Topic: The RAWK Film Thread

[OneTouchFooty]

I think for me he'd be nowhere in the discussion, because he so frequently plays the same man. I know that's a massive oversimplification, and unfair, but I don't really feel like there's much diversity in his roles.

That’s fair and I said it myself, though I was considering his collection of films rather than solely the actor.. though now I’m thinking about it I feel I made a hasty decision. There’s few big time Hollywood actors out that really diversify every role and challenge themselves. Though Gary Oldman & Fassbender spring to mind.

[Buck Pete]

Watched the Equalizer tonight.

Nothing like a bit of Denzel shooting Russian Shits with a nail gun.

[Redcap]

Think I liked it more than you did, but can't argue.

Basically a rehash of the first part, but without the charm of the child actors who brought that to life. A bunch of people in their late forties running about shouting over each other like the Goonies, and they seem to have left out the big scares. The first one had some excellent jump scare moments, and OK it's a cheap way to do horror, but the first one elevated that to an art form, the bit with the projector was one of the best jump scares I can remember, but I can't even think of one such moment in part 2, and I only watched it last night.

I do like the fact they made a running gag about "shitty endings" and even got Stephen King himself in on the joke, but yeah, disappointing experience overall.

I feel like it should have been better, given the quality of the cast. But the writing was very much phoned in.

There's a certain kind of magic in the best Stephen King adaptations that transcends horror, and cuts through to something more profound and human. Stand By Me is a good example of that, as is Carrie and to an extent the first It from a couple of years back. I haven't read the book, but you get a sense of what King was trying to convey in this that didn't really carry through. There's a huge gaping hole where the pathos is supposed to kick in at the end that usually speaks to a lack of homework in an earlier act to earn that payoff. In this case it seems like the movie huffed and puffed and tried very hard to elicit some sort of an emotional reaction linked to the characters' trauma as children and how they've carried it with them, but it's all very hamfisted and probably required a lot more time than they had to do it justice.

I wouldn't mind seeing a decent mini-series adaptation of it, actually, I think if we spent the first 5 episodes of a 13 episode season on the children, and then another 5 or so episodes on the adults, giving a bit more depth to the characters, it would allow a much more emotionally satisfying conclusion.

[Nessy76]

I feel like it should have been better, given the quality of the cast. But the writing was very much phoned in.

There's a certain kind of magic in the best Stephen King adaptations that transcends horror, and cuts through to something more profound and human. Stand By Me is a good example of that, as is Carrie and to an extent the first It from a couple of years back. I haven't read the book, but you get a sense of what King was trying to convey in this that didn't really carry through. There's a huge gaping hole where the pathos is supposed to kick in at the end that usually speaks to a lack of homework in an earlier act to earn that payoff. In this case it seems like the movie huffed and puffed and tried very hard to elicit some sort of an emotional reaction linked to the characters' trauma as children and how they've carried it with them, but it's all very hamfisted and probably required a lot more time than they had to do it justice.

I wouldn't mind seeing a decent mini-series adaptation of it, actually, I think if we spent the first 5 episodes of a 13 episode season on the children, and then another 5 or so episodes on the adults, giving a bit more depth to the characters, it would allow a much more emotionally satisfying conclusion.

Yes. The adults were basically just the kids but they look older, it does not ring true. They need to be characters in their own right. I get that thematically none of them have been able to move on and grow, but there was no sense that they had lived at all since leaving. The opening act, when we see where they all are now (mostly living very cosmetically successful lives in various ways) does not fit with what follows.

[tubby]

Blindspotting is pretty good.

[Jake]

Watched Green Book last night. Great film, very good indeed. Salty.

[Agent99]

Holmes and Watson is one of the worst films I have ever seen. How the fuck did some of that cast sign up for it? Also, why does John C Reilly keep starring in comedies? He isn't funny at all.

[Beav]

Hustlers rules.

J.Lo deserves a nomination for her entrance alone. Iconic.

[soxfan]

Saw Stan & Ollie yesterday. Such a thoughtful and moving film, I thought Coogan and Reilly were magnificent and you could really feel it was made with such a love and reverence for the original Stan & Ollie.

Agree 100%.

[soxfan]

And even some women in amongst that lot as well?

The reference was about male actors I thought. Certainly many great actresses over time as well.

[Damian V]

Few I've seen recently:

Parasite - wow, what an amazing movie. Story, acting, photography, all of the absolute highest level.
Once Upon A Time In Hollywood - I know opinions vastly differ on this one but I personally loved it. Didn't feel like it dragged at any point and would go for a rewatch.
It: Chapter 2 - basically a rehash of the first one, everything by the book but was ok
Support The Girls - nice little movie about a highway diner in USA, charming movie
Ready or Not - fun horror (I guess?) movie, but don't quite get the high praise it received.

Not sure if this applies for the film thread, but also seen the 3 standups by Bill Burr, Dave Chappelle & Aziz. Bill Burr one was hilarious, Chappelle one was also very good but the Aziz Ansari one was just ok.

[Nitramdorf]

There is a short film just released from the Jurassic World series.

https://twitter.com/JurassicWorld/status/1173461348069650432?s=19

[rawcusk8]

Saw It Chapter 2 last night, massive let down. Felt like I was watching an episode of Goosebumps, just so over the top with the scares, should have kept it simple and creepy as opposed to the childish shite served up.

[Buck Pete]

Few I've seen recently:

Parasite - wow, what an amazing movie. Story, acting, photography, all of the absolute highest level.

Still sitting here (im)patiently waiting for the UK release.

Ad Astra for me on Thursday night in IMAX

[Redcap]

The reference was about male actors I thought. Certainly many great actresses over time as well.

Not having a go, mate.

My wife's made a point of telling me over and over that actresses should be called actors as well, because there's no difference in the trade, and therefore there's no need to differentiate with an entirely different noun.

A part of me thinks she's quibbling, but in the context of these chats about the 'great actors', it's probably a fair point.

There's no reason to differentiate between the male and female leads in conversations like this, and doing so tends to focus the conversation on the male actors. Of course you do get Merryl Streep and Julianne Moore lionised from time to time as giants of the industry as well, but way less often than you do with Tom Hanks, who, arguably, is no better than either of the above. And that's way before you get into any of the other myriad great actresses like Penelope Cruz, Zhang Ziyi, Catherine Deneuve, Isabelle Huppert etc. etc.

So returning to my wife's point - I don't necessarily think differentiating male and female actors with a different noun matters - that's probably more PCness than we need and just twice as many syllables. But I think it is useful to think of male and female actors as doing the same job, and therefore should be referred to in the same conversations about 'best actors' or 'worst actors'.

[afc tukrish]

Not having a go, mate.

My wife's made a point of telling me over and over that actresses should be called actors as well, because there's no difference in the trade, and therefore there's no need to differentiate with an entirely different noun.

A part of me thinks she's quibbling, but in the context of these chats about the 'great actors', it's probably a fair point.

There's no reason to differentiate between the male and female leads in conversations like this, and doing so tends to focus the conversation on the male actors. Of course you do get Merryl Streep and Julianne Moore lionised from time to time as giants of the industry as well, but way less often than you do with Tom Hanks, who, arguably, is no better than either of the above. And that's way before you get into any of the other myriad great actresses like Penelope Cruz, Zhang Ziyi, Catherine Deneuve, Isabelle Huppert etc. etc.

So returning to my wife's point - I don't necessarily think differentiating male and female actors with a different noun matters - that's probably more PCness than we need and just twice as many syllables. But I think it is useful to think of male and female actors as doing the same job, and therefore should be referred to in the same conversations about 'best actors' or 'worst actors'.

Is there a female equivalent to Nic Cage?

Angelina Jolie, perhaps?

Difficult to categorizse, never mind define...

[Max_powers]

Tom Hanks is basically the James Milner of Hollywood actors for me. Solid performer, never seen a movie where he was poor. But for me he never put in mesmerizing performances actors like De Niro or Al Pacino put in occasionally.

Nic Cage is Eden Hazard, blows very hot and cold.

Edit: One actor that I find is severely underrated is Harvey Keitel. Some of his work in early Scorcese and Tarantino films is amazing.

As far as including actresses in these conversations as Redcap mentions, I fully agree with him. I think another reason why they aren't usually is because Hollywood is not really good at writing type of female lead roles that garner a lot of critical praise. When they do, these roles often go to a select few established name actresses. Even in really good Hollywood movies I find that female characters are often not fully fleshed humans, maybe because the characters are written by men mostly.

As an aside Hollywood is also really bad at writing and directing child actors. Kids in Hollywood movies just act and behave like weird robots, totally unlike real kids.

[Damian V]

Still sitting here (im)patiently waiting for the UK release.

