye opening alright.

EyeSight

Mousewar wrote: »

I'm sure you're right - I never actually watched Lost past the first episode. I didn't think they had a concept to get them past one episode let alone one season.

I don't think you can comment on the entire series then... It was obviously meant to be a show that continued for multiple seasons
They openly admit that the network forced them to do more seasons than they wanted. In the end the creators made a deal to cut the season length and they agreed on a firm finish date. In reality the entire show fit together very well, except the ending :mad:
Homeland like prison break should have been 1 season.

As for the Shield, i liked it but i don't think it's that great a show. The ending of episode 1 undermines everything that happens after. Some of the story lines were a bit far-fetched but it is an enjoyable show

I'm on the last episode of the Killing. Enjoyable season because they got rid of the tactic of leading the viewers down the wrong path each episode. Episode 5 got a little weird

noodler

I personally never had any doubts Vic was evil!

kearneybobs

Pacific Rim
Man of Steel
Are on Netflix Finland

Hannibal Season 2 has been added to Netflix Denmark

Eamo71

Mousewar wrote: »

That's the problem with a lot of TV series. They have a concept which is good for one season but if it's successful they try to milk it for as long as they can and the show breaks down. Essentially, they should be films rather than TV series.
Homeland is the quintessential example of this for me. The idea of a captured US soldier being turned into a terrorist is a decent concept for a film but it's just not a concept to sustain a TV show for years and years. See also, Lost, Orphan Black.

The flip side of that is shows like The Shield, The Sopranos, Breaking Bad - shows with superb characters that we can watch grow and develop over the years and ones that don't rely on a gimmick concept to sustain them.

In fairness that lasted three seasons and was wrapped quite satisfactorily. Brody's story is now done and Homeland will be concentrating on something else. Also that concept was developed into a film concept - The Manchurian Candidate starring Frank Sinatra. and there was a remake with Denzel Washington ( I think).

Agent Coulson

Separate threads for film & TV

Eamo71 wrote: »

In fairness that lasted three seasons and was wrapped quite satisfactorily. Brody's story is now done and Homeland will be concentrating on something else. Also that concept was developed into a film concept - The Manchurian Candidate starring Frank Sinatra. and there was a remake with Denzel Washington ( I think).

Homeland is also a remake of an Israeli tv series.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Separate threads for film & TV

Eamo71 wrote: »

In fairness that lasted three seasons and was wrapped quite satisfactorily. Brody's story is now done and Homeland will be concentrating on something else. Also that concept was developed into a film concept - The Manchurian Candidate starring Frank Sinatra. and there was a remake with Denzel Washington ( I think).

I wouldn't say it was wrapped up satisfactorily. It was wrapped up but it could have been wrapped up in S2 easily enough. I would say it's fairly obvious they had no idea how to drag it out more and I don't know why they did. The amount of nonsense in S3 that, to me, was obviously there to fill time was ridiculous. All the focus on Dana, Brody in Caracas and the last few episodes leading up to the end, which I was fine with, were also a bit far fetched and not at all in keeping with the high quality they'd had through S1 and most of S2.