Saw it tonight as the missus set up a cinema night after a stressful week at work. She hates horrors and only did it as she knows I am a massive King fan.
Shows what a deep story it has beyond a scary clown that she came out saying how she loved it and that it reminded her of bits of Stand By Me and The Goonies.
Wish it had been in the 50s like the book but they did integrate the 80s well - and it allows them to bring he 2018 chapter 2 into a contemporary age
If anyone liked "Hell or High Water," the same writer/producer and director have a new one out, "Wind River." Stars Jeremy Renner and Elizabeth Olsen, I saw it and liked it more than HOHW, so those who liked that will probably really like the new one. Very similar moviemaking sensibility and delivery.
The same director also wrote "SIcario" a couple of years ago and that movie is incredible and I can't recommend it highly enough. Stars Emily Blunt and an incredible performance by Benicio del Toro.
IT looks good. As much as Tim Curry nailed Pennywise, it was a fairly cheap TV miniseries so the movie is very welcome.
Sadly, it sounds like Dark Tower might be going a bit wrong. The studio may have bottled it.
I thought the new version looked a bit shite. Curry's Pennywise is terrifying, the new one looks a bit too polished. Hopefully the new version will have the end sorted out. Always pissed me off.
I haven't seen teh new one but Curry was brilliant in that role and I did think it would be tough to emulate that!
If anyone liked "Hell or High Water," the same writer/producer and director have a new one out, "Wind River." Stars Jeremy Renner and Elizabeth Olsen, I saw it and liked it more than HOHW, so those who liked that will probably really like the new one. Very similar moviemaking sensibility and delivery.
The same director also wrote "SIcario" a couple of years ago and that movie is incredible and I can't recommend it highly enough. Stars Emily Blunt and an incredible performance by Benicio del Toro.
Thanks @NapaAddick. I really enjoyed HOHW and have this one earmarked for next week.
Saw it tonight as the missus set up a cinema night after a stressful week at work. She hates horrors and only did it as she knows I am a massive King fan.
Shows what a deep story it has beyond a scary clown that she came out saying how she loved it and that it reminded her of bits of Stand By Me and The Goonies.
Wish it had been in the 50s like the book but they did integrate the 80s well - and it allows them to bring he 2018 chapter 2 into a contemporary age
Thought IT was great, the sequel will be terrible however.
Over-rated imo, i watched it Sunday. I get its a good story etc just not my kind of movie and probably a bit dragged out. I'd give it 6/10, watchable and not terrible just wouldn't watch again.
Over-rated imo, i watched it Sunday. I get its a good story etc just not my kind of movie and probably a bit dragged out. I'd give it 6/10, watchable and not terrible just wouldn't watch again.
Over-rated imo, i watched it Sunday. I get its a good story etc just not my kind of movie and probably a bit dragged out. I'd give it 6/10, watchable and not terrible just wouldn't watch again.
I think Sully is the most pointless film I have ever watched. (edit: I am really sorry that I ranted like this but this film really bothers me).
The true story is this: - Man flies plane. - Plane hits birds. - Pilot lands on water. - Everyone thanks Pilot. - Investigators say "pilot did the right thing" without any question. - Everyone congratulates pilot. - That's it.
Clint "why the fuck do people still let me make movies" Eastwood then, somehow, managed to turn it into four separate plane crash sequences, while demonising the investigators and turning them into generic bad guys (with no logical reason for their skepticism), and he then uses a fucking video game at the end for one of the most cringe-inducingly stupid "shock! gasp!" big finishes I have seen in a film.
If anyone liked "Hell or High Water," the same writer/producer and director have a new one out, "Wind River." Stars Jeremy Renner and Elizabeth Olsen, I saw it and liked it more than HOHW, so those who liked that will probably really like the new one. Very similar moviemaking sensibility and delivery.
The same director also wrote "SIcario" a couple of years ago and that movie is incredible and I can't recommend it highly enough. Stars Emily Blunt and an incredible performance by Benicio del Toro.
Totally with you on this (Sicario is in my top ten of all time!), but for some reason Wind River just didn't work for me as well as HOHW did. I'm not sure why. I am definitely invested in Taylor Sheridan now, I think he's working on really interesting, original, mid-budget thrillers/ dramas and long may it continue.
Well actually the investigators didn't agree at first and felt he could have returned to the airport rather than landed on the Hudson.
Maybe the story was too difficult for you to grasp.
I agree with Jimmy, on the face of it i do not see how they got a film from it. Yes they didn't agree and there were investigations etc. but alot of it seemed so pointless to me. My mate who watched it said its a 'Great film' so each to their own but i didn't get that at all.
Well actually the investigators didn't agree at first and felt he could have returned to the airport rather than landed on the Hudson.
Maybe the story was too difficult for you to grasp.
Sorry if you took that personally Bob, I am guessing that's the case given the child-like riposte!
