What film did you watch last night?

barmyllama said:
The Sugarland Express (1974)

One of the few Speilberg I haven't seen (1941, Lincoln & West Side Story)

It actually was pretty decent, especially for the type of film it was. It starts out almost as a comedy, but gradually gets a bit darker as it moves on. But as it moves on the film seems more interested in showing car crashes and shootouts l, than developing the characters any further.

6/10
Click to expand...
Speilberg's directing debut and his first collaboration with John Williams.
 
Shawshank Redemption.. 9.5/10 (watched many times but always worth a re-watch when you've not seen it for a year of two!)

What a well put together film, the story (taken from the Steven King short story, Rity Hayworth and the Shawshank Redmption, great read!!), actiing and cinematography are just superb..

Genuinely welled up
when Brooks hangs himself.. even though I knew it was coming..

And such a good payoff/final 15-20 mins..
 
Subzero85 said:
Sonic 1 with jim carey as Dr Robotnik, nice feel good family type film, will watch the 2nd later
Click to expand...

Snap! (almost) I already knew Sonic 1, so I saw Sonic 2 just now in preparation for Sonic 3 which is currently showing in the cinemas.

I liked that Tails is in it and was surprised that she is voiced by a female. I grew up thinking that both Tales and Sonic were male in the Megadrive games! Knuckles from Sonic 3 (game) also appears in Sonic 2 (film). Without saying too much, he's one of the more deeper characters. When the 3 animals are all on-screen, they show together as blue, yellow and red which is pleasing on the eye because they make up the primary colours in print.

I liked the 2 lead girls as well, Rachel and Maddie. They were badass in/after the wedding scene when it got messy then using the gadgets to infiltrate the bad guys guarding that mansion.

7.5 or 8 out 10 from me.
 
Pawnless Endgame said:
Snap! (almost) I already knew Sonic 1, so I saw Sonic 2 just now in preparation for Sonic 3 which is currently showing in the cinemas.

I liked that Tails is in it and was surprised that she is voiced by a female. I grew up thinking that both Tales and Sonic were male in the Megadrive games! Knuckles from Sonic 3 (game) also appears in Sonic 2 (film). Without saying too much, he's one of the more deeper characters. When the 3 animals are all on-screen, they show together as blue, yellow and red which is pleasing on the eye because they make up the primary colours in print.

I liked the 2 lead girls as well, Rachel and Maddie. They were badass in/after the wedding scene when it got messy then using the gadgets to infiltrate the bad guys guarding that mansion.

7.5 or 8 out 10 from me.
Click to expand...
Miles 'tails' Prowler is indeed a he. Voiced by a woman to sound more youthful, much like Bart Simpson etc.

The Sonic films are all fantastic.
 
The Silent Hour
From Brad (The Machinist) Anderson. Starring Joel Kinnerman.

It shares a few things in common with that other Kinnerman movie from last year 'Silent Night'.

1. Nothing much happens for the first hour (in this movies case, nothing much happens at all)
2. Kinnerman loses his hearing this time out, but he doesn't talk that much anyway.
3. Kinnerman has to defend himself, rather goes looking for a gang of thugs.
4. It's ********.

^ ^ That's not 8 stars outta 10 above!!
 
Last edited:
Carry-On https://www.imdb.com/title/tt21382296/

I think, providing one can suspend the complete absence of realism, it's an okay action-type movie for a one-off viewing.
It obviously did enough right to get me to watch it all the way through, but boy, the cheese was strong at times… :D

On a side note, the character 'Watcher', for some reason, kept reminding me of Kinky John from Caterrick, a sitcom from Vic & Bob (brilliant, BTW).
One minute, I was seeing this...

0GPtwNi.png

... then the next I was thinking of this:

P6NZX17.jpg
 
Blue Velvet (1986)

A film I should've seen by now and if you'd asked me before hand, I'd probably be convinced I had seen it but can't remember much. Turns out I haven't seen it and now I've had two hours of my life stolen I'll never get back.

It's utter, utter dross.

The acting is terrible, half the scenes either don't make any sense at all or add anything to the overall narrative. To me it's just weird for the sake of being weird half the time. Even knowing beforehand it's David Lynch film and it might be a bit weird, still doesn't excuse this crud.

How it was ever thought to have strong sexual and violent content is beyond me. I know sex and violence in films have gotten stronger over time, but I wouldn't have thought it was either back in 1986.

I don't even know why I bothered watching it all, I knew it wouldn't get any better within the first 20 minutes and that there be no real pay off.

Easily one of the worst films I ever watched in it's entirety.

0/10
 
barmyllama said:
Blue Velvet (1986)

0/10
Click to expand...

Wow, scathing! I think it’s a great film.

Re: acting, without looking anything up to verify it, I always thought it was deliberately stylised to be akin to, say, a 50s American family sitcom.

David Lynch often flips between ‘everything being wholesome and OK’ and then showing a ‘disturbing, seedy underbelly’ of society that’s been there the whole time just lurking out of view.

In line with that, there is a twee and slightly surreal ‘wholesomeness’ that is put on by the actors to create an atmosphere of idealism and naivety. This is to ramp up the ‘shock’ when things become disturbing and also to underline (taking the film as a whole) how ‘fake’ these ‘perfect family photograph’, ‘50s sitcom’ lifestyles really are.

You see the same sort of acting in Mulholland Drive and Twin Peaks, I presume for the same reason.
 
I watched the 1970 Waterloo on TV - a great epic, 8/10 - made in the days before CGI and had mass casts of extras to portray the scale of the battle - really enjoyed it (apart from the dipiction of Napoleon which felf a little over done!).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom