What Is The Last Film You Watched? (Newer Films)

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Of course! She's an actress, not a singer.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,511]

Oh 

[Marian Schedenig 8,191]

8 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

Of course! She's an actress, not a singer.

 

But usually, Disney tends to hire actresses who actually can sing.

[Matt C 452]

T2 Trainspotting

 

Danny Boyle leans a bit too much on his previous film, as there are several flashbacks and nods to the original film. (Even Kelly Macdonald has a one-scene cameo.) The returning actors are in fine form, but the story made me go "That's it? That's what Mark, Sickboy and Begbie have been doing for the past 20 years?" It's still an enjoyable film, just don't expect the story to wow you.

 

Their Finest

 

A true gem. It's a warm satire of the British filmmaking scene during World War II, with some pointed barbs at the sexism Gemma Arterton's character faces in the film. But there's heart and love invested into this film, and you really get a sense of the time period the film takes place in. Sam Claflin and Bill Nighy are good, but Arterton is fantastic and anchors the entire film. I hope she gets some awards love later this year.

[Nick1Ø66 4,710]

 Kong Skull Island.

 

Utterly stupid. I mean, I was expecting typical popcorn film stupid, but this was pretty inane. Fun in parts to be sure (the film is a snooze without the John Filey character), but I expected to like it more than I did.  I came away with no desire to see a sequel.

[crocodile 7,999]

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2. It gave us more of everything - gags, character motion, flashy visuals, pop music... running time. It's fun for the most part but somewhat over-indulgent, overlong and poorly paced. A very awkwardly and clumsily put together story held together largely by one-liners. The first one wasn't a masterpiece of plotting but this one, while not devoid of some humour and heart, doesn't hold together as well. But James Gunn is trying very hard to outdo himself, bless his heart.

 

14 hours ago, Nick1066 said:

 Kong Skull Island.

 

Utterly stupid. I mean, I was expecting typical popcorn film stupid, but this was pretty inane. Fun in parts to be sure (the film is a snooze without the John Filey character), but I expected to like it more than I did.  I came away with no desire to see a sequel.

It felt a bit like a tie-in to an actual film than the event itself. Peter Jackson can sleep peacefully.

 

Karol

[A24 4,331]

4 hours ago, crocodile said:

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2. It gave us more of everything - gags, character motion, flashy visuals, pop music... running time. It's fun for the most part but somewhat over-indulgent, overlong and poorly paced. A very awkwardly and clumsily put together story held together largely by one-liners. The first one wasn't a masterpiece of plotting but this one, while not devoid of some humour and heart, doesn't hold together as well. But James Gunn is trying very hard to outdo himself, bless his heart.

 

 

Yeah, the trailer already said that much. Gunn is afflicted by the dreaded 'More' disease. Is there by any chance a kid in the movie that says: "You call him Dr. Star-Lord, doll!"? No?

 

Now James Gunn has an excuse to make a third Guardians movie. You know, to make up to the audience for the second one.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

So let's all skip this one!

[A24 4,331]

But ... then Marvel will not come up with the dough for the third movie!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

They would make it on a lower budget. More story and character, less FX!

[A24 4,331]

Or ...

 

Breaking News: James Gunn jumps ship and joins DC!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Yes!

 

Josh Whedon and James Gunn. DC is saved!

[Quintus 5,399]

2 hours ago, Stefancos said:

So let's all skip this one!

 

Never gonna happen.

[crocodile 7,999]

5 hours ago, Alexcremers said:

 

Yeah, the trailer already said that much. Gunn is afflicted by the dreaded 'More' disease. Is there by any chance a kid in the movie that says: "You call him Dr. Star-Lord, doll!"? No?

 

Now James Gunn has an excuse to make a third Guardians movie. You know, to make up to the audience for the second one.

It's not terrible or anything. Just doesn't really hold together very well. I can't say I really cared about the story at all. The smaller moments and eye candy visuals are still appealing. But it's less than sum of its parts this time, I'm afraid. There was a point, about halfway through, that I started to think to myself: OK, what is this story about again? It seems to really almost entirely on character moments and jokes. Half of which already reference the original film.

