nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

What have you watched recently? 3D!

johnny_ultimate

You people just keep on watching films, don't you?

We have reached the contractually-mandated 10,000 post limited in thread 2, so here's another one. It's like the first two, but with gimmicky 3D added and a no-name director taking over from the well-known one who directed the first two.

Here's the first thread: https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055488699
And the second: https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056732038

So... what have you watched recently?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

[Deleted User]

Del.Monte wrote: »

"Terminator: Dark Fate" (2019) on DVD.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxy8udgWRmo

By far the weakest of the Terminator movies but a must have if you're a fan like me. The whole movie looked tired, the script was as confusing as ever and both Arnie and Linda Hamilton also look tired, the all important special effects offered nothing new.

It's in my collection now but it could be years before I give it a second look. Can it really be the last of the Terminator franchise?? 4/10

Not worse then the one with the Game of Thrones chick surely?

Retr0gamer

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Runaway Train - as the title helpfully suggests, this is indeed a film about a runaway train. It's also about Jon Voight and Eric Roberts battling to see who has the most bizarre accent possible. It's a draw in that regard. But as far as runaway trains go, this train is at least 150% more runaway than the Unstoppable one and going at quite frankly ludicrous speeds. The whole film has a deranged 80s pace and tone to it which you have to salute. In conclusion, I would rate this a 'runaway train' out of 'runaway train'.

Ended up watching this as well. Was very curious about it as it was considered the 'good' canon film. Wasn't exactly amazing but I was thoroughly entertained. There's great performances from Jon Voight and Eric Roberts and it's gorgeously shot. It's all juxtaposed to how ludicrous the whole premise is. When I saw the screenplay was by Akira Kurosawa at the start and who the director was I was baffled this was a Canon film.

Del.Monte

Kicked off a serious season of Clint Eastwood movie watching last night with "A Fistful of Dollars" (1964)...part of a 4 DVD unused box set (€3) from a local charity shop.

Little to be said about this except that it's one for the Desert Island collection.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UytSgHWsZs

Clint is supreme as "the man with no name" who arrives in a deadbeat town controlled by two warring families and plays them off against each other until the inevitable showdown. Violence, humour and even compassion. 10+/10

shrapnel222

Nomadland

i don't think this would have worked with anyone other than Frances McDormand. She's nailed on for the oscar, as very possible is the director. Halfway between a documentary and a fictional piece steeped in poetry, Frances glides along this beautifully shot work effortlessly.

The nest

interesting drama set in the 80s with Jude Law and Carrie Coon about an anglo american couple who move their family to London only to watch it fall apart piece by piece. Well shot and really enjoyable although felt some scenes were just a bit poorer for ad libbing.

FullBack Jam

House of Games

Bit of an oldie. Got very good reviews. The overall idea is fairly good. But dear God, the acting is brutal. I have never seen anything as bad as the lead actress whoever she is. This is an example of a film dating very very badly. It's a 1987 movie, so it's not ancient.

Galaxy Quest.

Another film that was highly regarded. I only watch about 45 mins so I'm not in a position to completely write it off. But for me anyway, I did not like it. I didn't hate it; it just did nothing for me. I didn't see anything funny in it. I probably should watch the rest of it tonight before commenting in a negative manner. But I don't think I want to give it another hour.

Ridley

Retr0gamer wrote: »

When I saw the screenplay was by Akira Kurosawa at the start and who the director was I was baffled this was a Canon film.

Well, that's going on my watchlist now.

I only tend to get on with Kurosawa when he's making Shakespeare good, or influencing Star Wars so '80s action film should definitely get a look-in.

loyatemu

watched a load of Bond movies over Xmas with the kids. A couple of observations:

I grew up watching Roger Moore and always had a bit of a preference for him over Connery - I was wrong. Whilst the Moore films are reasonably enjoyable, and Roger is pretty good, they're also extremely cheesy and silly (moreso than the 60s Bonds) and even the ones that are considered "good" like The Spy who Loved Me and For Your Eyes Only are patchy. Also Moores age makes the 80s movies increasingly preposterous (I still find it amazing that the producers replaced Connery with a guy who was even older).

