Just finished the King of Staten Island. I nearly gave up as the characters were all irritating, but it grew on me. It had Bill Burr who I like as a comedian, and he did an okay job here. Overly too slow but okay
Cruella was last week and enjoyed it a lot. Good characters and a bit overlong, but a good addition to the Disney catalogue.
It was okay - the best thing about it was the performance of Millicent Simmonds. A bit too formulaic after the first film.
I thought it was really disappointing. Aliens that can’t swim . What nonsense
I thought the whole premise for the first film was nonsense.
How did the aliens get here? If they can see how did they construct a space ship? Without weapons how would they knockout a noisy tank that they must have been attracted to?
I managed to get perhaps a third of the way into the first film before giving up. Utter dross that was so predictable with the kid having been given a noisy toy.
In all fairness, @TellyTubby, you not knowing the answers is not the same as it being nonsense.
Where they came from isn't relevant to the story, and isn't something you should get hung up on. But if you really need to know in order to enjoy the film, they reference a meteor landing (and that's visible in the sequel briefly) thus implying they arrived on that, possibly by accident rather than design. But this isn't Independence Day. The monsters don't need to have motives. The style of storytelling the movie is going for is more show-don't-tell which is why I like it so much.
Also, given their speed and near-indesctructable form, what good would a tank do? Sure, someone would be safe from them in a tank, but good luck shooting them. And I don't remember the kid being given the toy, I thought the kid took it when he wasn't supposed to - although it has been a while since I've seen it.
Ultimately, you're picking holes in a film because you chose to dislike it. Which is a shame for you really!
In all fairness, @TellyTubby, you not knowing the answers is not the same as it being nonsense.
Where they came from isn't relevant to the story, and isn't something you should get hung up on. But if you really need to know in order to enjoy the film, they reference a meteor landing (and that's visible in the sequel briefly) thus implying they arrived on that, possibly by accident rather than design. But this isn't Independence Day. The monsters don't need to have motives. The style of storytelling the movie is going for is more show-don't-tell which is why I like it so much.
Also, given their speed and near-indesctructable form, what good would a tank do? Sure, someone would be safe from them in a tank, but good luck shooting them. And I don't remember the kid being given the toy, I thought the kid took it when he wasn't supposed to - although it has been a while since I've seen it.
Ultimately, you're picking holes in a film because you chose to dislike it. Which is a shame for you really!
I thought someone might disagree but I didn't expect to be patronised.
I didn't CHOOSE to dislike the film, I just thought it was poor and don't worry about me, I will get on with life fine without seeing the light that doesn't exist in a dull film that has more holes than a colander.
I feel happy for you that you enjoyed the film, feel happy for me that I found the off switch at an early stage. Same as I did for the overhyped Lord of the Rings bore fest.
Let's agree that in this instance, we like different things.
I saw these (and a number of other films) at recent previews and they're now on general release:
Father - 7/10
A chamber piece, which reflects its adaptation from a play. Set almost exclusively in the flat where the father lives, which increases the sense of claustrophobia, the audience is presented with his confused and deeply troubled perspective. The cast is, as you’d expect with Hopkins, Coleman, Rufus Sewell and Mark Gatiss, very impressive.
The result is a powerful but ultimately rather predictable film.
Gunda (Norway/USA) - 5/10
A wordless, black and white Norwegian documentary about farm animals, which has been critically acclaimed.
Charming in parts - notably, the piglets - but I personally found it a little boring, although I did feel for Gunda when a distressing event occurs towards the end of the film. Soothing in its own way and the camerawork is very good but I thought it was very average overall and a strange choice of subject matter.
Mandabi (1968, Senegal/France) - 6/10
This 1968 film (recently restored and rereleased) was the first feature ever made in an African language.
Set in Dakar, it tells the story of Ibrahim and the effect that a money order from his nephew in Paris for 25,000 Francs has upon his fortunes. Beset by numerous bureaucratic obstacles, he is also a soft touch and enters into a number of ridiculous arrangements and loan deals whilst trying to cash his money order.
The film feels very dated and I found the man’s idiocy and the level of endemic corruption a little disturbing.
Not impressed, its basically a romcom (which i normally enjoy fyi) just felt it was very predictable, tried to be heartwarming in spots. The main actors were ok but one to miss for me.
Watched Ben Wheatey's 'In the Earth' yesterday. Could have been called 'Another Field In England' with it's small cast, woodland setting and psychadelic folk horror stylings. I found it alright, like most of his films, I enjoy the knowing dark humour, striking imagery and fun gore, but I always find his films just trail off into weird meaninglessness. I mean, I love weird but I just wish he would land a film with an ending that's more than just a blender full of acid, kaleidoscopes and folklore.
Watched Ben Wheatey's 'In the Earth' yesterday. Could have been called 'Another Field In England' with it's small cast, woodland setting and psychadelic folk horror stylings. I found it alright, like most of his films, I enjoy the knowing dark humour, striking imagery and fun gore, but I always find his films just trail off into weird meaninglessness. I mean, I love weird but I just wish he would land a film with an ending that's more than just a blender full of acid, kaleidoscopes and folklore.
Thought the same about Kill List. Really unnerving film and finished like it did sort of took the gloss off it.
Fast & Furious, the movie, not the curry I had last night, well worth a watch, completely over the top as per usual, bit of humour, and a bit of a back story.
Watched Ben Wheatey's 'In the Earth' yesterday. Could have been called 'Another Field In England' with it's small cast, woodland setting and psychadelic folk horror stylings. I found it alright, like most of his films, I enjoy the knowing dark humour, striking imagery and fun gore, but I always find his films just trail off into weird meaninglessness. I mean, I love weird but I just wish he would land a film with an ending that's more than just a blender full of acid, kaleidoscopes and folklore.