Ad Astra for me on Thursday night in IMAX

I read it's only coming out in February in the UK? Bit mad!
But definitely worth a wait to see it in cinema rather than on the small screen at home.

[Something Worse]

Cage is Maradona

[Damian V]

Cage is Maradona

Hopefully the biopic about him is as brilliant as Maradona's

[Buck Pete]

I read it's only coming out in February in the UK? Bit mad!
But definitely worth a wait to see it in cinema rather than on the small screen at home.

Curzon have the UK rights and I cant understand why they aren't screening it yet.

I think it will be available on Curzon Home Cinema soon or from a torrent even, but as you say, I want to watch it at the flicks.

[Machae]

Just watched Godzilla King of the Monsters thought it was a mess of a film and it really annoyed me that they did a cover version of Blue Oyster Cults Godzilla and didn't let them do it over the end titles.

Awful film, other than the visuals. I'm slightly worried for Godzilla vs Kong, aren't they two anti-heroes, I like both and a bit upset one of them will lose

[Redcap]

I think another reason why they aren't usually is because Hollywood is not really good at writing type of female lead roles that garner a lot of critical praise. When they do, these roles often go to a select few established name actresses. Even in really good Hollywood movies I find that female characters are often not fully fleshed humans, maybe because the characters are written by men mostly.

As an aside Hollywood is also really bad at writing and directing child actors. Kids in Hollywood movies just act and behave like weird robots, totally unlike real kids.

Agreed. I think the writing of good female roles is probably under-served. That's probably a part of the reason why there is no female Nic Cage. There just isn't as wide a range of weird and interesting roles for women.

[Nobby Reserve]

I feel like it should have been better, given the quality of the cast. But the writing was very much phoned in.

There's a certain kind of magic in the best Stephen King adaptations that transcends horror, and cuts through to something more profound and human. Stand By Me is a good example of that, as is Carrie and to an extent the first It from a couple of years back. I haven't read the book, but you get a sense of what King was trying to convey in this that didn't really carry through. There's a huge gaping hole where the pathos is supposed to kick in at the end that usually speaks to a lack of homework in an earlier act to earn that payoff. In this case it seems like the movie huffed and puffed and tried very hard to elicit some sort of an emotional reaction linked to the characters' trauma as children and how they've carried it with them, but it's all very hamfisted and probably required a lot more time than they had to do it justice.

Saw this last night and I started off this post with "I quite enjoyed it, but it's not without its faults."

When I started thinking through the 'faults', I realised I was talking myself out of liking it. In general, certain segments felt really contrived and even though it runs to nearly 3 hours, at times it felt rushed, especially the end.

In terms of specific issues:

Spoiler

The 'dead monsters' who attacked the different characters were a bit crap.

I didn't see the point of bringing back the Henry Bowers character; he ultimately does next to fuck all.

The whole 'self redemption' thing was overplayed - especially Bill's in his own childhood flooded basement. I know 'Pennywise' creates scenarios to scare the shit out of his victims, but this seemed to have the purpose of giving Bill the opportunity to reconcile himself with the fact he shouldn't blame himself for Georgie's death.

So the 'evil entity' that is Pennywise was alien? WFT? I don't think there was a need to do that. They could have just left it as 'supernatural & unexplained'.

The way they killed Pennywise was crap and smacked of 'too convenient, too easy' - in fact the whole finale had the feeling of 'can't be arsed any more' by the makers

[close]

I did like the flashback scenes (teenage Rich still cracks me up) and the way the characters bonded like they were teenagers again (despite barely remembering each other and the events of 'It' whilst they were away from Derry). There's quite a few in-jokes that were also good.

Overall, I still enjoyed the film experience, though.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

The book is much better, but makes even less sense.

That's because the book isn't the full book. It's the first part of three.

It's the Southern Reaches Triology.

Once you've read Annihilation, Authority, Acceptance then it makes more sense as the future books delve into the past

Spoiler

Also most bits don't make any sense because they are attempting to view an extra-dimensional space with differing rules of reality through the viewpoint of a human.

The main point is the meeting of the outside and the meeting of those that encountered it. You also get to finally find about about the crawler and the circumstances around that happening, plus a lot more back story.

The transformation is the key - perhaps this is the outside transforming those that cannot ever relate into something that can?


Also - if you liked the book, try Roadside Picnic.

[close]

[Beav]

Ad Astra is phenomenal.

