R
rainy broons
Guest
Rubbish. Seeing babies drown in swimming pools is not going to save you from any horror when you actually experience your own child drowning.
-
Welcome to the discussion forums. To get posting, register an account.
Last movie you saw
- Thread starter molloch!
- Start date
Rubbish. Seeing babies drown in swimming pools is not going to save you from any horror when you actually experience your own child drowning.
molloch!
Obsessive :)
Ghost Town sounds like a riiot
It's dfefinately worth going to see. It's not so much a riot CLE, but it is very funny if you enjoy Ricky's sense of humour and the way he delivers. It's subtle but i certainly enjoyed it.
Mud Cake
God
The expression "a riot" usually means lots of fun
I'm going to see this on Monday my friend bought me a ticket to see this.
http://www.thebeautifulmovie.com/
What an absurd example. Nobody would be interested in a horror film about drowning children, for it is not really a fear that taps into the human psyche, like child abduction does. A pool can be fenced, but a child abductor can come from nowhere. There wouldn't be a parent in Australia that is not troubled by the fate of Daniel Morecombe.
Such fears find cathartic release in a horror film such as Changeling.
There is obviously nothing that can prepare a parent for the loss of a child, but it is not just the parents that are dealing with the dead infant. There are paramedics, mortuary workers, undertakers. I've seen some extremely grisly sights, which don't affect me at all. I thank horror movies of the 80s for this.
Last edited:
Gran Torino - well I must say I was expecting big things after reading everyone in here loved it. I'd say it was a good movie but nothing I'd rave about. He is a biggeted, racist old fart who only changes this opinion when he is accosted and pestered by his Vietnamese neighbours.
Maybe he reminded me too much of my Grandfather (who made it to age 90 and had fought against the Japanese in World War II) he never held back from telling it like it was (according to him) and we hardly respected him for it.
I mean I got the message that the old guy came around in the end, but for me, it didn't make me sit up and taken notice of the film. Clint did well acting and directing but gee he's old now. The movie however does make me want to go out and buy some sort of box set of Dirty Harry
I think that it's really just a small interesting film, that is quite surprisingly good. However the hype has seemed to go to levels that make it seem like a much larger film than it is.
Hellboy 2
I quite enjoyed it. it was visually great, very creative designs through out. The action was good, as well as the characters. It seemed a little bit too focussed on the visuals and creative, cool ideas and the day to day world of the hellboy central characters and universe, than on the villains plot. Which suffered as no real sense of what he was aiming to do, and the threat was ever really established.
I will definitely see a third if it gets made. I remember being entertained for the most part but somewhat underwelmed by the first, which i only have seen once in theatres. So from that memory comparing to this, I preferred this one. I shall watch the first again some time soon though.
Alexander - The Directors Cut
Not nearly as bad as I expected. I unfortunately found out from my research after watching the film, i probably watched the weakest of the three versions. It was a flawed film, and I could see so much potential in it that wasn't met. The narative was off, and I feel a more linear storytelling could have given to a greater drive and sense of adventure. You also really never got all that clear an idea of geography, and his accomplishments. As knowing a little bit about Alexander the great, gaping holes in the story were as if they never existed.
There was no clear sense of his motivations, or weather he was just crazy. Knowing the guy was quite a monster at times, this seemed to be pushed aside, to give the impression of some sort of misguided, idealistic leader wanting to go down in history like the legends in the stories he was told as a child. Not someone who'd burn down Persepolis, or march their army through a desert to punish them. He was also no where near beloved and was seen as a monster by the Persians.
I really think what was missing was short scenes, montages, and better maps. If you were given a sense of where he was going, what he was doing, on actual maps, not distorted period maps. If the narration explained how far he actually went, and what he did, even just overlayed with maps and short scenes and shots, would have really given a much better sense of what he did. while i'd rather such things explored in the film, in place of all the Colin farrell and jarrod leto making dreamy eyes at each other, these short montage way, would have been a great and simple solution to improve the film. The obviously were trying to put a focus on a story of the character and sacrificed these, but whatever point they were trying to tell was not met.
