Paid Members Dead Mike Posted February 18 Paid Members Share Posted February 18 Watched The Beekeeper last night. Preferred it to John Wick. Statham > Keanu. Soz Scorch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Hannibal Scorch Posted February 18 Paid Members Share Posted February 18 1 hour ago, Dead Mike said: Watched The Beekeeper last night. Preferred it to John Wick. Statham > Keanu. Soz Scorch. I respect your opinion even though it’s clearly insane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Alan Grant Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 Girl, Interrupted - I’m a massive sucker for blonde Angelina and Clea Duvall. 4/5 Sing (first watch) - awful. An utter waste of a decent cast (and Taron Egerton). 1/5 Sing 2 (first watch) - more awfulness. More Taron Egerton. Shite. 1/5 Annie (first watch) - the 70s John Huston one. I loved it. The main kid wasn’t at all annoying, Albert Finney was terrifying and lovable. But Carol Burnett was utterly wonderful. Stole the film. I then had a look at John Huston’s filmography and it’s insane. African Queen, Treasure Of The Sierra Madre, Maltese Falcon, Asphalt Jungle. Plus a load that have been on my list for quite some time, like Key Largo, Judge Roy Bean. 4/5 Charlie And The Chocolate Factory - it’s not very good at all, is it? I’m a Burton fanboy, but I can’t really find many positives. The songs are forgettable, the kids are rubbish other than Veruca, the Wonka Sr backstory is unnecessary. Depp’s performance is unsettling, which was presumably the point, but I found it irritating. The Oompa Loompa’s were terrible too. 2/5 for Veruca. I was annoyed after watching that, so next up was Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory. It may be nostalgia, but I love it. Catchy songs, a Wonka that’s eccentric but crucially not an unlikable weirdo and the kids are…fine. 4/5 Starship Troopers - Carmen sucks, Dizzy rules. 4/5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Chest Rockwell Posted February 18 Moderators Share Posted February 18 (edited) 1 hour ago, Dr. Alan Grant said: Charlie And The Chocolate Factory - it’s not very good at all, is it? I’m a Burton fanboy, but I can’t really find many positives. The songs are forgettable, the kids are rubbish other than Veruca, the Wonka Sr backstory is unnecessary. Depp’s performance is unsettling, which was presumably the point, but I found it irritating. The Oompa Loompa’s were terrible too. 2/5 for Veruca. I was annoyed after watching that, so next up was Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory. It may be nostalgia, but I love it. Catchy songs, a Wonka that’s eccentric but crucially not an unlikable weirdo and the kids are…fine. 4/5 I have watched both recently as well as my kids are obsessed with all three of these films and their soundtracks at the moment. The Johnny depp one is really underrated. It's much truer to the book than the Gene Wilder one, it's got some good laughs, it looks great, I like the oompa loompa songs, and I like the angle that the daddy issues bring to the character. The only bit that feels a bit over long is the resolution of all that stuff with his dad at the end of the movie. The 1971 movie doesn't really make that much sense. It has is moments but I don't feel its aged that well. I know the grandpa Joe stuff has become a bit of a meme, but his character really is a lot more likeable in the newer film. Wonka is hands down the best of the three though. As an aside, my youngest has now worn a Willy Wonka hat around the house for two straight weeks. Every day without fail. He sleeps with it, he even came into my room with the hat when he woke up from a nightmare at 3 am. Edited February 18 by Chest Rockwell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Lorne Malvo Posted February 18 Paid Members Share Posted February 18 I have been rewatching all the Kung Fu Pandas, Ghostbusters and MonsterVerse movies in anticipation for their new installments next month; Kung Fu Panda might be the most consistently 'good' trilogy ever. None of them are excellent, none of them are bad, they're just good. All of them have the exact same storyline of 'Po must master his teachings to defeat an enemy' but they're fun and don't overstay their welcome. I might lose a lot of forum cred (yeah right) here but I've never been a massive fan of Ghostbusters. It's okay but I'm baffled as to why it gets it's classic status, and Venkman annoys the fuck out of me. I actually prefer Ghostbusters II - Venkman is fine in this one and a painting that turns people evil is a better story than the original. I don't mind the panned 2016 version even if it does lose its way in the last act. Afterlife does the Force Awakens thing of just running on nostalgia and hitting the same beats as the first one but gets away with it due to a game cast and genuinely moving finale. MonsterVerse is a weird franchise. Godzilla is boring as fuck and suffers from killing it's best character off and turning the military dullard into the lead. Kong:Skull Island is great and has a real idiosyncratic style all the way through which makes it stand out from the crowd. Spoiler Shea Whigham going for the heroic sacrifice just to be swatted away like an insignificant fly is a highlight. I hated