Last movie you saw?

lip

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2005
Messages
3,091
Location
Switzerland
Car(s)
Audi S6 V10 wagon
The-Gentlemen-plkakat.jpg


Guy Richie still has it. Good one, I was entertained, goal achived.

Colin Farrell and Hugh Grant playing against their typcast was especially excellent. - Matthew McConaughey was a bit of a miscast though. - Eh, whatever, i say: 8/10
 

Matt2000

An Unfortunate Discovery
DONOR
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
16,005
Location
Four from the top and two from the third row, GB.
Car(s)
2020 Tesla Model 3, 1990 Discovery 1 Bobtail
After watching both seasons of Snowpiercer on Netflix and thinking that the second season really went off the boil, I finally watched the movie last night. I thought it was mostly garbage. :LOL:

Old movie so I'm not going to bother with spoiler tags.

I know a series has much more time for development of... everything... but the movie seemed to skip a lot of the train while still taking time to draw out certain sequences longer than necessary. I found myself skipping forward on the classroom scene because I was bored of it. The sauna was too drawn out for me too, especially with what happens later.

The engine was a big disappointment, I don't buy the idea of Wilford driving the train without any means to control it. The idea of children replacing systems in the engine was poorly written too and felt like an afterthought, I mean what could they actually be doing to keep a reactor like that going? At least this train did clearly have a reactor powering it, unlike the Netflix show that had a train apparently powered by magic pixie dust that we shouldn't question.

Maybe I was spoilt by the series and was familiar with the train, the first season of the show seems even better now. The second season still seems rubbish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lip

DanRoM

Forum Addict
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
9,296
Location
Ruhr Area, Germany
Car(s)
MX-5 ND, Tracer 900 GT & two bikes
  • Mission: Impossible: Yes, the first one. Rewatched after quite some years.
    This is a good movie, and it is really a big contrast to what the later M:I movies represent. This has only very low-key action (and the final fight on the train/in the tunnel is so ridiculously bullshit, it almost hurts :D ), but works all the better as a spy movie.
    It's also funny to see a very young Tom Cruise. He looks like an apprentice at best. And, the movie is so 1990s... especially the suits and coats worn by the male characters - they look so cliché government official/agent it's a wonder they could get any covert work done at all. Plus, the computer stuff. :D
    But all taken with the knowledge that this was filmed in a time when "Internet" was largely unknown to the general public and "Smartphone" was about as fantastic as a Star Trek communicator, it was fun to see.
    As I have never seen the original TV series before, I am also not as angered by the twist that the hero of the series now turns into the villain here.
    All considered, still a very good movie. Can recommend.
  • The Hateful Eight.
    This movie is Taratino indulging in Tarantinoness. I was drawn in by, well, Tarantino, plus the impressive cast. But I was disappointed. I found the dialogue difficult to follow because of the slurred speech everyone used. This was also the first Tarantino movie I saw that did not profit at all from the trademark over-the-top comical goriness that Tarantino likes so much. I think the movie would have been much better if the violence was done as quiet as the film as a whole, without blood (and other things) spraying all over the place.
    It also suffered from none of the characters being remotely likeable (Jackson's character coming the closest to not just being an asshole), apart from minor ones with hardly any screentime towards the end of the movie.
    As I said above, this movie felt like Tarantino tarantinoing for the sake of it, nothing more. Cannot recommend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lip

GRtak

Forum Addict
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
21,830
Location
Michigan USA
  • Mission: Impossible: Yes, the first one. Rewatched after quite some years.
    This is a good movie, and it is really a big contrast to what the later M:I movies represent. This has only very low-key action (and the final fight on the train/in the tunnel is so ridiculously bullshit, it almost hurts :D ), but works all the better as a spy movie.
    It's also funny to see a very young Tom Cruise. He looks like an apprentice at best. And, the movie is so 1990s... especially the suits and coats worn by the male characters - they look so cliché government official/agent it's a wonder they could get any covert work done at all. Plus, the computer stuff. :D
    But all taken with the knowledge that this was filmed in a time when "Internet" was largely unknown to the general public and "Smartphone" was about as fantastic as a Star Trek communicator, it was fun to see.
    As I have never seen the original TV series before, I am also not as angered by the twist that the hero of the series now turns into the villain here.
    All considered, still a very good movie. Can recommend.
  • The Hateful Eight.
    This movie is Taratino indulging in Tarantinoness. I was drawn in by, well, Tarantino, plus the impressive cast. But I was disappointed. I found the dialogue difficult to follow because of the slurred speech everyone used. This was also the first Tarantino movie I saw that did not profit at all from the trademark over-the-top comical goriness that Tarantino likes so much. I think the movie would have been much better if the violence was done as quiet as the film as a whole, without blood (and other things) spraying all over the place.
    It also suffered from none of the characters being remotely likeable (Jackson's character coming the closest to not just being an asshole), apart from minor ones with hardly any screentime towards the end of the movie.
    As I said above, this movie felt like Tarantino tarantinoing for the sake of it, nothing more. Cannot recommend.


