It's the logic they've used for every other world-renowned franchise and long-waited for film.
Film The Redcafe Movie review thread
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) are here to discuss three 1-1 draws.
The first got us knocked out of the FA Cup, the next puts us in a good position in our Round of 16 Europa League game, and the latest was an actual decent performance against Arsenal at Old Trafford.
All hopes for the season now rest on the Europa League - does Amorim have the squad to win it?
What about Avatar? The leads in that are minorities.
Pretty sure that Na'vi would be the majority on Pandora
It's a pertinent point, but like most arguments expressed in a meem or a tweet, it's massively oversimplified.
It's the kind of thing that only "wins" an argument in an echo chamber. Which is where most meems and tweets exist, tbf.
It's the kind of thing that only "wins" an argument in an echo chamber. Which is where most meems and tweets exist, tbf.
Last edited:
It's not the highest grossing film of all time and probably wont be.
Zoe Saldana is black....
In fancy dress.
And a woman.
Literally playing exotic romantic interest to the white, western saviour.
She kicks ass in the film. She is clearly more then what you have just said she is. She saves him in fact.
Was this stolen off Tumblr?
I stole it off facebook
That's incidental, she was mostly there to have weird sex with the dude who rides the big bad dragon.
I'd agree with a lot of that. The first hour or so dragged, both in terms of too much dialogue and those almost pointless overlong carriage in the snow shots. The whole flashback/narrator thing seems to be a way to shoehorn in an off-screen cameo for himself. It could have been completely avoided if they'd shot part of the original scene from a different angle.
I actually enjoyed the repetitive door gag, although i can see how it would grind on some people. Despite the flaws with length, the flashback and some of the strange lengthly shots, I think the main problem for me is that I didn't feel the tension that the films premise should have created. In terms of his recent films, The tension created in the underground bar in Inglourious, or the Calvin Candie and Dr Schultz scenes in Django was gripping, whereas I never felt the same in Hateful 8, despite the whole film being set up as a giant stand-off.
I enjoyed the film, and when it clicks into gear, it's excellent. The only problem is that the excellent bits are padded out with lots of unnecessary guff. I have to say that it's a good film, but sits comfortably below Django and Inglorious in terms of his recent fare. I think it could make a very good stage play if it's trimmed down a bit.
Surely that's because you know precisely that - that the whole film is set up for a giant stand off? You sort of know both of those earlier scenes will probably go wrong, but since they're mid-way through the films, while the plot is still very much in flux, you can't guarantee it. Or at least you don't know just how bad they're going to go.
Here, you know where it's going from the off, and once it gets there....meh. Inglorious and Django both had a fair bit going for them before the silly endings (both the worst parts of each for me, fwiw) but since this is all just one long preamble to this one very obvious and specific point, who cares?
There's fun to be had, and I didn't dislike it by any means, I just felt nothing. Apart from at that one, deliberately OTT mid-point monologue. The one that had little if anything to do with the actual film's plot.
I acknowledge your point about the circumstances, however lots of films with a similarly obvious set up have managed to crank up the tension far more successfully and tension is one of the things that Tarantino usually excels at.
Everest - not that bad really. I found it kind of affecting. Difficult story to tell admittedly but they did a serviceable job.
Are there any non-boring Jim Jarmusch films?
Ghost Dog was pretty good if I remember correctly.
I didn't think the performance in American Sniper was bad, but it definitely wasn't brilliant either.
Down By Law is a good time and less navel-gazy than most of his other films.
Interesting to hear you say that because I had this discussion with my mate after the film and concluded that the lack of tension could largely be due to reading the script ages ago and knowing who was 'in on it' and who wasn't. Seems it might not be the case.
I don't want to keep bagging on it because I did enjoy it over all but I certainly think it might be the least rewatchable of his films.
Soundtrack is absolutely awesome though and should have been used more. I see Morricone has won a Globe for it and has to be a hot favourite for an Oscar now.
I think this is definitely the case. I usually find Tarantino's films have some re-watch value, but I can't see myself re-watching Hateful Eight. A very forgettable film altogether.
The Nightmare
A documentary telling the stories of 8 people who claim to see supernatural beings during sleep paralysis. Right off the bat I would like to state that something similar to this has happened to me so I connected with the documentary straight away, therefore I am a little biased here. It was a well made documentary with people that have interesting stories to tell. The reenactments were done well and pretty spooky also. However, it was missing two things in my opinion:
1. It should have had at least two experts with opinions for and against the cases in the documentary. We are instead left to just the accounts from the people interviewed and as you might find when hearing a 'supernatural experience' from a friend that the minute doubt comes into your mind, the story falls flat due to the lack of evidence and expert opinions.
2. They kind of brush through a section about the mythologies of sleep paralysis in various countries around the world but I felt that this segment needed much more investigation which would have stopped the documentary from being a little repetitive.
I still enjoyed it and wouldn't recommend watching this right before you sleep as I stupidly did 7/10
A documentary telling the stories of 8 people who claim to see supernatural beings during sleep paralysis. Right off the bat I would like to state that something similar to this has happened to me so I connected with the documentary straight away, therefore I am a little biased here. It was a well made documentary with people that have interesting stories to tell. The reenactments were done well and pretty spooky also. However, it was missing two things in my opinion:
1. It should have had at least two experts with opinions for and against the cases in the documentary. We are instead left to just the accounts from the people interviewed and as you might find when hearing a 'supernatural experience' from a friend that the minute doubt comes into your mind, the story falls flat due to the lack of evidence and expert opinions.
2. They kind of brush through a section about the mythologies of sleep paralysis in various countries around the world but I felt that this segment needed much more investigation which would have stopped the documentary from being a little repetitive.
I still enjoyed it and wouldn't recommend watching this right before you sleep as I stupidly did 7/10
I saw a program about that a few years back. It was particularly interesting that the form of the manifestations seems to be culturally influenced: in the past people saw angels or demons; now they're more likely to encounter extraterrestrials. As if it was a real phenomenon on which sufferers were grafting their own preconceptions.
Saw The Big Short yesterday, thought it was excellent with great performances all round. Really interesting film which you go out from wanting to punch a banker or anyone. A lot of very complex notions are talked about but they have some original ways to explain them which make the film quite amusing. There are a lot of laughs in there, but ultimately it's quite depressing.
Very good film though, this, Wolf of Wall Street and Margin Call could be the 21st century Dollars Trilogy.
Also, I'm pretty sure Adam McKay made this cos no one took the overarching plot to The Other Guys seriously, when he probably felt he was making a great critical stance.
Very good film though, this, Wolf of Wall Street and Margin Call could be the 21st century Dollars Trilogy.
Also, I'm pretty sure Adam McKay made this cos no one took the overarching plot to The Other Guys seriously, when he probably felt he was making a great critical stance.
Watched American Sniper there. While it was pretty well made the whole premise just seemed wrong. Should someone like that be glorified? Especially in such a bullshit war.
It was a very silly film and if he expected that, he's a very silly man.
@pauldyson1uk Did you ever get round to watching The Wicker Tree (know I've asked this before). Am about 15 mins in and can see where it's going. The blonde is fit though. Bit of a low budget zone horror special on the face of it.
There is a chance lesbian sex which could yet save it. Am defo gonna have to watch it in two halves due to fatigue.
There is a chance lesbian sex which could yet save it. Am defo gonna have to watch it in two halves due to fatigue.
Blue?
I don't know what the hype was all about. For me it was an ok film.
Knowing the ending probably didn't help either though.
It was good but not brilliant. Minor annoyance for me is that the actual mission church doesn't have a bell tower (Mission San Juan Bautista). Hollywood, eh!
I enjoyed Rear Window a lot more.
The women Jimmy Stewart got to play alongside
In real life.
Only Lovers Left Alive was great. Very cool.
The Revenant - I really thought I'd dislike this but I didn't. It's kind of like Mad Max meets The Grey with about as much depth as you'd expect from that mutant baby. Gets pretty portentous in the middle but recovers. Leo is good but still not Oscar good whatever that means. And it's obviously gorgeous.
I did yes.
The Wicker Tree.
The Wicker Man this was not, but it wanted to be so badly, but if just failed.
