Hacksaw Ridge

bnt

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2-1hz1juBI

WW2 drama starring Andrew Garfield as a medic who refuses to carry a weapon for religious reasons. With Teresa Palmer, Vince Vaughn, Hugo Weaving, and Rachel Griffiths, directed by Mel Gibson. One for the Awards season, methinks.

dreamers75

that looks decent.

Sad Professor

I'm so bored of war movies...

Gibson needs to stop faffing around and make that viking movie he was talking about.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Is it just me thinks this looks awful? Like an SNL spoof of a war film?

Hande hoche!

Think it looks very decent.

Duggy747

Looks ok, Garfield's acting doesn't quite seem right to me however.

Hopefully it'll be entertaining, want to see Gibson fire out more movies and I'm waiting on that Viking epic too.

bnt

They liked it at the Venice Film Festival, apparently: Mel Gibson’s ‘Hacksaw Ridge’ Rivets With 10-Minute Ovation At World Premiere – Venice.

py2006

Can't wait for this, it looks amazing!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5ai4tI948Q

JP Liz V1

Vince Vaughn and Hugo Weaving getting good praise

ktulu123

No sign of a release date for here yet? It's out tomorrow in the states

py2006

ktulu123 wrote: »

No sign of a release date for here yet? It's out tomorrow in the states

I thought it was tomorrow but it doesn't seem to appear in the "coming soon" section of some of the cinema websites here.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Don't think it's out until 2017 here.

Frank O. Pinion

IMDB lists it for 27th January, for the UK, so probably the same for Ireland.

MilesMorales1

Vince Vaughn in a serious drama? Don't think I've seen that before.

Slydice

Many... Many good reviews from what I've seen.

Oasis1974

Has anyone had a *coughs* sneaky peek of this movie due out on the 27th? Saw it myself and was reaching for my barf bucket so many times it was that bad

Hank Scorpio

Oasis1974 wrote: »

Has anyone had a *coughs* sneaky peek of this movie due out on the 27th? Saw it myself and was reaching for my barf bucket so many times it was that bad

Yes... excellent movie.

A must see, best movie of 2016 imo.

Oasis1974

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Yes... excellent movie.

A must see, best movie of 2016 imo.

What impressed you most the acting Vince Vaughan :P the dialogue or Forrest Gump in the lead role. Add the cheesy scenes cheap CGI i could go on and on

Hank Scorpio

Oasis1974 wrote: »

What impressed you most the acting Vince Vaughan :P the dialogue or Forrest Gump in the lead role. Add the cheesy scenes cheap CGI i could go on and on

Thought Vaughan was pretty good actually, and the lead role outstanding. I enjoy war movies so I might be biased

There was certainly some cheesy scenes, that I'll concede!

darced

This post has been deleted.

Oasis1974

For sure needs to be seen on the big screen.

Dr Crayfish

Incredible. Dubious at the start but Christ those war scenes. I don't think modern(ish) war has ever been portrayed better in a film, the bar has been set post Saving Private Ryan. Need to see it again. The man was such a hero in real life too.

spurious

Good chance it is the Odeon Screen Unseen film on Monday next.
The clues seem to fit.

py2006

I thought this would be one for the big screen 1 in the Savoy. Apparently not!

Disposable1

Enjoyed it a lot. It's nice to see a film about a decent human being, particularly one that managed to stick to his principals in such an awful setting. I do not like realistic violence in films (not styalised ultraviolence) but the lead character made it more palatable. Knowing that even in the midst of horrific situations is....something, I can't think of the word so I'll just go with "nice".
It reminds me of a quote by Mr. Rogers, something his mother said, "in awful situations, look for the helpers, there's always somebody helping." I quite like that because I tend towards the negative when I think of the human race.

As for a competent comment on the film itself I can not really provide that. I thought it dragged in places. There were moments that made me laugh out loud. There were also moments of visceral violence, it is the closest thing to the opening of Saving Private Ryan I have seen. The relationship between Desmond and Dorothy is sweet. I can't really fault it. I am especially glad to see Gibson back behind the camera.

