The Film Review Thread
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7192
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:31 pm
- Location: London
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0332452/goofsMarshall wrote:Is the movie Troy as wrong as they say it is? I notice you said you have read bits of the Iliad in Greek, I've read parts in Latin and was told not to watch the film before my exam because it is incredibly inaccurate. Correct or a bit of an exageration?
Just found this and I think it deals with the main issues.
Prufrock wrote: Like money hasn't always talked. You might not like it, or disagree, but it's the truth. It's a basic incentive, people always have, and always will want what's best for themselves and their families
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7404
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 9:08 pm
- Location: in your wife's dreams
- Contact:
I like dark films, my dvd collection has Saw, original Ring, Halloween, Friday 13th etc in there so I don't mind blood, violence and horror. But this is an appalling film, it has little or nothing redeemable about it, nothing more than some piece of repellant salacious voyeurism. Nauseous at best, vomit inducing exploitation at worst. Don't waste your time.Batman wrote:'Last House on the Left' now.................wes craven
If you want something stark and graphic watch Henry: Portrait of a serial killer. A very difficult film to watch because of its subject matter and the very cold way in which acts are shown but it is much more documentary in its approach and style.
power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely
kevin nolan is so fat, that when he sits around the house he sits around the house
kevin nolan is so fat, that when he sits around the house he sits around the house
Went to watch Saw II at the weekend.
Although being somewhat predictable I still found it an enjoying watch. Mainly to find out what the inevitable twist at the end would be.
Not as good as the first, but I think a lot of that can be put down to the fact that the shock factor isn't there this time around - well, at least not to the same extent.
Although being somewhat predictable I still found it an enjoying watch. Mainly to find out what the inevitable twist at the end would be.
Not as good as the first, but I think a lot of that can be put down to the fact that the shock factor isn't there this time around - well, at least not to the same extent.
-
- Icon
- Posts: 5210
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:04 pm
aye, saw it sunday. after hearing mixed reviews was a bit iffy about going but was very good, they continue to invent some nasty scenariosTonyZicoKelly wrote:Went to watch Saw II at the weekend.
Although being somewhat predictable I still found it an enjoying watch. Mainly to find out what the inevitable twist at the end would be.
Not as good as the first, but I think a lot of that can be put down to the fact that the shock factor isn't there this time around - well, at least not to the same extent.
twist at the end was excellent
Yeah, I was pleasantly surprised. They left it open for a third which I think may be stretching it a tad.hisroyalgingerness wrote:aye, saw it sunday. after hearing mixed reviews was a bit iffy about going but was very good, they continue to invent some nasty scenariosTonyZicoKelly wrote:Went to watch Saw II at the weekend.
Although being somewhat predictable I still found it an enjoying watch. Mainly to find out what the inevitable twist at the end would be.
Not as good as the first, but I think a lot of that can be put down to the fact that the shock factor isn't there this time around - well, at least not to the same extent.
twist at the end was excellent
-
- Icon
- Posts: 5210
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:04 pm
this is the film industry, do we honestly expect them to come up with something new so soon?TonyZicoKelly wrote:Yeah, I was pleasantly surprised. They left it open for a third which I think may be stretching it a tad.hisroyalgingerness wrote:aye, saw it sunday. after hearing mixed reviews was a bit iffy about going but was very good, they continue to invent some nasty scenariosTonyZicoKelly wrote:Went to watch Saw II at the weekend.
Although being somewhat predictable I still found it an enjoying watch. Mainly to find out what the inevitable twist at the end would be.
Not as good as the first, but I think a lot of that can be put down to the fact that the shock factor isn't there this time around - well, at least not to the same extent.
twist at the end was excellent
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7042
- Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 10:36 am
- Location: HULL, BABY!
- Contact:
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7042
- Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 10:36 am
- Location: HULL, BABY!
- Contact:
1. I am very much the same. If the critics say a fantasy/Si FI/ action film is poop, then I just know i'm going to enjoy itkeveh wrote:I've got it on DVD at home, was meant to watch it last night. (a proper DVD rip as well)
1. It's meant to be shit, but I will no doubt love it.
2. I watched Unleashed last night, that was pretty good. The fighting (what there is of it) kicks ass.
2. That just tells me that you haven't seen Ong - Bak.
YOU CLIMB OBSTACLES LIKE OLD PEOPLE FXCK!!!!!!!!!!!
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7192
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:31 pm
- Location: London
Well, maybe I was wrong and it does say a lot. This year's Oscar for Best Picture.mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:
Crash
In a film-making climate of sticking to franchises for a safe and predictable level of success (I notice that a Jurrassic Park IV is on its way out), it is with some regret that I find myself criticising this film for being a bit 'over-ambitious'. It tries to make incisive racial observations... but fails and tends to fall back on the portrayal of stereotype. It also tries to mix several storylines and characters into one film; it's not an easy trick to pull off and it's not one that this director did. The link between all these chracters is also an unsatisfying ending to it all: the idea that we're all connected in some way is far less ground-breaking than the film shows an appreciation of. There are a few interesting individual performances: Sandra Bullock plays a distinctly 'uncongenial' role, Matt Dillon plays the racist W.A.S.P. cop very well, and Jennifer Epositio plays a small, but visually pleasing part. I don't know where Ryan Phillipe's career has gone since his role in Cruel Intentions, but he was very unimpressive.
All in all, a watchable film, but it has far less to say than it thinks it does.
**
Prufrock wrote: Like money hasn't always talked. You might not like it, or disagree, but it's the truth. It's a basic incentive, people always have, and always will want what's best for themselves and their families
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests