No smilies, no avatars, no flashing gifs. Just discuss the issues of the day, from last night's telly via football to science or philosophy.
Started by Shadrack22 on Nov 19, 2020 12:43:55 PM
What was the last film you saw III

Talk about it here.

Previous
|
Next
|
Top
|
Bottom
Spontu - 19 Nov 2020 12:46:48 (#1 of 1094)

The Ash-Tree

Shadrack22 - 19 Nov 2020 12:47:42 (#2 of 1094)

The MR James one?

Agaliarept - 19 Nov 2020 12:51:10 (#3 of 1094)

Contagion.

Just to finish off any nerves I had left.

thisonehasalittlehat - 19 Nov 2020 12:53:11 (#4 of 1094)

I wanted Matt Damon to die.

Agaliarept - 19 Nov 2020 13:41:31 (#5 of 1094)

I wanted Matt Damon to die.

In the film? Or just in general?

Dementor - 19 Nov 2020 14:00:01 (#6 of 1094)

He did a Reddit AMA a few years ago - came across as a decent bloke.

thisonehasalittlehat - 19 Nov 2020 14:02:01 (#7 of 1094)

In the film. I wanted him to be locked up with his daughter for a year, let the boy in right at the end after he's got his vaccine, but then the boy is lying because he's just horny, and infects the whole family and they all die.

That's what I wanted to happen.

AlanII - 19 Nov 2020 14:03:15 (#8 of 1094)

You old sentimentalist, you.

thisonehasalittlehat - 19 Nov 2020 14:06:29 (#9 of 1094)

Well, I was also a bit disappointed that the people who died didn't come back to life and start eating the living like in 28 days later. I mean I think 28 days later covered the whole coronavirus experience better.

Zymurgy1 - 19 Nov 2020 14:22:49 (#10 of 1094)

The Stand did it best

(Stephen King for the young ones)

lammaMia - 19 Nov 2020 15:18:17 (#11 of 1094)

Dark Waters

The story of the lawyer who took on Dupont to show that they hid evidence about PFOA for decades while selling it to consumers. Take a happy pill before watching this.

Biden has the then-communications consultant of Dupont in his transition team.

Boog23 - 19 Nov 2020 15:53:08 (#12 of 1094)

The Secret Garden (2020)

I loved the 1993 version. In my humble opinion, the changes they made enhanced the story, adding a bit of ritual and Mystery into the tale that Burnett's Christian Science would not have tolerated.

So I came to this thinking the whole enterprise was a bit superfluous. What could they bring to freshen and update the story and maybe even introduce different themes and concepts, without ruining the central message of Positive Transformation?

The answer is, alas, not much.

First of all, I'll get the obvious out of the way. The camera work and CGI are stunning, the scenery and setting opulently and beautifully realised; but for me it is almost claustrophobic. Even for the scenes in the garden, the camera never really pulls away to reveal a sense of time and place and revel in openness and landscape.

Secondly, the character of Dickon is mostly replaced by a dog. When he does eventually appear through the mist, he has been reduced to a cross between James Herriott and Alan Titchmarsh; here a vet, there a kindly horticultural snob.

And thirdly, one of the successes of the book and the 1993 film was that the relationship between Mary and Colin was at once believable and ephemeral, innocent and yet complex. Ultimately, the story is about transformation; as the garden moves from winter, through spring into summer, both of the Craven children undergo physical and spiritual healing, their characters moving from spoilt and damaged to becoming kinder, more considerate, and the result is an exaltation of nature and its effects on the human spirit.

We have none of that subtelty here. The children's relationship is taken for granted, Colin's change is sudden and meaningless, the garden blooms in fake CGI waves, regardless of season, and the house needs to burn to the ground dramatically for Colin Firth's Uncle to realise the folly of his thinking. (Up until then his phoned-in grief giving no hint of any softening or awakening)


I didn't mind the fact they changed the story to 1947 particularly, but in doing so they created an odd sensation that the story was missing technology of the period.

Anyway, in summary, it's not shit. The actress who plays Mary gives an impressive performance. As does the dog.

But if you want to watch a brilliant adaptation of this novel, choose the 1993 Maggie Smith version instead.

YogiMeerfield - 20 Nov 2020 16:37:19 (#13 of 1094)

The Children Act - A sombre tale based on the Ian McEwan novel. Starring Emma Thompson as a High Court judge who has to decide whether a 17 year old Jehovah's Witnesses boy should receive a life-saving blood transfusion, despite both his and his parent's refusal of treatment for religious reasons.

In part, it has similar themes to Enduring Love. At times it's a bit theatrical and perhaps worked better on the written page. Currently on iPlayer.

bossab2 - 20 Nov 2020 17:33:50 (#14 of 1094)

Le Mans 66

Engaging enough even if you arent a petrol head.

solomongursky - 21 Nov 2020 13:41:10 (#15 of 1094)

Holmes And Watson

worse than you thought.

LippyPongstocking - 22 Nov 2020 09:25:18 (#16 of 1094)

Easy Virtue (2008)

Classy film adaptation of the 1924 Noël Coward play - a drawing room comedy-drama set not longer after the end of WWI about the tensions which arise when the only son of an upper-class household marries a ritzy American divorcée and moves back into the family manse.

It's familiar territory, but lifted by some suitably crackling dialogue and a predictably waspish turn from Kristin Scott Thomas as the acid matriarch who loathes her son's new wife. Jessica Biel as the unwelcome American is the weakest link - she looks lovely but doesn't quite convince - but the rest of the cast do well enough.

Undemanding, enjoyable entertainment.

MorrisMitchener - 22 Nov 2020 21:28:55 (#17 of 1094)

American Beauty (on Netflix)

Right. This hasn't aged quite as badly as you think it might've done. And yet. Hard not to view the lead as a whinging, entitled borderline peado prat.Cos...well, there's not much evidence to the contrary.

There are unexpected pleasures. Alan Ball's very funny dialogue and a great, committed performance from Annette Bening In fact, I wouldn't mind seeing the whole story from her point of view. She's far better here than Spacey in an underwriiten and unsympathetic role. The teens are very good too. I'm not just saying this cos I'm joining some kind of anti-Spacey hate mob. Not at all.

But it is a bit much that we’re meant to think what a fantastic and sensitive guy Spacey’s character is cos he makes the wonderfully noble choice not to fuck his daughter’s under age pal! I mean, pur-lease!

Dayraven - 22 Nov 2020 21:46:37 (#18 of 1094)

Hard not to view the lead as a whinging, entitled borderline peado prat.

And as for the character....

HouseOfLametta - 22 Nov 2020 22:42:56 (#19 of 1094)

1917 A technical tour de force, extraordinary performances and, I suppose, the most realistic portrayal of the Western Front you will see, and yet, and yet...

Vaguely uninvolving. I think there are two issues, too much jammed in- war is hell but it doesn't all happen in two hours of real time, and something unhorrific about the horror.

I think the hyperreality defuses the atrocity, somehow. You admire the craftsmanship that realised the corpse on the wire, the rotting horse carcasses, but you don't believe it.

Still, there are some scenes you won't forget in a hurry.

widenation - 22 Nov 2020 22:48:36 (#20 of 1094)

Vaguely uninvolving.

Yes I'd agree with that - saw it on the big screen and felt the same, despite being glued to the spectacle of it all.

Previous
|
Next
|
Top
|
Bottom
Check Subscriptions
|
Home » Film