Godzilla: King Of The Monsters on first watch but actually quite enjoyed it second time around, although by the end of it I was sick of the sight of rain. Can they not do a fight sequence in a desert or something? Lastly, I had the reverse feeling with Godzilla v Kong. According to Letterboxd I liked it first time round, but it's dogshit. A terrible script that makes good actors look incompetent, a load of shite about an axe that gets charged by the core of the earth and MechaGodzilla getting involved, a side story featuring Millie Bobby Brown that is a massive waste of time. It's just bad. Also, I don't want to come across too 'clutching pearls' here as it's just a dumb blockbuster movie, but I do wonder if it was such a good idea to make the 'don't drink the tap water!' conspiracy theorists the heroes in a film that came out in 2021? Strikes me as an odd decision, anyway. Lastly, I rewatched Dune. I still don't think its the Film of the year contender many had it down as, but it is very good. Rebecca Ferguson is incredible, I need to check out Silo asap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Alan Grant Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 38 minutes ago, Lorne Malvo said: I actually prefer Ghostbusters II - Venkman is fine in this one and a painting that turns people evil is a better story than the original. I love the second one. More Rick Moranis, the Statue Of Liberty climax is great fun and Peter MacNicol has given me 30 odd years of my butchered impression of him. “He is Vigo!” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Danger Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 Iron Claw. Fuck that for a Sunday nights viewing, Zac Effron made me cry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaitoRyo Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 11 hours ago, Dr. Alan Grant said: Charlie And The Chocolate Factory - it’s not very good at all, is it? I’m a Burton fanboy, but I can’t really find many positives. The songs are forgettable, the kids are rubbish other than Veruca, the Wonka Sr backstory is unnecessary. Depp’s performance is unsettling, which was presumably the point, but I found it irritating. The Oompa Loompa’s were terrible too. 2/5 for Veruca. I was annoyed after watching that, so next up was Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory. It may be nostalgia, but I love it. Catchy songs, a Wonka that’s eccentric but crucially not an unlikable weirdo and the kids are…fine. 4/5 I'm currently reading the book with my kids and they're really into it (we're working our way through the Roald Dahl boxset). I was wondering whether either film would be appropriate for a 3 1/2 and a 5 1/2 year-old? I've seen the Gene Wilder one and only remember one really 'scary' bit (the boat ride) but haven't seen the Burton version, which is on Netflix and would like to watch with them once we've finished the book (providing it wouldn't be too intense for them). Thanks in advance, Doctor! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Hannibal Scorch Posted February 19 Paid Members Share Posted February 19 @Chest Rockwell I have to agree with your analysis of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. In fact the only thing I’m not keen on is Depp’s decision to do play Wonka the way he does. It feels a bit too Michael Jackson parody to me. But I’ve banged the drum for years that this is an adaptation of the book whilst Willy Wonka feels inspired by the book (probably why Dahl hated it so much). And it’s probably my favourite even though the musical has great songs in it. I wasn’t taken with Wonka though. It felt like someone saw the Paddington films and tried to rip them off to make a Willy Wonka film. And maybe because I loved those films I didn’t enjoy this as much as I’d hoped. It’s not awful or anything, I just didn’t love it as much as I hoped. But for the opinion that counts my daughter rates them Wonka, CatCF and WWatCF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Chest Rockwell Posted February 19 Moderators Share Posted February 19 40 minutes ago, SaitoRyo said: I'm currently reading the book with my kids and they're really into it (we're working our way through the Roald Dahl boxset). I was wondering whether either film would be appropriate for a 3 1/2 and a 5 1/2 year-old? I've seen the Gene Wilder one and only remember one really 'scary' bit (the boat ride) but haven't seen the Burton version, which is on Netflix and would like to watch with them once we've finished the book (providing it wouldn't be too intense for them). Thanks in advance, Doctor! My kids are 6 and 3 and as mentioned are obsessed with all three films. And my youngest is usually pretty sensitive with stuff he finds scary, so I'd say have at it. We read the book first as well, which I think helped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members BomberPat Posted February 19 Paid Members Share Posted February 19 later than it should have been, but the Tim Burton Charlie & The Chocolate Factory is when I got utterly fed up with him as a director, and largely with Depp as an actor too. It felt like the tipping point of Tim Burton deciding that the reason he's making films is people want to see what a wacky dark and creepy Tim Burton