What's new

"Now Showing"

Saw The Brothers Bloom after work.

Didn't really know anything about the film but could've sworn it was released in the US years ago. Anyway I thoroughly enjoyed it. I thought the performances were really good and the story feels original and quirky with some very LOL moments every now and then. The characters were all intriguing and good fun. Also Robbie Coltrane FTW! Look forward to watching this again on DVD.

Rating: 4/5
 
Borrowed Jarhead off a mate the other day.

I really liked this film. It did have an element of 'Full Metal Jacket' at the start, which was amusing. Without giving too much away, the film follows a group of Marines during the Gulf War. It's not particularly bloody, although there are some quite intense moments, and it's really well rounded.

It wasn't the typical sort of war film, with loads of extreme action, but it was more about their lives as soldiers. It really was very good and I would recommend it to anyone, whether or not you like war films.

8/10


My dad also randomly bought Taking of Pelham 123 the other day, and with nothing to watch on TV last night, we figured, why not?

This film started off much the same way as any hostage/terrorist movie does. Baddies hijack vehicle, goodie gets caught up in trying to save them. However this film doesn’t quite continue along the normal hostage movie from there. I can’t really pinpoint why, it just felt like it was being done differently. Again, it was really well put together and it kept up the suspense all the way though. It really was a brilliant film.

8/10
 
Me again. First film I saw yesterday was 4.3.2.1.

Now I've seen a fair bit of this film already at work (we did most of the post, see the Molinare logo at the beginning of the film? That's who I work for :p) but I saw it without sound so it's quite nice to see it altogether with sound. I have to admit that the first section of the film is boring and just felt like it was relying on the other stories to make it good. The second part was probably my favourite because of the cameos. The film overall just felt very meh. Like it might have an odd good moment but it was mainly a big pile of dog poo. Maybe it's because I'm not gangsta enough to like it? Maybe it's because I think Noel Clarke's ego needs to be taken down a few notches? Maybe it's because it's a film that just is simply, not very good? I dunno, I think I'm going to be thinking about this for a couple of days to get a proper grip on what I think about the film.

I'll give it a rating of 2/5 for the moment.



Then I saw She's out of my league.

Didn't really know what to expect (hadn't seen a trailer for it) and was pleasantly surprised that it wasn't turd. It was enjoyable, if very predictable, and any time it got a little boring, boom, another amusing moment happens. It's not great by any means but it's a nice little comedy for watching on TV on a sat night or something.

Rating: 3/5


Last film of the night was Death at a funeral (2010)

I thought this was going to be one of those films where all the funny bits would be in the trailer (just like Date night). However the film was full of hilarious scenes and it snowballed as it went on, it just got better and better. There are some excellent performances in there and the small guy is hilarious towards the end. I really enjoyed it, recommend.

Rating: 4/5


Should be seeing at least two films tonight :D
 
peep said:
Me again. First film I saw yesterday was 4.3.2.1.

Now I've seen a fair bit of this film already at work (we did most of the post, see the Molinare logo at the beginning of the film? That's who I work for :p) but I saw it without sound so it's quite nice to see it altogether with sound. I have to admit that the first section of the film is boring and just felt like it was relying on the other stories to make it good. The second part was probably my favourite because of the cameos. The film overall just felt very meh. Like it might have an odd good moment but it was mainly a big pile of dog poo. Maybe it's because I'm not gangsta enough to like it? Maybe it's because I think Noel Clarke's ego needs to be taken down a few notches? Maybe it's because it's a film that just is simply, not very good? I dunno, I think I'm going to be thinking about this for a couple of days to get a proper grip on what I think about the film.

I'll give it a rating of 2/5 for the moment.

Yeah blud, dat is defo da case coz u no dat bein blak iz wat u need to hav to underztand da film doh blud etc etc ;)
 
Saw another two films today. First up was Streetdance in 3D.

It's the first British 3D film and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I'm not a massive fan of dance flicks but this one was engaging, entertaining and just great fun. It may be a little bit predictable in places, but what else can they do with a dance film? I liked the idea behind the story though and it was done well. The performances weren't amazing but they were all amazing dancers. The 3D effect was great and was used for depth rather than throwing stuff at the screen (bar maybe one or two tiny moments), it was great and just drew you into the film like the 3D effect should. Really do recommend this film.

Rating: 4/5



Next up, The killer inside me.

