ciallkennett
Strata Poster
^ Maybe on Wednesday for the final time before Blu-Ray times 
"Now Showing"
- Thread starter Mark
- Start date
coaster_mad
Roller Poster
I love Saw 1 and 2. The third one is ok but doesn't quite match up to the previous two, however I think a third was needed so we knew what happened to "Jigsaw" and Alex (that was her name right? I haven't seen it in awhile). They should've really ended it there, but IMO after that it just got worse and worse. It seemed like they just wanted to milk the franchise for all the money it was worth instead of actually making the film decent!WelcomeToOblivion said:Watched Saw 4 which I rather enjoyed. I found it to be better than Saw 3 but not as good as 1 or 2. I'm also developing a soft spot for Kramer. I don't think that's what was intended... but oh well. I just hope I never meet the person who comes up with the ideas for the traps. They might be a bit messed up
That's what I hate, when they ruin a perfectly good film by making sequel after sequel..... That and ****ing remakes
coaster_mad
Roller Poster
Amanda, that was it! I knew it began with an "A"
Will
Strata Poster
[I guess I should say at this point; don't read my reviews if you don't want spoilers. I naturally assume if I've seen something then EVERYBODY has. Years ago. With the family dog.]
Tonight's film was Fight Club. Having talked to a number of people, and only heard one half decent review, my expectations weren't exactly high going into this one, regardless of what IMDB seemed to want me to believe. I guess I'll make the obvious comment with regards to my opinion and say that the first rule of Fight Club should have been... this film must be made at least half an hour shorter.
To explain - I really liked the first 80-90 minutes or so, the flashback technique worked to great effect, and thus scene setting and introducing the story was done really well, and so it continued. I was pleasantly surprised, and the early plot before things, characters and the plot in general get more than a little carried away, was pretty good. Then, around the 95 minute mark, irritation begins to set in, and something along the lines of "I'D FIGURED THAT OUT THREE QUARTERS OF AN HOUR AGO!" was yelled at the screen. Continue another 10 minutes, and bring on the Eureka moment when you realise it's going to be another of *those* 'all is not what it at first seemed' films, a la Memento, Shutter Island etc. - I like that when it's done well, I just... seem to have seen far too many of them of late.
Thus, once the true nature of the main character (or... characters?) was disclosed, I began to lose patience somewhat, and thought the closing stages; half an hour of a guy 'shooting at his imaginary friend' and essentially beating hell out of himself (not for the first time...) for half an hour just wasn't all that entertaining. And as for the actual ending... both anticlimactic, and annoyingly ambiguous.
Also of note: it's not often that I'm really impressed by a particular performance - but Helena Bonham Carter went beyond good here, as some of you will have already seen me acknowledge - I thought she moreorless carried the film to the halfway point, and it was when she stopped being on screen nearly enough that it began to struggle. Whether or not it's just because of the certain... undefinably alluring quality that she can bring to even the darkest of roles, her character always seemed more intriguing than the other leads...
Anyway, this was another film with a promising start which at least meant I got into it quickly, but then failed to deliver when it mattered most. Are there good performances in there? Yes. Is it a particularly good way of killing 2 hours or so? I would say so... Is it the 18th best film ever made? In my entirely uneducated opinion: absolutely not.
Tonight's film was Fight Club. Having talked to a number of people, and only heard one half decent review, my expectations weren't exactly high going into this one, regardless of what IMDB seemed to want me to believe. I guess I'll make the obvious comment with regards to my opinion and say that the first rule of Fight Club should have been... this film must be made at least half an hour shorter.
To explain - I really liked the first 80-90 minutes or so, the flashback technique worked to great effect, and thus scene setting and introducing the story was done really well, and so it continued. I was pleasantly surprised, and the early plot before things, characters and the plot in general get more than a little carried away, was pretty good. Then, around the 95 minute mark, irritation begins to set in, and something along the lines of "I'D FIGURED THAT OUT THREE QUARTERS OF AN HOUR AGO!" was yelled at the screen. Continue another 10 minutes, and bring on the Eureka moment when you realise it's going to be another of *those* 'all is not what it at first seemed' films, a la Memento, Shutter Island etc. - I like that when it's done well, I just... seem to have seen far too many of them of late.
Thus, once the true nature of the main character (or... characters?) was disclosed, I began to lose patience somewhat, and thought the closing stages; half an hour of a guy 'shooting at his imaginary friend' and essentially beating hell out of himself (not for the first time...) for half an hour just wasn't all that entertaining. And as for the actual ending... both anticlimactic, and annoyingly ambiguous.
Also of note: it's not often that I'm really impressed by a particular performance - but Helena Bonham Carter went beyond good here, as some of you will have already seen me acknowledge - I thought she moreorless carried the film to the halfway point, and it was when she stopped being on screen nearly enough that it began to struggle. Whether or not it's just because of the certain... undefinably alluring quality that she can bring to even the darkest of roles, her character always seemed more intriguing than the other leads...