I recently watched the whole Mission Impossible series, and I agree completely, the first movie is vastly different.


I like The Hateful Eight more than you do though. Not near as much as Pulp Fiction, or Jackie Brown, but it is better than Kill Bill.
 

lip

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2005
Messages
3,091
Location
Switzerland
Car(s)
Audi S6 V10 wagon
I'm a slow and picky pill when it comes to movies or TV series, as I'm always a few years behind, I rarely go to the cinema and I'm not up to date with movie news as I never watch any trailers. - It all just flows by me. - The good thing about this is that I can pick out the awesome and seasoned stuff later on, and don't have to waste time on crap. - All I do is to occasionally go onto IMDB and check out movies that have a high rating.

1917_%282019%29_Film_Poster.jpeg

And like this, I just watched 1917

Had no knowledge about the movie other that it played in WW1. Naturally the one-scene gimmick surprised me. In a very positive way, damn it really took me in. A few flaws (plane crashes into the one building within miles of empty land, river travels perfectly from random point to the exact position where the hero has to be) but all in all great stuff.

I watched it twice in a row. And that means something. The last time that this happend was with Master and Commander.

9/10
 

93Flareside

Döner Kebab enthusiast
DONOR
Joined
Jul 20, 2009
Messages
20,681
Location
Hot Dog with Everything
Car(s)
'03 Audi Allroad, '87 Mercury Colony Park
I'm a slow and picky pill when it comes to movies or TV series, as I'm always a few years behind, I rarely go to the cinema and I'm not up to date with movie news as I never watch any trailers. - It all just flows by me.

Last time I went to a theater was 2015 and that was down to just trying to pass time in the evening in a middle of nowhere town Michigan. I'd like to go again but feel weird doing it by myself.
 

NecroJoe

Stool Chef
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
20,578
Location
San Francisco area, CA, USA
Car(s)
2015 Mazda 3 S GT, 2015 VW e-Golf
A few flaws (plane crashes into the one building within miles of empty land

FWIF, as someone who grew up with the front yard with the only tree for about a 1/2 mile in either direction on our side of the road, which was hit by cars MULTIPLE times, I can say target fixation is real. :lmao:
 
  • Like
Reactions: lip

DanRoM

Forum Addict
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
9,296
Location
Ruhr Area, Germany
Car(s)
MX-5 ND, Tracer 900 GT & two bikes
I watched lots of movies in recent times...

  • Now You See Me: Good entertainment, and I was entertained enough not to notice how straight it played several tropes (notably the "Chekov's Gun"). I should rewatch it and watch out for all the hints I missed. :D
  • Now You See Me 2: Decent sequel, even the change in main cast regarding the Horsemen was, against my expectations, good. And watching Daniel Radcliffe having a blast playing that role was very much fun.
  • Dune: Yes, the new one by Denis Villeneuve.
    This is difficult. Having not read the book and not watched any of the prior attempts on putting them to film, I was completely clueless about the plot and the characters. This left me hanging a bit, because the movie doesn't bother with exposition much. Still, it was enjoyable - and it's definitely worth watching on the big screen. I was really drawn into the movie, something that just doesn't happen the same way to me when watching at home. And it made the experience much better.
    Still, I reserve a final judgment until after the second part, whenever that comes. Because necessarily, as "part 1", this movie ends in the middle of the story. Because of this, while it was good to watch, it felt like a good first half of a really good movie, but with the point in the story where they made the cut, it doesn't really work as a standalone movie for me.
  • 1984 (1956): Yes, the 50s version, in all its black-and-white glory. :D It was on TV yesterday as part of a democracy theme week. So why not? Time to close that gap in my education, I guessed. No, I have never read the book, not even in school. Shocking, I know.
    What can I say? This is a movie from the 50s. It had laughably bad special effects, cheap sets, and most importantly, it lacked any subtlety at all. But in a weird way, it was not bad and definitely worth watching for the educational experience.
    I'll have to try the 1984 version, though. Should be in a different league...
  • The Saint (2017): I stumbled upon this due to the actress playing the female lead. While she possibly looks even more stunning than in her early career now, that is not enough to make this movie worth watching. It is really bad. I am confused as to why Roger Moore, the original Simon Templar, agreed to play a small role in this adaption.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: lip

GRtak

Forum Addict
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
21,830
Location
Michigan USA
Roger Moore needed the money.
 
Top