Brosnan > Dalton. I know Bond purists prefer Dalton but I found him unconvincing as a wise-cracking ladies man who likes to kill people; whereas Brosnan (in GoldenEye at least) nails it - he's a charming arsehole. It also helps that PB's films clearly have a much bigger budget - License to Kill looks like an extended episode of Miami Vice by comparison.

Bond's a terrible spy - first thing he does in every movie is tell the bad guys his real name :rolleyes:

loyatemu

Also watched Parasite which I thought was pretty good - different from the Hollywood fare that usually takes the best picture Oscar. It does go a bit off the rails in the second half, in particular I thought it was a bit implausible that

they would let the old housekeeper in after they'd been so careful previously. That's the catalyst for everything that goes haywire afterwards, and it was so unneccessary on their part.

I sort of expected them to end up conning the rich family out of the house (earlier in the film they manage to get a copy of the house deeds), but nothing ever comes of it.

mikhail

loyatemu wrote: »

Bond's a terrible spy - first thing he does in every movie is tell the bad guys his real name :rolleyes:

I think Dench calls him a blunt instrument at one point in Casino Royale, which is a far better description than spy. I think the line is taken from Flemming, too.

NIMAN

Tried to watch Tenet tonight, stopped with about 45min left. Just lost interest.

Very clever effects and all, but just too silly a storyline that was painful to follow.

And was it just me, or was the acting and script a bit clunky?

FullBack Jam

Olympus has fallen

I was a bit surprised at how enjoyable this was. Gerard Butler stars as the hero out to save the US president. It's daft as brush, all action and over the top. But I was completely drawn in by it. If some night you just want to unwind with braindead thrilling action, throw it on. Unless you're very cynical you won't be disappointed.

budgemook

flasher0030 wrote: »

Olympus has fallen

I was a bit surprised at how enjoyable this was. Gerard Butler stars as the hero out to save the US president. It's daft as brush, all action and over the top. But I was completely drawn in by it. If some night you just want to unwind with braindead thrilling action, throw it on. Unless you're very cynical you won't be disappointed.

It was a bit mad the way White House Down came out around the same time although we have had that before (Armageddon and Deep Impact in 1998, Dante's Peak and Volcano in 1997 etc). I haven't seen Olympus Has Fallen or its sequel London Has Falling but I might check them out over lockdown.

FullBack Jam

budgemook wrote: »

It was a bit mad the way White House Down came out around the same time although we have had that before (Armageddon and Deep Impact in 1998, Dante's Peak and Volcano in 1997 etc). I haven't seen Olympus Has Fallen or its sequel London Has Falling but I might check them out over lockdown.

I watched Angel has Fallen last night (3rd instalment). They are quite entertaining, so long as you keep an open mind, and not looking to pick holes in a movie.
Lots of action and running around. Who are the bad guys pretending to be good etc. Gerard Butler does a good job.

budgemook

Ford v Ferrari

Enjoyed this film last night - apparently 152 minutes long but did not feel like it at all. Some good performances, an interesting story and the racing scenes were done very well. I'd recommend this one.

One thing that annoyed me throughout was Cristian Bale's son having an English accent. I checked afterwards and concluded that he must have been born in US or at least been there from a very young age. Maybe he was home schooled or something :pac:

RurtBeynolds

Widows

This movie made absolutely zero sense. Very underwhelming.

bnt

I watched The Philadelphia Story (1940) again today, after reading a little about the film. It was Katharine Hepburn's comeback film after being labeled "box office poison", and in retrospect plays like a finely-tuned machine aiming to disarm all the criticism being levelled against her. It's a screwball comedy worthy of serious study as a film.

