Your favourite films

[ricardo 7,401]

18 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Just watched Oppenheimer. First of all, it's not really one of those films you have to see at the cinema. No big special effects at all. 

It wasn't at all what I expected but it's very powerful. I expected to be baffled by the science but the film is more about the politics behind the bomb and the treatment of Oppenheimer afterwards. 

Definitely worth a watch. Don't be put off by the length, it flew by. Don't go to Cinema City in the afternoon to see it, my parking bill was £9.00.

PS there was a showing of Barbie on one of the other screens. There were a lot of women who dressed for the occasion which has left me with some disturbing images I'll probably never be able to erase! 

So an afternoon not entirely wasted then?

[Herman 9,828]

1 hour ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Just watched Oppenheimer. First of all, it's not really one of those films you have to see at the cinema. No big special effects at all. 

It wasn't at all what I expected but it's very powerful. I expected to be baffled by the science but the film is more about the politics behind the bomb and the treatment of Oppenheimer afterwards. 

Definitely worth a watch. Don't be put off by the length, it flew by. Don't go to Cinema City in the afternoon to see it, my parking bill was £9.00.

PS there was a showing of Barbie on one of the other screens. There were a lot of women who dressed for the occasion which has left me with some disturbing images I'll probably never be able to erase! 

 

[The Raptor 1,235]

1 hour ago, dylanisabaddog said:

First of all, it's not really one of those films you have to see at the cinema. No big special effects at all. 

That's interesting. Some trailer game them impression that it was big and spectacular so I was considering seeing it on the IMAX screen. I won't bother now. I'll hopefully see it one afternoon next week. 

[PurpleCanary 5,582]

On 29/06/2023 at 11:53, The Raptor said:

Slightly annoying. Don't let that put you off tho as I've always thought that about her although I can't put my finger on why. 

First time I’d seen Phoebe W-B in anything, and I thought she was fine. 

[KiwiScot 1,461]

15 hours ago, Herman said:

 

Front row is awesome, but always always depends on the individual cinema as some put you to close. But you can scretch your legs, less chance of people around you. Can get a bit drafty.

Back row is also good. No one behind you, a grand overview of the screen, but lots of heads between you and the screen. You are paying to watch others watching the film.

[KiwiScot 1,461]

11 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

First time I’d seen Phoebe W-B in anything, and I thought she was fine. 

On 29/06/2023 at 11:53, The Raptor said:

Slightly annoying. Don't let that put you off tho as I've always thought that about her although I can't put my finger on why. 

I think she is fine also, but also a face and how she projects that doesn't quite fit. Her bit hit Fleabag has kind of typecast her as a quirky, oddball, but likeable character and the show became such a cult&mainstream hit that's lived longer than it should have. I think the most interesting thing is that she is a writer and producer, writing said show and has been involved in this role more and more. Killing Eve and the last James Bond movie to name a few which also keeps her in the celeb spotlight while fleabag runs and runs on streaming sites.

[Herman 9,828]

49 minutes ago, KiwiScot said:

Front row is awesome, but always always depends on the individual cinema as some put you to close. But you can scretch your legs, less chance of people around you. Can get a bit drafty.

Back row is also good. No one behind you, a grand overview of the screen, but lots of heads between you and the screen. You are paying to watch others watching the film.

I am getting to that age where an aisle seat is very preferable. 😁

[PurpleCanary 5,582]

On 22/07/2023 at 18:40, dylanisabaddog said:

Just watched Oppenheimer. First of all, it's not really one of those films you have to see at the cinema. No big special effects at all. 

It wasn't at all what I expected but it's very powerful. I expected to be baffled by the science but the film is more about the politics behind the bomb and the treatment of Oppenheimer afterwards. 

Definitely worth a watch. Don't be put off by the length, it flew by. Don't go to Cinema City in the afternoon to see it, my parking bill was £9.00.

PS there was a showing of Barbie on one of the other screens. There were a lot of women who dressed for the occasion which has left me with some disturbing images I'll probably never be able to erase! 

I saw it yesterday, on an IMAX screen. Not by choice. I had no idea what an IMAX screen meant. it was the only option for the original English version as opposed to dubbed.

It is right that it isn't a blockbuster movie full of special effects, but even so there moments when seeing the film immersively adds to the experience.

It is certainly very much worth watching, even if I had a few quibbles. One of the female roles (Florence Pugh) is underwritten, although the Emily Blunt role is latter on fleshed out satisfactorily.