 

Karol

[Jay 37,336]

That's too bad about the pacing and bloat.  Oh well.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Karol's is the most negative take I've seen.  Many people seem to think it's very good indeed.  Can't wait to find out I feel about it!

 

Most promising to me is I've read it's free of MCU tie-in nonsense, that it stands alone as a film.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[A24 4,331]

That's right! I completely forgot!  

 

Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol.2: 

 

RT: 88%

 

IMDb: 8.3/10

 

Metacritic: 67

 

 

[crocodile 7,999]

35 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

Karol's is the most negative take I've seen.  Many people seem to think it's very good indeed.  Can't wait to find out I feel about it!

 

Most promising to me is I've read it's free of MCU tie-in nonsense, that it stands alone as a film.

It's not un-enjoyable. It just feels bit unfocused. My two cinema companions loved it. But I heard some of the younger audience members sitting on the other side saying they "prefer the first one". So people will have different opinions on this one. This one definitely feels less like Star Wars and more like Jupiter Ascending.If you liked the colourful and over-designed world of the first film, and you love your one-liners, then it should be fine. This film has more of that. It's probably more s-f comedy rather than space opera this time. All the successful ingredients are supposedly there but they don't feel as fresh and as well balanced. It's a bit like Age of Ultron in that respect, a film which isn't really bad at anything, just slightly... off.

 

It does reference a lot of Marvel stuff. But not in direct plot-related way. Some things may setup something that might happen in the next two Avengers films but it doesn't really matter.

 

Karol

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Just now, crocodile said:

It's a bit like Age of Ultron in that respect, a film which isn't really bad at anything, just slightly... off.

 

I was the weirdo who prefers Ultron to the first Avengers so I'm primed and ready to like this movie more  

[crocodile 7,999]

5 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

 

I was the weirdo who prefers Ultron to the first Avengers so I'm primed and ready to like this movie more  

I like Age of Ultron too. But you have to admit that film actually feels like there's too much stuff in there and none of the elements ever get a chance to play out fully. There's the villain who supposedly has an agenda... but it gets reduced to a couple of lines of dialogue. There's a hero whose ambition ultimately causes terrible tragedy but you never get to see any consequences of his actions (they rectified that in Civil War, thankfully). You have a love story... that doesn't really feel like much. Everything is sort of very compressed and undercooked.

 

38 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

 

The first one was already a bit like that.

True, but the first one moved more quickly.

 

Karol

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Just now, crocodile said:

I like Age of Ultron too. But you have to admit that film actually feels like there's too much stuff in there and none of the elements ever get a chance to play out fully. There's the villain who supposedly has an agenda... but it gets reduced to a couple of lines of dialogue. There's a hero whose ambition ultimately causes terrible tragedy but you never get to see any consequences of his actions (they rectified that in Civil War, thankfully). You have a love story... that doesn't really feel like much. Everything is sort of very compressed and undercooked.

 

Intellectually, I know everything you say is correct.  It just turns out that, emotionally, I like Joss Whedon best when he's stretched to his breaking point!

[crocodile 7,999]

1 minute ago, Disco Stu said:

 

Intellectually, I know everything you say is correct.  It just turns out that, emotionally, I like Joss Whedon best when he's stretched to his breaking point!

I'm still amazed that it all still works as well as it does.

 

Karol - who, for whatever reason, started to like Ant-Man after a recent re-watch.

[A24 4,331]

Reviewers say it's got a big heart (underneath the sarcasm), so maybe there's hope, because it's probably the reason why I like the first one.

 

 

Alex - who didn't see a lot of heart in Age Of Ultron.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

None of them have even a fraction of the heart contained in your average (pre-2009) Star Trek film.

 

Disco Stu, his arms wide

[crocodile 7,999]

12 minutes ago, Alexcremers said:

Reviewers say it's got a big heart (underneath the sarcasm), so maybe there's hope, because it's probably the reason why I like the first one.

 

 

Alex - who didn't see a lot of heart in Age Of Ultron.

But Alex.... You're a connoisseur, a lonely voice of reason. After Roger Ebert's passing you're the last bastion of good taste. You can't be talking about heart.

 

Karol

[A24 4,331]

Of course I can talk about heart. Heck, I couldn't even tell you the story of the first one. I leave that to the story watchers.