After the commercial failure of films including the classic Bringing Up Baby, Hepburn took a break then turned to the stage in a play that was essentially written for her. She could afford to back it financially, and Howard Hughes bought her the film rights. After it was a huge success on Broadway and in a national tour, and Hollywood came knocking, Hepburn could sell the film rights in exchange for veto control over casting and directing.

There's no question that Hepburn is the star, but the studio didn't trust her to carry the film, and so two famous male leads were cast. Cary Grant demanded and got top billing, and James Stewart has a strong part that won him an Oscar. Her character is literally pushed over in the first scene, falling flat on her backside, and later she has an existential crisis over being called "remote" and decides to get drunk to prove everyone wrong. She also gets pretty racy (for 1940) in a swimsuit and generally works to prove she's not demanding and "stuck up". It worked - Hepburn never looked back after that and went on to win three more Oscars.

Mad_maxx

Bad Boys 3

loved it , best of the series which i was never a huge fan of tbh

loyatemu

Total Recall (1989) - continuing to educate the kids on the classics - still great, clever plot but also a lot of fun. I've never seen the remake, and I never will.

[Deleted User]

Promising Young Woman - 2020

Refreshingly original and quirky twist on the revenge genre - an originality that manages to persist to the end.
Good work.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9620292/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0

7.8 /10

Tony EH

'Spider-man: Homecoming'

As someone who doesn't qualify as a Marvel fan, of either the movies of the comics they came from, I have always been aware of Spider-Man, largely due to the animated TV show that did the rounds continuously for years since they were first made in the 60's. So, who he is and what he does has been known to me for decades. But I don't think he's ever transferred to live action terribly well. The 80's TV was hilarious for all the wrong reasons and the Sam Raimi films left me very cold indeed, helmed by an unbearably insipid lead and a wishy-washy love interest. The recent reboot efforts were ok, and Andrew Garfield was a charming enough Peter Parker, but they were still just ok with nothing about them being particularly memorable. In addition, the sheer rebooty mess that the screen efforts have left in their wake just leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

But 'Spider-Man: Homecoming' (a weird title) is probably the best effort to bring the friendly neighbourhood webbed wonder to life that's been done yet. That may be because Tom Holland makes for an agreeable central figure or that it makes efforts to tie into a greater story, al la 'The Avengers' timeline (not that I am an expert on that mind you). But it adds up to a more satisfying whole than anything that's come before and to it's benefit eschews, completely, the origin aspect that everyone and their mother already knows about at this point.

Other bonus points are the inclusion of Batman Michael Keaton as the lead antagonist - The Vulture - a guy who's not an alien or a god or someone with a blue box or a shaft of light that wants to take over the world/galaxy somehow. He makes for a refreshing, if somewhat low key bad guy, who enters into his role due to the spiky nature of a run in with faceless government types in the movie's opening. Keaton's character certainly isn't a good guy that's been simply undone by bureaucracy however, as evidenced by his willingness to murder in an attempt to pursue his goals.

There's also pleasing "comic relief" in the form of Peter's classmate, Ned (Jacob Balaton), who provides the film with some humour and, an even better looking 59 than she was at 39, Marisa Tomei as Aunt May (as unlikely as that seems at first) who almost ends the film with its best line. It's helped too, by yet another scene stealing display by Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark/Ironman, who remains, without a single doubt, the best Marvel character to see the light of day.

Where the film falls down a bit is with it's meh side story, involving Peter's crush and a "twist" that everyone must have seen coming from a mile off. Another issue is in the fact that it's probably essential to have seen other Marvel movies, before you can sit down to this one, which is never a good thing.

In any case, 'Spider-Man: Homecoming' is probably one of the more enjoyable Marvel efforts that I've seen and I'll probably check out 'Spiderman-Far From Home' on the back of it...after I've put myself through 'Avengers - whatever" first.

7/10

Del.Monte

loyatemu wrote: »

Total Recall (1989) - continuing to educate the kids on the classics - still great, clever plot but also a lot of fun. I've never seen the remake, and I never will.