As for your point - do you have a source? I remember them being rather upset at the way they were portrayed. Source 1. Source 2.
My issue with the film is that the writer, Todd Komarnicki, managed to find drama where it didn't exist. Ordinarily I wouldn't be too bothered by that. For the same reason that I don't criticise The Hobbit purely for being nine hours based on a short story - If the story can be stretched out, it doesn't matter how short the source material is.
But Sully, like The Hobbit, did a piss-poor job of extending that material. The writer, and Eastwood, cheated the audience in a few ways. Most notably repeating the entire crash sequence twice. The tension they created with the investigators was done in a ham-fisted way that was no more sophisticated than an episode of Hollyoaks.
The only reason the movie isn't a total bomb is the casting. Eckhart and Hanks are excellent, as are the supporting character actors (not so much the investigators, but the material they had to work with was so one-dimensional I can't blame them for that).
If someone else enjoys a movie more than me, I think they win. Good for them. I certainly wouldn't try to imply they're stupid for disagreeing!
Saw Wind River - starts out slowly but as the film develops it really drags you in. The landscape is very bleak and the isolation really comes across. Jeremy Renner is very good.
Victoria and Abdul - okay but a bit lightweight. Judy Dench delivers as usual.
Well actually the investigators didn't agree at first and felt he could have returned to the airport rather than landed on the Hudson.
Maybe the story was too difficult for you to grasp.
Sorry if you took that personally Bob, I am guessing that's the case given the child-like riposte!
As for your point - do you have a source? I remember them being rather upset at the way they were portrayed. Source 1. Source 2.
My issue with the film is that the writer, Todd Komarnicki, managed to find drama where it didn't exist. Ordinarily I wouldn't be too bothered by that. For the same reason that I don't criticise The Hobbit purely for being nine hours based on a short story - If the story can be stretched out, it doesn't matter how short the source material is.
But Sully, like The Hobbit, did a piss-poor job of extending that material. The writer, and Eastwood, cheated the audience in a few ways. Most notably repeating the entire crash sequence twice. The tension they created with the investigators was done in a ham-fisted way that was no more sophisticated than an episode of Hollyoaks.
The only reason the movie isn't a total bomb is the casting. Eckhart and Hanks are excellent, as are the supporting character actors (not so much the investigators, but the material they had to work with was so one-dimensional I can't blame them for that).
If someone else enjoys a movie more than me, I think they win. Good for them. I certainly wouldn't try to imply they're stupid for disagreeing!
Jimmy, I'm sure you're right about all of that but without the insight that you shared when I watched it I really enjoyed it.
I just assumed that the movie followed the story reasonably accurately, and I felt that there was genuine tension for Sully when he was facing loosing his career and the stigma that goes with it. My uncle was a Pilot and he went through an inquest following a questionable event that occurred while he was flying so maybe I had more empathy with it.
As I say, I'm sure that all of your observations are accurate and your knowledge of file making will dwarf mine, as I have none. Sometimes, though, a decent story with some good character acting is enough for me.
I want to see "Mother!", starting Jennifer Lawrence, in the worst way. I hear is is so awful and pretentious. It got a Cinemascore of "F", which means people surveyed after seeing it rank it as one of the worst movies of all time. I think this movie could be a great version of a great bad movie and I wanna see it before it is pulled from theatres.
I don't know about you but sometimes I do get fed up with the stereotypical Hollywood stuff, where all the women have to be stunners and whenever a blokes shown bare chested he has to have the full works. Just show some fucking ordinary people for christs sake.
That's one of the reasons I thought Fargo was so good, just ordinary people!
Well actually the investigators didn't agree at first and felt he could have returned to the airport rather than landed on the Hudson.
Maybe the story was too difficult for you to grasp.
Sorry if you took that personally Bob, I am guessing that's the case given the child-like riposte!
As for your point - do you have a source? I remember them being rather upset at the way they were portrayed. Source 1. Source 2.
My issue with the film is that the writer, Todd Komarnicki, managed to find drama where it didn't exist. Ordinarily I wouldn't be too bothered by that. For the same reason that I don't criticise The Hobbit purely for being nine hours based on a short story - If the story can be stretched out, it doesn't matter how short the source material is.
But Sully, like The Hobbit, did a piss-poor job of extending that material. The writer, and Eastwood, cheated the audience in a few ways. Most notably repeating the entire crash sequence twice. The tension they created with the investigators was done in a ham-fisted way that was no more sophisticated than an episode of Hollyoaks.
The only reason the movie isn't a total bomb is the casting. Eckhart and Hanks are excellent, as are the supporting character actors (not so much the investigators, but the material they had to work with was so one-dimensional I can't blame them for that).
If someone else enjoys a movie more than me, I think they win. Good for them. I certainly wouldn't try to imply they're stupid for disagreeing!
