What films have you watched recently?

Tone71

The Platform on Netflix - A bit dull but I really enjoyed it

Haych

Red Dragon

The 2002 prequel to Silence of the Lambs. 

The story/plot was good but it was one of those films where you just felt it had all been done before. 

A pretty good cast with Hopkins reprising his role as Hannibal - that was odd since he’d aged quite a lot since SotL but it was set before. 

Edward Norton didn’t quite fit the role of the FBI agent who brings down Ralph Fiennes as a quite creepy serial killer. 

Nice to see Mary Louise Parker, too. She’s very hot in an understated kinda way. 

The film is set, I suppose, somewhere in the late 80s/early 90s but, compared to other films made in the same era, the whole production feels like it was made in the late 80s, it’s dated quite badly and felt like it was made for TV rather than the big screen. 

Not sure it’s fair to give it a score out of ten. The story was good but it could have picked up the pace a bit and I just can’t get past Ed Norton as the main good guy and just how dated it felt. 

fretmeister

Haych said:

Red Dragon

The 2002 prequel to Silence of the Lambs. 

The story/plot was good but it was one of those films where you just felt it had all been done before. 

A pretty good cast with Hopkins reprising his role as Hannibal - that was odd since he’d aged quite a lot since SotL but it was set before. 

Edward Norton didn’t quite fit the role of the FBI agent who brings down Ralph Fiennes as a quite creepy serial killer. 

Nice to see Mary Louise Parker, too. She’s very hot in an understated kinda way. 

The film is set, I suppose, somewhere in the late 80s/early 90s but, compared to other films made in the same era, the whole production feels like it was made in the late 80s, it’s dated quite badly and felt like it was made for TV rather than the big screen. 

Not sure it’s fair to give it a score out of ten. The story was good but it could have picked up the pace a bit and I just can’t get past Ed Norton as the main good guy and just how dated it felt. 

The proper original version "Manhunter" is a lot better. I like Brian Cox's Lecter more now these days too. Less cheesy.

Haych

fretmeister said:

The proper original version "Manhunter" is a lot better. I like Brian Cox's Lecter more now these days too. Less cheesy.

Thanks @fretmeister, I wasn't aware of this version, I'll check it out.

skullfunkerry

fretmeister said:

Finally saw Star Wars Rise of Skywalker 

Ok it was pretty much a remake of ROTJ and it took a couple of liberties (force ghosts with powers?) but overall I really liked it. I don’t get the panning it got at all.

Thoroughly enjoyable nonsense, as even the mighty Empire Strikes Back is. 

Agreed

boogieman

skullfunkerry said:

I watched the new Invisible Man last night. My wife liked it, but I thought it was a bit shit, and was quite peeved that we'd paid £16 to rent it

£16 to rent it? Woah!!! 

Philly_Q

Haych said:

fretmeister said:

The proper original version "Manhunter" is a lot better. I like Brian Cox's Lecter more now these days too. Less cheesy.

Thanks @fretmeister, I wasn't aware of this version, I'll check it out.

I think both versions are a little weak compared with the book - I know everyone says that about film adaptations of books.  But Manhunter is definitely the better of the two films.  And I always preferred Brian Cox's Lecter (or Lecktor!), I really don't think Hopkins deserved that Oscar.

fretmeister

Philly_Q said:

Haych said:

fretmeister said:

The proper original version "Manhunter" is a lot better. I like Brian Cox's Lecter more now these days too. Less cheesy.

Thanks @fretmeister, I wasn't aware of this version, I'll check it out.

I think both versions are a little weak compared with the book - I know everyone says that about film adaptations of books.  But Manhunter is definitely the better of the two films.  And I always preferred Brian Cox's Lecter (or Lecktor!), I really don't think Hopkins deserved that Oscar.

I liked Hopkins, but it was certainly of it's time. Silence of the Lambs has aged terribly almost to the point of being unwatchable.
Hannibal (the sequel, not the TV show) has actually survived the passage of time far better, and it is not nearly as good as Silence was on release.

Haych

Oceans Eleven

Never watched this before which is odd considering the hype that surrounds it. 

It was ok, but just ok. I didn’t know what to expect and it was pretty good but nothing outstanding and not that memorable, again considering the hype. 

Easy to watch but too easy, if you know what I mean - there was no tension or excitement or heart in your mouth on the edge of your seat
moments which in a heist movie I would expect in droves. It also felt like it took an age to get going and even then nothing really happens and everything that did happen was very predictable. 

Not a bad film but not a great one either. Its school report would read, has potential but must do better. 

Philly_Q

Haych said:

Oceans Eleven

Never watched this before which is odd considering the hype that surrounds it. 

I assume you're talking about the George Clooney version not the Frank Sinatra one?

EricTheWeary

Philly_Q said:

Haych said:

Oceans Eleven

Never watched this before which is odd considering the hype that surrounds it. 

I assume you're talking about the George Clooney version not the Frank Sinatra one?

Those bobbysoxers never rest.

Haych

Philly_Q said:

Haych said:

Oceans Eleven

Never watched this before which is odd considering the hype that surrounds it. 

I assume you're talking about the George Clooney version not the Frank Sinatra one?

Indeed. I was aware it was a remake but hadn’t seen either until last night. 

