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

[A24 4,333]

CGI wise, The Matrix still looks good to me.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

The Matrix CGI looks fine.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword

 

In typical Guy Ritchie fashion, the legend of King Arthur is told as the story of a street thug rising to become a king. There's a bunch of Ritchieisms that work well and I loved seeing an unabashed high fantasy tale in the cinema (this is not your dour, "gritty" Clive Owen King Arthur). But good Lord, this is one of the most overstuffed and poorly paced films in recent memory. Clocking in at 126 minutes, this movie feels like it's at least 45 minutes longer. And it's a shame, because there's a decent cast, good effects work and a whole bunch of lovely costumes. The potential is there, but throughout the picture I kept thinking this should have been a six or even eight-hour miniseries. How anyone came to the decision to stuff all this in a mere two hours of screen time in this golden age of television is beyond me.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

You watched this? Really?

 

Trailer looked ghastly.

[A24 4,333]

Indeed. 

 

Maybe he thought bad trailer = good movie?

 

Or maybe his trailer-reading kills are not so good as ours?

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

Well, going to see it was free.

 

Also, there were free drinks.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

You saw it drunk? I see.

[A24 4,333]

30 minutes ago, Mr. Breathmask said:

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword

How anyone came to the decision to stuff all this in a mere two hours of screen time in this golden age of television is beyond me.

 

Frack! Now there's an idea! 

 

HBO's Excalibur

[Quintus 5,399]

I can't drink fluids if I go to the cinema. If I were knocking back lagers I'd need about 5 wees during the movie. 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I can't have popcorn because it makes me fart. Within 5 minutes of the first mouthfull!

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I usually do have to get up for at least two pees during a movie.

 

I've stopped eating popcorn altogether since I saw Shin Godzilla when a puffed kernel with a hard core damaged one of my back teeth.

[Marian Schedenig 8,193]

17 hours ago, Mr. Breathmask said:

That's because Spielberg never drew attention to his effect shots by using crazy impossible camera moves or having animated characters defy the laws of physics. 

 

I don't think that ever happened before Tintin, where it's justified by the mere nature of it being a crazy colorful 3D cartoon (I dig the falcon sequence).

 

Actually, what I like (most, perhaps) about Tintin is that it's a CGI film done by a "real" director who knows how to handle a camera. Spielberg used the CGI environment to create camera moves as if he had a real camera that could do all these impossible things. It never feels fake or video game-y.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

True

[Disco Stu 15,495]

4 minutes ago, Marian Schedenig said:

 

Actually, what I like (most, perhaps) about Tintin is that it's a CGI film done by a "real" director who knows how to handle a camera. 

 

Robert Zemeckis is reading this right now and weeping.

[Marian Schedenig 8,193]

I've never seen Zemecki's CGI efforts, so I can't comment on them. I should also add that I've never had a problem with Pixar's or Disney's handling of their cameras. But Spielberg's seemed more "grounded" than those.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

I kind of enjoy The Polar Express for what it is, but Beowulf was really bad.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

My name's Beowulf, and I'm here to kill yer munsta!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Good score, though.

[crocodile 8,012]

Beowulf as a technical breakthrough was underwhelming. Beowulf as the film was pretty good. It was refreshing that Zemeckis didn't go for big spectacle and decided to go for this theatre-like approach.

 

Karol

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Disagree again.

[crocodile 8,012]

What was wrong with it?

 

Karol

[Disco Stu 15,495]

I haven't seen it since 2007(?) in theaters.  I remember being bored to tears and thinking that literally everything about it was awful.  Performances, visuals, screenplay.  No redeeming qualities.  I've never thought myths work especially well adapted to film.  They mostly don't work when you have to apply more rigid dramatic structure to them.  There are exceptions, of course.

[King Mark 3,631]

On 2017-04-25 at 11:54 AM, Disco Stu said:

Has anybody seen The Lost City of Z?  It looks like it could be good.  Guess I'll wait til it's on VOD.

 

 

Yes I saw it last week. If your in the mood for a serious historical drama with nice cinematography it's a good movie.

 

I also saw last week :Get Out : Very smart "horror comedy". I wasn't sure where the movie was going halfway through but the last part was worth the price of the ticket

 

Today I had an Emma Watson double feature.

 

The Circle could have been a decent movie but the script was so bad and full of plot holes that i can't recommend it .it just wastes the few interesting ideas it had

 

Beauty and the Beast. I expected to hate it or be indifferent , but I admit that it was very efficient at shamelessly manipulating my emotions. I never saw the original so I had nothing to compare it to

[Matt C 454]

Colossal

 

The trailer gives a better impression of the plot than I could, but even then it defies expectations. It's both an indie comedy and a big monster movie, and it managed to surprise me in places. Anne Hathaway is fantastic here, balancing neurotic comedy with genuine conflict. Jason Sudeikis is also good here, but this is Hathaway's show all the way through. Nacho Vigalando outdid himself here, as he follows through his outlandish premise with satisfying results. Seriously, the climatic scene in Seoul alone is worth seeing in theaters.

 

Bear McCreary's score doesn't disappoint either. He seems to be channeling Akira Ifukube with an underlying superheroic tone. Really enhanced the movie itself without being obtrusive.

[A24 4,333]

9 hours ago, crocodile said:

Beowulf as a technical breakthrough was underwhelming. Beowulf as the film was pretty good. It was refreshing that Zemeckis didn't go for big spectacle and decided to go for this theatre-like approach.

 

Karol

 

I liked it because it it's pretty harsh for an animation movie. 6-year-olds will be in shock. While not exactly pretty to look at, the visual storytelling is pretty immersive. 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Agreed. I didn't really notice the animation much, but the story was good.

