Film The Redcafe Movie review thread

Never Let Me Go:

Very poignant story set somewhere in an alternate reality with a group of children - who we see grow into adults - learning pretty soon that they have been created and chosen for one main purpose. The film sensitively deals with a lot of the feelings of worthlessness that comes from being born for such a basic purpose also the relationships that these children strike up with each other in adulthood and how these relationships are tested by the fate that they are all too aware lies in store for them. Features some excellent performances from Keira Knighley, Carey Mulligan and Andrew Garfield. A really thought provoking movie that I’d strongly recommend.
8/10

Was going to review this myself as I'm literlally watching the credits right now but bam-bam here is spot on. Andrew Garfield though confuses me, how can someone with such a gormless look be a good actor.
 
The Rum Diary Johnny Depp as a 1960 New York journo who moves to Puerto Rico. Typical Hunter Thompson in that it's mostly about the ambience, and is ultimately disppointing. 5/10

The Help Set in Jackson in 1963, a satire about the racialist white society women and the way they treat their black helpers. Draws on some actual events like the murder of Medgar Evers. No doubt it will offend sensibilities on both sides of the racial divide, but it seemed like a nuanced film to me. 7/10

Hunter Thompson books should not be filmed.
 
Was going to review this myself as I'm literlally watching the credits right now but bam-bam here is spot on. Andrew Garfield though confuses me, how can someone with such a gormless look be a good actor.

Cheers, Waiting to see him in the spider man reload to see whether he looks any less gormless. :lol:

Good actor though.
 
Cheers, Waiting to see him in the spider man reload to see whether he looks any less gormless. :lol:

Good actor though.

Cracking actor his performances in lion for lambs, social network, red riding were all superb but even in those films he ends up looking retarded at some point.
 
Hearts and Minds - really excellent documentary on the Vietnam war, one I'm sure many have already seen and one that I'd recommend to anyone. It's essentially made up of interviews from the Vietnamese during the war, images of the destruction during the war and US interviews 20 years later from those involved physically or politically. One man talks about how it's not just a job he has to do, it's not a daily grind, but rather he enjoys killing gooks; while another likens flying a b52 bomber to the thrill of driving a racecar and watching the bombs explode is like the excitement of a firework display. It's manipulative through its use of successive contrast but there's every reason for it to be considering the agenda it's pushing, and it's done very well.

Nuit et Brouillard - documentary on the Holocaust focusing on the concentration camps and the horror that took place inside them, utterly brutal images. One particularly haunting image of hundreds of horrifically gaunt corpses being moved along by huge plough-like vehicles into ditches as if they were trash being moved onto a landfill. Another with a line of decapitated bodies with their heads in a bucket next to them, as the narrator tells us they will use the bodies to make soap from. It's a must-watch and it's only half an hour long.

Suffice to say I wasn't a bundle of joy following these documentaries, but as painful as some of the images are they're something that really must be experienced, incredibly thought-provoking and emotionally moving.
 
I still think we should have a thread for ordinary films too.

For instance I watched four weddings and a funeral again over the weekend and loved it but you lot always make me feel daft when I post my thoughts on films like that.

I am probably in the minority but I don't like what I call ' deep ' films
 
I still think we should have a thread for ordinary films too.

For instance I watched four weddings and a funeral again over the weekend and loved it but you lot always make me feel daft when I post my thoughts on films like that.

I am probably in the minority but I don't like what I call ' deep ' films

Nothing to do with "deep" or "ordinary". You're right though. This thread is basically 5-6 posters talking about classic, "non mainstream" cinema amongst themselves. Occasionally you'll get a new release review posted which might get one reply and then its back to discussing stuff the majority haven't heard of.

I say get them their own thread. Something titled "Poncy obscure film buffs".
 
Nothing to do with "deep" or "ordinary". You're right though. This thread is basically 5-6 posters talking about classic, "non mainstream" cinema amongst themselves. Occasionally you'll get a new release review posted which might get one reply and then its back to discussing stuff the majority haven't heard of.

I say get them their own thread. Something titled "Poncy obscure film buffs".

:lol:

Now you're talking !
 
Star Wars, Minority Report, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Dude, Where's My Car are all non-mainstream, yeah.


I watched our Idiot Brother yesterday, but it was so bad (apart from a few good-looking women) that I dont think i can write anything about it.
 
Four Weddings a great film agreed.

I watched something, but I forgot, must of been pretty tragic. Oh yeah, the Green Lantern, it was tragic. I don't how Ryan Reynolds went from being a very diverse leading man in comedy, thriller, superhero films and married to Scarlett to getting divorced from Scarlett, flopping big time with two superhero films, The Chnage Up and The Proposal.....if it wasn't for Buried getting some good feedback(though kind of overrated), I'm pretty sure he'd have killed himself by now.
 
Nothing to do with "deep" or "ordinary". You're right though. This thread is basically 5-6 posters talking about classic, "non mainstream" cinema amongst themselves. Occasionally you'll get a new release review posted which might get one reply and then its back to discussing stuff the majority haven't heard of.

I say get them their own thread. Something titled "Poncy obscure film buffs".

It's been that way since the start of this thread, it's not going to change now! Take a random page - https://www.redcafe.net/f27/redcafe-movie-review-thread-165633/index51.html - and it's basically just mehro and Spoony highjacking the thread to talk about poncy film buff movies, really. And I can understand the dislike at constant classic talk*...it'd be like the football forums constantly talking about Di Stefano, Garrincha and Cruyff every week essentially having the same conversation every year or so...but I don't get the non-mainstream bit.

Other than Spoony's obsession with Asian cinema the likes of Wilder, Hitchcock, Kubrick, Spielberg, Scorcese, Lynch, Coppola and the Coen brothers take up a large part of it, and they're hardly obscure. Even Truffaut, Godard, Bergman and Kurosawa were fairly mainstream, surely? I reckon you'd probably find at least one movie from each in IMDB's top 250 which I thought is supposed to represent the mainstream view.

Anything with Hugh Grant in it is instantly contemptible. Shouldn't stop people who enjoyed it talking about it though, just because gimps like me didn't like it doesn't mean others don't...I'm sure it was good fun he's just a smarmy, pretty boy cock-end.

*a lot of the time I don't even both reviewing them because I know no-ones arsed because they're either not interested in that kind of movie or has already seen it and talked about the exact same things. I just like putting things down on paper(/the internets) to remind myself how much I enjoyed that movie, possibly to recommend it to a mate at some point so I can remind myself what I liked about it. That kind of thing...
 
It's been that way since the start of this thread, it's not going to change now! Take a random page - https://www.redcafe.net/f27/redcafe-movie-review-thread-165633/index51.html - and it's basically just mehro and Spoony highjacking the thread to talk about poncy film buff movies, really. And I can understand the dislike at constant classic talk*...it'd be like the football forums constantly talking about Di Stefano, Garrincha and Cruyff every week essentially having the same conversation every year or so...but I don't get the non-mainstream bit.

Other than Spoony's obsession with Asian cinema the likes of Wilder, Hitchcock, Kubrick, Spielberg, Scorcese, Lynch, Coppola and the Coen brothers take up a large part of it, and they're hardly obscure. Even Truffaut, Godard, Bergman and Kurosawa were fairly mainstream, surely? I reckon you'd probably find at least one movie from each in IMDB which I thought is supposed to represent the mainstream view.

Anything with Hugh Grant in it is instantly contemptible. Shouldn't stop people who enjoyed it talking about it though, just because gimps like me didn't like it doesn't mean others don't...I'm sure it was good fun he's just a smarmy, pretty boy cock-end.

*a lot of the time I don't even both reviewing them because I know no-ones arsed because they're either not interested in that kind of movie or has already seen it and talked about the exact same things. I just like putting things down on paper(/the internets) to remind myself how much I enjoyed that movie, possibly to recommend it to a mate at some point so I can remind myself what I liked about it. That kind of thing...

You're right. Mainstream/non mainstream doesn't really come into it. I'm still not sure what the correct terminology would be though. I guess vintage or old.
 
No I understand, I don't think there's much wrong with having a thread for, say, pre-90s movies that people have re-watched, watched for the first time or for those who want to read reviews about to inspire them to watch classics...other than the fact that at least half of the discussion in here is about 'classics', with another third of it just Spoony and mehro's nonsensical ramblings attempting to turn the entertainment forum into the new general, and then the rest about more recent films. If it ain't broke...
 
Oi! What nonsensical ramblings?

Erica, people will always have opinions that dont match yours. Shouldnt stop you from posting here that you like a certain movie. I would have thought that all the discussions we have in this thread would made people want to watch some of those movies, not drive them away because they're afraid we'll slam one they like.
 
