Watching Indiana Jones and the temple of doom, I havnt seen this for years, one of my ultimate favourite childhood films, just realised Spectre may have copied the Aston/ fiat 500 scene from the opening scenes with the rickshaw?
Bolgen (The Wave) 2015. A Norwegian film with English subtitles. The film is in the "disaster movie" category and is similar in substance to films like Dante's Peak. Stunning scenery and a plot based on what could happen if a mountain subsided into a lake causing a tsunami (which really has had happened in the past). The acting and CGI is very good. Worth seeking out.
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
A fjord, the Geiranger fjord, not a lake. I actually mer a man who experienced the same thing when he was a kid. Roar Uthaug, the director, is now making the new Lara Croft movie.
Watched Shout at the Devil again yesterday, directed by Peter Hunt and loads of Bond names in the production unit. Why couldn't Roger Moore have played Bond as he does Bassy in the 2nd, dark half, of this . His fight with the German naval officer is brutal ,almost Craig like and the final killing of the villain is colder and revenge filled than anything else I have seen him do.
If watching it make sure you get the full two hour plus version not the butchered one that has been shown on TV.
This has to be IMHO Moores best performance.
finally saw The Night Manager
trying to rate Hiddleston as a potential Bond, but Hugh Laurie as the villain completely overwhelms him ... Laurie was scaring the poop out of me every scene he was in, I had to keep reminding myself "that's Bertie Wooster, he's not scary, he needs Stephen Fry to tie his shoelaces for him"
Tom Hollander too I know as a comedian, last I saw he was taking abuse from Peter Capaldi in In the Loop, so that's two comedians being really scary and outclassing poor Tom Hiddleston's performance
beautiful expensive looking location shots, and being as its Le Carre its completely different pacing than a Bond movie, so its hard to compare what Hiddleston has to do here with what he'd have to do in a Bond film ... still, I wouldn't mind some of this type of slowboiling suspense and paranoia in a Bondfilm in place of the nonstop action sequences
EDIT: plotwise, this is actually quite similar to License to Kill: gory murder of a woman at the beginning motivates our hero, who then infiltrates the villain's organisation under a false identity and gains his trust, while sowing distrust between the villain and his underlings, seduces the villain's girl, then blows up an armada of the villain's merchandise at the end
Pirates Of The Caribbean Dead Men Tell No Tales.
Here's a review by comparison:
If (like me) you love the first one but thought 2 & 3 were kind of big & noisy with an unsatisfying end, this new one will end up being your second favourite.
If you loved all of 1, 2 & 3 this will be your fourth favourite.
If you though 4 was the best... well then, you're on your own, mate.
A good movie. I think it's one of the better superhero movies - good story, good action, good cast. It has a lighter mood than some other superhero movies. It reminds me of Indiana Jones and Captain America.
Gal Gadot is a good choise for the lead and also very hot!
An abomination, by some margin the worst film I've seen in a long, long time. My dad, who is 88, said he wouldn't mind seeing it, and so I went along with it, but it truly is beyond awful. Avoid at all costs.
A good movie. I think it's one of the better superhero movies - good story, good action, good cast. It has a lighter mood than some other superhero movies. It reminds me of Indiana Jones and Captain America.
Gal Gadot is a good choise for the lead and also very hot!
And also she was 5 months pregnant during a lot of the filming.
An abomination, by some margin the worst film I've seen in a long, long time. My dad, who is 88, said he wouldn't mind seeing it, and so I went along with it, but it truly is beyond awful. Avoid at all costs.
A good movie. I think it's one of the better superhero movies - good story, good action, good cast. It has a lighter mood than some other superhero movies. It reminds me of Indiana Jones and Captain America.
Gal Gadot is a good choise for the lead and also very hot!
And also she was 5 months pregnant during a lot of the filming.
I think it was only visible on Gadot in pick-up scenes, so they had to CGI her pregnancy away.
An abomination, by some margin the worst film I've seen in a long, long time. My dad, who is 88, said he wouldn't mind seeing it, and so I went along with it, but it truly is beyond awful. Avoid at all costs.
The Brian Cox one? That's disappointing. I quite fancied that
I watched 'American Psycho' last night ... what a weird yet strangely fascinating film
I had to do some research after watching it to find out what it was actually about )
An abomination, by some margin the worst film I've seen in a long, long time. My dad, who is 88, said he wouldn't mind seeing it, and so I went along with it, but it truly is beyond awful. Avoid at all costs.
What was so bad about the movie?
