What Was The Last Movie You Watched?

[Boostin' Kev]

On 16/02/2018 at 13:25, Sooky said:

Call Me By Your Name (cinema)

 

Fantastic film that really deserves its award nominations. Also quite relatable in parts (minus the Italian sunshine) and the speech by Michael Stuhlbarg near the end really got to me.

Also I thought it was quite good how the ending basically forces you to watch the credits!

I would certainly recommend watching!

 

9/10

Seen it mentioned near the top of every best of 2017 list I've looked at. Looks like the kind of thing that wouldn't appeal to me in the slightest but been meaning to give it a try. 

[Boostin' Kev]

1 hour ago, accies1874 said:

Why?

Was tempted to turn it off after half an hour and only managed to last until 45-50 mins. Most overrated film I've seen in a long time. 

Edited February 20, 2018 by Boostin' Kev

[Mr. Brightside]

[emoji23]

[19QOS19]

I've not seen the film in question so I'm not having a pop at the 'reviewer' here. But it seems every year when the 'best' films are announced that there are always 1 or 2 on here who will watch these films and give it a '0' or '1'. Do some folk like to dislike what everyone else enjoys?

Films are obviously pretty subjective for the most part but when a film is being touted for a shitload of awards then surely there must be something in it worth praising even if they don't like it.

There's been a few big films I've not enjoyed but can appreciate things such as the directing or sound for example.

[accies1874]

15 minutes ago, Boostin' Kev said:

Was tempted to turn it off after half an hour and only managed to last until 45-50 mins. Most overrated film I've seen in a long time. 

I did actually feel that the first 45 minutes or so dragged on. However, the visuals, acting, score and direction add up to a wonderful experience. In terms of a story, it isn't the best, but the characters are all engaging enough to make up for that.

Edited February 20, 2018 by accies1874

[killiepiemuncher]

Shape of Water 8/10

Really enjoyed this and can see why it’s in contention for multiple Oscars. Better than the lovies favourite La La Land from last year.

[Boostin' Kev]

12 minutes ago, accies1874 said:

I did actually feel that the first 45 minutes or so dragged on. However, the visuals, acting, score and direction add up to a wonderful experience. In terms of a story, it isn't the best, but the characters are all engaging enough to make up for that.

It was too quirky/fantasy like for me. Didn't think I'd like it but gave it a try. 

[Bobby Skidmarks]

Sat down to back to back films with the missus, my choice then hers

Bright - 3/10

Reminds me of shite 80s cop/alien buddy film Alien Nation except worse. Got bored of it after about forty minutes as it was just them running from club to club getting chased and shot at. Half of it didn't even make sense and Will Smith seems to be invincible in it.

Pitch Perfect 3 - 1/10

One point for Anna Kendrick, the rest was utterly horrific. Im sure there was some c**t from Hollyoaks in it, thats the level we are dealing with here.

An all-round shite evening. 

[GrahamJags]

2 hours ago, accies1874 said:

Why?

I thought the acting was so poor it was bordering on parody (including Michael Shannon, who I'm usually a big fan of), the storyline was ridiculous, and the ending was abysmal. I almost left at various points but stayed till the end because I was desperate to find something that I'd like about the film. Left the cinema struggling to understand what all the fuss was about, but have since spoken to a few of my mates who loved it and can sort of see it. Still doesn't take away from the fact I absolutely hated it though. Didn't seem like the type of film I would enjoy from the trailers I had seen, but went solely because of the buzz it had been getting, and I have an Unlimited Card so I try and see as many films, particularly the bigger releases during award season, as possible.

1 hour ago, 19QOS19 said:

I've not seen the film in question so I'm not having a pop at the 'reviewer' here. But it seems every year when the 'best' films are announced that there are always 1 or 2 on here who will watch these films and give it a '0' or '1'. Do some folk like to dislike what everyone else enjoys?

Films are obviously pretty subjective for the most part but when a film is being touted for a shitload of awards then surely there must be something in it worth praising even if they don't like it.

There's been a few big films I've not enjoyed but can appreciate things such as the directing or sound for example.

I do know what you mean. I think there are people who are desperate to give "big" films grief, just because of their popularity, however I tend to like the majority of the awards-nominated stuff. I didn't particularly like All The Money In The World, but there were some aspects and performances in that which I really enjoyed. There was absolutely nothing about this that I liked though. As I said in the previous comment, I've since spoken about it with a few mates and can now sort of understand why it's been getting the praise it has been, but my opinion remains the same. I don't read direct film reviews until I've seen the film on purpose so that I don't have any preconceived opinion beforehand. Obviously trailers, other press, IMDB etc may have at least some sort of effect on that but I do my best to have as open a mind as possible when going to the cinema. 

[Ira Gaines]

Movies aren't subjective "for the most part". They're subjective in every single case.

[Christophe]

I liked it ok, but agree it should be nowhere near Best Picture. 

[Mark Connolly]

7 hours ago, 19QOS19 said:

I've not seen the film in question so I'm not having a pop at the 'reviewer' here. But it seems every year when the 'best' films are announced that there are always 1 or 2 on here who will watch these films and give it a '0' or '1'. Do some folk like to dislike what everyone else enjoys?

Films are obviously pretty subjective for the most part but when a film is being touted for a shitload of awards then surely there must be something in it worth praising even if they don't like it.

There's been a few big films I've not enjoyed but can appreciate things such as the directing or sound for example.