Plays like a modern Apocalypse Now (in spaaace), one man's dreamlike journey into the harshest of environments to find a mythical figure supposedly driven insane with obsession, as he wrestles with his own state of mind along the way.

A story of the importance of what we have, how hard we need to hang on to human connections on this mad blue marble.

Go see it.

[Only Me]

Ok then, I’ll be the one to admit seeing the new Downton movie.

As dreadfully twee and lightweight as the tv series-if you liked that, then you’ll like the film.

Saw it in the Everyman cinema though, so boss night anyway. Such a great place to watch a film. Even a shite one. Food is boss, service is great, seats are dead comfy, and everyone there seems to behave properly (no noisy, mobile using selfish twats).

Also had a boss kip on one of their couches during about 95% of Angry Birds 2!

[LallanaInPyjamas]

I caught Hostiles on Netflix last night. Really good, better than I expected.
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/vJz5l5ru7ws" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/vJz5l5ru7ws</a>

Just watched this. Awesome film. Soundtrack, editing, cinematography and pacing all on point. Similar in style to the Assassination of Jesse James - and that it's kept well under the radar.

[Buck Pete]

Ad Astra is phenomenal.

Plays like a modern Apocalypse Now (in spaaace), one man's dreamlike journey into the harshest of environments to find a mythical figure supposedly driven insane with obsession, as he wrestles with his own state of mind along the way.

A story of the importance of what we have, how hard we need to hang on to human connections on this mad blue marble.

Go see it.

Apocalypse Now in Space. Do me a favour

I just got back from watching this and I absolutely knew Beav would be on here saying he loved it and quoting phrases like "dreamlike Journey".  I do remember you getting very excited about a star is Born and suchlike so its safe to say we have different views on film

I did read about the comparison to Apocalypse before I went, but how anyone can even compare this to Coppola's masterpiece is frankly deluded and it's a massive insult to all concerned with the movie. One man looking for another man who's gone rogue, while accompanied by his voice-over track throughout the movie, that's where the comparison ends. So lets keep this relevant and say the two movies are not even in the same solar system. 

My son is a snotty 3rd year film student at Manchester Uni and he watched (his first time) a 40 year anniversary screening of Apocalypse Now with me the other week. We were gripped throughout and left the cinema blown away having seen such magnificence on the big screen. He too scoffed at the comparison between the two.

Aside from the excellent cinematography there is absolutely nothing to get excited about.  This is a film purely for the critics who were topped up with champers and fine grub before sitting down to watch a movie they unlike us, didn't have to get their hand in their pockets to pay for in the first place .  The general public on the whole will largely find it boring garbage with a paper thin plot. 

This movie didn't have a clue what genre it belonged to and the supporting characters outside of Tommy Lee Jones were absolutely pointless.  There's no Bobby Duval, Larry Fishburne, Dennis Hopper et al supporting performances on show here I'm afraid.

Oh and watch out for the utterly bizarre appearance of some random Moon Pirates, Angry Monkeys, the Asteroid field shield is magnificent in its shiteness and keep your eye out for the highly trained but moronically inept intergalactic rocket crew you are ever likely to meet.  Brad Pitts repetitive psychological tests on his Ipad will not keep you entertained either.

A story of the importance of what we have, how hard we need to hang on to human connections on this mad blue marble.

Spoiler

There was no backstory to what McBride HAD in the first place, which ultimately left us not giving a flying fuck when he let his dad float off

[close]

I don't demand to see endless explosions, action, guns and shagging on the cinema screen, I just want a good story.  I want to hate some characters, root for others and in some way or another care as to what happens to them and get excited, scared, feel happy or sad..whatever. None of these emotions hitting me in this I'm afraid.

Don't go see it.  Steal it off a torrent in a few weeks and save your money as its probably gonna flop anyway no matter what the critics say.

[soxfan]

Just watched this. Awesome film. Soundtrack, editing, cinematography and pacing all on point. Similar in style to the Assassination of Jesse James - and that it's kept well under the radar.

Some of the outdoor shots in this movie took your breath away. I live in the heavily populated northeast US. I need to go and visit some of this spectacular scenery out west.

[LallanaInPyjamas]

I do enjoy a Buck Pete rant!

I'm seeing it next week, imagine I'll be somewhere in the middle but I'll keep an open mind either way. I'm a little sci-fi spacehsipped out though I have to say, have a feeling it'll be more of what we've seen before really.

[killer-heels]

Watched John Wick 3 on the insistence of my other half.

Bit mad. Fun though.