Heard lots of things about this film, when it was shown at Cannes the other month people actually walked out horrified at the scenes where he attacks women...I'm really not surprised. It's such a powerful film and there was a gasp amongst the audience every time he hit one of the other characters. Casey Affleck was absolutely amazing and engaging as the absolute nutter and he made the film so watchable (despite the horrific scenes I have already mentioned). The entire cast is just superb and the direction is phenomenal and just pure excellence. It's such a fantastic, powerful film and I highly recommend (if you have a strong stomach :p)

Rating: 5/5
 
Sat and watched The Time Travellers Wife last night. After I got over the initial shock of it being about a time traveller (and causing much hilarity when I proclaimed "but it didn't mention time travel on the box!") I did actually manage to get into it. It was less confusing than I initially feared, although there were still plenty of "WTF?!" moments. That said, I'm still not 100% sure what was actually going on at the end. It is very sentimental, and a bit cliched in that sense, but the plot device is original and well executed enough to get away with it.

All in all, a bit better than your average soppy film, but still nothing spectacular. 3/5
 
Need to update on the films I've seen over the past month.

Hot Shots:
Watched this round Maddies. Didn't think I'd be funny but I actually found myself laughing quite a bit. It does have some pretty funny moments and it's quite quotable as well.
7/10

Nightmare on Elm Street: (Remake)
I haven't seen the original for years and couldn't remember what happened which was good as it meant while watching this I couldn't compare it to the original. It was actually a good film. Filmed really well and the filters they use make it look great. It actually had some really jumpy moments and kept catching you off guard. The only criticism I can think off is Freddy's voice. When he kept speaking it made him less scary form some reason. Especially with some cheesy lines such as "Now that's what I call a wet dream". Although it was quite amusing and added a slight comedy tone to the film. So yeah, overall it was actually pretty decent. Not sure what I would of thought if I saw the original first.
8/10

Nightmare on Elm Street: (Original)
Got back and put the DVD on. It's aged pretty badly although a couple of the scenes like when the girl flies around the room like she's possessed still looks fantastic even now. It's more laughable and not scary at all although I can imagine when it first came out it was quite scary to the public. I remember when Freddy is walking down the alley with those super long arms and it's just so funny.
It's worth watching to see what it's like but if you're planning on seeing what it's all about then I'd recommend you see the remake and then this if you're interested in seeing what the original was like.
6/10

Ice Age 3:
Was better than the second one but it still feels like it's missing something. It has a few funny moments but you can't really connect with the characters. The story is very predictable as well and the story is very linear. Still a fun little watch though.
6/10

Rec 2:
Been waiting for this film for about 2 years. I LOVE the first film and ever since I heard there was going to be a sequel I knew I HAD to see it in the cinema. It's being shown in very few cinemas for some reason so we had to travel all the way to Portsmouth to see it.
The film was good and it had some excellent stand-out scenes. Although the whole theme/style has changed completely. Instead of been done using a single camera there's about six in this one that it changes between. Although it means you see more it also means that it feels all jumpy when it flicks between them. Also the whole 'Paranormal/demonic' direction the film takes is quite strange and detracts from the believability a bit.
The main thing I was annoyed at though is that halfway through the film it stops and then essentially starts again. Although it was good to see things from a different angle it did feel like you were starting all over again and halted any feeling of progression the film had.
That said though it still has some sections of amazing tension that Rec is known for. You don't know what's going to happen or when and once again the scenes at the end are nail biting stuff.
Not as scary or as good as the first but worth going to see as it's still quite fun to watch. :)
7/10

Inglorious Basterds:
Wanted to see this film for a while as it looked quite good. It started off really well with the first few scenes being really good. I find with Tarantino though his films always start and end really well but the middle is just filled with really long scenes that can easily have stuff cut out. It did find my attention drifting. The end scenes were fantastic though.
7/10
 
I don't rate films to compare them. I rate them individually. I gave my reasons why. It's not just I flung a random rating on the end.
I actually enjoyed the new one. It was more scary, filmed much better and looked better.
The old one has dated quite badly and is good for classic horror but is just laughable now.
 
I agree that the new Nightmare on Elm Street was better than the first. I don't like that they changed the story though. I preferred the ending of the new one to the first as well, only because the ending on the first was a wee bit cheesy for my tastes
6/10 is a little low, I'd probably give it 7, and it hasn't aged that badly as you can definitely see the scare factor. I think it might have been better if I'd have seen it on a big screen with surround sound rather than my small telly.
It also might have been better if I'd have seen the original previously.