The story was pretty much the same, with a couple of twists but not anything you did not see coming a mile away.
There was no horror in it, no scary bits.
Having said that it was not has bad as I expected it to be, Christopher Lee makes a brief appearance as an old man in a flash back, who may or may not be intended as an elderly Lord Summerisle, but while his ill-health prevented him from taking on the role of the main villain his shoes are well filled by Graham McTavish, who provides some much needed fire and brimstone in contrast to the rather stilted performances from the two lead characters, although there were some good performances from the supporting cast, most notably Clive Russel as the butler Beame and Honeysuckle Weeks as the promiscuous pagan Lolly.
I would say it was worth a watch, but only just.
4/10
For me it was just a worse version of The Hurt Locker. Hinted at some interesting ideas but never delved into any of them with any depth.
If I recall correctly, at the end of The Other Guys, during the end credits, there were several messages about Wall Street and the abuses. Also, the storyline was unnecessarily 'complicated' for a silly film, as you call it, and I'm quite sure Adam McKay, to a certain extent, felt it was a comedy first, sure, but also criticism of Wall Street. And I'm sure no one picked up on the second part, because it was handled in a clumsy manner, ultimately.
I was exaggerating of course when I said 'the only reason he made The Big Short was because no one took The Other Guys' seriously, but I'm sure it's a story he really cares about and he wanted to make a 'serious' film about it.
Not her character then was it. It was a cartoon version of her.
Technically, blue people are minorities on earth. And, in that setting, white people are the minority.
I've been looking forward to watching it, and was surprised when I looked up the director after he was mentioned in this thread to see he was the guy who did Anchorman, The Other Guys and similar stuff. Certainly strikes me as a change in style from him.
Nice review and yep, I can certainly see it heading there. Will watch the rest of it tonight, but it's pretty obvious the girl being invited to be the 'May Queen' is not a good thing and those American two are so ridiculously over the top it is untrue.
Not got to the Lord Summerisle chap yet. It's daft, but I feel committed to watching the whole thing, given or despite, not sure which, my love of the original film.
It means he didn't really do any acting. I'm pretty sure most of us would look just as terrified and annoyed if we were methoding it out in the wilderness.
I don't watch many movies, but I'd heard so many good things about 45 Years that we rented it from Amazon on Monday when it was released in the UK - it's not reached the cinemas here yet, as far as I know.
The action (such as it is, it's a quiet film) is set in a small rural town in Norfolk. It describes what happens over one week leading up to the 45th wedding anniversary party of the two main characters (all the dialogue is really between the two of them, apart from a few scenes where the woman is talking to friends).
The comfortably-off, previously-happy couple are played by veteran actors Charlotte Rampling and Tom Courtenay. They have already received awards for their performances, and there's an outside chance that Rampling may even bag an Oscar for her brilliant, restrained portrayal of an older woman coming to terms with a secret her husband has kept to himself for nearly 50 years. Even the moment where she finally discovers what he's never told her isn't actually accompanied by words, or referred to directly in conversation.
Her final scene (at the anniversary party, after things have been learned that can't be unlearned) is mesmerising, and she doesn't even speak. It's a movie about time and relationships, and how firm foundations can be shaken for ever when you least expect it.
I'd give it 10/10. One of the best movies I've ever seen.
The action (such as it is, it's a quiet film) is set in a small rural town in Norfolk. It describes what happens over one week leading up to the 45th wedding anniversary party of the two main characters (all the dialogue is really between the two of them, apart from a few scenes where the woman is talking to friends).
The comfortably-off, previously-happy couple are played by veteran actors Charlotte Rampling and Tom Courtenay. They have already received awards for their performances, and there's an outside chance that Rampling may even bag an Oscar for her brilliant, restrained portrayal of an older woman coming to terms with a secret her husband has kept to himself for nearly 50 years. Even the moment where she finally discovers what he's never told her isn't actually accompanied by words, or referred to directly in conversation.
Her final scene (at the anniversary party, after things have been learned that can't be unlearned) is mesmerising, and she doesn't even speak. It's a movie about time and relationships, and how firm foundations can be shaken for ever when you least expect it.
I'd give it 10/10. One of the best movies I've ever seen.