Last film you watched and your rating

Jenuall wrote:Return of the King is noticeably weaker than the other two LotR films.

And the other two are already crap

Thank you. The 3rd being noticeably the weakest (not them being crap), I think the first 2 are great and the 3rd is only good to very good.

BOR wrote:Candyman (2021) - 6/10

It was all right and nothing was special about it.

I am also watching James Bond marathon and I'm now up to OHMSS.

I’m doing the same! Next up for myself is Live and Let Die, really enjoyed OHMSS when I rewatched it recently.

Zilnad wrote:

Preezy wrote:Only a 7! Christ, there are some tough critics out there

Goldfinger is a perfect Bond film, top 3 easily.

7 might have been a little too critical. Might have to make it an 8.

I’d probably give Goldfinger and 8.5/10, it’s really good and maybe what the franchise needed to take off and become the huge series it still is now? Although I’ve never actually looked how Dr No and FRwL performed on release so that could be a load of crap from me I actually think FRwL is Connery’s best film, he had 3 really good films in these two and Thunderball though.

The Batman - 9/10

This honestly has no business being this good! Any number of things could have made this fall apart. The casting Robert Pattinson as Batman. They made a three hour comic book detective thriller when making it an HBO miniseries would have made more sense. There's tonnes of moments that made me laugh that I question were written to be funny. Any of these could make for yet another DC flop, and yet I loved it.

The best versions of Bruce Wayne, Batman, Catwoman, Alfred, and the Batmobile that have been put on film.

However getting a Joker cameo at the end undermines a lot of what the film managed to do in making something relatively grounded and much more interesting than any DC film that's been released in decades.

Nibble wrote:

Tomous wrote:

Imrahil wrote:Putting aside the lazy stereotypes in Temple of Doom, the film itself isn't bad. It's just... rather bizarre. It's like Spielberg wanted to make a horror film but couldn't get away from the fact it's a family Indiana Jones flick, so it ends up being two films mashed together and neither works as well as it should.

Wasn't he going through a nasty divorce at the time? He's spoken often about his regrets in how that film turned out. It contains some genuinely impressive filmmaking though, it's a great looking film. I think I actually prefer how he directed it to how he directed Last Crusade, which lost a lot of the gritty feel from Raiders and ToD.

I do prefer Crusade to ToD though, the story doesn't get bogged down at all and is just more interesting/enjoyable.

I'd say the film goes past lazy stereotypes and is firmly in the territory of being extremely racist and culturaly insensitive, with the white saviour going to rescue the monkey brain eating, savages.

I think these are all perfectly valid criticisms. Would it be fair to say that you find the portrayal of the Hovitos in Raiders -as a representation of indigenous South American tribes- as equally repugnant?

Yep, it's a fair point and while Temple of Doom is by far the worst every one of the Indy films have aspects that have aged really badly. Even his catchphrase "it belongs in a museum!" has.

Cuttooth wrote:However getting a Joker cameo at the end undermines a lot of what the film managed to do in making something relatively grounded and much more interesting than any DC film that's been released in decades.

i agree to an extent but i dont think it hurts the film too badly and it certainly could have been a lot worse-have a look for the deleted joker scene they didnt use.

I just hope hes not the main villain of the recently announced sequel.

Tomous wrote:

Nibble wrote:

Tomous wrote:

Imrahil wrote:Putting aside the lazy stereotypes in Temple of Doom, the film itself isn't bad. It's just... rather bizarre. It's like Spielberg wanted to make a horror film but couldn't get away from the fact it's a family Indiana Jones flick, so it ends up being two films mashed together and neither works as well as it should.

Wasn't he going through a nasty divorce at the time? He's spoken often about his regrets in how that film turned out. It contains some genuinely impressive filmmaking though, it's a great looking film. I think I actually prefer how he directed it to how he directed Last Crusade, which lost a lot of the gritty feel from Raiders and ToD.

I do prefer Crusade to ToD though, the story doesn't get bogged down at all and is just more interesting/enjoyable.

I'd say the film goes past lazy stereotypes and is firmly in the territory of being extremely racist and culturaly insensitive, with the white saviour going to rescue the monkey brain eating, savages.

I think these are all perfectly valid criticisms. Would it be fair to say that you find the portrayal of the Hovitos in Raiders -as a representation of indigenous South American tribes- as equally repugnant?

Yep, it's a fair point and while Temple of Doom is by far the worst every one of the Indy films have aspects that have aged really badly. Even his catchphrase "it belongs in a museum!" has.

And, of course, if we are to take Marion's words literally, then our protagonist is clearly a perpetrator of child sexual abuse.