It is set in the days before D-Day and makes out that Churchill is dead against the invasion and tries to persuade Monty and Eisenhower not to go ahead by turning up with a redrafted alternative plan, they fob him off like he's an embarrassing old relative at a wedding reception. He seems like a senile drunk. None of this seems based on any kind of truth, the dialogue is inane, exposition leaden, and there's this awful pretentious soundtrack and heavy cinematography to distract from the fact its made on a tiny budget. It's insultingly bad.
Churchill was a drunk, but a highly functional one. But the idea that he was against the D-day landing sounds strange to me and it is at odds with everything I've read on the subject. Sad that a bad movie has been made on such an interesting subject.
An abomination, by some margin the worst film I've seen in a long, long time. My dad, who is 88, said he wouldn't mind seeing it, and so I went along with it, but it truly is beyond awful. Avoid at all costs.
What was so bad about the movie?
It is set in the days before D-Day and makes out that Churchill is dead against the invasion and tries to persuade Monty and Eisenhower not to go ahead by turning up with a redrafted alternative plan, they fob him off like he's an embarrassing old relative at a wedding reception. He seems like a senile drunk. None of this seems based on any kind of truth, the dialogue is inane, exposition leaden, and there's this awful pretentious soundtrack and heavy cinematography to distract from the fact its made on a tiny budget. It's insultingly bad.
Sounds almost as inaccurate and offensive as braveheart!
Gibson directed no movies between 2006 and 2016. Something about his private life, I understand. "Berserker" came out in 2007? Is England really that badly det informed :v
I merely stated that the film berserker came out in 2007 I know it wasn't anything to do with Mel Gibson...... Lost in translation I think sums up this exchange.... In both directions
Wonder Woman
glad this film turned out to be good after decades of delays, and glad DC finally made a decent film
I actually didn't like the Nolan Batman films, I haven't enjoyed any DC comics film since the Burton Batmans
and this should finally end the prejudice against making female superhero movies, obviously a sequel will be a priority for DC, and Marvel may suddenly be thinking about giving Black Widow her own film
I rewatched the pilot of Lynda Carter's series before going, as well as rereading the first three stories from the 1940s comic (Dr Poison is from the third story: Sensation Comics #2)
the beginning of the film is essentially the same as the original, with a different tone and much better production values
in the tv series there was a whole lotta jiggling going on on Paradise Island, but these Amazons really are warriors
aside from the Germans invading, biggest difference was in the details of the mythic background ... if I understand right, Wonder Woman now is another daughter of Zeus? I don't think Aphrodite was even mentioned in the film, it seems like a big change to emphasise the patriarchal gods, the Amazons relationship to Aphrodite was important in the original conception of the comic
other big difference of course is the change from WWII to WWI .... Captain America already made such memorable use of all the gung-ho WWII propaganda imagery, even if the Wonder Woman tv show did it first they may have felt the need to differentiate ... but more important to the story, war is the fault of Ares interfering in human affairs, and WWI was the much more meaningless war, its easier to blame Ares for that mess ... also, within the comic, it was always an odd contradiction right from the beginning that this Amazon outsider would come to Man's World just to adopt the colours of one country and take sides in a war. Her creator William Moulton Marston was trying to pack a lot of feminist/pacifist philosophy into a children's comic, and the WWII propaganda angle seemed artificially tacked on ... so by relocating the origin to the more pointless World War that contradiction got cleaned up a bit
scenes in London and the French village are also beautifully filmed, but the whole last third really drags at a ponderous pace ... this is a problem common to all these modern superhero films, I could happily leave the theatre prior to whichever interchangeable final effects finale, all the fun stuff is usually long over by then
Yeah i suprisingly enjoyed Wonder Woman, however she is hard to take your eyes off her! Great casting!
Agree the end CGI fest kinda brought it down a few notches just like Batman Vs superman. The CGI finales seem way out of place with the rest of the film
Comments
If watching it make sure you get the full two hour plus version not the butchered one that has been shown on TV.
This has to be IMHO Moores best performance.
trying to rate Hiddleston as a potential Bond, but Hugh Laurie as the villain completely overwhelms him ... Laurie was scaring the poop out of me every scene he was in, I had to keep reminding myself "that's Bertie Wooster, he's not scary, he needs Stephen Fry to tie his shoelaces for him"
Tom Hollander too I know as a comedian, last I saw he was taking abuse from Peter Capaldi in In the Loop, so that's two comedians being really scary and outclassing poor Tom Hiddleston's performance
beautiful expensive looking location shots, and being as its Le Carre its completely different pacing than a Bond movie, so its hard to compare what Hiddleston has to do here with what he'd have to do in a Bond film ... still, I wouldn't mind some of this type of slowboiling suspense and paranoia in a Bondfilm in place of the nonstop action sequences
EDIT: plotwise, this is actually quite similar to License to Kill: gory murder of a woman at the beginning motivates our hero, who then infiltrates the villain's organisation under a false identity and gains his trust, while sowing distrust between the villain and his underlings, seduces the villain's girl, then blows up an armada of the villain's merchandise at the end
Here's a review by comparison:
If (like me) you love the first one but thought 2 & 3 were kind of big & noisy with an unsatisfying end, this new one will end up being your second favourite.
