What films have you watched recently?

UnclePsychosis

Skipped;78753" said:

bertie said:



CabbageCat said:

World War Z - Don't know what all the moaning was about TBH. I thought it was pretty good.





same here,  I normaly hate "old style" zombie films,  perhaps thats why the traditionalists slated it so

we watched Epic the other week -  fantastic  





And me (World War Z).

I often wonder what the severe critics think this film should have been like. It's just a movie. I expected nothing and I was entertained for a couple of hours.

The "problem" with the WWZ film is that it bears literally no resemblance whatsoever to the source material, other than there are zombies. I don't actually know why they bothered calling it WWZ, it did nothing but get them flak. It's like calling a film "the jimi hendrix story" when actually its a fictional account of a white jazz trombonist. Even if it's a good film people will complain.

The book is brilliant, by the way. My wife hates zombie things and even she was hooked on it. It's a shame that noone will do a film of it "properly" now.

holnrew

The best books are unfilmable anyway.

HAL9000

Saw Gravity last night. Not sure it really lived up to the hype but was certainly very impressively done and kept me entertained.

Also saw One Chance (the James Corden film about Paul Potts). Not normally the kind of thing I'd bother with but Mrs9000 wanted to see it. Actually it was far better than I'd expected, had a few laughs, got something in my eye at one point (that's what I told Mrs9000 anyway). Probably more one for the ladies but, again, I was entertained.

holnrew

Notes On A Sandal (Scandal, but I prefer the typo)

Judy Dench is creepy as fuck.

randomhandclaps

 

bertie said:

this always boils my piss........

I dont read books, ever.  so from a "missing out" perspective I really dont give a fuck,  I just hate the sanctimonious,  higher ground "Im obviously a better being"  kind of reason they do it

not that Im bitter 

It does really piss me of this.  If I wanted to read the book I know where I could order it, however I don't have this option.  Instead I wanted to sit back and watch a film for what it is - completely different medium. 

It does make me laugh when a mate will moan that the adaptation of the new Stephen King book was lacking and how much more high-brow they are for taking the time to read the book.

 

Anyone know of a score which is better than the recording?

 

EricTheWeary

I tried watching From Dusk Til Dawn again the other day. This is a film where the soundtrack is actually better than the film. I gave up part way through and may now just order the soundtrack off amazon.

CabbageCat

The Hunt - Awesome movie starring Mads Mikkelsson about a teacher accused of child abuse. Parents, teachers and anyone associated with children should all watch it.

ThePrettyDamned

I saw Session 9 the other day, and it was pretty terrible, despite being lived up to being a good low budget creeper.  It wasn't scary.

Seeing Gravity this week for my birthday, and I'm expecting it to be terrible because of Avatar syndrome (3D, very hyped).  Avatar is, by far, the single biggest disappointment ever.  Half hour in (it's not a short film) and me and my mate worked out the entire plot, including characters that had not yet been introduced.  Appalling writing.  Doesn't deserve any praise for anything but looking pretty. 

Seeing Saw today.  Looking forward to it. Really getting into my horror, so if anyone can recommend good, stupidly creepy films (a la The Ring), I'm game.

Also saw Oldboy again last week.  Highly recommended, and you'll wish you could watch it again for the first time.  Amazing script, acting, and the whole film is stupid tense and uncomfortable.  Not one for the kids

fatherjack

I read World War Z and enjoyed it muchly, but though they couldn't really film the book as it was.  I watched the film and I was right, but that wasn't my gripe with it - a lot of films run differently from the source book, they're two different art forms with different needs - it was that they made it a 12.  If you're going to make a zombie film, put blood and guts into it.  Make it a 15 at least, you'll still get a fair audience.

IanSavage

ThePrettyDamned said:

Seeing Saw today.  Looking forward to it. Really getting into my horror, so if anyone can recommend good, stupidly creepy films (a la The Ring), I'm game.

 

If you can put up with subtitles, there's a Spanish fillum called '[Rec]' which is pretty damned creepy.

randomhandclaps

If you want a good horror film nowadays you are most probably going to have to put up with subtitles - or wait until there's a dire remake that misses the point.  The Orphanage is a great one if you've not seen it.

Danny1969

Saw Gravity in 3D last night. I thought it was visually stunning, best 3D I've seen. 

Col_Decker

chillidoggy said:

'Predators'.

 

Not bad actually. Milking the Predator franchise a bit, but I thought it was worth watching nonetheless.

We watched that too. A bit odd I thought. Though I did enjoy Yakuza chap with Samuari sword vs.Predator with big knife scene.

Lixarto

randomhandclaps said:

 It does make me laugh when a mate will moan that the adaptation of the new Stephen King book was lacking ...

Why?

Jalapeno

Thought "The Unbearable Lightness Of Being", supposedly unfilmable was a superb adaption for the screen.

not_the_dj

Watched 'Jaws' on DVD last night. Jolly good, I think it'll be a hit ;-)

Seriously though there are so many classic moments. That great "zooming in while tracking back" shot, Ben Gardner popping out (still made my wife jump off the sofa), The USS Indianapolis speech (in fact Robert Shaw's performance as a whole).

Just brilliant, I could watch it again tonight and still enjoy it just as much.

 

 

randomhandclaps

Lixarto said:

randomhandclaps said:

 It does make me laugh when a mate will moan that the adaptation of the new Stephen King book was lacking ...

Why?

Because his suggestion is always that he is far more cultured and learned for reading a Stephen King book than someone who may be just a horror film fan.  If the likes of Stephen King (or any living writer) were more concerned with conserving their art and ideas or the authenticity of their story rather than cashing in on a big movie pay day then they would never sign away the rights.

Stephen King remains eternally narked about Kubrick Shining straying from the story.  I understand the points he makes but considering the admiration he claims to have had for Kubrick he should have been aware that when Kubrick made a film he made it his way.  Still though he willingly sells the rights to his books to any satellite channel that wants to make a cheap hammed up soap-style version of them.

Good luck to writers who cash in and make a fortune off their ideas.  However for them or their fans to complain about two hour film adaptions of four hundred page novels missing or altering bits - are they that naïve?  There seems very few authors who allow their principles to get in the was of repeated Hollywood cheques.  The imagery of a book exists in your head solely.  If your version of a book has been spoiled by Hollywood then the person to blame is not the guy who made the film, it's the guy who sold his rights for it to be exploited.

Myranda

randomhandclaps said:

Lixarto said:

randomhandclaps said:

 It does make me laugh when a mate will moan that the adaptation of the new Stephen King book was lacking ...

Why?

Because his suggestion is always that he is far more cultured and learned for reading a Stephen King book than someone who may be just a horror film fan.  If the likes of Stephen King (or any living writer) were more concerned with conserving their art and ideas or the authenticity of their story rather than cashing in on a big movie pay day then they would never sign away the rights.

Stephen King remains eternally narked about Kubrick Shining straying from the story.  I understand the points he makes but considering the admiration he claims to have had for Kubrick he should have been aware that when Kubrick made a film he made it his way.  Still though he willingly sells the rights to his books to any satellite channel that wants to make a cheap hammed up soap-style version of them.

Good luck to writers who cash in and make a fortune off their ideas.  However for them or their fans to complain about two hour film adaptions of four hundred page novels missing or altering bits - are they that naïve?  There seems very few authors who allow their principles to get in the was of repeated Hollywood cheques.  The imagery of a book exists in your head solely.  If your version of a book has been spoiled by Hollywood then the person to blame is not the guy who made the film, it's the guy who sold his rights for it to be exploited.

How about that Stephen King is just a bit shit as an author - he has great ideas but tends to wig out at the end...

It's why my favourite adaptation of one of his books is Needful Things... it uses most of the ideas from the book, but doesn't turn the shop keeper into a tiny goblin.

I.T. was great - till Pennywise turned out to be Golgotha the spider god (And... Why?! He was scary as a creepy murderous clown in peopleles nightmares)

The Shining is absolutely bloody amazing and Stephen King moaned that it wasn't the same as his book - nope, but it was brilliant rather than average...

Ok, Carrie was pretty similar to the book, but if you throw enough shit... 

CabbageCat

The ending in the Watchmen movie was much better than the ending in the book.

randomhandclaps

Shit endings?  Are you forgetting the Langoliers?