What's new
By:

What's The Last Movie You’ve Seen?

Saw any man
Was ok. Normal super hero movie quality.

Gonna watch Sisters next. Hoping it can be close to as good as Trainwreck and Spy. Both movies that I loved.
 
The Labyrinth.


The TV station here was showing this as a tribute to David Bowie's death I guess? All I can say is "It's So BAD it's GOOD". The hair, the 80's music, the shabby graphics and puppetry...


Well, that and Jennifer Connelly was absolutely wonderful in it. She's lovely.
 
I've seen The Big Short now 3x. I tend to work late and stumble into the movie theater. Really like that cast. Christian Bale is one of the sleeper best actors out there.

I'm not a big fan of Dicapprio.
 
Catchall said:
I've seen The Big Short now 3x. I tend to work late and stumble into the movie theater. Really like that cast. Christian Bale is one of the sleeper best actors out there.

I'm not a big fan of Dicapprio.
Click to expand...

Me neither, but The Revenant was actually the first movie I hated him the least in.
 
Catchall said:
I've seen The Big Short now 3x. I tend to work late and stumble into the movie theater. Really like that cast. Christian Bale is one of the sleeper best actors out there.

I'm not a big fan of Dicapprio.
Click to expand...

Sleeper best actors? Um, nobody is sleeping on him.
 
Just saw the "Hateful 8".


Loved the first half (before the mass shooting start), but didn't care for the 2nd half at all. Would love to know how everyone else who's seen it felt about this.


I just thought the first half was full of tension and suspense, you hang on to everybody's words and wondered how the story would unfold. The 2nd half when they went back to what happened in the morning was a bit too predictable to me. You know who survived and who didn't so you just don't really about who didn't.. just didn't have the same tension.


I'd still give it a solid 8/10 though, a good effort, but just a bit disappointing and kept me wondering about what could have been a GREAT film.
 
ONE LOVE said:
Just saw the "Hateful 8".


Loved the first half (before the mass shooting start), but didn't care for the 2nd half at all. Would love to know how everyone else who's seen it felt about this.


I just thought the first half was full of tension and suspense, you hang on to everybody's words and wondered how the story would unfold. The 2nd half when they went back to what happened in the morning was a bit too predictable to me. You know who survived and who didn't so you just don't really about who didn't.. just didn't have the same tension.


I'd still give it a solid 8/10 though, a good effort, but just a bit disappointing and kept me wondering about what could have been a GREAT film.
Click to expand...

I thought it was interesting. One of those rare movies that doesn't have a main character and makes it work somehow. I feel like it's essentially a story about stories and what role they play in our lives. Basically the whole movie is people sitting around telling stories--ones which may or may not be true (or a little bit of both). It's metafictional in this sense, especially at the half way point when there's suddenly a narrator retelling us the story we just saw.
 
spycam1 said:
I thought it was interesting. One of those rare movies that doesn't have a main character and makes it work somehow. I feel like it's essentially a story about stories and what role they play in our lives. Basically the whole movie is people sitting around telling stories--ones which may or may not be true (or a little bit of both). It's metafictional in this sense, especially at the half way point when there's suddenly a narrator retelling us the story we just saw.
Click to expand...

Which is the part I started to not like... why did they need that 'guy' to narrate what was happening? They could have done that in a different way, more subtly .... let the viewer figure it out themselves.


Also I'd like your take on whether or not you felt it laborious when he went back to the events in the morning and show us what happened. Like when they revealed who the 4 are, then the rest must have already died - so there wasn't any point in trying to learn about them? Because we can safely assume Minnie & her helper & her friends are dead, who cares what they're like anyway? I thought that was really pointless.... the story didn't go anywhere after that.
 
ONE LOVE said:
Which is the part I started to not like... why did they need that 'guy' to narrate what was happening? They could have done that in a different way, more subtly .... let the viewer figure it out themselves.