Oasis1974

Anyone scratching there head with the scene in which the soldier picks up a piece of a fallen comrade and you remember the rest. Thought that bizzare almost offensive. What what Gibson thinking there.

Outstanding film. Took me a bit of time to warm up to the lead, because well Mel likes his God themes doesn't he. But once it gets to the crux of the movie the backstory becomes much more relevant. One or two flaws which I think will stop it from winning best picture, but overall and outstanding piece of work with the battle scenes exceptionally directed.

Cantona's Collars

Watched this last night,a damn good war movie.The reasons why Doss wouldn't carry a weapon became more evident through the movie and made the viewer buy into his reasoning even more than his faith in God.
The battle scenes were extremely visceral and in your face but weren't gory just for the sake of it,they showed the horror of war and made it even more remarkable that Doss went onto that ridge without so much as a stick to hit somebody with.
Garfield's goofy look took time to warm to but as the movie went on I didn't mind it so much especially later on when he was on Okinawa.

Looper007

Fantastic film, Mel Gibson's knows to shoot the hell out of a War scene and to think he made this with less of a budget then he did Braveheart, you have to give him props. Andrew Garfield got a well deserved Oscar nod for Best Actor, he's amazing in this give it the slight nod ahead of his turn in Silence. Hugo Weaving deserves praise too as his WW1 veteran father. Even Vince Vaugan and Sam Worthington are both very good.

The first 40 minutes are easy going with Doss home life and meeting with his wife, also his troubled relationship with his father. Before you kick into the action, the stuff in army boot camp are great but it's the two battles scenes and Doss rescuing the wounded that's when this is at it's very best. It's definitely not a easy sit through, some pretty gruesome stuff and I do think this is some of the best war stuff since Saving Private Ryan. Garfield really shines during the one man rescue of the wounded, it's gripping stuff.

It's must see on the big screen, probably Gibson's best film behind the camera too.

WinnyThePoo

The Battles scenes where some of the most intense I have seen on Film.

ktulu123

Is this on in any big screens in Dublin? Most cinemas i've looked at are small

Frankie5Angels

Welcome back Mel, you crazy ould coot!

The bits at the start when Garfield was so nice/smiley, or where he meets Dorothy, stuck in my craw a bit - complete cheese.


Great film overall, though, really enjoyed the battle scenes. If half of his escapades in this film are true (particularly

the bit in the tunnel where he helps the Jap soldier

), Doss was some man.

Slydice

This film was excellent.

I thought the first half was also good because:

- it recognised world war 1 through the father
- it showed what war had done to the father
- it didn't shy away from showing the domestic violence and how terrible and traumatic it is
- it showed what Doss had to go through to get through the army process

The second half just upped the ante. It felt like the world and tone of the film just turned.

Faith+1

Watched it originally on a Cam torrent but knew it was best watched on the big screen. Great flick but would of loved to see it on the big screen .i.e Savoy no1.

Amazed how Doss wasen't even tempted to pick up a rifle and shoot back, I know in his situation I would! The fact that he saved 75 mens lives is astounding. A true hero

pumpkin4life

Mel may be a crazy bastard, but he's a brilliant director.

Outstanding film; a classic imo. Five star movie for the pumpkin. The first half's uneasy, yet slightly cheesy sentimentality leads brilliantly into one of the most visceral, gory, simply out and out batshìt fùcking insane segments of cinema I've ever seen.

What was the last war movie that pulled something like this off? Been years I'd say. Garfield is brilliant in it, as well as Vince Vaughan and Agent Smith. Seriously blown away by this movie lads. Best film of 2016 easily, and it's a cruel one that this will probably be passed over for Blowjob musical land and Casey Affleck in a boat.

Mel and Vinnie, making movies great again.:D

razorblunt

I watched it yesterday and I liked it far more than I thought I would. Saying that though it took far too long to warm to Garfield and get past his accent. I thought Hugo Weaving and Vince Vaughn were fantastic.