And there is the problem in such history films of introducing a host of famous people into the narrative, and the "Oh I must introduce you to so and so" trap isn't entirely avoided.

Court-room dramas are usually very watchable, but Nolan has two, and at the start it gets confusing, cutting between them, especially I suspect for a non-US audience. But Nolan pulls them together at the end.

[dylanisabaddog 4,990]

8 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

I saw it yesterday, on an IMAX screen. Not by choice. I had no idea what an IMAX screen meant. it was the only option for the original English version as opposed to dubbed.

It is right that it isn't a blockbuster movie full of special effects, but even so there moments when seeing the film immersively adds to the experience.

It is certainly very much worth watching, even if I had a few quibbles. One of the female roles (Florence Pugh) is underwritten, although the Emily Blunt role is latter on fleshed out satisfactorily.

And there is the problem in such history films of introducing a host of famous people into the narrative, and the "Oh I must introduce you to so and so" trap isn't entirely avoided.

Court-room dramas are usually very watchable, but Nolan has two, and at the start it gets confusing, cutting between them, especially I suspect for a non-US audience. But Nolan pulls them together at the end.

Good review but I have a nasty feeling that most Americans won't know who Oppenheimer was so probably won't understand the court scenes. As for Florence Pugh, I have sympathy for Nolan. There was probably a lot more to it but it would be guessing and Nolan did his best to keep it factual. Oppenheimer was a naughty boy with the ladies but I got the feeling she was the one. Did you read it like that? 

Having thought about it on and off I'd like to see it again 

[PurpleCanary 5,582]

13 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Good review but I have a nasty feeling that most Americans won't know who Oppenheimer was so probably won't understand the court scenes. As for Florence Pugh, I have sympathy for Nolan. There was probably a lot more to it but it would be guessing and Nolan did his best to keep it factual. Oppenheimer was a naughty boy with the ladies but I got the feeling she was the one. Did you read it like that? 

Having thought about it on and off I'd like to see it again 

I didn't have strong feelings as to whether she was really the one. If the film is true to the Emily Blunt character then she was probably more what Oppenheimer needed when it all got political. Like you I would happily see the film again.

[Wings of a Sparrow 1,431]

I may have mentioned it previously, but Marathon Man popped up on a Facebook post earlier, what a great film that is and a better book.

[dylanisabaddog 4,990]

22 hours ago, Wings of a Sparrow said:

I may have mentioned it previously, but Marathon Man popped up on a Facebook post earlier, what a great film that is and a better book.

A wonderful film but it will give you nightmares if you're frightened of the dentist. 

Apparently Laurence Olivier took a huge dislike to Dustin Hoffman and offered to drill his tooth for real if Hoffman thought it would help with his method acting. Ouch. 

[Wings of a Sparrow 1,431]

1 hour ago, dylanisabaddog said:

A wonderful film but it will give you nightmares if you're frightened of the dentist. 

Apparently Laurence Olivier took a huge dislike to Dustin Hoffman and offered to drill his tooth for real if Hoffman thought it would help with his method acting. Ouch. 

Is it safe...

[dylanisabaddog 4,990]

The nation's favourite sound tracks. Take with a pinch of salt, as voted by Classic FM listeners. 

https://news.sky.com/story/the-lord-of-the-rings-soundtrack-voted-nations-favourite-film-music-12949498

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

One of my favourite scenes in a movie. In the Electric Mist. One of my favourite actors Tommy Lee Jones and the late great singer/drummer from The Band Levon Helm. What a gravelly yet rich creamy voice Levon had.

 

[The Raptor 1,235]

Never seen it. Will check it out. Especially with lemon helm. Singing and drumming is an art I've not yet mastered and never will I reckon.

I can't belive I'm going to see jurrasic Park on the big screen again next week!  I went to either the 20th or 25th anniversary screenings as well. Its a work of art.

In a roundabout way the inspiration for my name. It comes from not wanting a norwich pun that would age badly. I picked the Toronto raptors nba team as they're great. They formed when jurassic park came out and the name went to a vote. Obviously everyone voted for raptor. Just be thankful I'm not Mr huskie...

[GodlyOtsemobor 2,401]

Elvira's Haunted hills. 👍

[PurpleCanary 5,582]

I took in the latest Branagh Poirot adaptation yesterday, set in Venice, having not seen either of the first two.  A combination of a haunted house and locked-room murder mystery, but all a bit flat, even with the admirable Camille Cottin, and cheap physical effects to scare the viewer rather than psychological tension.