Jimmy, I'm sure you're right about all of that but without the insight that you shared when I watched it I really enjoyed it.
I just assumed that the movie followed the story reasonably accurately, and I felt that there was genuine tension for Sully when he was facing loosing his career and the stigma that goes with it. My uncle was a Pilot and he went through an inquest following a questionable event that occurred while he was flying so maybe I had more empathy with it.
As I say, I'm sure that all of your observations are accurate and your knowledge of file making will dwarf mine, as I have none. Sometimes, though, a decent story with some good character acting is enough for me.
Hey if you enjoyed it more, that's cool! I really don't begrudge anyone that.
There is a question about the responsibility of the filmmaker to tell an honest version of events. Does it matter here? I'm not sure. For many, this will be the definitive account, even though it's not particularly accurate beyond the broad strokes (and the landing itself). But what harm does that do? Not a lot I guess. I think American Sniper is a similar thing, but in that case Clint's work can cause more trouble than Sully.
Saw IT last night... loved all the other quirky little references... from those with a musical slant, the kid in the Anthrax 'among the living' shirt (a song based on SKs 'the stand').. and then playing Anthrax 'anti-social' as they rocks at each other made me chuckle. Some really good jumpy moments and not been in a cinema for a while where the audience reacted with some screams... good fun!
Watched The Hitman's Bodyguard last night. Really enjoyable action movie with a lot of humour thrown in, as well as car/motorbike chases and lots of bullet flying about. Samuel L is always good value and thought Ryan Reynolds was very good too.
I always enjoy watching the locations -London features a lot, including one scene with Richard E Grant which takes place in the reception of one of my clients, high above Liverpool St Station!
Saw it at the weekend. Wasn't my choice, knew nothing about it, warned it was long.
Really enjoyed it, didn't feel long at all. Fearful the rioting would be the whole film as that whole sequence could be perceived as long before the story starts but it did set a scene for the rest of it. Harrowing stuff at times though. People can be awful to other people.
Finally saw Dunkirk last week. Personally really enjoyed the way it didn't bother with any back stories for the characters. For me this gave it a "disinterested" feel towards war that Richard Hillary talked about in his book "The Last Enemy". I was gripped from start to finish. It felt like looking through a window into an event. And I found it very believable, even if it was not an entirely accurate historical account.
The Spitfire scene at the end in particular seemed a bit factually unbelievable, but I got the feeling that wasn't the true point of it - more a piece of artistic cinematography, that was an incredibly atmospheric and stirring climax to the film.
I thought the score worked, other than the augmentation of Elgar's "Nimrod" (who ironically was a Gerry) at the end, that just frustrated a bit - why play around with a piece of music that is already bullet proof?
Overall though, it is the first film in years that I'm still mulling over almost a week after seeing it. I hope it wins an Oscar.
Saw it at the weekend. Wasn't my choice, knew nothing about it, warned it was long.
Really enjoyed it, didn't feel long at all. Fearful the rioting would be the whole film as that whole sequence could be perceived as long before the story starts but it did set a scene for the rest of it. Harrowing stuff at times though. People can be awful to other people.
Very much looking forward to this film. I loved Zero Dark Thirty and The Hurt Locker and truly admire Kathryn Bigelow's ability as a director. I don't think I'll see this one in China's cinema but I'll definitely watch it when it is released online.
Watched The Hitman's Bodyguard last night. Really enjoyable action movie with a lot of humour thrown in, as well as car/motorbike chases and lots of bullet flying about. Samuel L is always good value and thought Ryan Reynolds was very good too.
I always enjoy watching the locations -London features a lot, including one scene with Richard E Grant which takes place in the reception of one of my clients, high above Liverpool St Station!
I'll be having a word about undeclared income!!
Yes, I liked this too. The humor is absolutely my style. My son (who's 13) loved it also. No cultural value to it but sometimes when I watch a movie I just want to relax and laugh a little - this definitely made me laugh. I'd never thought of Jackson as a comedy actor but he has some very funny lines and delivered them perfectly.
Seeing IT on Monday, very.muxh looking forward to it.
Working through the horror films on NowTV at the moment.
Best I've seen of the bunch are Ouija Origin of evil (very scary), Don't Breath (about some people breaking into a blind guys house to rob him. Not supernatural at all but brilliantly directed, very recommend) and Lights Out... Not particularly original but a good solid scary horror flick.
Other horror recommendations gratefully received
We watched the ouija film last night thanks to your post. Not as scary as I was expecting, we were laughing at a few scenes that were meant to be scary which is never a good sign. Still, quite enjoyed it. Already commented on Don't Breathe on here, really liked that one. Plan to watch Light's Out.
Couple to try if you haven't already.... 'Hush' 'Get Out'. Avoid 'It Follows', really just a waste of time.
