Paid Members seph Posted January 20, 2011 Paid Members Posted January 20, 2011 (edited) Went to see The Green Hornet today. Wasn't that good TBH. Details in the tag. <-- click on 'spoiler' to show/hide the spoiler They only had a 3D version available in the cinema, and the 3D was really unnecessary - felt like it was tacked on just to bump up the price, as it was only really used to any effect for the end credits. Christoph Waltz spent the whole movie unable to make up his mind as to what kind of villain he wanted to play, but the really grating thing is Seth Rogen - in spite of being the lead - spends 3/4 of the movie being an absolute cock to people who are saving his skin - yeah, that might be the point- but his demeanour felt as if he'd have happily spent the film speaking an F-word every five if the MPAA rating didn't matter so much. Cameron Diaz had very little to do as did Edward James Olmos, and aside from some OK action scenes and some geek-out cameos (Cutty! Edward Furlong!) there really isn't much reason to spend more than Edited January 20, 2011 by sephjnr
Paid Members Foale Posted January 20, 2011 Paid Members Posted January 20, 2011 Just watched 'Children of Men', very suprised that this slipped under the radar for me up until now. A very unique, gripping film, with some of the best single shot camera work I have ever seen. Set in the year 2027, every woman on Earth is infertile, with no one on the planet any younger than 18 years old, the human race faces extinction within the next 100 years. Society completely collapses, basically. Stars Clive Owen, worth a watch.
Van Dammer Posted January 21, 2011 Posted January 21, 2011 Went to see The Green Hornet today. Wasn't that good TBH. Details in the tag. <-- click on 'spoiler' to show/hide the spoiler They only had a 3D version available in the cinema, and the 3D was really unnecessary - felt like it was tacked on just to bump up the price, as it was only really used to any effect for the end credits. Christoph Waltz spent the whole movie unable to make up his mind as to what kind of villain he wanted to play, but the really grating thing is Seth Rogen - in spite of being the lead - spends 3/4 of the movie being an absolute cock to people who are saving his skin - yeah, that might be the point- but his demeanour felt as if he'd have happily spent the film speaking an F-word every five if the MPAA rating didn't matter so much. Cameron Diaz had very little to do as did Edward James Olmos, and aside from some OK action scenes and some geek-out cameos (Cutty! Edward Furlong!) there really isn't much reason to spend more than
Paid Members seph Posted January 21, 2011 Paid Members Posted January 21, 2011 (edited) Went to see The Green Hornet today. Wasn't that good TBH. Details in the tag. <-- click on 'spoiler' to show/hide the spoiler They only had a 3D version available in the cinema, and the 3D was really unnecessary - felt like it was tacked on just to bump up the price, as it was only really used to any effect for the end credits. Christoph Waltz spent the whole movie unable to make up his mind as to what kind of villain he wanted to play, but the really grating thing is Seth Rogen - in spite of being the lead - spends 3/4 of the movie being an absolute cock to people who are saving his skin - yeah, that might be the point- but his demeanour felt as if he'd have happily spent the film speaking an F-word every five if the MPAA rating didn't matter so much. Cameron Diaz had very little to do as did Edward James Olmos, and aside from some OK action scenes and some geek-out cameos (Cutty! Edward Furlong!) there really isn't much reason to spend more than Edited January 21, 2011 by sephjnr
Van Dammer Posted January 21, 2011 Posted January 21, 2011 Went to see The Green Hornet today. Wasn't that good TBH. Details in the tag. <-- click on 'spoiler' to show/hide the spoiler They only had a 3D version available in the cinema, and the 3D was really unnecessary - felt like it was tacked on just to bump up the price, as it was only really used to any effect for the end credits. Christoph Waltz spent the whole movie unable to make up his mind as to what kind of villain he wanted to play, but the really grating thing is Seth Rogen - in spite of being the lead - spends 3/4 of the movie being an absolute cock to people who are saving his skin - yeah, that might be the point- but his demeanour felt as if he'd have happily spent the film speaking an F-word every five if the MPAA rating didn't matter so much. Cameron Diaz had very little to do as did Edward James Olmos, and aside from some OK action scenes and some geek-out cameos (Cutty! Edward Furlong!) there really isn't much reason to spend more than
Loki Posted January 21, 2011 Posted January 21, 2011 Just watched 'Children of Men', very suprised that this slipped under the radar for me up until now. A very unique, gripping film, with some of the best single shot camera work I have ever seen. Set in the year 2027, every woman on Earth is infertile, with no one on the planet any younger than 18 years old, the human race faces extinction within the next 100 years. Society completely collapses, basically. Stars Clive Owen, worth a watch. That is SUCH a great movie. I completely forgot about that in the 10 Best of the 2000s thread. The scene where they go back in to the building to retrieve the child is one of the most incredible shots in movie history, as it's a single take! I really engaged with the story too, it felt real plus Caine was excellent in it. The director hasn't done anythins since as far as I know, which is a pity.