Nibble wrote:

Tomous wrote:

Nibble wrote:

Tomous wrote:

Imrahil wrote:Putting aside the lazy stereotypes in Temple of Doom, the film itself isn't bad. It's just... rather bizarre. It's like Spielberg wanted to make a horror film but couldn't get away from the fact it's a family Indiana Jones flick, so it ends up being two films mashed together and neither works as well as it should.

Wasn't he going through a nasty divorce at the time? He's spoken often about his regrets in how that film turned out. It contains some genuinely impressive filmmaking though, it's a great looking film. I think I actually prefer how he directed it to how he directed Last Crusade, which lost a lot of the gritty feel from Raiders and ToD.

I do prefer Crusade to ToD though, the story doesn't get bogged down at all and is just more interesting/enjoyable.

I'd say the film goes past lazy stereotypes and is firmly in the territory of being extremely racist and culturaly insensitive, with the white saviour going to rescue the monkey brain eating, savages.

I think these are all perfectly valid criticisms. Would it be fair to say that you find the portrayal of the Hovitos in Raiders -as a representation of indigenous South American tribes- as equally repugnant?

Yep, it's a fair point and while Temple of Doom is by far the worst every one of the Indy films have aspects that have aged really badly. Even his catchphrase "it belongs in a museum!" has.

And, of course, if we are to take Marion's words literally, then our protagonist is clearly a perpetrator of child sexual abuse.

Lawrence Kasdan: I like it if they already had a relationship at one point. Because then you don’t have to build it.

George Lucas: I was thinking that this old guy could have been his mentor. He could have known this little girl when she was just a kid. Had an affair with her when she was eleven.

Kasdan: And he was forty-two.

Lucas: He hasn’t seen her in twelve years. Now she’s twenty-two. It’s a real strange relationship.

Spielberg: She had better be older than twenty-two.

Lucas: He’s thirty-five, and he knew her ten years ago when he was twenty-five and she was only twelve.

Lucas: It would be amusing to make her slightly young at the time.

Spielberg: And promiscuous. She came onto him.

Lucas: Fifteen is right on the edge. I know it’s an outrageous idea, but it is interesting. Once she’s sixteen or seventeen it’s not interesting anymore. But if she was fifteen and he was twenty-five and they actually had an affair the last time they met.

more heat than light wrote:Anyway, bit of a change of pace, but High Noon is on 4OD. It's probably the greatest of the classic westerns, and is pretty much compulsory viewing for anyone interested in the genre.

10/10

Great, great film. Should be compulsory for all!

You don't even need to be a fan of Westerns to love High Noon, it's just a perfect bit of storytelling.

Sonic 2 -7/10

Just got back from seeing this with the kids.
We really enjoyed it. It dips in the middle with the bollocks wedding bullshit bit, but gathers pace again soon enough after.

Loved the super sonic appearance at the end.
And my oldest got super excited by the end credits scene with shadow

Moggy wrote:

Nibble wrote:

Tomous wrote:

Nibble wrote:

Tomous wrote:

Imrahil wrote:Putting aside the lazy stereotypes in Temple of Doom, the film itself isn't bad. It's just... rather bizarre. It's like Spielberg wanted to make a horror film but couldn't get away from the fact it's a family Indiana Jones flick, so it ends up being two films mashed together and neither works as well as it should.

Wasn't he going through a nasty divorce at the time? He's spoken often about his regrets in how that film turned out. It contains some genuinely impressive filmmaking though, it's a great looking film. I think I actually prefer how he directed it to how he directed Last Crusade, which lost a lot of the gritty feel from Raiders and ToD.

I do prefer Crusade to ToD though, the story doesn't get bogged down at all and is just more interesting/enjoyable.

I'd say the film goes past lazy stereotypes and is firmly in the territory of being extremely racist and culturaly insensitive, with the white saviour going to rescue the monkey brain eating, savages.

I think these are all perfectly valid criticisms. Would it be fair to say that you find the portrayal of the Hovitos in Raiders -as a representation of indigenous South American tribes- as equally repugnant?

Yep, it's a fair point and while Temple of Doom is by far the worst every one of the Indy films have aspects that have aged really badly. Even his catchphrase "it belongs in a museum!" has.

And, of course, if we are to take Marion's words literally, then our protagonist is clearly a perpetrator of child sexual abuse.

Lawrence Kasdan: I like it if they already had a relationship at one point. Because then you don’t have to build it.

George Lucas: I was thinking that this old guy could have been his mentor. He could have known this little girl when she was just a kid. Had an affair with her when she was eleven.

Kasdan: And he was forty-two.

Lucas: He hasn’t seen her in twelve years. Now she’s twenty-two. It’s a real strange relationship.