adaptation of a story looks like (spoiler: stripes, mugging to camera and a Danny Elfman score), rather than him actually bothering to tell the story. I think it gets unfairly criticised for things that it shouldn't, because it's treated as a "remake" of the Gene Wilder film, rather than a separate adaptation of the same book, and in many ways is closer to the book, but it's not a better film for it. Depp playing Wonka as Michael Jackson is somewhat justifiable when you consider that the character is an eccentric recluse, so he probably wouldn't be all-singing all-dancing but, again, while it might have a logical reason for it, it doesn't make it enjoyable to watch. And all the stuff with Christopher Lee as Wonka's dad is bollocks. In terms of the Wilder film being scary, I wonder how much of that is a thing of adults looking back and finding that scene creepy because it feels like a horror set-piece, whereas kids without that experience have no reason to be scared by it? I don't think I ever found it scary as a kid.  I watched Everything Everywhere All At Once last night, and thought it was perfectly solid. I expected more, given how much praise it got on release, and I expected it to be weirder and harder to follow given so much of the chat around it at the time was how wild and hallucinatory and inventive it was. It's certainly odd, but it's not Holy Mountain, is it? Visually it's very fun, and I can see why it would have been great to see in a big cinema, and there's some good performances in there, but it's solidly around a 3 and a half stars if we're doing that, leaning towards four if I'm being generous. The best part was the universe where it's just rocks and silence - it was a good gag, but one that felt like genuinely taking a risk in a Hollywood setting, rather than just wackiness for its own sake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Chest Rockwell Posted February 19 Moderators Share Posted February 19 (edited) Oh yeah, I forgot to mention in my post that my kids weren't scared by the boat scene at all. They said it looked like a fun rollercoaster. They found slugworth creepy and said Charlie shouldn't be talking to strangers though. I would agree about the trajectory and laziness of Tim Burton films Pat, but I think Burton fatigue is one of the reasons this movie gets unfairly marked down. Edited February 19 by Chest Rockwell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Alan Grant Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 1 hour ago, SaitoRyo said: I'm currently reading the book with my kids and they're really into it (we're working our way through the Roald Dahl boxset). I was wondering whether either film would be appropriate for a 3 1/2 and a 5 1/2 year-old? I've seen the Gene Wilder one and only remember one really 'scary' bit (the boat ride) but haven't seen the Burton version, which is on Netflix and would like to watch with them once we've finished the book (providing it wouldn't be too intense for them). Thanks in advance, Doctor! I’d say the Burton one is fine for kids. There’s a very brief snippet of a chicken getting its head cut off in the boat scene you mention, which I only noticed for the first time on my most recent rewatch, despite having seen it countless times as a kid. Or maybe I just forgot about it. But I don’t have kids and I was watching Hammer horror films and Nightmare On Elm Street when I was five years old, so I may not be the best judge on what’s suitable! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 33 minutes ago, BomberPat said: later than it should have been, but the Tim Burton Charlie & The Chocolate Factory is when I got utterly fed up with him as a director, and largely with Depp as an actor too. It felt like the tipping point of Tim Burton deciding that the reason he's making films is people want to see what a wacky dark and creepy Tim Burton adaptation of a story looks like (spoiler: stripes, mugging to camera and a Danny Elfman score), rather than him actually bothering to tell the story. My first question when someone decides to reboot, remake or revisit primary source material is - is there a need for this?  In the case of Wonka, the original version is so popular, so beloved, and still so watchable that a new film is ALWAYS going to get compared to it, often unfavourably.  There's so much other material out there that could be made into films, or even you know, make an original film. Burton's first Charlie film is definitely where the almost straight line drop in the quality of his films began, for me.  I didn't enjoy Big Fish as much as everyone else though, and I think my tolerance for "magic realism" style films is probably quite low in comparison to most people.  But I think Burton has made more bad films than good at this point, and combine that with finding Johnny Depp an increasing embarrassment (even before the abuse allegations)... Burton fatigue, and Depp fatigue - it's a real thing.  But if kids love his films, then great! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members WeeAl Posted February 19 Paid Members Share Posted February 19 I Don't like Tim Burton, Johnny Depp, Willy Wonka, musicals or Gene Wilder. By fuck have I come to the wrong thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.