Philly_Q

Haych said:

Philly_Q said:

Haych said:

Oceans Eleven

Never watched this before which is odd considering the hype that surrounds it. 

I assume you're talking about the George Clooney version not the Frank Sinatra one?

Indeed. I was aware it was a remake but hadn’t seen either until last night. 

Give the original a go.  It's far from a great film, in fact it's a pretty bad one (and I'm not really a fan of the Rat Pack) but if you like older films - many people don't - it's got that late 50s, early 60s cool vibe which makes it quite entertaining.

Whereas the remake (and even more so, its sequels), despite being directed by Steven Soderbergh whose films I normally quite like, just seem like slick, vacuous modern Hollywood nonsense to me.

ICBM

Dark Waters

Legal/environmental drama about the corporate cover-up of the effects of a poisonous chemical (I won't say what, or it will be a spoiler) being dumped in rural America. Perhaps not the most exciting subject but it's a powerful story, well-acted and involving, with a great lead performance from Mark Ruffalo. Anne Hathaway is as annoying as usual - but at least her role, while important, is not totally central. I had - like most of us, almost certainly - been totally unaware of the background to the case, and it's worth knowing just how corrupt huge corporations can be, and how much it might affect all our lives.

7/10

HAL9000

ICBM said:

Dark Waters

Legal/environmental drama about the corporate cover-up of the effects of a poisonous chemical (I won't say what, or it will be a spoiler) being dumped in rural America. Perhaps not the most exciting subject but it's a powerful story, well-acted and involving, with a great lead performance from Mark Ruffalo. Anne Hathaway is as annoying as usual - but at least her role, while important, is not totally central. I had - like most of us, almost certainly - been totally unaware of the background to the case, and it's worth knowing just how corrupt huge corporations can be, and how much it might affect all our lives.

7/10

Saw this just before the lockdown. Great performance, as always, from Mark Ruffalo. Thoroughly gripped by the film and well worth a watch.

HAL9000

Blues Brothers 2000. Having watched Blues Brothers a week or so back it was time to watch the sequel. Far better than I remembered with some real laugh out loud moments but also pretty poor in places. Worth it though for performances from Aretha Franklin, Wilson Pickett, James Brown, BB King, Eric Clapton, etc. Band members included Steve Cropper, Eddie Floyd, Steve Winwood, Jimmie Vaughan, Clarence Clemens, Dr John, Bo Didley, and I’m sure plenty of others that I failed to spot. Only 5 or 6 out of 10 for the actual film, but probably 8 or so just for the chance to see performances by some of the greats.

hollywoodrox

Haych said:

I also watched The Numbers Station last night. 

John Cusack plays a burned out CIA black ops agent who fluffs a hit by refusing to pull the trigger on a teenage girl who witnessed him offing a loose end. Instead his partner shoots her and it clearly bothers his conscience. 

He’s sent for a psych evaluation and is reassigned to a CIA outpost in Suffolk minding a clueless employee whose job it is to broadcast random numbers from a secure underground bunker over shortwave radio. 

Cue bad guys who break in with their own agenda and it makes for a decent movie. 

John Cusack plays the tortured CIA operative well. Malik Åckerman is ok as the otherwise clueless broadcaster who doesn’t know why she’s doing what she is but doesn’t really fit the role well when the heat is turned up. 

The plot isn’t strong, and doesn’t need to be, but still carries the movie along and it otherwise revolves around Emerson’s (Cusack) guilt at letting the girl die at the start of the movie. 

I thought it was pretty good for a film whose cast is for the large part just two people and Cusack carries much of the weight of that on his shoulders.

7/10 

I’ve seen that before , it’s very good. Plus I like numbers stations,used to pick them up on shortwave 

Springywheel

HAL9000 said:

Blues Brothers 2000. Having watched Blues Brothers a week or so back it was time to watch the sequel. Far better than I remembered with some real laugh out loud moments but also pretty poor in places. Worth it though for performances from Aretha Franklin, Wilson Pickett, James Brown, BB King, Eric Clapton, etc. Band members included Steve Cropper, Eddie Floyd, Steve Winwood, Jimmie Vaughan, Clarence Clemens, Dr John, Bo Didley, and I’m sure plenty of others that I failed to spot. Only 5 or 6 out of 10 for the actual film, but probably 8 or so just for the chance to see performances by some of the greats.

Saw that when it first came out and didn't think it was all that great...but I did see James Brown promoting the film on tour that year at the unlikeliest of venues for a funk legend....Lydiard Park in Swindon. 

Haych

Blade Runner. 

The lighting and cinematography was very good. The special effects for its time were also excellent. The artwork and design still look good even close to forty years later. 

As a film, though, utter bollocks! Slow, meandering and wearisome. 

I know it’s a cult classic and I’ll probably be hunted down like a replicant for saying so but really quite dull. 

ICBM

Haych said:

Blade Runner. 

The lighting and cinematography was very good. The special effects for its time were also excellent. The artwork and design still look good even close to forty years later. 

As a film, though, utter bollocks! Slow, meandering and wearisome. 

I know it’s a cult classic and I’ll probably be hunted down like a replicant for saying so but really quite dull. 

You didn't accidentally see Blade Runner 2049 instead, did you?