I guess i'll finish this up now. it is a flawed film, it's no where near as terrible as I expected. Some bits were great, and it was a decent film over all. Never lost interest. I just found it lacked a real sense of what he did, and no clear picture of who he was. Even in a fictionalised version, making him more sympathetic, there was no clear idea. The action was well done. Although he was involved in way more battles. It seemed like he conquered the Persian empire in one battle. Not true, then that was all he did. The film has dragged out bits, with relationships that aren't developed and slow it down, and does this to the detriment of the actual story of him.
Apparently the theatrical cut was better. Then there's the final cut which goes for three and a half hours, which is everything, and supposed to be the best. So if I watch the film again, which i might years from now, that'll be the one to get. Unfortunately that 45minutes of extra footage won't expand on all he did that wasn't in the film. Hopefully at least the narration gives more of an explanation.
I quite enjoyed it. it was visually great, very creative designs through out. The action was good, as well as the characters. It seemed a little bit too focussed on the visuals and creative, cool ideas and the day to day world of the hellboy central characters and universe, than on the villains plot. Which suffered as no real sense of what he was aiming to do, and the threat was ever really established.
I will definitely see a third if it gets made. I remember being entertained for the most part but somewhat underwelmed by the first, which i only have seen once in theatres. So from that memory comparing to this, I preferred this one. I shall watch the first again some time soon though.
Alexander - The Directors Cut
Not nearly as bad as I expected. I unfortunately found out from my research after watching the film, i probably watched the weakest of the three versions. It was a flawed film, and I could see so much potential in it that wasn't met. The narative was off, and I feel a more linear storytelling could have given to a greater drive and sense of adventure. You also really never got all that clear an idea of geography, and his accomplishments. As knowing a little bit about Alexander the great, gaping holes in the story were as if they never existed.
There was no clear sense of his motivations, or weather he was just crazy. Knowing the guy was quite a monster at times, this seemed to be pushed aside, to give the impression of some sort of misguided, idealistic leader wanting to go down in history like the legends in the stories he was told as a child. Not someone who'd burn down Persepolis, or march their army through a desert to punish them. He was also no where near beloved and was seen as a monster by the Persians.
I really think what was missing was short scenes, montages, and better maps. If you were given a sense of where he was going, what he was doing, on actual maps, not distorted period maps. If the narration explained how far he actually went, and what he did, even just overlayed with maps and short scenes and shots, would have really given a much better sense of what he did. while i'd rather such things explored in the film, in place of all the Colin farrell and jarrod leto making dreamy eyes at each other, these short montage way, would have been a great and simple solution to improve the film. The obviously were trying to put a focus on a story of the character and sacrificed these, but whatever point they were trying to tell was not met.
I guess i'll finish this up now. it is a flawed film, it's no where near as terrible as I expected. Some bits were great, and it was a decent film over all. Never lost interest. I just found it lacked a real sense of what he did, and no clear picture of who he was. Even in a fictionalised version, making him more sympathetic, there was no clear idea. The action was well done. Although he was involved in way more battles. It seemed like he conquered the Persian empire in one battle. Not true, then that was all he did. The film has dragged out bits, with relationships that aren't developed and slow it down, and does this to the detriment of the actual story of him.
Apparently the theatrical cut was better. Then there's the final cut which goes for three and a half hours, which is everything, and supposed to be the best. So if I watch the film again, which i might years from now, that'll be the one to get. Unfortunately that 45minutes of extra footage won't expand on all he did that wasn't in the film. Hopefully at least the narration gives more of an explanation.
Last edited:
Mud Cake
God
Beautiful
Well I am back from seeing Beautiful..