Comments
The Big Sick - an enjoyable mix of humour and poignancy, with a good turn from Holly Hunter.
Saw it tonight as the missus set up a cinema night after a stressful week at work. She hates horrors and only did it as she knows I am a massive King fan.
Shows what a deep story it has beyond a scary clown that she came out saying how she loved it and that it reminded her of bits of Stand By Me and The Goonies.
Wish it had been in the 50s like the book but they did integrate the 80s well - and it allows them to bring he 2018 chapter 2 into a contemporary age
The same director also wrote "SIcario" a couple of years ago and that movie is incredible and I can't recommend it highly enough. Stars Emily Blunt and an incredible performance by Benicio del Toro.
The true story is this:
- Man flies plane.
- Plane hits birds.
- Pilot lands on water.
- Everyone thanks Pilot.
- Investigators say "pilot did the right thing" without any question.
- Everyone congratulates pilot.
- That's it.
Clint "why the fuck do people still let me make movies" Eastwood then, somehow, managed to turn it into four separate plane crash sequences, while demonising the investigators and turning them into generic bad guys (with no logical reason for their skepticism), and he then uses a fucking video game at the end for one of the most cringe-inducingly stupid "shock! gasp!" big finishes I have seen in a film.
Fuck Sully, it's a pointless film!
Maybe the story was too difficult for you to grasp.
As for your point - do you have a source? I remember them being rather upset at the way they were portrayed. Source 1. Source 2.
My issue with the film is that the writer, Todd Komarnicki, managed to find drama where it didn't exist. Ordinarily I wouldn't be too bothered by that. For the same reason that I don't criticise The Hobbit purely for being nine hours based on a short story - If the story can be stretched out, it doesn't matter how short the source material is.
But Sully, like The Hobbit, did a piss-poor job of extending that material. The writer, and Eastwood, cheated the audience in a few ways. Most notably repeating the entire crash sequence twice. The tension they created with the investigators was done in a ham-fisted way that was no more sophisticated than an episode of Hollyoaks.
The only reason the movie isn't a total bomb is the casting. Eckhart and Hanks are excellent, as are the supporting character actors (not so much the investigators, but the material they had to work with was so one-dimensional I can't blame them for that).
If someone else enjoys a movie more than me, I think they win. Good for them. I certainly wouldn't try to imply they're stupid for disagreeing!
Victoria and Abdul - okay but a bit lightweight. Judy Dench delivers as usual.
I just assumed that the movie followed the story reasonably accurately, and I felt that there was genuine tension for Sully when he was facing loosing his career and the stigma that goes with it. My uncle was a Pilot and he went through an inquest following a questionable event that occurred while he was flying so maybe I had more empathy with it.
As I say, I'm sure that all of your observations are accurate and your knowledge of file making will dwarf mine, as I have none. Sometimes, though, a decent story with some good character acting is enough for me.
Thought it was watchable, not brilliant.
I don't know about you but sometimes I do get fed up with the stereotypical Hollywood stuff, where all the women have to be stunners and whenever a blokes shown bare chested he has to have the full works. Just show some fucking ordinary people for christs sake.
That's one of the reasons I thought Fargo was so good, just ordinary people!
There is a question about the responsibility of the filmmaker to tell an honest version of events. Does it matter here? I'm not sure. For many, this will be the definitive account, even though it's not particularly accurate beyond the broad strokes (and the landing itself). But what harm does that do? Not a lot I guess. I think American Sniper is a similar thing, but in that case Clint's work can cause more trouble than Sully.
Some really good jumpy moments and not been in a cinema for a while where the audience reacted with some screams... good fun!
I always enjoy watching the locations -London features a lot, including one scene with Richard E Grant which takes place in the reception of one of my clients, high above Liverpool St Station!
I'll be having a word about undeclared income!!
Saw it at the weekend. Wasn't my choice, knew nothing about it, warned it was long.
Really enjoyed it, didn't feel long at all. Fearful the rioting would be the whole film as that whole sequence could be perceived as long before the story starts but it did set a scene for the rest of it. Harrowing stuff at times though. People can be awful to other people.
The Spitfire scene at the end in particular seemed a bit factually unbelievable, but I got the feeling that wasn't the true point of it - more a piece of artistic cinematography, that was an incredibly atmospheric and stirring climax to the film.
I thought the score worked, other than the augmentation of Elgar's "Nimrod" (who ironically was a Gerry) at the end, that just frustrated a bit - why play around with a piece of music that is already bullet proof?
Overall though, it is the first film in years that I'm still mulling over almost a week after seeing it. I hope it wins an Oscar.
Better than the reviews it's had imo
Already commented on Don't Breathe on here, really liked that one.
Plan to watch Light's Out.
Couple to try if you haven't already.... 'Hush' 'Get Out'.
Avoid 'It Follows', really just a waste of time.