You win some, you lose some I guess. I'd never question Tarantino's talent, that would be stupid, but his films have never worked for me. Except for Reservoir Dogs.
Film The Redcafe Movie review thread
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to talk about United's dreadful home defeat at the hands of Big Ange's Tottenham Hotspur. Should this have been the end of Ten Hag? How long does he actually have left? And does Nik finally want ETH out?!
You win some, you lose some I guess. I'd never question Tarantino's talent, that would be stupid, but his films have never worked for me. Except for Reservoir Dogs.
Catch A Fire A story based largely on the reality of Aparteit South Africa and all the better for it. Tim Robbins manages to be a monster who you don't quite hate because he seems human and you can at least know his motivations. One of his best. Many criticise the ending but I for one thought it made a good film better. 8.5/10
The Holiday If you like romantic comedies then you will enjoy this one. Not as good as Notting Hill and the like but still highly watchable if that is your thing. If you need a DVD to watch with the missus you could do worse. Action junkie had better get something else. 6/10
Collateral Oh dear. Don't waste 1.5 hours of your life. What could have been a half decent thriller was spoiled by a ludicrous and lazy plot. Silly 2.5/10
I love that film, it is, IMO, Michael Mann's best. 9/10.
I found the plot ludicrous especially the last third. Hard to say why without posting spoilers.
Apart from the truly dreadful Miami Vice (1/10 at most) I think it is far and away his worst film. Even his cheap early version of Red Dragon (Manhunter) was good.
Apart from the truly dreadful Miami Vice (1/10 at most) I think it is far and away his worst film. Even his cheap early version of Red Dragon (Manhunter) was good.
I didn't found it unbelievable (within the genre, I mean.) But there’s no disputing about taste, I guess.
By the way, back in my late teens I had a somewhat similar experience. I was heading home after a Ferencvaros(Hungarian football) game, when, for some reason, an utterly insane man, who was convinced that I was staring at him, forced me to go with him to have a drink with a gun he had in his pocket. At the bar I managed to run away, asking the staff on my way out to call the police.
Some 12 years later I still don't know what had happened with that maniac. It was the scariest experience I've ever had.
I guess this experience might have added something to the film for me.
Yet again Wibble I have to dissagree completely with you on a movie review. I thought this was one of Manns and Cruises best outings to date. A great film, believable enough within this genre with some great performances. It was well shot creating a great mood for the film along with it's moody soundtrack.
All in all I would give this film an 8.5/9 out of 10 and would recommend it to anyone.
I could just about live with the main plot line (it was close - why not just kill them) but the coincidence relating to the first customer (I don't want to be more specific in case anyone wants to watch it) was just plain silly. If Cruise was meant to have picked him because of his previous customer then this makes even less sense. Why pick such a convoluted way to kill people when it was utterly obvious their connection and thus why they would be killed and by who.
As you say we are obviously not going to agree because I though Cruise was dire in Eyes Wide Shut and that it was one of the worst films ever made. Even sillier than Collateral.
Collateral is excellent.
Hope this helps.
Hope this helps.
I have no problems with 'coincidences' like that, that what "suspension of disbelief" is for
I'm a Kubrick fanatic, and I loved the movie - and the reason why Cruise was so good in it, is because it was tailored for him. He was a pretentious, senseless idiot in the movie, just how he is in real life.
But don't start argue over this, i say
Collateral was pretty good.
You should hear what my missus thought of it. My review was positively glowing in comparison.
i didnt like Collateral either
Spiderman3
im not even going to rate it. it was fecking awful
im not even going to rate it. it was fecking awful
Apocalypto
Set in the Mayan civilization, when a man's idyllic presence is brutally disrupted by a violent invading force, he is taken on a perilous journey to a world ruled by fear and oppression where a harrowing end awaits him. Through a twist of fate and spurred by the power of his love for his woman and his family he will make a desperate break to return home and to ultimately save his way of life.
Haven't got it yet, nearly do. Would appreciate if anyone else who has seen it would let me know what it was like.
Set in the Mayan civilization, when a man's idyllic presence is brutally disrupted by a violent invading force, he is taken on a perilous journey to a world ruled by fear and oppression where a harrowing end awaits him. Through a twist of fate and spurred by the power of his love for his woman and his family he will make a desperate break to return home and to ultimately save his way of life.
Haven't got it yet, nearly do. Would appreciate if anyone else who has seen it would let me know what it was like.
It was good until the eclipse part then it went a bit crappy. Also, the cinematography was quality, but it felt like dressed up American drama. I mean the jokes and interaction just didn't feel authentic at all.