I see your general point, but then I also don't see the need to say "the make-up was excellent" if the film was a pile of shite.

I thought the English Patient, for example, was a luvvie wankfest and a dreadful film, and couldn't give a f**k what the Oscar-winning film editing was like.

[19QOS19]

Movies aren't subjective "for the most part". They're subjective in every single case.

As a film goer maybe. But sometimes some scenes are superbly directed. The one in one of The Matrix for example. I think it was the second one with the motorway scene. Even if I didn't enjoy that film I'd tilt my cap to a very good piece of directing.

I see your general point, but then I also don't see the need to say "the make-up was excellent" if the film was a pile of shite.
I thought the English Patient, for example, was a luvvie wankfest and a dreadful film, and couldn't give a f**k what the Oscar-winning film editing was like.

I just enjoy different aspects of films. The story is obviously the main thing for me but I've watched films in the past and not liked the story but respected it for another thing. And on the flipside I've came away from a film thinking the plot was excellent but the execution of it was shite. I don't think I'm some kind of critic, I just like to find some positives even from films I've really not enjoyed.

[DA Baracus]

Didn't Avatat win a load of awards? It's a huge pile of shite with zero redeeming features

[accies1874]

10 hours ago, DA Baracus said:

Didn't Avatat win a load of awards? It's a huge pile of shite with zero redeeming features

I don't know the specifics but I'd imagine it won a whole load of technical awards - which it deserved. I'm sure it did get nominated for Best Picture, though, which I didn't think it deserved. 

ETA: It's worth noting that this was the first year of the reintroduction of the extended nominees. 

Edited February 21, 2018 by accies1874

[wellinwigan]

Detour 

8/10

Cracking indie movie.split into 2 parallel universes this road movie thriller was great and the 3 young lead actors did a good job 90 mins flew by.

Sky movies

[DA Baracus]

Copland (Sony Movie Channel)

 

6/10. Decent premise and a great cast but a rushed conclusion loses this points. Sylvester Stallone is Frank, the sheriff of a small New Jersey town in which a load of corrupt NYPD officers live, led by Harvey Keitel. He generally turns a blind eye to their misdemeanours, believing them to be pretty harmless.

 

After the corrupt cops fake the suicide of one of their own in order to get him off with killing two black teenagers who he mistakenly thought shot at him, internal affairs, led by Robert De Niro, start investigating the town and the officers there.

 

Frank soon become suspicious that things are more serious that he realises, and he soon discovers that the whole town is a front for the mob, with whom the corrupt cops are in collusion with.

 

It’s up to him to bring them down…

 

As mentioned this has a great cast, as besides De Niro, Stallone and Keitel we also have Ray Liotta and Robert Patrick. The film does a good job of showing what a lame duck Frank is, although only a couple of scenes really show how corrupt the bad cops are, most notably when Keitel’s character ensures that they can’t reach a fellow cop who is hanging on to a breaking aerial high up a block of flats, resulting in the cop’s death. Frank’s romantic subplot is totally unnecessary and those scenes are pretty worthless as it goes nowhere and doesn’t serve the plot. As I said at the start, the ending is rushed, as once Frank decides to take action most of the outcome of this happens over only 20 minutes or so.

 

Stallone gained 40 pounds to play the sad, bumbling Frank, and his performance is often great. He really captures the beaten spirit of a guy coasting in life. Robert Patrick rocks a mean moustache, and Ray Liotta plays greasy bug eyed like only he can. De Niro has a smaller role and is perfunctory, whilst Keitel drips menace.

 

Still, there’s not really enough plot to go around to serve all the stars here.

[Joe Terrapin]

The Florida Project 7/10

One of these films where nothing really happens but it does leave a lasting impression. The acting from the kids make the film with good support from Dafoe and Vinaite. Watching this so soon after 3 Billboards shows that America is really a fucked up nation.

Probably struck a cord with me as years ago(late 90's) I booked a holiday to Florida with the wife and kids (pre internet days using Teletext holidays?!?!) We ended up, in the middle of the night, at a motel very similar to the one in this. Some dodgy looking Hispanics were fixing a car in the car park . We stayed one night and got the f**k out of there as soon as morning arrived, not sleeping a wink.

[Boostin' Kev]

That's one of the best films I've watched recently. 

[accies1874]

Isle of Dogs (2018):

'Fantastic Mr Fox' meets '1984' with an undercurrent of marginalisation. 

Wes Anderson is definitely in my top three directors currently working so I jumped at the opportunity to see it early. While I thought that it was going to play too closely to the aforementioned FMF, I'd say that it takes more risks in its tone and story. The visual style is, of course, similar, and there are other similarities such as the grittily-voiced (animal) protagonist and a rag-tag group of animals trying to take down the big guy. However, this is certainly a darker and nastier tale due to how dire the whole situation is; an innocent group are ostracised due to a corrupt leader not liking them (hmmm). 

It brings plenty of chuckles, which can simply be down to how disciplined and orderly Anderson likes to frame his shots to have such a strange scene playing out on such an organised backdrop, however it's far from his funniest film - I'm ok with that as the story and message doesn't lend itself to a laugh-a-minute romp. 

As per most of Anderson's films, the sets are glorious too. There are long stretches of monotonous grey locales but they are often interrupted by a injection of colour, hence implying that there is need for colour in a one-note world (again, hmmm).