I haven't sat there in shock at something like that from a war movie since the Omaha landing in Saving Private Ryan.

Some parts were a bit much though

slap, slap, kick to the grenades

but thankfully came quite late.

I read up on him afterwards and it looks like his Medal of Honor citation had a few other examples listed too, some man. They told him he saved 100 soldiers, he said it was 50, they settled at 75!

ricero

Best war film i have seen in the past decade and a half. Fantastic

Muff Richardson

Just finished watching, was a fair mish mash of repeated extreme war violence and the shock factor dissipated early on. Less is more somtimes.

Genuine question, does anyone know was the actual soldier Goss semi retarded in some way? That's how he came across in the actors portrayal of him. I'm not the only one asking this btw, seems to be quite a few forums asking the same thing.

pumpkin4life

Muff Richardson wrote: »

Just finished watching, was a fair mish mash of repeated extreme war violence and the shock factor dissipated early on. Less is more somtimes.

Genuine question, does anyone know was the actual soldier Goss semi retarded in some way? That's how he came across in the actors portrayal of him. I'm not the only one asking this btw, seems to be quite a few forums asking the same thing.

He seemed a more naive, highly innocent, overly nice mum's boy, than semi retarded imo. There are a fair few moments in the film where he makes a number of very sharp, very quick decisions.

Corholio

pumpkin4life wrote: »

What was the last war movie that pulled something like this off? Been years I'd say. Garfield is brilliant in it, as well as Vince Vaughan and Agent Smith. Seriously blown away by this movie lads. Best film of 2016 easily, and it's a cruel one that this will probably be passed over for Blowjob musical land and Casey Affleck in a boat.

So Spiderman in mud was good then?

TerrorFirmer

I thought it was very good overall, though it was a bit more 'Hollywood' than I would have liked. It's a strange film in that regard, a sort of weird blend between moments of extreme visceral violence reminiscent of Saving Private Ryan, and then Sunday afternoon, often goofy, formulaic 'feel good' film making.

For me it has the general vibe of 'Pearl Harbour' without being as much of a ham fest, while the combat scenes were far more comparable to Saving Private Ryan/Band of Brothers/The Pacific. One thing I hate in films in general is dramatic slow motion shots, and there were a few in this, with maybe one or two working well and the others just being a bit cliche and generic to my tastes.

It all worked quite well to be fair, and I really did enjoy the first half of the movie all the same (Vince Vaughan and Sam Worthington are fantastic in this), though I found myself wishing it was a bit more grounded and gritty in tone throughout the film, the inconsistency in tone was a bit disappointing but that's just a mild critique of a film still well worth seeing.

Also surprised by the ending which significantly ups the cheese factor and actually ignores a far more amazing truth in favor of a cheesy, hammed up final action of our heroic conscientious objector.

In the movie,

his legs are riddled with shrapnel after he, in glorious slow motion, bats away one incoming grenade while booting away another - it's mildly cringe inducing and the only stand out bad choice in the movie for me

In real life,

his legs are hit with shrapnel in the course of duty, his arm is then shattered by a sniper, and he STILL crawled off his stretcher to administer aid to others, before crawling back to an aid station on his own in that condition

Why they went with their made up, hammy ending in favor of the truth is beyond me as what really happened is infinitely more powerful, awe inspiring stuff.

Anyway, overall a very good movie and well worth seeing - great action scenes and standout performances from an entire array of people I'd usually be quite indifferent to (honestly, can't believe how good Vaughan and Worthington are).

Also - have to agree with the above - Doss (as portrayed by Garfield) did definitely not come across in any way, shape or form as intellectually lacking to me.... more just a sheltered, innocent and naive young man who lived a very simple and principled life.

We're almost 20 years now since Saving Private Ryan and this is probably one of the better films to come out since then, though I quite liked Flags of Our Fathers and Letters from Iwo Jima as well. I haven't seen it in awhile but that Korean film 'Brotherhood of War' from about 10 years ago was superb as well and visually almost a direct clone of Saving Private Ryan.