[Nuff Said 5,178]

On 30/07/2023 at 08:45, Wings of a Sparrow said:

I may have mentioned it previously, but Marathon Man popped up on a Facebook post earlier, what a great film that is and a better book.

A good side topic, I was in a discussion the other day that concluded the book is always better than the film. There must be some where it’s the other way round, but I can’t think of an example?

[Nuff Said 5,178]

11 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

I took in the latest Branagh Poirot adaptation yesterday, set in Venice, having not seen either of the first two.  A combination of a haunted house and locked-room murder mystery, but all a bit flat, even with the admirable Camille Cottin, and cheap physical effects to scare the viewer rather than psychological tension.

I can’t hear the name Branagh without thinking of this.

 

[dylanisabaddog 4,990]

17 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

I took in the latest Branagh Poirot adaptation yesterday, set in Venice, having not seen either of the first two.  A combination of a haunted house and locked-room murder mystery, but all a bit flat, even with the admirable Camille Cottin, and cheap physical effects to scare the viewer rather than psychological tension.

It was either that or Bolan's Shoes this week for me. You've made my mind up for me

[dylanisabaddog 4,990]

Bbc 4 on Thursday. Worth a watch

[Canary73 160]

 

[king canary 7,679]

On 29/07/2023 at 09:36, PurpleCanary said:

It is right that it isn't a blockbuster movie full of special effects, but even so there moments when seeing the film immersively adds to the experience.

Completely agree on this. I saw it in IMAX and I really doubt the film would be anywhere near as powerful at home on your TV. The scene where everyone is stamping their feet on the wooden bleachers while Oppehimer sees them all turning to ash was sensorally overwhelming in a way that helped you understand how he was feeling. I doubt that would come across so well at home unless you've got an incredible set up.

[PurpleCanary 5,582]

17 minutes ago, king canary said:

Completely agree on this. I saw it in IMAX and I really doubt the film would be anywhere near as powerful at home on your TV. The scene where everyone is stamping their feet on the wooden bleachers while Oppehimer sees them all turning to ash was sensorally overwhelming in a way that helped you understand how he was feeling. I doubt that would come across so well at home unless you've got an incredible set up.

Yes. Without spoiling, there is also a scene where the only sound is just Oppenheimer breathing, which again I doubt would work anything like so well on a TV, even given that some TV screens are pretty big...

[king canary 7,679]

24 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Yes. Without spoiling, there is also a scene where the only sound is just Oppenheimer breathing, which again I doubt would work anything like so well on a TV, even given that some TV screens are pretty big...

It is the thing I love about Nolan. He has his flaws but I can't think of another mainstream director working right now who's films make better use of sound, lighting and all the benefits of an actual cinema. 

Edited September 16, 2023 by king canary

[PurpleCanary 5,582]

On 16/09/2023 at 06:28, dylanisabaddog said:

It was either that or Bolan's Shoes this week for me. You've made my mind up for me

I am flattered you value my opinion! As it happens it has generally got poorish reviews but some critics have liked it, or at least have said it is the best of the three Poirots Branagh has now done. Having not see the others I wouldn't know about that.

[The Raptor 1,235]

26 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I am flattered you value my opinion! As it happens it has generally got poorish reviews but some critics have liked it, or at least have said it is the best of the three Poirots Branagh has now done. Having not see the others I wouldn't know about that.

The other two were decent enough. However I prefer the two knives out films. Both out at similar times, large ensemble casts, plot twists and turns. Knives out did it slightly better tho. It's also good to see Daniel Craig play a completely different character to Bond.

[dylanisabaddog 4,990]

35 minutes ago, The Raptor said:

The other two were decent enough. However I prefer the two knives out films. Both out at similar times, large ensemble casts, plot twists and turns. Knives out did it slightly better tho. It's also good to see Daniel Craig play a completely different character to Bond.

Loved the first Knives Out but not so keen on the second. 

As for the first 2 Branagh/Poirot films, @PurpleCanary I would say they're worth a look.

On the theme of Agatha Christie, I saw Mousetrap recently and was quite disappointed. I think most of the audience had guessed the killer by the interval. 

[dylanisabaddog 4,990]

20 hours ago, king canary said:

It is the thing I love about Nolan. He has his flaws but I can't think of another mainstream director working right now who's films make better use of sound, lighting and all the benefits of an actual cinema. 

The David Lean of his generation