What film did you watch last night?

Joined
10 Jan 2004
Posts
9,863
Location
Poland
I didn't refer poor. You're referring Lucas is so asterix, yet he's been so successful for decades bringing in endless money. Now, If thats crap, then what is good?

Are you saying the direction of Episodes 1/2/3 is outstanding? As for his success, who knows, most people my age grew up with SW so flocked to the cinema, kids will watch anything of that sort and buy toys. So in that regards yes he's successful but a good director? far from it IMO.
 
Soldato
Joined
31 Dec 2005
Posts
11,179
Location
Glasgow
Hunger Games -Catching Fire

The first one for me was a bit meh 6/10 maybe

This one for was much much better. 8/10 Even though jenny is a bit chubby now.

But certainly quite interesting concept - and ironic parody of our own x-factor/facebook filled lives.
 
Soldato
Joined
31 Dec 2005
Posts
11,179
Location
Glasgow
Actually, De Niro has become a parody of himself, much like Bruce Willis in a lot of ways. Whilst watching the Family, all I can think of is "you are much better than this!".

It's like he is doing this light comedy drama these days just for the pay cheque rather than the arts.

Bruce Willis is just crap now... i dont know why he didnt make more of his comedic roles a la films like Hudson Hawk. Now (sorry i mean in the last 10 years) he only has one dour expression on his face and it stays forever!


In a similar sortof situation if you look at Tom Cruise ...any earlyish film like A few good men or Jerry Maguire he is chirpy and wisecracking in a light hearted vein. Nowadays its all serious straight faced ****..... very dull and boring acting persona he has carved out for himself
 

V F

V F

Soldato
Joined
13 Aug 2003
Posts
21,184
Location
UK
Are you saying the direction of Episodes 1/2/3 is outstanding? As for his success, who knows, most people my age grew up with SW so flocked to the cinema, kids will watch anything of that sort and buy toys. So in that regards yes he's successful but a good director? far from it IMO.

Doesn't matter about my point of view. Money talks. Success is based on money. Endless millions flocked to both generations of films. Including getting it on VHS, DVD and Blu-Ray.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
12,317
Location
Vvardenfell
Contact is such an underrated film, its fun. Yeah its not a masterpiece. But its not as bad as most people say. Based on a good book as well.


The most interesting thing I found about Contact was that it, more than any other SF film I've ever seen, had the feel of written SF. It's not just that it was pretty faithful to the book, but that it felt like proper SF writers had been involved. It certainly had weaknesses, but most of those were weaknesses in the original source material.
 
Caporegime
Joined
28 Jun 2005
Posts
48,104
Location
On the hoods
Doesn't matter about my point of view. Money talks. Success is based on money. Endless millions flocked to both generations of films. Including getting it on VHS, DVD and Blu-Ray.

Money is one metric of success. Star Wars and Empire Strikes Back are great. The other films are not. Did they make lots if money? Yes. Are they good films. Not really.
 
Caporegime
Joined
20 Oct 2002
Posts
74,500
Location
Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
Bruce Willis is just crap now... i dont know why he didnt make more of his comedic roles a la films like Hudson Hawk. Now (sorry i mean in the last 10 years) he only has one dour expression on his face and it stays forever!


In a similar sortof situation if you look at Tom Cruise ...any earlyish film like A few good men or Jerry Maguire he is chirpy and wisecracking in a light hearted vein. Nowadays its all serious straight faced ****..... very dull and boring acting persona he has carved out for himself

If I recall correctly Tom Cruise fired his agent of 14 years (Pat Kingsley) in 2004.

He then changed agents again in 2010, which may explain his current line of movies where he is just a standard text book action hero.

His choice of roles under his first agent was much more varied compared to the last 9 years.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
11 Mar 2004
Posts
76,634
The Boondock Saints



Conner and Murphy MacManus (Sean Patrick Flannery and Norman Reedus) are two Boston boys who believe it is their divinely-appointed mission to eliminate all the criminals in their neighbourhood. The local people are pleased by this, applaud the killings, and turn the boys into saints. But with FBI agent Paul Smecker (Willem Dafoe) on their trail, it seems their days might be numbered.
Fantastic film, i like the artyness, reminds me of hannibal and dexter series where you kind of see the crime through the cops thoughts while it looks like he's conducting an orchestra, and the ending is superb.

8/10
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
16 Mar 2006
Posts
4,118
Location
Wirral
Monsters University - I was expecting a bit of a train wreck after some of the reviews but it was OK. I know a lot of debate has happened regarding Pixar films being better than everything else back in the day but the recent sequels have diluted them, I think that is true and look forward to their next non-sequel (however Finding Dory could still be good). 4/5
 
Soldato
Joined
10 Sep 2008
Posts
11,973
Location
Bangor, Northern Ireland
Just back from watching 47 Ronin, thoroughly disappointed to be honest. The trailer made it out to be a much more exciting film than it was. Not much action and for a Samurai film not a single drop of blood or gore is shown. While its a good story, it wasn't at all what I was expecting.

5/10
 
Associate
Joined
12 Feb 2013
Posts
1,090
Location
East Mids
Prisoners.

Great performances all around, particularly Jackman and Gyllenhaal. 8.5/10

Saw this last night, wasn't expecting much to start with however kept me on the edge of seat in places. Ending was cut a little bit short as if they ran out of time but all in all a good film

8/10
 
Back
Top Bottom