[[new username under construction]]

Managed 30 seconds of Hobbs and Shaw before deciding it was stupid as fuck.....any reason to watch it all?

[JoeCole]

Managed 30 seconds of Hobbs and Shaw before deciding it was stupid as fuck.....any reason to watch it all?

I mean it's just what it's supposed to be, an over the top, cheesy, fun action film

[[new username under construction]]

I mean it's just what it's supposed to be, an over the top, cheesy, fun action film

Fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine I'll grit my teeth

[Beav]

Apocalypse Now in Space. Do me a favour

I just got back from watching this and I absolutely knew Beav would be on here saying he loved it and quoting phrases like "dreamlike Journey".  I do remember you getting very excited about a star is Born and suchlike so its safe to say we have different views on film

A Star Is Born is great though, so..

Yeah, I never said it was as good as Apocalypse Now, just that its borrowing ideas from it (and to be honest its literally a journey with dreamlike imagery). Sorry you didnt get anything out of it, have you seen his previous film The Lost City of Z?

Oh and also Rambo: Last Blood is terrible garbage, but goes kind of enjoyably mental in the last half hour. Cant recommend a cinema trip for it.

[Buck Pete]

A Star Is Born is great though, so..

Yeah, I never said it was as good as Apocalypse Now, just that its borrowing ideas from it (and to be honest its literally a journey with dreamlike imagery). Sorry you didnt get anything out of it, have you seen his previous film The Lost City of Z?

Oh and also Rambo: Last Blood is terrible garbage, but goes kind of enjoyably mental in the last half hour. Cant recommend a cinema trip for it.

For the record I do enjoy your movie posts. They are very articulate and well thought out.  Movies like most art is subjective of course.

Not seen Lost City of Z but reading about it indicates this director always puts LOTS into his movies visuals, which in itself is great.  I will give it a go and I may be totally wrong here, but it may be a whole load more of style over substance.

As for Rambo, surely it was never going to be anything more than a shit kicker popcorn movie.  Its an 18 Certificate so I assume it plays out more like a gore fest?  Critics are horrified at the levels of violence so I'm in    I grew up with Rambo (not literally!!) so will go watch it for old times sake.

[Beav]

For the record I do enjoy your movie posts. They are very articulate and well thought out.  Movies like most art is subjective of course.

Not seen Lost City of Z but reading about it indicates this director always puts LOTS into his movies visuals, which in itself is great.  I will give it a go and I may be totally wrong here, but it may be a whole load more of style over substance.

As for Rambo, surely it was never going to be anything more than a shit kicker popcorn movie.  Its an 18 Certificate so I assume it plays out more like a gore fest?  Critics are horrified at the levels of violence so I'm in    I grew up with Rambo (not literally!!) so will go watch it for old times sake.

Thanks mate, of course they are, that's the fun in it all .

Lost City of Z deals with a lot of similar ideas as this, but more of the father's side of obsession, that drive to explore. Its really good.

The Rambo series started off as more than just a dumb action movie, which is why it's a shame that this one is so generic. It's not even that gory until the final fifteen minutes, which is admittedly where all the good stuff is, but the rest is dull as fuck.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Just saw Rambo

Possibly the most racist film I have ever seen

Its portrayal of Mexico and Mexicans is disgraceful

Was it produced by that fat orange baby?

[Macphisto80]

Just saw Rambo

Possibly the most racist film I have ever seen

Its portrayal of Mexico and Maxicans is disgraceful

Was it produced by that fat orange baby?

I'm about to watch a dodgy copy of that, but from what I've been reading, a few have had the same issue with it's portrayal of Mexican people. It's the usual sad bastards that are turning that into a reason to actually champion the film because critics have raised concerns of its violence for the sake of shock value, and the overt racist overtones, citing they've turned the film into a political case to argue with, when it isn't. Really? I mean, Rambo being political? Never. I mean, it's not like the first film, where there was a strong anti-war post Vietnam satire regarding stereotypes of returning soldiers, the politics of that era, and their mental state after coming back from that war. Or how about the almost comic book cartoon depictions and cold war era propaganda of the Russians in part 2 and 3, where they actually had to redact or and remove the last scene's annotation where it describes the film was dedicated to the brave Mujaheddin of Afghanistan. Nope. Rambo has never been used a political propaganda. Not at all. Some of these people today, I swear...fuckin morons all over the place.

Anyway, I think I'll go off and watch it now and judge it on its own merit as a piece of entertainment first.