In a word "great"
For an Australian film I thought this was quite damn good. The film passed quickly but I think this was more of how it managed to suck you into its world. I really got caught up in the world of the characters. To me the stars of the film were Sebastian Gregory as Danny the photo taking aloof kid who noone seems to understand. His dad says he should try and fit in more and eveyrone would like him and understand him more. But danny wants no part of that, choosing to do his own thing, including taking pictures of the girl across the road Suzy as she sunbakes in her front yard even in rain.
Suzy is played by the very lovely Tahyna Tozzi. She does her role well being that of the mysterious femme fatale in training. This is where the story picks up as she knows he photographed her and when they finally talk she recruits him in a scheme to find out about a house on their street that everyone gossips about. This sets the pace for the rest of the film and there were one or two moments that caught me off guard and made me jump.... I won't say any more but you will have to see this for yourself. It's a great little film.
You may like it, or you may hate it. But for what it's worth I totally enjoyed it. The acting wasn't overdone. It seemed to me very understated and that's how you want a film to be. It's a tight film with not too many if at all dragging moments, and a few bits of humour here and there.
7/10
Well I am back from seeing Beautiful..
In a word "great"
For an Australian film I thought this was quite damn good. The film passed quickly but I think this was more of how it managed to suck you into its world. I really got caught up in the world of the characters. To me the stars of the film were Sebastian Gregory as Danny the photo taking aloof kid who noone seems to understand. His dad says he should try and fit in more and eveyrone would like him and understand him more. But danny wants no part of that, choosing to do his own thing, including taking pictures of the girl across the road Suzy as she sunbakes in her front yard even in rain.
Suzy is played by the very lovely Tahyna Tozzi. She does her role well being that of the mysterious femme fatale in training. This is where the story picks up as she knows he photographed her and when they finally talk she recruits him in a scheme to find out about a house on their street that everyone gossips about. This sets the pace for the rest of the film and there were one or two moments that caught me off guard and made me jump.... I won't say any more but you will have to see this for yourself. It's a great little film.
You may like it, or you may hate it. But for what it's worth I totally enjoyed it. The acting wasn't overdone. It seemed to me very understated and that's how you want a film to be. It's a tight film with not too many if at all dragging moments, and a few bits of humour here and there.
7/10
Last edited:
G
Goldenberry
Guest
Tarantino has some upcoming Nazi film coming up (Brad Pitt's in it), and the word is he's gone too far this time.
What do they mean "this time"? I still recall this woman fainting in the seat in front of me when I saw Reservoir Dogs.
R
Ravenau1
Guest
At what part?
G
Goldenberry
Guest
Aw come in, you know what part. A clue: "Stuck in the middle with you" - by the (great) "Steeler's Wheel" (Gerry Rafferty).
She woke up to find she was halfway up the exit stairs and being carried in the middle of two guys - and the poor lady shrieked out. Ah well, she can probably laugh about it these days.
As a 23 year old student I kind of liked the movie, and the later "Pulp Fiction". Now I find these movies over the top and completely lacking in subtlety.
She woke up to find she was halfway up the exit stairs and being carried in the middle of two guys - and the poor lady shrieked out. Ah well, she can probably laugh about it these days.
As a 23 year old student I kind of liked the movie, and the later "Pulp Fiction". Now I find these movies over the top and completely lacking in subtlety.
Tarantino as someone you love or hate is such a bs statement to try and make him sound like some niche genius. He's someone people absolutely love no matter what, then there's people who don't like anything, then there's the objective people that like some of his stuff but not everything.
Inglorious Basterds, just sounds dumb. Not just from the misspelt title. People committing terrorism, and war crimes.. sounds great... and the fact you know he'll miss this point just points more to how bad it'll be. He picked an easy target in nazi's, and in doing so, because they're nazi's there won't be a turn around of the characters going, oh wait, we're just bas bad as them, or we should try and be better, because every german in the 40s was of course an evil ruthless person deserving of death by the most brutal means possible. Of course a viewer with intelligence will see the hypocrisy and stupidity on this. And the dumb viewer will get wet in their pants from all the gore and not think twice, and the die hard tarantino fans will claim there's a depth and subtly to it, but be unable to explain it, but insist its there.