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted January 21, 2011 Paid Members Posted January 21, 2011 Just watched 'Children of Men', very suprised that this slipped under the radar for me up until now. A very unique, gripping film, with some of the best single shot camera work I have ever seen. Set in the year 2027, every woman on Earth is infertile, with no one on the planet any younger than 18 years old, the human race faces extinction within the next 100 years. Society completely collapses, basically. Stars Clive Owen, worth a watch. That is SUCH a great movie. I completely forgot about that in the 10 Best of the 2000s thread. The scene where they go back in to the building to retrieve the child is one of the most incredible shots in movie history, as it's a single take! I really engaged with the story too, it felt real plus Caine was excellent in it. The director hasn't done anythins since as far as I know, which is a pity. Y Tu Mama Tambien is pretty good but can also be infuriatingly daft if you take it too seriously. Apparently he's working on a sci-fi film with Sandra Bullock and George Clooney now.
Mr. Seven Posted January 21, 2011 Posted January 21, 2011 Black Swan I'm gay for Darren Aronosky and Vincent Cassel so I was probably always going to like this. Bias aside it's absolutely brilliant. Creepy, claustrophobic, deeply unsettling and at times genuinely scary with a career-best turn from Natalie Portman. Believe the hype where she is concerned.
Paid Members Scott Malbranque Posted January 21, 2011 Paid Members Posted January 21, 2011 Black Swan I'm gay for Darren Aronosky and Vincent Cassel so I was probably always going to like this. Bias aside it's absolutely brilliant. Creepy, claustrophobic, deeply unsettling and at times genuinely scary with a career-best turn from Natalie Portman. Believe the hype where she is concerned. This. An amazing, amazing movie. I didn't expect much from Kunis, but her performance is nearly as good as Portman's. I just watched Blue Valentine. I'm intrigued by Gosling coz a lot of cunts tell me I look like him, but my word, he is a tremendous actor given the right material. He deserves at least a nomination for the big prize, as does Williams. I've never seen a more believable on screen couple than these two. This movie will stay with me for a long time....incredible.
Paid Members Egg Shen Posted January 21, 2011 Paid Members Posted January 21, 2011 Gosling is great in everything ive seen him in.
Paid Members Egg Shen Posted January 21, 2011 Paid Members Posted January 21, 2011 Just watched Catfish. Not what I was expecting. Really liked it. Best not to give anything away about it, but I do recommend watching it. i just saw it, i've read in magazines to avoid reading about as much as possible so i did... SPOILER - Highlight the black box to read the movie wasn't what i expected either, i knew kind of the gist of what was going to happen, but i expected some real disturbing kind of conclusion, what you got was a super sad story about a very lonely woman. I felt sorry for Angela, she did it all for an escape from a life she clearly didn't enjoy. i thought Nev treated the situation well, he could have gone down 'you're a psycho' route, but staying calm and letting Angela actually explain her actions made it all the more poignont, it was fucking sad man, i had a tear in my eye. My housemate on the other hand...he had no time for Angela, the moment he found out she lied about having cancer he was done with it...he said 'fuck her'. It was never really made clear why she said that? i guess she was panicing at the time? or she was just a compulsive liar. don't read that unless you've seen it...if you haven't seen it...go get it.
ultimo the great Posted January 22, 2011 Posted January 22, 2011 (edited) Le Diner de cons is on the i-player right now. Wanted to see it ever since someone on here recommended it a couple of years back. Very funny with a decent little plot that never leaves one guy's appartment. It was described as a bit Frasier-esque which is probably why I quite fancied it and I'd agree with the comparison. One or two wee things that go wrong escalating into a big farce. Check it out if you have a spare 75 minutes to kill. Just to check, as Im not sure, this is what was the basis for 'Dinner for Shmucks'? Very loose remake, the tone is very different. Le Diner de Cons is awesome, Dinner for Schmucks just about manages to be 3 stars thanks to Steve Carrell (and the taxidermied mice obviously) & a nutso performance from Jemaine Clement (who's not in it enough). Zach Galifianakis & David Walliams on the other hand are AWFUL and Paul Rudd is wasted too. It's worth checking out some of Francis Veber's other films too, most of them have had US remakes as well. Edited January 22, 2011 by ultimo the great
Paid Members Scott Malbranque Posted January 22, 2011 Paid Members Posted January 22, 2011 Gosling is great in everything ive seen him in. He can be great, and I even loved the Notebook, but he was terrible in Stay and also in Fracture. He had one good moment in Stay, when he mocked the 'suicide' motion to McGregor, but other than that he was horrendous. Yeah, Lars and the Real Girl was tremendous, I thought anyway.
alex1 Posted January 22, 2011 Posted January 22, 2011 Gosling is great in everything ive seen him in. He can be great, and I even loved the Notebook, but he was terrible in Stay and also in Fracture. He had one good moment in Stay, when he mocked the 'suicide' motion to McGregor, but other than that he was horrendous. Yeah, Lars and the Real Girl was tremendous, I thought anyway. Please, please please check out Half Nelson for another one of Gosling's great performances.
Recommended Posts