Anyone who's looking for 'the best film since Saving Private Ryan' would be doing themselves a disservice by not watching this movie:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZoy6wRJ-pw

Hande hoche!

Very well put together film, with some great performances. Vince Vaughn was excellent in his role. Didn't even realize it was Sam Worthington till the credits. Also the battle scenes benefited from the large screen so would recommend seeking this out while it's playing in the cinema.

Theboinkmaster

Why didn't the japs just cut the rope that the allies used to climb the ridge

Hande hoche!

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Why didn't the japs just cut the rope that the allies used to climb the ridge

My reading was that when the Yanks weren't attacking, they were shelling the ridgeline.

Cantona's Collars

razorblunt wrote: »

I watched it yesterday and I liked it far more than I thought I would. Saying that though it took far too long to warm to Garfield and get past his accent. I thought Hugo Weaving and Vince Vaughn were fantastic.

I haven't sat there in shock at something like that from a war movie since the Omaha landing in Saving Private Ryan.

Some parts were a bit much though

slap, slap, kick to the grenades

but thankfully came quite late.

I read up on him afterwards and it looks like his Medal of Honor citation had a few other examples listed too, some man. They told him he saved 100 soldiers, he said it was 50, they settled at 75!

Don't forget folks that there's an interview with Doss and others at the end of the movie.Makes it hit home even more as to what he did and was so humble about it.

mickmac76

Saw it last night and I found it very good. The night time scenes of him crawling around looking for wounded soldiers was nerve wracking. Rare to see a film that doesn't glorify wars.

Morgans

Interesting to see so much love for the film. I thought it was full of cheese, and not just they perhaps-consciously schmaltzy first half. The platoon of characters in the army almost cliche, and while the war scenes are gory, it didnt really capture the horrors of war/bravery of soldiers. Bordered on comic book violence. A good story and a story worth telling, but don't think Mel came close to nailing it.

Joe_ Public

While I did enjoy it for the most part, I'd have to agree there were far too many cheesy bits for comfort. It's a constant source of irritation for me why hollywood directors feel the need to embellish and exaggerate already sensational stories that dont need it. The ending was particularly ridiculous, though not half as preposterous as We Are Soldiers which, coincidentally, had Gibson in the lead.

Slydice

Joe_ Public wrote: »

The ending was particularly ridiculous

The thing though..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacksaw_Ridge#Historical_accuracy

After the war, Doss turned down many requests for books and films, because he was wary of whether his life, wartime experiences, and his Seventh-day Adventist beliefs would be portrayed inaccurately or sensationally. Doss' only child, Desmond Doss Jr., stated: "The reason he declined is that none of them adhered to his one requirement: that it be accurate. And I find it remarkable, the level of accuracy in adhering to the principal of the story in this movie."

How glossy they made it though.. I know the cliff wasn't as tall cos you can google to see the picture of Doss on the real one.

Joe_ Public

Slydice wrote: »

The thing though..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacksaw_Ridge#Historical_accuracy


How glossy they made it though.. I know the cliff wasn't as tall cos you can google to see the picture of Doss on the real one.

Well, I read something where Gibson said he left stuff out because he was worried audiences would probably find it too unbelievable, but then he has Doss at the end doing ridiculous stuff I wont describe because I don't know how to do that spoiler stuff! I don't understand why they feel the need to do that really.

Fair enough if the son thinks they were true to the principle or spirit of the story. It's a pretty remarkable tale in all fairness.

pearcider

Amazing and absorbing film. Such a pleasure to enjoy a good war film with no pretentiousness and a good solid plot. Ridiculously insane battle scenes. Hell on earth. Hard to believe it's a true story but there you go. Really recommend people catch this in the cinema before it's out. The flame throwers ffs!!! Very funny at points too especially in the training camp. Even my girlfriend loved it and she's very picky. Top marks Mister Gibson!