[Kasey Kockroach 2,344]

Since when did we get the idea that Roger Ebert had good taste? Didn't he give Space Jam a positive review? 

[Quintus 5,399]

Ebert was a populist. He's not really too well known here in the UK, but even I can tell he wasn't exactly a difficult critic. 

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Ebert was a wonderful, intelligent, and sensitive writer who had an open, curious mind that never gave into easy cynicism.

[A24 4,331]

2 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

Ebert was a wonderful, intelligent, and sensitive writer...

 

Are you sure?

 

 

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Oh yes!  And he was very funny!

[nightscape94 965]

1 hour ago, Disco Stu said:

Ebert was a wonderful, intelligent, and sensitive writer who had an open, curious mind that never gave into easy cynicism.

 

Agreed.  He was truly brilliant in his criticism and his arguments were always well-supported and thought out.  He was a good writer who took film very seriously as art and was in no way lenient for the sake of popularity.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

He was great. The only critic I've ever been able to stand, because he was so much more than just a critic.  I've not seen anyone else able to genuinely accomplish that.  Most are stuck peddling pseudo intellectual tripe.  

[mrbellamy 6,275]

Ebert's weekly reviews were okay and usually pretty enjoyable reads and he was an entertaining TV presence, but he really rose in my estimation as a writer with his Great Movies essays and his blog after his cancer had left him literally speechless.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

6 hours ago, kaseykockroach said:

Since when did we get the idea that Roger Ebert had good taste? Didn't he give Space Jam a positive review? 

What you got against Space Jam, bub?

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

He didn't like Aliens or Die Hard either.

[Luke Skywalker 1,794]

I also think GotG 2 was alittle too much in one liners, but my girlfriend and the rest audience loved it, lots of loud laughs over the film.

 

The de-aging technology is becoming really great.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Great for Indy 5!

[Quintus 5,399]

Bring it

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

De-age the Short Round actor too!

[Luke Skywalker 1,794]

If they can get connery out of retirement definately i would like indy 5 to be set between LC and KOTCS.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

He's 86 now, and frail looking 

[crocodile 7,999]

Maybe they could bring him back to play Bond?

 

Karol

[Quintus 5,399]

I didn't know you could drive a mobility scooter! 

 

Drive yes. Disembark, no. 

 

[Hurmm 91]

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2

 

Like reviews have said, not as good as the first. What was once considered fresh is now expected, and the sequel doesn't quite rise above it. But it's still pretty darn good, and hugely entertaining in most parts. Part of the problem it has is due to the lack of focus and visible plot for the first half of the movie, but I would contend that even when the story finally unfolds, it's not terribly exciting stuff. I'm not sure if I'm alone in this, but Kurt Russell wasn't very good in this - in fact I'd say he's not in the same league as the rest of the cast, which is pitch perfect. 

 

Spoiler

The movie stalls in the early scenes in Ego's planet. There just wasn't anything interesting happening, and the planet itself was quite a bore. It looked literally like a any other desert. 

 

A lot of the humour works though, and there is some comedy gold here. I also think they did a fine job with Baby Groot. They could have easily made him the cute comic relief and ran away with it but thankfully they did not overplay it at all. Part of the charm of the characters is that they're all quite different and everyone has their own favourite. Drax was mine. Even Gamora, who on her own would have been drab, works really well as a counterweight to all the other colourful characters. 

 

Spoiler

I never read the comics, so it was a surprise to me that Quill had god powers. To be frank I was disappointed in learning that he could fly and do crazy shit, but thankfully the writers/filmmakers realised this as well and made his superpowers brief in duration. He only really works as a normal human being with no superpowers. 

 

[Sweeping Strings 2,352]

Guardians Of The Galaxy 2 - half-an-hour longer than the first, which unfortunately just means that it sags drearily in the middle. But there's enough action and irreverent humour to see it through.

[A24 4,331]

Why is it so long? First one felt exactly long enough.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Longer, bigger, louder, more = better, Alex!

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

Guardians of the Galaxy, vol. 2

 

It's good. Better than the first, actually. A deftly handled ensemble piece with plenty of laughs, thrills and cheers. I look forward to seeing more of these characters in Vol. 3.