Also I'd like your take on whether or not you felt it laborious when he went back to the events in the morning and show us what happened. Like when they revealed who the 4 are, then the rest must have already died - so there wasn't any point in trying to learn about them? Because we can safely assume Minnie & her helper & her friends are dead, who cares what they're like anyway? I thought that was really pointless.... the story didn't go anywhere after that.
Click to expand...

Hmm, I'm gonna go with no. I can see why you would feel that way, though.

I think it feels like the story doesn't really go anywhere because there's not a main character. If there's not a protagonist, then whose story are you telling? If you can't answer that, then, in a way, there really isn't a "story." Not having a protagonist can have a hollowing effect, and it's probably true here. I guess I feel like the movie isn't meant to follow that traditional narrative; its focus is on the stories within the story, not the story itself.
 
spycam1 said:
Hmm, I'm gonna go with no. I can see why you would feel that way, though.

I think it feels like the story doesn't really go anywhere because there's not a main character. If there's not a protagonist, then whose story are you telling? If you can't answer that, then, in a way, there really isn't a "story." Not having a protagonist can have a hollowing effect, and it's probably true here. I guess I feel like the movie isn't meant to follow that traditional narrative; its focus is on the stories within the story, not the story itself.
Click to expand...

I actually thought Major Marquis and John Ruth were the protagonists and it's a 'story' of how they were going to get their bounty paid. The movie started with the 2 of them and their journey and followed them to the Haberdashery. There, the story was focussed on them again as they tried to figure out what happened prior to them arriving there and as they plan to survive the night or the next 2-3 days in the snow storm.
 
Everest-movie-poster.jpg


I recollect seeing the preview for this and thinking the special effects looked awful and the movie itself, thin. I also feel like I recall fish commenting on this movie and liking it a lot.

He was right, I was wrong.

Months ago, when the film had been released, I had read the basic accounts of what had occurred on the mountain. The story was unreal. Overall, from the little I know and remember, I thought the movie did a good job of reliving that while also bringing a solid emotional level to it. I can't specify as to whether the movie remained in fact very accurate to actual events as I have not read Into Thin Air (which I now plan on reading) and even then, the book is just one man's words, but again, from what I remember, it seemed fairly solid in that regard from I recall having read online. Moreover, the special effects, on the small screen at least, were very well done and the acting which is always of paramount importance, was quite good. Jason Clarke, as Rob Hall, the leader of one of the expeditions, was excellent. To me, he made the movie. John Hawkes and Josh Brolin were also very good. Some of the other supporting roles were equally as strong. The script, which felt a little weak early (it glazed over things a bit for me) picked up steam about 30 minutes in and never looked back. A really solid movie that went pretty much unnoticed.
 
Cunning Linguist said:
Everest-movie-poster.jpg


I recollect seeing the preview for this and thinking the special effects looked awful and the movie itself, thin. I also feel like I recall fish commenting on this movie and liking it a lot.

He was right, I was wrong.

Months ago, when the film had been released, I had read the basic accounts of what had occurred on the mountain. The story was unreal. Overall, from the little I know and remember, I thought the movie did a good job of reliving that while also bringing a solid emotional level to it. I can't specify as to whether the movie remained in fact very accurate to actual events as I have not read Into Thin Air (which I now plan on reading) and even then, the book is just one man's words, but again, from what I remember, it seemed fairly solid in that regard from I recall having read online. Moreover, the special effects, on the small screen at least, were very well done and the acting which is always of paramount importance, was quite good. Jason Clarke, as Rob Hall, the leader of one of the expeditions, was excellent. To me, he made the movie. John Hawkes and Josh Brolin were also very good. Some of the other supporting roles were equally as strong. The script, which felt a little weak early (it glazed over things a bit for me) picked up steam about 30 minutes in and never looked back. A really solid movie that went pretty much unnoticed.
Click to expand...

After watching that movie i started researching more about mt everest and these people who climb it.
Its amazing how dangerous it is to try to climb and i think that those who do climb it are dumb. Its just something i cant understand wanting to do i guess. Its expensive, its really unhealthy and dangerous, and its not fun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top