Anyway, this was another film with a promising start which at least meant I got into it quickly, but then failed to deliver when it mattered most. Are there good performances in there? Yes. Is it a particularly good way of killing 2 hours or so? I would say so... Is it the 18th best film ever made? In my entirely uneducated opinion: absolutely not.
nadroJ
CF Legend
As you've quickly realised, the IMDB Top 250 list is extremely flawed, mainly because it's voted for by internet folk, who as we know are not an entirely educated and worldly wise bunch of people. Jurassic Park doesn't even make the cut for Gods sake!
Anyway, I don't know what it is about Fight Club that makes it so compelling. As a female I can muster one reason why I love to watch it again and again but it, for me anyway, really is one of those films I can put on any time and find myself enjoying it over and over again. Also, as pretty as he is, I love to see Jared Leto get his face smashed in over and over again.
I suppose I should post some reviews..
Ok, so I saw Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, out of boredom mainly but I suppose there was a small part of me that was intruiged by this yet another 'geek get the girl' film, so on to the cinema I went.
I didn't expect to be entirely thrilled by the movie but I definitely did not expect to be bored out of my mind within the first half hour. After he fights the first ex it slowly dawns on you that, oh god, not only do I have to sit through at least SIX more of these boring scenes I also have to put up with the annoying comic book touches that are so overused in this movie 'RING RING' 'POW' etc etc.
Anyway, we all knew how the film would pan out from about half an hour in. This, plus annoying lead man, Michael 'me again' Cera (stole that from another review but it made me laugh) I just found the film boring and found myself wanting it to end a LOT sooner than it did.
Anyway, I don't know what it is about Fight Club that makes it so compelling. As a female I can muster one reason why I love to watch it again and again but it, for me anyway, really is one of those films I can put on any time and find myself enjoying it over and over again. Also, as pretty as he is, I love to see Jared Leto get his face smashed in over and over again.
I suppose I should post some reviews..
Ok, so I saw Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, out of boredom mainly but I suppose there was a small part of me that was intruiged by this yet another 'geek get the girl' film, so on to the cinema I went.
I didn't expect to be entirely thrilled by the movie but I definitely did not expect to be bored out of my mind within the first half hour. After he fights the first ex it slowly dawns on you that, oh god, not only do I have to sit through at least SIX more of these boring scenes I also have to put up with the annoying comic book touches that are so overused in this movie 'RING RING' 'POW' etc etc.
Anyway, we all knew how the film would pan out from about half an hour in. This, plus annoying lead man, Michael 'me again' Cera (stole that from another review but it made me laugh) I just found the film boring and found myself wanting it to end a LOT sooner than it did.
Will
Strata Poster
Haha, very true, that was another severely redeeming feature. Top 5 musical crimes perpetrated by Jared Leto in the 21st century; go.nadroJ said:
And in case you hadn't guessed - yes - yours was the one half-decent review; the very mention of the title last week resulted in the simultaneous raising of three pairs of eyes in the general direction of the ceiling...
However, whilst I'm starting to wonder if using the dreaded list for guidance is the equivalent of using... I don't know - the Daily Star's list of top coasters, then realising Stealth and Colossus are a load of ****, but... at the same time, it's refreshing to not just have to sift through the recommendations of the self-decreed worldly wise. At this point, I'm probably more sympathetic to the masses than the diehard enthusiast...
And the worldly wise haven't made me a spreadsheet
Having said that, I've been putting my own rankings in an additional column, and there's quite a stark difference from the originals. Shows what I know, I guess...
nadroJ
CF Legend
That is true, but at least you get to see some films that never would have crossed your mind alongside all the true greats.
And like I said, there's an explanation for each result, rather than just a percentage vote. I don't mind the IMDB list, I'm just angry at it for it's exclusion of Jurassic Park =]
And like I said, there's an explanation for each result, rather than just a percentage vote. I don't mind the IMDB list, I'm just angry at it for it's exclusion of Jurassic Park =]
Lain said:
I concur!
I've actually seen more of the general "regarded as best top 100" films than I have in the top 100 IMDB list.
However, I wouldn't recommend a lot of those to your average viewer (such as Will) who is simply after an hour or twos simple entertainment.
Hence the IMDB list wins out simply because it's better rounded and the films are more accessible to everyone.
People who want to expand their film buffness can move onto the "real lists" if they really want to take the next step.
Not on any list (I hope) is The Exorcist which I recorded the other night and forced Minor_furie to sit through. I find it dull, laughable and as scary as a bundle of fluffy kittens. I can see why, maybe, 30 years ago it caused a stir, but this is the third time I've seen it, and I've not been impressed any time. This time I know a bit more about films, and I have a wider understanding, but I still don't think it's a great film at all. Though Linda Blair is superb as the possessed kid.
Needless to say, neither Minor_Furie or myself are in need of spiritual assistance after watching it. One of those "must see" films, even if it's rubbish. 5/10
Will
Strata Poster
It's also #191.nadroJ said:
For some reason, most likely that one, it got recorded for me last week, but is now knocking around the lounge on one of around a hundred unlabelled DVDs. Given the fact that I'm not exactly the biggest horror fan, I was quite prepared to let it stay that way, but the fluffy kitten based review makes me more likely to dig it out for next week... From what I can gather, it is indeed a matter of people becoming a lot harder to upset over the last few decades. We shall see.