Thought the same about Kill List. Really unnerving film and finished like it did sort of took the gloss off it.
Totally agree, I think the first 2/3 of Kill List is his best film.
Watched Ben Wheatey's 'In the Earth' yesterday. Could have been called 'Another Field In England' with it's small cast, woodland setting and psychadelic folk horror stylings. I found it alright, like most of his films, I enjoy the knowing dark humour, striking imagery and fun gore, but I always find his films just trail off into weird meaninglessness. I mean, I love weird but I just wish he would land a film with an ending that's more than just a blender full of acid, kaleidoscopes and folklore.
I'n not a fan of Ben Wheatley. I hated A Field In England. His films are far too trippy for my liking . I will probably give this one a miss.
not a new one .. 'The Man with the Iron Heart' is a somewhat disturbing (some scenes of mass murder and torture) biopic of Nazi madman Reinhard Heydrich, the hunt for his assassins and the reprisals suffered by the Czechs for his killing. The film is based on the book HHhH which I read a while ago and found, like the film, both interesting and disturbing. The acting is first class, Stephen Graham giving a terrific cameo as Heinrich Himmler is a revelation
It was okay - the best thing about it was the performance of Millicent Simmonds. A bit too formulaic after the first film.
I thought it was really disappointing. Aliens that can’t swim . What nonsense
They'll have learnt how to by Part 3.
Part 3 would be the aliens that sent the aliens to clear the indigenous lifeforms away turning up, expect a cleared planet but walking into the human race ready to kick ass.
Comments
Cruella was last week and enjoyed it a lot. Good characters and a bit overlong, but a good addition to the Disney catalogue.
How did the aliens get here? If they can see how did they construct a space ship? Without weapons how would they knockout a noisy tank that they must have been attracted to?
I managed to get perhaps a third of the way into the first film before giving up. Utter dross that was so predictable with the kid having been given a noisy toy.
Where they came from isn't relevant to the story, and isn't something you should get hung up on. But if you really need to know in order to enjoy the film, they reference a meteor landing (and that's visible in the sequel briefly) thus implying they arrived on that, possibly by accident rather than design. But this isn't Independence Day. The monsters don't need to have motives. The style of storytelling the movie is going for is more show-don't-tell which is why I like it so much.
Also, given their speed and near-indesctructable form, what good would a tank do? Sure, someone would be safe from them in a tank, but good luck shooting them. And I don't remember the kid being given the toy, I thought the kid took it when he wasn't supposed to - although it has been a while since I've seen it.
Ultimately, you're picking holes in a film because you chose to dislike it. Which is a shame for you really!
I didn't CHOOSE to dislike the film, I just thought it was poor and don't worry about me, I will get on with life fine without seeing the light that doesn't exist in a dull film that has more holes than a colander.
I feel happy for you that you enjoyed the film, feel happy for me that I found the off switch at an early stage. Same as I did for the overhyped Lord of the Rings bore fest.
Let's agree that in this instance, we like different things.
I saw these (and a number of other films) at recent previews and they're now on general release:
Father - 7/10
A chamber piece, which reflects its adaptation from a play. Set almost exclusively in the flat where the father lives, which increases the sense of claustrophobia, the audience is presented with his confused and deeply troubled perspective. The cast is, as you’d expect with Hopkins, Coleman, Rufus Sewell and Mark Gatiss, very impressive.
The result is a powerful but ultimately rather predictable film.
Gunda (Norway/USA) - 5/10
A wordless, black and white Norwegian documentary about farm animals, which has been critically acclaimed.
Charming in parts - notably, the piglets - but I personally found it a little boring, although I did feel for Gunda when a distressing event occurs towards the end of the film. Soothing in its own way and the camerawork is very good but I thought it was very average overall and a strange choice of subject matter.
Mandabi (1968, Senegal/France) - 6/10
This 1968 film (recently restored and rereleased) was the first feature ever made in an African language.
Set in Dakar, it tells the story of Ibrahim and the effect that a money order from his nephew in Paris for 25,000 Francs has upon his fortunes. Beset by numerous bureaucratic obstacles, he is also a soft touch and enters into a number of ridiculous arrangements and loan deals whilst trying to cash his money order.
The film feels very dated and I found the man’s idiocy and the level of endemic corruption a little disturbing.
Not a recent film but an excellent documentary on the W Indies cricket team of the 70s and 80s. Some great footage and interviews.
8.5/10
Not impressed, its basically a romcom (which i normally enjoy fyi) just felt it was very predictable, tried to be heartwarming in spots. The main actors were ok but one to miss for me.
5/10
I'n not a fan of Ben Wheatley. I hated A Field In England. His films are far too trippy for my liking . I will probably give this one a miss.
The acting is first class, Stephen Graham giving a terrific cameo as Heinrich Himmler is a revelation
Infinite
Voyagers
Rogue Hostage
Interesting take on Alien's 👽 trying to wipe out humanity.
Stars the beautiful Yvonne Strahkovski and Jasmine Mathews, but they're just supporting Chris Pratt.
It's got a bit of a Chris Pratt in Jurassic Park, but with Aliens feel to it. And a touch of time travel.
I think 👽👽👽👽 /5 is fair. I enjoyed it.
A Danish film about losing your way in middle age and the importance of friendship. Shows how central drinking is to Danish culture.
Very funny in places and some really good acting. Ultimately shows how everyone has to muddle along. I really enjoyed watching it.
Won the Oscar for the best foreign film.
8/10
Absolute drivel.
If you've seen previous ones, why not watch all before the 9th.
If not why start at 9?!