If you loved all of 1, 2 & 3 this will be your fourth favourite.
If you though 4 was the best... well then, you're on your own, mate.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
A good movie. I think it's one of the better superhero movies - good story, good action, good cast. It has a lighter mood than some other superhero movies. It reminds me of Indiana Jones and Captain America.
Gal Gadot is a good choise for the lead and also very hot!
An abomination, by some margin the worst film I've seen in a long, long time. My dad, who is 88, said he wouldn't mind seeing it, and so I went along with it, but it truly is beyond awful. Avoid at all costs.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
And also she was 5 months pregnant during a lot of the filming.
What was so bad about the movie?
I think it was only visible on Gadot in pick-up scenes, so they had to CGI her pregnancy away.
The Brian Cox one? That's disappointing. I quite fancied that
I watched 'American Psycho' last night ... what a weird yet strangely fascinating film
I had to do some research after watching it to find out what it was actually about
What great, silly and wonderful fun. I must admit I was teary through half the film but I don't think I ever enjoyed it that much like this time.
All four popular villains working together...Lee Meriwether makes a great Catwoman for this film.
The typical gang...
Some days, you just can't get rid of a bomb!
Bruce and Kitka
It is set in the days before D-Day and makes out that Churchill is dead against the invasion and tries to persuade Monty and Eisenhower not to go ahead by turning up with a redrafted alternative plan, they fob him off like he's an embarrassing old relative at a wedding reception. He seems like a senile drunk. None of this seems based on any kind of truth, the dialogue is inane, exposition leaden, and there's this awful pretentious soundtrack and heavy cinematography to distract from the fact its made on a tiny budget. It's insultingly bad.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Sounds almost as inaccurate and offensive as braveheart!
Though my sources ( Google) tell me this film came out in 2007 is Norway really that behind?
Google is American I believe
I thought it was superb. Tremendous cast and an incredible story.
Glad I knew what the verdict was before I watched
glad this film turned out to be good after decades of delays, and glad DC finally made a decent film
I actually didn't like the Nolan Batman films, I haven't enjoyed any DC comics film since the Burton Batmans
and this should finally end the prejudice against making female superhero movies, obviously a sequel will be a priority for DC, and Marvel may suddenly be thinking about giving Black Widow her own film
I rewatched the pilot of Lynda Carter's series before going, as well as rereading the first three stories from the 1940s comic (Dr Poison is from the third story: Sensation Comics #2)
the beginning of the film is essentially the same as the original, with a different tone and much better production values
in the tv series there was a whole lotta jiggling going on on Paradise Island, but these Amazons really are warriors
aside from the Germans invading, biggest difference was in the details of the mythic background ... if I understand right, Wonder Woman now is another daughter of Zeus? I don't think Aphrodite was even mentioned in the film, it seems like a big change to emphasise the patriarchal gods, the Amazons relationship to Aphrodite was important in the original conception of the comic
other big difference of course is the change from WWII to WWI .... Captain America already made such memorable use of all the gung-ho WWII propaganda imagery, even if the Wonder Woman tv show did it first they may have felt the need to differentiate ... but more important to the story, war is the fault of Ares interfering in human affairs, and WWI was the much more meaningless war, its easier to blame Ares for that mess ... also, within the comic, it was always an odd contradiction right from the beginning that this Amazon outsider would come to Man's World just to adopt the colours of one country and take sides in a war. Her creator William Moulton Marston was trying to pack a lot of feminist/pacifist philosophy into a children's comic, and the WWII propaganda angle seemed artificially tacked on ... so by relocating the origin to the more pointless World War that contradiction got cleaned up a bit
scenes in London and the French village are also beautifully filmed, but the whole last third really drags at a ponderous pace ... this is a problem common to all these modern superhero films, I could happily leave the theatre prior to whichever interchangeable final effects finale, all the fun stuff is usually long over by then
Agree the end CGI fest kinda brought it down a few notches just like Batman Vs superman. The CGI finales seem way out of place with the rest of the film