Karate Bear Fighter....Sonny Chiba kills a bear with his own hands. The movie makes very little sense, but feck, he kills a bear with his own hands.
I liked it.
Moreso the Jack Black/Kate Winslet storyline. The other two(Diaz/Law) annoy me but not as much in this movie as the normally do.
Saw The Prestige yesterday and really liked it. As you could guess from two magicians, there was a lot of bluff and double bluff!
Inland Empire
The latest David Lynch...
the most bizarre, surreal, crazy, mindless, mindblowing, annoying, slow, creepy, wonderful, ugly, dreamy piece of cinema EVER
This film is pure David Lynch, no boundaries. Total Annihilation. In comparison "Mulholland Drive" looks like a mainstream popcorn movie.
It's surely unwatchable for most of the people. I don't recommend it, but if you like Lynch, you have to see this.
btw Laura Dern is fantastic.
omg
The latest David Lynch...
the most bizarre, surreal, crazy, mindless, mindblowing, annoying, slow, creepy, wonderful, ugly, dreamy piece of cinema EVER
This film is pure David Lynch, no boundaries. Total Annihilation. In comparison "Mulholland Drive" looks like a mainstream popcorn movie.
It's surely unwatchable for most of the people. I don't recommend it, but if you like Lynch, you have to see this.
btw Laura Dern is fantastic.
omg
Inland Empire
The latest David Lynch...
the most bizarre, surreal, crazy, mindless, mindblowing, annoying, slow, creepy, wonderful, ugly, dreamy piece of cinema EVER
This film is pure David Lynch, no boundaries. Total Annihilation. In comparison "Mulholland Drive" looks like a mainstream popcorn movie.
It's surely unwatchable for most of the people. I don't recommend it, but if you like Lynch, you have to see this.
btw Laura Dern is fantastic.
omg
You lucky bastard
I'm so anxious to watch this movie, but still has no release date over here in Hungary....The Fountain
Dir. Darren Aronofsky
2006
I watched this yesterday, and read some reviews of it today. It seems to have completely split film critics down the middle, some love it and some hate it.
First off, I liked it. It does have flaws, and seems a lot longer than 90 minutes. But it's stunningly beautiful, at times it's very gripping, intensely so. It will frustrate some people because of it's sheer courage, it focus on three conciousnesses of the main character Tommy, all slightly meandering and slow moving, though just when you seem to be getting somwhere it flips around again. Although it is apparant what is going to happen in the film, it's not on a concious level, there are no twists or revolutionary plot turns. The lack of focus and tendency to sometimes repeat itself will probably not go down well with most cafites, and some will find it pretentious, though I didn't.
The music and visuals are incredible, I can't stress that enough.
A fantastically brave film, that is a bit like marmite.
Dir. Darren Aronofsky
2006
I watched this yesterday, and read some reviews of it today. It seems to have completely split film critics down the middle, some love it and some hate it.
First off, I liked it. It does have flaws, and seems a lot longer than 90 minutes. But it's stunningly beautiful, at times it's very gripping, intensely so. It will frustrate some people because of it's sheer courage, it focus on three conciousnesses of the main character Tommy, all slightly meandering and slow moving, though just when you seem to be getting somwhere it flips around again. Although it is apparant what is going to happen in the film, it's not on a concious level, there are no twists or revolutionary plot turns. The lack of focus and tendency to sometimes repeat itself will probably not go down well with most cafites, and some will find it pretentious, though I didn't.
The music and visuals are incredible, I can't stress that enough.
A fantastically brave film, that is a bit like marmite.
Any large masked turtles?
No, but there was a talking rat.
I'm in.
Good movie indeed and yes they stretched it unnecessarily for last 15 mins.The Lives of Others
This has little to do with the film, but I want you to go and see it
German film about a Stasi secret policeman charged with eavesdropping on a potentially dissident writer and his famous actress girlfriend. I'm not going to tell you much more, go and see it while it's in the cinema, it is superb.
Great acting, flawless direction, best screenplay for years - watch out for the scene in the lift, a masterclass in screenwriting, about 4 sentences of beautiful naturalistic dialogue and the story is turned on its head. Masterful.
Only one moan, there's a resolution scene after the main story, about 10 minutes, it's not bad but it's more sentimental than the rest of the film, and totally unnecessary. You can walk out after the main climax - you'll know when that is - and will have lost nothing.
Also, the title's shit. Maybe it has nuances in German I can't access. It should obviously have been called "Symphony for a Good Man." Maybe they thought that was too pretentious, but it was the right choice. "The Lives of Others" - feck off, that could safely and blandly describe any film ever made.
Still, feck it! Who cares about the cocking title!