Or so is my impression of how the project will turn out.
Inglorious Basterds, just sounds dumb. Not just from the misspelt title. People committing terrorism, and war crimes.. sounds great... and the fact you know he'll miss this point just points more to how bad it'll be. He picked an easy target in nazi's, and in doing so, because they're nazi's there won't be a turn around of the characters going, oh wait, we're just bas bad as them, or we should try and be better, because every german in the 40s was of course an evil ruthless person deserving of death by the most brutal means possible. Of course a viewer with intelligence will see the hypocrisy and stupidity on this. And the dumb viewer will get wet in their pants from all the gore and not think twice, and the die hard tarantino fans will claim there's a depth and subtly to it, but be unable to explain it, but insist its there.
Or so is my impression of how the project will turn out.
R
Ravenau1
Guest
I guess she didn't watch actually gorey movies then.
G
Goldenberry
Guest
Yeah, but that part with the ear is kind of OTT. It's not enough to make one faint though.
I can recall once years ago I was at a party and this guy got quite irate with me because I'd put on the "Reservoir Dogs" video. Not sure why, other people had wanted to watch it, including him. So I had to tell him to keep his shirt on.
Another time this woman got irate with me because we'd been at a video store, and it was me who decided to hire "Pulp Fiction" (which is really not too shocking at all). Again, I was made to eject the video mid-stream, at about the point where Bruce Willis ends up with a ball in his mouth.
Given this track record, you can see why I opt for more subtle fare these days.
I can recall once years ago I was at a party and this guy got quite irate with me because I'd put on the "Reservoir Dogs" video. Not sure why, other people had wanted to watch it, including him. So I had to tell him to keep his shirt on.
Another time this woman got irate with me because we'd been at a video store, and it was me who decided to hire "Pulp Fiction" (which is really not too shocking at all). Again, I was made to eject the video mid-stream, at about the point where Bruce Willis ends up with a ball in his mouth.
Given this track record, you can see why I opt for more subtle fare these days.
My Bloody Valentine 3D
Terrible movie. I was hoping it'd be a stupid fun horror movie. It was just dumb and really bland and lame. The set up could have provided some cool deaths, but it didn't. Standard, people being killed with an pick axe. The plot was also clumsy. I don't know if the end was meant to be a twist or something, but it was obvious, and the film tried so blandly to be misleading. Even in the end, it didn't make any sense really. I just wanted the film to end.
Also I don't know why the film was made in 3d? It barely used it to any great effect. Except for the pick axe swinging at camera, and one shot of a jaw being ripped off and flying at the camera. The highlight of the movie was the completely naked girl, being chased by the killer. It just wasn't bad or cheesy enough to be good, and so it was just lame and a waste of time. Not even worth seeing for the 3d which is the only reason i went. After Beowolf, i thought.. wow I wish every movie was in 3d. After this, i don't care for 3d, it really needs to only be used on films that warrant it.
Sex Drive (Unrated)
In a nut shell, a teen sex comedy road trip movie. Basically an 18 year old guy has been talking bit about himself on the internet to some girl and him, his best mate ( who's a hit with the ladies), and his best female friend who he's in love with go on a road trip so he can loose his virginity to the girl from the internet.
It actually was quite decent. I was a bit drunk and drinking through it, but if you can enjoy these sort of teen gross out comedies, this was definitely above average. There was plenty of genuinely funny moments all through out, and a bunch of great cameos. Most notably seth green as the smart arse amish guy. It's nice when these films actually can in someway tough upon things you can relate to from you're days of a teenager. Even if it does go a bit into the way you wished things would turn out even if they never do.