Spielberg: She had better be older than twenty-two.

Lucas: He’s thirty-five, and he knew her ten years ago when he was twenty-five and she was only twelve.

Lucas: It would be amusing to make her slightly young at the time.

Spielberg: And promiscuous. She came onto him.

Lucas: Fifteen is right on the edge. I know it’s an outrageous idea, but it is interesting. Once she’s sixteen or seventeen it’s not interesting anymore. But if she was fifteen and he was twenty-five and they actually had an affair the last time they met.

George

LewisD wrote:Sonic 2 -7/10

Just got back from seeing this with the kids.
We really enjoyed it. It dips in the middle with the bollocks wedding bullshit bit, but gathers pace again soon enough after.

Loved the super sonic appearance at the end.
And my oldest got super excited by the end credits scene with shadow

Bridgeton season 1 - 8.5/10
I was pleasantly surprised as it didn't look like my cup of tea. But my friend kept recommending it to me. Glad he did too. The soundtrack is a highlight as I was not expecting modern day music in a period drama like an instrumental version of Bad Guy by Billie Eilish.

Jenuall wrote:

LewisD wrote:Sonic 2 -7/10

Just got back from seeing this with the kids.
We really enjoyed it. It dips in the middle with the bollocks wedding bullshit bit, but gathers pace again soon enough after.

Loved the super sonic appearance at the end.
And my oldest got super excited by the end credits scene with shadow

I quite liked the wedding bit, one of the things that surprised me about the original and continues in this is that the "non-Sonic" bits aren't gooseberry fool

For me the dip is the bit where they go up the mountain and have some kind of dance battle, that dragged on too much for me, but otherwise it's another thoroughly entertaining kids movie!

Ah yes, forgot about that. The whole Siberian mountain top section is a bit of a write off as well.

Was hoping for a segment similar to the bar fight in Sonic 1.

Tenet (2020 / disc) - it kept me interested throughout; I didn't really get the plot beyond "time travel" but I was still entertained. There was some very clever filming / effects work during the "people moving normally whilst others were moving backwards" phases and there were some excellent detail/colour in places - particularly the docks/ocean views. I enjoyed it! [6].

No:1 Final Fantasy Fan wrote:Bridgeton season 1 - 8.5/10
I was pleasantly surprised as it didn't look like my cup of tea. But my friend kept recommending it to me. Glad he did too. The soundtrack is a highlight as I was not expecting modern day music in a period drama like an instrumental version of Bad Guy by Billie Eilish.

Bath city centre.

It Chapter Two - 7/10

I enjoyed this. Seemed more 'horror' than I remember Chapter One being, but it's been a while since I've seen that, so I could be wrong.
A fair bit of humour though to counter the horror moments, so it always had that slightly playful side to it. Some creepy scenes, and some genuinely funny moments, and I quite liked how it kept referring back to the past (partly because it helped me remember who everyone was ), but at the same time it maybe felt a bit messy as a result. Good overall, but damn - why on earth was it 3 hours long?

SpiderMan No Way Home - 8

Probably my favourite outing with Holland as SpiderMan. The setup and early action sequences were fantastic and it had some great emotional moments. I felt some of the banter in the second half was a little ordinary especially with so much they could have done, it was quite safe and by the numbers. Strange was brilliant whenever he was involved, would have liked more Wong too. Just shy of the very top tier of Marvel films, but definitely the best since Endgame.

Vermilion wrote:

No:1 Final Fantasy Fan wrote:Bridgeton season 1 - 8.5/10
I was pleasantly surprised as it didn't look like my cup of tea. But my friend kept recommending it to me. Glad he did too. The soundtrack is a highlight as I was not expecting modern day music in a period drama like an instrumental version of Bad Guy by Billie Eilish.

Bath city centre.

Cool is that where it's filmed? I did recognise the Crescent buildings.

No:1 Final Fantasy Fan wrote:

Vermilion wrote:

No:1 Final Fantasy Fan wrote:Bridgeton season 1 - 8.5/10
I was pleasantly surprised as it didn't look like my cup of tea. But my friend kept recommending it to me. Glad he did too. The soundtrack is a highlight as I was not expecting modern day music in a period drama like an instrumental version of Bad Guy by Billie Eilish.

Bath city centre.

Cool is that where it's filmed? I did recognise the Crescent buildings.

Yeah, i've not actually seen the show, but there's always a lot of buzz in Bath about it being filmed there.

On a separate note, watched Jackass Forever yesterday, and in an increasingly po faced world, it was actually kinda refreshing to see a guy getting his nuts squashed by a dude on a pogo stick.