I also saw [Rec]2 last week. I really enjoyed the first, but this one came as a bit of a disappointment. I was hoping they wouldn't take the religious route but they did. The vicar and Tito were very irritating characters after a while (almost, but not quite as annoying as the presenter in Quarantine) and that put me off a bit, as did the multi cam effect. I didn't jump half as many times at the second one as I did the first which was a shame as well. However the ending was a nice, interesting turn which I wasn't really expecting. 7/10
 
Due to me staying up all night, I decided to watch 3 films from my "List of Films to See Before I Die" to pass the time:

I firstly watched Fight Club. I had been informed of the greatness of this film many times beforehand and it had been on my list a while, so I sat down expecting greatness. I was blown away. It was quite simply amazing. It was one of very few films which have me fully gripped within the first 10 mins, and almost all films that do that I have rated very highly. This was no exception.

It was masterful and the twist was great, even though I could see quite a lot of the clues throughout so the affect on me wasn't as great as most people. But I did notice the erm, "Brad Pitt Character" in single frames throughout the film, which was great as it linked in well with his "character". I also loved the scene in which the characters are aware they are in a film <3 Uncommon to see it in non-spoof surroundings.

The only thing I didn't like was the drawn out ending after the twist, but I can see it had to be done to explain it all.

9.5/10


Then it was Angus, Thongs and Perfect Snogging - The worst wooden acting I've ever seen, topped with an incredibly predictable and tediously awful storyline finished with a whole load of cringiness. It was really quite awful and has left me to ponder whether girls aged around 14 actually thought and discussed the things in the movie. I doubt it, and suspect/hope it was an exaggeration, but I shall ask the girls in my Film Studies class when I go back...

To sum up: Quite possibly the worst tripe I've ever had to endure, however, Georgia Henshaw <3

4/10


Finally, I watched (500) Days of Summer, a sweet offbeat rom-com. It was quite a nice little film that was really well put together and had a nice flow to it. Like all rom-coms do, it did have a nice ending, but in a slightly more unusual way which I shan't disclose to those who haven't seen it. It was a good refreshing feel-good film :) Plus, Zooey Deschanel <3

8/10
 
Ollie said:
The old one has dated quite badly and is good for classic horror but is just laughable now.

Heavily disagree. The new one has no memorable death scenes whereas in the original each and every death is memorable and gross, with excessive amounts of gore.

The old Freddy is actually terrifying, he's a pervert, he makes jokes while he's killing you AND probably the most important contrast to the remake, he cannot be defeated, hence he is a scarier villain than the new one.

The original leaves you thinking Freddy is still out there and if I go to sleep tonight maybe he'll be in my dreams, whereas the remake, well, he gets killed doesn't he so we can all go to bed safe and sound. How boring.

Also, the original is meant to be a bit silly, it makes it scarier and it makes Freddy seem crazier. Like the scene where his arms are all long when he's chasing her, it's unnerving because you're terrified yet he looks so ridiculous, the two emotions confuse each other and you're just left feeling helpless.

So, in conclusion, the remake doesn't suck but in no way whatsoever is it EVER going to be better than the original. The End.

PS, I like Nightmare on Elm Street ;]
ciallkennett said:
"Brad Pitt Character"
Brad Pitt's character = Tyler Durden
Edward Norton's character = the Narrator
 
If people haven't seen it then they won't have a clue ;]
Also, did you post your 'movies to see before I die' list? I'm intruiged by it =]
 
Erm, I may have done when I first formed it, but it's grown now. There are quite a few films on there which aren't "To see Before I Die" but simply films I'd quite like to see and didn't want to forget them. But about 85% of the films on there are related to the title.

The list can be viewed in full HERE!
 
Fanboyz

Being a huge fan of The Wars and Trek.. it made me laugh the whole way through.. plus the ending was quite good.

9/10


Shrek: Forever After

Not bad.. and I'm happy they finally finished the series.

7.5/10
 
ciallkennett's blog thing said:
* Alien WATCHED 16/02/10
* Aliens

GET THE QUADRILOGY BOX SET BIIIITCH! GET IT NAOW! IT HAS ALL VERSIONS OF THEM LIKE THE GOOD ALIEN 3!

GET IT!

GET IIIT!
 
Top