There's a disclaimer before the unrated version, that you shouldn't watch it unless you've watched the original as it's just for fans of the movie, not a proper version of the film. I haven't seen the original, don't think its necessary. Basically from what I can tell, the unrated version, contains a few out takes edited in, and the big one, they've just randomly superimposed naked girls into various scenes. Just standing in the back ground, walking past the camera ect.
I did genuinely enjoy this film, much funnier than i expected. You know if this is the sort of film for you or not and it's above average for a genre which really just got stale and tired and try hard.
Terrible movie. I was hoping it'd be a stupid fun horror movie. It was just dumb and really bland and lame. The set up could have provided some cool deaths, but it didn't. Standard, people being killed with an pick axe. The plot was also clumsy. I don't know if the end was meant to be a twist or something, but it was obvious, and the film tried so blandly to be misleading. Even in the end, it didn't make any sense really. I just wanted the film to end.
Also I don't know why the film was made in 3d? It barely used it to any great effect. Except for the pick axe swinging at camera, and one shot of a jaw being ripped off and flying at the camera. The highlight of the movie was the completely naked girl, being chased by the killer. It just wasn't bad or cheesy enough to be good, and so it was just lame and a waste of time. Not even worth seeing for the 3d which is the only reason i went. After Beowolf, i thought.. wow I wish every movie was in 3d. After this, i don't care for 3d, it really needs to only be used on films that warrant it.
Sex Drive (Unrated)
In a nut shell, a teen sex comedy road trip movie. Basically an 18 year old guy has been talking bit about himself on the internet to some girl and him, his best mate ( who's a hit with the ladies), and his best female friend who he's in love with go on a road trip so he can loose his virginity to the girl from the internet.
It actually was quite decent. I was a bit drunk and drinking through it, but if you can enjoy these sort of teen gross out comedies, this was definitely above average. There was plenty of genuinely funny moments all through out, and a bunch of great cameos. Most notably seth green as the smart arse amish guy. It's nice when these films actually can in someway tough upon things you can relate to from you're days of a teenager. Even if it does go a bit into the way you wished things would turn out even if they never do.
There's a disclaimer before the unrated version, that you shouldn't watch it unless you've watched the original as it's just for fans of the movie, not a proper version of the film. I haven't seen the original, don't think its necessary. Basically from what I can tell, the unrated version, contains a few out takes edited in, and the big one, they've just randomly superimposed naked girls into various scenes. Just standing in the back ground, walking past the camera ect.
I did genuinely enjoy this film, much funnier than i expected. You know if this is the sort of film for you or not and it's above average for a genre which really just got stale and tired and try hard.
Watchmen.
Pretty good, besides the hokey makeup effects. When will someone in Hollywood realise it is pointless using aging effects, when the voice remains youthful? Just substitute in a genuine old person, it's much more authentic.
But yes, I think the film captured the essence of the comic quite nicely. It held the audience despite its two and a half hours. All except a giggling girl that laughed at stupid moments...
Pretty good, besides the hokey makeup effects. When will someone in Hollywood realise it is pointless using aging effects, when the voice remains youthful? Just substitute in a genuine old person, it's much more authentic.
But yes, I think the film captured the essence of the comic quite nicely. It held the audience despite its two and a half hours. All except a giggling girl that laughed at stupid moments...
Why oh why did i make plans to see watchmen on tuesday
Mud Cake
God
Is that bad?
I was hoping Carla Gugino gets a bigger role then she got. On At The Movies this week she only got 2 seconds of mention in the movie.
R
Ravenau1
Guest
We're going to see Watchmen in Imax on Sunday. I'm a bit dubious as I normally hate comic adaptions, there have only ever been a couple of exceptions and '300' was one of them, which is the only reason I agreed to see this.
Mud Cake
God
Watchmen will surprise you.......Definitely for adults.
R
Ravenau1
Guest
It's not an issue of movies being for kids etc, it's that most comics don't translate well to film in my opinion.
I love comics (well, dark, violent, bloody comics) but films of comics, not so much.