9/10
8.5/10 for me
Happy Feet Not so much a film as an excuse for animated penguins to engage in as many song and dance numbers as possible. The rather feeble "ecological" message was a waste of space. They should have cut the film in half leaving only the song and dance numbers and the Robin Williams bits, which were excellent. Great fun at times but deeply flawed. 6/10
It has a very nice music to it but I found it a bit shallow. It promises deeper meaning, delivers simple metaphors.
I don't know, It's just too obvious, everything is right there to see, little to interpret. Maybe it's meant to be that way.
Liked it in the end but for me it's just poor man's "Solaris"
Munich
Plot: Post-Munich massacre attacks by the Black September the ones who planned the massacre were said to be living in various places around Europe. The film is about Operation Wrath of God and how ex-Mosad Avner (Eric Bana) and his team of assassins go about finding and killing them Black September members
Rating: 7/10
As with all Spielberg movies which tackles historic events his screenplay is excellent. Could've had better cinematography and the massacre should've been more detailed. The characteristic anti-climax isn't that good and if Spielberg altered that aspect of things in his script then he could've ended up with a truly brilliant movie instead of a very good one
Whoa there, first off I'd say yes it does have some simple morals to it, but I think maybe you are underestimating the leeway you are given for interpretation.
Secondly, I'd have to say from a technical standpoint that The Fountain is far, far superior to Solaris, and personally I really enjoyed Aronofsky's directing skills.
My major issue with it, is that it does tend to reiterate some of it's points too much, but again that's just my interpretation of it.
I'd have to disagree about "Solaris" but whatever
Aronofsky does have an interesting style and I was pleasantly surprised he didn't use his lightning fast changing shots and mad editing like in Pi and Requiem for A Dream, although he really likes colour filters and sticks to that.It's just that he always leaves this feeling as if his films have some deep meaning to them but they only scratch the surface of matters.
Oh, and one more thing - the "action scene" in the begining.. what was that? Couldn't get any of it and understand what's going on.
Hope Aronofsky never makes action films, ever.
I'd have to disagree about "Solaris" but whatever
It's just that he always leaves this feeling as if his films have some deep meaning to them but they only scratch the surface of matters.
Oh, and one more thing - the "action scene" in the begining.. what was that? Couldn't get any of it and understand what's going on.
Hope Aronofsky never makes action films, ever.
What didn't you understand, it's purpose or what was actually taking place?
Solaris is one of the worst movies I have ever seen.
Just watched Stranger than fiction.
Interesting movie, I liked it. Some funny moments and over all a light-hearted movie with some what novel concept. Don't think anyone would rate this movie as one of the best they have seen but I reckon most would enjoy it.
Also people should see without reading anything about the plotline.
7/10
Just watched Stranger than fiction.
Interesting movie, I liked it. Some funny moments and over all a light-hearted movie with some what novel concept. Don't think anyone would rate this movie as one of the best they have seen but I reckon most would enjoy it.
Also people should see without reading anything about the plotline.
7/10
what was actually taking place
looked lame and confusing (for an action scene)
imo
many people would agreestay away from the fountain then...I think
Munich
Plot: Post-Munich massacre attacks by the Black September the ones who planned the massacre were said to be living in various places around Europe. The film is about Operation Wrath of God and how ex-Mosad Avner (Eric Bana) and his team of assassins go about finding and killing them Black September members
Rating: 7/10
As with all Spielberg movies which tackles historic events his screenplay is excellent. Could've had better cinematography and the massacre should've been more detailed. The characteristic anti-climax isn't that good and if Spielberg altered that aspect of things in his script then he could've ended up with a truly brilliant movie instead of a very good one
A friend of mine was an extra in that movie, and some scenes were shot 50 metres away from my places.
But it wasn't a great film,firstly because it was advocating revenge, it had no real end to it, plus it was far too long...
*SPOILERS*
The beginning was part of Izzy's story, one of the three levels of the film.
At the begining he was on his quest in New Spain to find the tree of life, which is guarded by the flaming sword. The Queen of Spain sent him because of the Spanish Inquisition.
I haven't seen the original, I'm talking about the Steven Soderbergh version.
Ok, I messed up. What I actually wanted to say is that the scene itself wasn't made very well (the action part, the fighting n all)
That it was part of Izzy's story, I managed to pick up myslef as the film went on
Ok, I messed up. What I actually wanted to say is that the scene itself wasn't made very well (the action part, the fighting n all)
That it was part of Izzy's story, I managed to pick up myslef as the film went on
Hehe, I knew I was patronising you, but couldn't be too sure of the depth of your understanding.