Agree with you about the original - a classic - and although I enjoyed the remake I can't really remember much about it. Zero Recall??

Del.Monte

Two recent DVD watches in recent days:

Hang 'em High (1968) - a former lawman is wrongly lynched for cattle rustling with disastrous consequences for the participants. A strong cast led by Clint Eastwood, Ed Begley and Pat Hingle. Another classic if you like retribution movies. 10+/10

and for the times we're living in..

"The Manchurian Candidate" (2004) - conspiracy at the highest levels of the US military/industrial complex, a brainwashing programme involving American soldiers during the Gulf War and the election of one of those former soldiers as the next US President.

Denzel Washington, Liev Schreiber and Meryl Streep star but there are many other big names that appear including Jon Voight and Bruno Ganz. As a fan of 'quality' conspiracy movies, this is another 10/10.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2c5-L5qBvM

homerun_homer

I finally got around to watching The Love Witch (2016) yesterday which has been on my radar since it came out, and probably half as long on my Virgin Media box after I recorded it on Film4 one night.

I really enjoyed it, from the style, colour palette, set design and costumes. The story is a hoot. I imagine the wooden acting, mimicing that 60s trash movie/tv vibe is as hard to do just right as really good acting, and everyone in it does a great job. Feels very authentic, and enjoyably so.

Dades

Del.Monte wrote: »

Agree with you about the original - a classic - and although I enjoyed the remake I can't really remember much about it. Zero Recall??

It's a slick remake, but has none of the fun-factor that makes the first movie so enduring.

[Deleted User]

homerun_homer wrote: »

I finally got around to watching The Love Witch (2016) yesterday which has been on my radar since it came out, and probably half as long on my Virgin Media box after I recorded it on Film4 one night.

I really enjoyed it, from the style, colour palette, set design and costumes. The story is a hoot. I imagine the wooden acting, mimicing that 60s trash movie/tv vibe is as hard to do just right as really good acting, and everyone in it does a great job. Feels very authentic, and enjoyably so.

had to turn that off tbh when I tried watching it before

a retro colour palette and some gratuitous titties (of the style or not) wasn't going to save it

ran out of steam quicker than an electric locomotive and the terrible dialogue, long scenes and long runtime dragged harder than a horse.

S.M.B.

I watched the recent Bee Gees documentary. Thought it did its job very well.

FullBack Jam

glasso wrote: »

had to turn that off tbh when I tried watching it before

a retro colour palette and some gratuitous titties (of the style or not) wasn't going to save it

ran out of steam quicker than an electric locomotive and the terrible dialogue, long scenes and long runtime dragged harder than a horse.

Awful movie.

homerun_homer

glasso wrote: »

had to turn that off tbh when I tried watching it before

It's definitely not everyone's cup of tea, but I enjoyed it. Towards the end I did feel it drag a little but it wouldn't put me off watching it again some point in the future.

Sugarlumps

The Scheme - A jaw-dropping new documentary dives into an absurd tale of how the FBI tried to bring down a 26-year-old basketball star scout.

Good watch, Dawkins is a very likable character with smarts at a young age.

p to the e

Shoot 'em Up (2007). I hadn't seen this since the cinema and all I remembered was death by carrots and lots of other ludicrousness. Having watched it again I'm still none the wiser whether it's the worst film ever made or a genius piss take.

If you don't know anything about it on first watch then, after you pick your jaw up off the floor, it's easy to completely dismiss it as redbull filled nonsense. However when you find out that the director was heavily influenced by John Woo (specifically 'Hard Boiled') and that it's supposed to be a modern adult version of Bugs Bunny vs. Elmer Fudd then you become more sympathetic to its outlandishness. It got several laughs at some of the action scenes but, unlike some of the Brosnan 007 outings, these seem intentional. It knows what it is and seems better for it. I'd recommend it but with a warning to not take it too serious if that's even possible.