What film did you watch last night?

[Deleted member 23692]

Mad Max Fury Road.
Utter toss - I walked out

 

[w00hoo_kent]

I've read that Apocalypse Now isn't really a out-and-out film about the Vietnam war like Platoon is. I've only seen the excellent clip of the Huey's flying in to Wagner's - Ride Of The Valkyries, that has to be the one of the best scenes I've ever seen in a film. It's hard to believe that the film was made that long ago, a bit like Blade Runner in that respect. I must watch it, I obviously need to set out a bit of time for this, even if I'm not that struck on it like yourself, I guess its one of those films you have to watch.

I watched the Deer Hunter recently and I wasn't as keen on it as I thought I would be/as I rembered last time I watched it years ago. I still need to watch Apocalypse Now though. I've read mixed things stating that the Redux version is a waste of time. Haven't a clue though.

I'm not saying 'don't watch it', just don't expect it to live up to the hype. It might, depending on your likes, but it also depends on where you want your pacing and what you like out of a Vietnam film. It's a reimagining of Heart of Darkness, which is about the Congo and it's basically a road movie. It has some good set pieces but like a lot of older movies (and definitely Deer Hunter) it can drag a bit and the pacing is very different to anything made from around the mid 80's onwards. We watched Quadrophenia last night, great film but the last third showed that pacing drag that is really uncommon nowadays (even in modern 'nothing happens' movies) and I found myself thinking 'I've got it, your life's crap and you're a bit unhinged, just throw the scooter over the cliffs already'. I think Apocalypse Now suffers a bit from being a 'must watch before you die' type movie which means you believe it must be great, but that only works if you are on the same wavelength as the people saying 'must watch' and I often think a lot of them actually haven't yet...

 

[swee'pea99]

The Broken Circle Breakdown. IMDB reviews had told me it was going to be a bit of a downer so I kept it on the PVR till I felt up for it. Probably the best Belgian film I've seen, and not only on account of being probably the only Belgian film I've seen. Very good. But gruelling. In truth, a bit of a downer.

 

[swee'pea99]

that pacing drag that is really uncommon nowadays

I've never heard the expression 'pacing drag', but I guess it's the kind of thing we old timers used to think of as the space that allows for character development, ambience, tonal richness and all that kind of yada yada that really doesn't matter if you're raised in a video age that just wants a steady stream of what happens next and an endorphin boost every 2.8 minutes.

I'm all for cutting excess & redundancy, but the kind of mindset that can see or value nothing beyond quick-hit delivery seems to me to be denying future generations the experience of storytelling, as developed over 60,000 years of squatting round the fire, which includes stuff like pacing, variety, a rhythmic complexity that mimics the ebb & flow that is life.

All too often these days, it's just wham bam thank you mam. And if sections which any kind of thoughtful analysis would view as crucial for the retention of any kind of plot coherence end up on the cutting room floor in the interests of 'keeping it tight', well hell, like a 17 year old in Nebraska is going to notice?

(NB This is not aimed at anyone hereabouts...mainly recent thoughts triggered by my eldest's premature walkout from 'A Man for All Seasons' t'other night. All that talking! And not a wizard or a vampire in sight. *sigh*....)

 

[w00hoo_kent]

I've never heard the expression 'pacing drag', but I guess it's the kind of thing we old timers used to think of as the space that allows for character development, ambience, tonal richness and all that kind of yada yada that really doesn't matter if you're raised in a video age that just wants a steady stream of what happens next and an endorphin boost every 2.8 minutes.

I'd argue it's more subtle than this. I think the relevance of scenes is considered more and in some cases what is missing isn't character development time as it is pointless faff. This may be accentuated by the fact that we all know old films anyway so you are waiting for the big scenes and the smaller scenes seem to have less point to them but I really think there is more to it than that. I'm not saying (as one of my mates would) it needs space ships, guns and explosions or it isn't a film on my list and I'm more than happy to watch films with no exploding helicopters in them at all. But there's something about films of a certain age, and yes I agree it's almost definitely music video culture that has changed things, much in the same way that test cricket will never be the same now we have 20/20, that the pacing, and the choices made around it, just seem a bit weird.

I'm struggling a bit for examples, but watch say Deliverance and The Hole. Both psychological horror films where a thing happens and there is a police investigation in to the thing as the main thrust of the film. I'm in no way saying The Hole is going to be remembered three decades after its release in the way Deliverance is (a brief glimpse of a young Keira Knightlys breasts in no way equates to hill billy gay rape) but the way they tell the story is paced very differently. The second half of Deliverance just kind of meanders around (and if it hadn't been for hill billy gay raped I guess it probably wouldn't be remembered at all, much like The Hole) it encapsulates the slow southern way of doing things I guess, but I think it pushes the point far more than the viewer needs it to. I guess after the change the technique says 'here's a thing, got it? Good, lets move on' in a way that the earlier films didn't.

 

[postman]

Don't lose your head,a Carry On film,nine more to go.

 

[Crackle]

It's on now but is Avatar one of the worst films ever made?

 

[accountantpete]

Following comments earlier in the thread - The Raid and The Raid 2.

Non-stop action guaranteed although the fight scenes do tend to get a bit samey.

 

[Dayvo]

Saw Sherlock Holmes A Game of Shadows with Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law. 6/10

It was entertaining and well acted, but I don't think Guy Ritchie is the man to play around with Sherlock Holmes.

 

[MontyVeda]

It's on now but is Avatar one of the worst films ever made?

that what the trailer suggested all those years ago.... I've been avoiding it ever since

 

[MontyVeda]

Saw Sherlock Holmes A Game of Shadows with Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law. 6/10

It was entertaining and well acted, but I don't think Guy Ritchie is the man to play around with Sherlock Holmes.

His 1st one wasn't a bad film... but the 2nd was terrible... Holmes as an action hero and not a super sleuth just isn't Holmes. These days i don't think Guy Ritchie is the man to play around on movies.

 

[benb]

The Man From UNCLE looks like it might be good.

 

[welsh dragon]

Despicable me. Really funny film. 8/10.

 

[Hitchington]

Into the Wild. Bloomin' good. 8.5/10

 

[postman]

Carry On Doctor.