[A24 4,333]

And CGI Jolie is better than the real Jolie!

[nightscape94 965]

I enjoyed it in the theater, but haven't thought about it since.

[A24 4,333]

18 minutes ago, nightscape94 said:

I enjoyed it in the theater, but haven't thought about it since.

 

Once is enough.

[Jay 37,363]

28 minutes ago, nightscape94 said:

I enjoyed it in the theater, but haven't thought about it since.

 

Pretty much how I feel except I watched it at home

[Matt C 454]

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2

 

It's just more of the same, and the relentless action gave me a headache. I wasn't a fan of the first one, with its forced "hip" humor, ironic soundtrack choices and irritating characters. Rocket is still a sarcastic douche, Groot is now a cute baby version to sell toys, Drax is an insensitive idiot, Peter is a doofus, while Gamora and Nebula are the only interesting characters. It also wastes the talents of Elizabeth Debicki (who's insanely hot here), Sylvester Stallone (only two scenes), and Kurt Russell.

 

Maybe I'm just immune to Marvel Studios' output now. The audience laughed, cheered and hooted in the right spots, but I wasn't swept into the film. For all the critical praise, a lot of their recent films have left me cold.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

2 hours ago, Matt C said:

Drax is an insensitive idiot,

 

He he he...

[Quintus 5,399]

Isn't Guardians of the Galaxy 2 exactly the sort of movie it was always meant and expected to be? I saw the first one, it was enjoyable enough and I would say I was glad to have paid to go see it. But that doesn't mean it was remarkable, or particularly different to the endless  other comic book movies doing the rounds this decade. They're all pretty much identical really, it says so on the side of the tin. 

 

I saw the poster for this yesterday though in Germany on some wall, it looked like somebody had drunkenly vomited the various characters in the movie onto it and they'd splashed all around Chris Pratt who looks strangely poncy in the middle. 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

9 minutes ago, Quintus said:

 

Isn't Guardians of the Galaxy 2 exactly the sort of movie it was always meant and expected to be? I saw the first one, it was enjoyable enough and I would say I was glad to have paid to go see it. But that doesn't mean it was remarkable, or particularly different to the endless  or comic book movies doing rounds this decade. They're all pretty much identical really, it says so on the side of the tin. 

 

 

That's why these films are making their money. You know exactly what you are gonna get. It's why every single Bond film has turned a tidy profit regardless if it's actually any good. You buy your ticket knowing what you spend your money on.

 

Disney will do the same thing with Star Wars for the next few decades.

[A24 4,333]

4 hours ago, Matt C said:

are the only interesting characters ...

 

If you're hoping that the Guardians are interesting characters then that tells me you don't get it. 

[Naïve Old Fart 9,528]

1 hour ago, Stefancos said:

Disney will do the same thing with Star Wars for the next few decades.

 

What God wants, God gets. God help us all.

[Matt C 454]

5 hours ago, Alexcremers said:

 

If you're hoping that the Guardians are interesting characters then that tells me you don't get it. 

 

 

The conceit works better as an actual cartoon. 

 

Maybe it's because I'm not a Marvel fan either.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[KK 3,307]

What a joke!

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

3 hours ago, BloodBoal said:

 

Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 - James Gunn (2017)

 

Joke, joke, joke. Hey, look, joke. Joke? Joke! Joke joke, joke. Joke? Joke! Hey, look, story, joke! Serious moment? Joke! Action? Joke! Emotion? Joke!

 

Jokeverkill.

 

4/10

 

P.S.: Yondu was cool.

 

So it's BloodBoal: The Movie?

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Up to 11.

[crocodile 8,012]

That is a very good and eloquent review BloodBoal. This film has absolutely no sense of pace and/or story.

 

But you missed some beats. You need to insert "song" in between any other word in your review.

 

Karol

[Disco Stu 15,495]

I loved Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2. Happy to be the voice of dissent around here. It might be my favorite MCU movie yet.  It's the first to be about something in a way that resonated with me emotionally, beyond just "that was fun."

[Not Mr. Big 4,639]

How was the score?

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Not good,  but I also didn't enjoy the first score. I've never enjoyed a Bates score.  His main theme for the Guardians returns in a few notable instances, it's still ineffectual window dressing. The perfect songtrack is what's important in these movies.  I love 70s pop.

[A24 4,333]

I never listen to a Tyler Bates score but somehow he never stands in the way for me to like the movies he worked on. 300, Watchmen, Guardians Of The Galaxy... they all seem to have colorful scores. I don't remember John Wick but again I don't recall Bates being a harmful element. 

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

He might have more talent in running a motel.

[A24 4,333]

And apparently the Trump devotees don't like Tyler Bates so that's another positive point, right? 

[Hurmm 91]

17 hours ago, BloodBoal said:

 

Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 - James Gunn (2017)

 

Joke, joke, joke. Hey, look, joke. Joke? Joke! Joke joke, joke. Joke? Joke! Hey, look, story, joke! Serious moment? Joke! Action? Joke! Emotion? Joke!

 

Jokeverkill.

 

4/10

 

P.S.: Yondu was cool.

 

That much was evident from the trailers and to an extent, the first movie. But yes, the sequel could have benefitted from a better, more direct plot. Still, the characters are fleshed out further and remain charming, to me at least. Vol 1 was by far my favourite of the MCU movies so perhaps I'm biased. Not all the humour lands but most of them clicked with me. The punchline to the pacman joke was majestic. Fluff and nonsensical for sure, but in that moment it was an absolute riot. 

[BloodBoal 7,538]