James Posted July 18, 2017 Posted July 18, 2017 Sooo Dunkirk is doing pretty well with the old reviews. Can't wait to see it, hoping to get to an imax to see it. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/dunkirk_2017
Ashley Posted July 22, 2017 Posted July 22, 2017 Wasn't a huge fan of the book, but my friend worked in this so I'll see it opening weekend no doubt. Looks... Okay. As expected.
Fierce_LiNk Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 Saw Dunkirk tonight. Was on the edge of my seat the entire time and felt tense all the way through. It had everything for me...beautiful cinematography, fantastic soundtrack, the set pieces were great, etc. They really nailed it with the running time, too. Could have easily walked out of the screen room and into the next viewing straight after. 10/10 for me. It's not your typical Hollywood depiction of war, either. Definitely had a "less is more" type of vibe going on with it.
bob Posted July 28, 2017 Posted July 28, 2017 Been on a few long haul flights, so been watching all few films. Saw Lego Batman, which was alright, not as good as The Lego Movie, but quite funny. Saw Kong: Skull Island, which was surprisingly enjoyable. Pretty much a mindless animal disaster movie like many in the 90's. Good fun. Finally, saw Arrival which I've been wanting to see since it came out. It was pretty good. Loved the music, and the ending.
Kav Posted September 10, 2017 Posted September 10, 2017 On 27/07/2017 at 5:07 PM, Julius Caesar said: New trailer for IT. This film is FUCKING CLASS!!! Go watch it guys!
Sméagol Posted September 11, 2017 Posted September 11, 2017 4 hours ago, bob said: 4 hours ago, Charlie said: It. But what's it called? The red balloon
Beast Posted September 18, 2017 Posted September 18, 2017 I agree with @Kav. It's easily one of the best horrors in recent ages and it's something new. Absolutely loved IT. I could've easily watched it again. 1
Sméagol Posted September 20, 2017 Posted September 20, 2017 It was fun, though not perfect, and definitely not scary, though that could be because I've seen the older miniseries a long time ago. Also if they don't cast Amy Adams in the sequel, I'll be very disappointed. Don't think it'll be good, but hopefully it'll be fun. I'll go watch it for Alicia Vikander at the very least. Didn't know they'd actually use the first game of the new series as the inspiration.
Happenstance Posted September 20, 2017 Posted September 20, 2017 I think it's looks alright but it's a shame that they seem be be making her extremely capable right from the start. I liked the fact that the game reboot forced her into a situation where she had to adapt and learn a lot of this stuff or die.
Sméagol Posted October 5, 2017 Posted October 5, 2017 You, yeah YOU. Drop what you're doing and go see Blade Runner 2049. It's is BY FAR, the best sequel where Harrison Ford plays an older version of the same character he played many years ago.
bob Posted October 5, 2017 Posted October 5, 2017 You, yeah YOU. Drop what you're doing and go see Blade Runner 2049. It's is BY FAR, the best sequel where Harrison Ford plays an older version of the same character he played many years ago.Just wait til they release Firewall 2. 2
drahkon Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 First movie I've seen in a very long time: Baby Driver Such a cool movie. Nothing deep, nothing awe-inspiring. Just cool. And fucking entertaining. One of my favourites now.
Fierce_LiNk Posted October 27, 2017 Posted October 27, 2017 Saw Blade Runner 2049 this week. I had tons of reservations about this being made at all and was even more dubious with a different director other than Ridley Scott at the helm. However, looking at what a cluster fuck Alien: Covenant was and what a great job Denis Villeneuve did with Arrival, I decided to give it the benefit of the doubt. We saw this on Wednesday and I have to say that all of my fears were swept aside really quickly. It's a really well-thought out sequel. The look of the film is on point, as is the music and atmosphere. It feels like a continuation of the universe from the first film, but expanded upon. It's a lot brighter and I'd be curious to see this again and look at how many scenes did actually take place in that neo-noir night-time landscape. Brilliant film, in my opinion. It compliments the first one nicely and doesn't do that annoying thing some sequels do by constantly paying "homage" to the first. It definitely wasn't a frame-by-frame recount of the original. I actually think it could stand up on its own rather nicely. My only criticism is what I mentioned earlier. I'd have loved just a few more of those classic Blade Runner night-time city scenes. But, the trade-off is that we managed to see more of the rest of the world and were treated to some excellent visuals in the process. Delighted with how this turned out and it should be the blueprint for how future sequels are made in any series.
dwarf Posted October 27, 2017 Posted October 27, 2017 (edited) I hoped that Blade Runner 2049 would be better than the original, and had a hunch it could be. It totally was. They pretty much nailed everything with this one, and how often can you say that about reboots that are such a long time in the making? Perhaps a little overlong, but it stayed with me long after I left the cinema, I was so caught up and enchanted by it. Woah huge coincidence there Flink! Edited October 27, 2017 by dwarf 1
Fierce_LiNk Posted October 27, 2017 Posted October 27, 2017 Not sure about it being better than the original, though! I'd have to see it a second and maybe a third time to come to that conclusion. Rutger Hauer was too enigmatic in the first film and might just be the difference between the two movies.
dwarf Posted October 27, 2017 Posted October 27, 2017 (edited) I enjoyed the original but I rewatched it recently and thought, wow, haven't people blown up the whole ambiguous nature of the story over the years? I felt there was a lot more going on with the story in this one, with K given a way more satisfying character arc than Decard in the original (who basically just hunted replicants before getting off with one). Rutger Hauer was indeed magnetic in the first one, but the performances in this were terrific too - not as iconic, maybe, but that wouldn't be a realistic expectation given the history of the series and where sci-fi film was at that point. (Not saying that you had that expectation yourself.) Edited October 27, 2017 by dwarf
Fierce_LiNk Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 18 hours ago, dwarf said: I enjoyed the original but I rewatched it recently and thought, wow, haven't people blown up the whole ambiguous nature of the story over the years? I felt there was a lot more going on with the story in this one, with K given a way more satisfying character arc than Decard in the original (who basically just hunted replicants before getting off with one). Rutger Hauer was indeed magnetic in the first one, but the performances in this were terrific too - not as iconic, maybe, but that wouldn't be a realistic expectation given the history of the series and where sci-fi film was at that point. (Not saying that you had that expectation yourself.) I also watched the original before this and there's a lot to be said for the slimmed down nature of the first film. It's very streamlined in terms of locations and plot, but I quite like that. It works really well for that space-age detective story vibe that they were going for. I thought the performances in this were great, notably Gosling and whenever Leto was on screen. But, Hauer was something else. I loved how each line of his was like poetic and he had a great story arc, much better than Harrison Ford's in the original. I've always felt that the focus was more on Hauer and the story was more about him. The film is a classic and it's changed science-fiction cinema for the better. I hope that 2049 also improves the genre in some way. I think that it can. I hope that they actually do get to do a third film and expand on this universe even more.
Recommended Posts