I kinda agree with Erica. I have looked into this thread a few times looking for something to download formyself to watch. I'd like a review on Superbad or the likes, but instead I see pages of talk of old movies that I'm never going to watch and have no interest in reading about. You lads are of course perfectly right to speak about these movies as that's what you like, but maybe a seperate thread for popcorn fans like myself would be a good idea.
 
This thread reminds me of a scene in Ethel Mayakovski's 12-hour silent epic Thought Processes of a Talking Teapot (1936).
 
It was an Off The Cuff example. Anyway, maybe instead of moaning (wasn't really) I'll review a movie I watched last night.

MV5BNTAzMTg1NjY0NF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwODc3MTgzNA@@._V1._SY317_.jpg


HANNADirected by Joe Wright, staring Saoirse Ronan, Cate Blanchett and Eric Bana. It was well worth a download just to watch Saoirse Ronan's acting. For me she is destined to be a star of serious movies. It was a bit slow to start, but going along they did a great job at building up the anticipation through the movie. The big let down was a fairly mundane ending though. All in all, well worth a watch though

7/10
 
Oi! What nonsensical ramblings?

Erica, people will always have opinions that dont match yours. Shouldnt stop you from posting here that you like a certain movie. I would have thought that all the discussions we have in this thread would made people want to watch some of those movies, not drive them away because they're afraid we'll slam one they like.
I don't mind people having different opinions to me Mehro , otherwise I wouldn't always be defending Berba for instance :)

I just thought maybe a separate thread might work
 
I don't mind people having different opinions to me Mehro , otherwise I wouldn't always be defending Berba for instance :)

I just thought maybe a separate thread might work

I don't think there's a need for a seperate thread. I just look at who made the last post. You can tell who is going to post about old films, japanese films, obscure films etc. You can also pretty much know who is going to post pretensiously.
 
Yeah, that Spoony guy is terrible.

:lol: It wasn't all about the same person, although Spoony would certainly tick the foreign film box.

I tried to watch Pulp Fiction last night but just couldn't get into it at all. Is it just me?

I guess the way the story jumps about and the long dialogue between some of the characters could be quite off-putting. Personally, I love the film.
 
Erica, if I can make a recommendation - try watching My Sassy Girl. I think you might find some common ground there with us film buffs.
 
Anonymous At times it's an interesting take on who was the actual person behind the works credited to Shakespeare. Some of the plot lines it brings up are far too preposterous to be taken seriously(mainly Edward De Vere's relationship with Elizabeth). Rhys Ifans does a good job as the Earl of Oxford. There are parts I really liked about it, but the aforementioned barely believable plot lines do make it hard to take seriously.
 
I thought it must be me!

The soundtrack, Travolta Dancing in the Diner and Jackson (who I usually don't like) coming across as a bad mofo with the bible speech.

All reasons alone to love this movie. Again though there are so called classics that I'm sure I don't like either.
 
The soundtrack, Travolta Dancing in the Diner and Jackson (who I usually don't like) coming across as a bad mofo with the bible speech.

All reasons alone to love this movie. Again though there are so called classics that I'm sure I don't like either.

I cant get in to this film, but the bible speech and the part about the tasty burger are very good.
 
Well, we've just discussed Star Wars, Rise of the Planet of the Apes and Fahrenheit, two of those films are mainstream blockbusters and the latter isn't exactly an obscure movie. I think the issue is some folk think this place is a massive gay clique - which it clearly isn't, or else we'd have told Brwned and other new ponces not to join our gang. As for pretentiousness, I think that says more about the people who actually use that word/term to describe film lovers. We don't all enjoy the same things....if watching Captain America(and yeah, it was an awful movie, not even the fact it was filmed in Manchester saved it) is keeping it real and enjoying and rating the likes of Delicatessen uber pretentious then I guess most people who love movies are pretentious. But as Brwned said, Hitchcock, Kurosawa, Kubrick, Wilder et al are hardly anything other than mainstream. Unless mainstream means Hollywood popcorn trash that is.
 
I don't see how a film isn't ordinary just because it's old, or in a different language or whatever. Do people think the film buffs are watching crazy shit about naked Europeans flipping eggs and slitting their wrists?

If you're looking for a film to watch and a bunch of poncy film buffs recommend it, why not give one a look every once and a while? The worst thing that'll happen is you might not like it.