Similarly, much as it pains to me say it, I'm in agreement with Lain, on the basis that he managed to word moreorless exactly what I was trying to say quite considerably better. :evil:
Nah, my mum went to see it when she was a student in Sheffield. She said it was pants on release and she couldn't understand the need for the nuns to be outside offering spiritual advice to people who had just watched it.
I think people are just prone to different hysteria today than they were. Make a film about the Poles coming over to steal our jobs, and today's audience would be coming out in shock and outrage to find counsellors hired by the Daily Mail to help people recover... Though I did hear that counselling causes cancer
Anyway, don't bother digging out the DVD, just watch it performed by bunnies! It's scarier and only wastes 20 seconds of your life!
http://www.angryalien.com/0204/exorcistbunnies.html
I think people are just prone to different hysteria today than they were. Make a film about the Poles coming over to steal our jobs, and today's audience would be coming out in shock and outrage to find counsellors hired by the Daily Mail to help people recover... Though I did hear that counselling causes cancer
Anyway, don't bother digging out the DVD, just watch it performed by bunnies! It's scarier and only wastes 20 seconds of your life!
http://www.angryalien.com/0204/exorcistbunnies.html
Will
Strata Poster
^
Haha, I've already seen the bunny version (you posted those on here years ago)... but on the basis that those are as funny as they are brilliant, and edited for length to cater for even my attention span, it deserves another viewing.
Yeah... it may have been the bunnies, but that did look a little ridiculous.
Haha, I've already seen the bunny version (you posted those on here years ago
)... but on the basis that those are as funny as they are brilliant, and edited for length to cater for even my attention span, it deserves another viewing.Yeah... it may have been the bunnies, but that did look a little ridiculous.
ciallkennett
Strata Poster
I would have seen Inception for the 4th time yesterday, but Cineworld decided to show it twice every other day apart from Wednesday...where it wouldn't show it at all that day ¬¬
Annoyed, we had little to choose from due to silly Cineworld timings, so I ended up selecting The Switch. I'm not sure if it was a romantic drama, or a rom-com. I couldn't tell - if it was a rom-com, it was dreadful, if it was a rom-drama, it was awful. Either way, I didn't enjoy it at all. Awkward, predictable and rather pointless.
3/10
Annoyed, we had little to choose from due to silly Cineworld timings, so I ended up selecting The Switch. I'm not sure if it was a romantic drama, or a rom-com. I couldn't tell - if it was a rom-com, it was dreadful, if it was a rom-drama, it was awful. Either way, I didn't enjoy it at all. Awkward, predictable and rather pointless.
3/10
Ollie
CF Legend
I quite liked The Exorcist. It's not scary but the effects still look alright, even now. It wasn't amazing but I didn't think it was bad at all.
Been watching all the Saw films with Maddie. Won't review them as have done before. But the more you watch them the more you notice and see how the past ones have things that are in the later films. Such as in Saw 4 you see Jigsaw working on the glass box that Strahm was meant to get in in Saw 5.
It does seem a bit silly with all the sequels. But watching them together or one each night is nice as it plays out a bit like a TV series.
It's more just one long story with the gaps being slowly filled in. So seeing what actually happened out and around scenes and traps from earlier films is actually quite neat for when you go back and watch it again and it all fits into this timeline of characters and events that has been developing since the first film.
Some other films I watched...
Gran Torino: Really enjoyed it. A couple of dull scenes here and there but a good film overall.
Orphan: Was a good film. The twist at the end was good as I thought it was going to be something else but I turned out to be completely wrong which I liked.
Let the Right One In: Probably the most disappointing film out of the past couple of weeks. I've heard great things about it but when we finally got to watch it it ended with us feeling 'is that it?'. Most of the dialogue was really boring and some of the shots and scenes went on for too long. It was good for an 'artsy' kinda film. But for entertainment it wasn't that good at all.
Been watching all the Saw films with Maddie. Won't review them as have done before. But the more you watch them the more you notice and see how the past ones have things that are in the later films. Such as in Saw 4 you see Jigsaw working on the glass box that Strahm was meant to get in in Saw 5.
It does seem a bit silly with all the sequels. But watching them together or one each night is nice as it plays out a bit like a TV series.
It's more just one long story with the gaps being slowly filled in. So seeing what actually happened out and around scenes and traps from earlier films is actually quite neat for when you go back and watch it again and it all fits into this timeline of characters and events that has been developing since the first film.
Some other films I watched...
Gran Torino: Really enjoyed it. A couple of dull scenes here and there but a good film overall.
Orphan: Was a good film. The twist at the end was good as I thought it was going to be something else but I turned out to be completely wrong which I liked.
Let the Right One In: Probably the most disappointing film out of the past couple of weeks. I've heard great things about it but when we finally got to watch it it ended with us feeling 'is that it?'. Most of the dialogue was really boring and some of the shots and scenes went on for too long. It was good for an 'artsy' kinda film. But for entertainment it wasn't that good at all.