|
In case you missed the hype the new Bond film is on general release today. Promises to be a good one. Got my tickets for this evening.
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 26 Oct 12 at 10:08
|
|
Daughter is taking me and the boss on Sunday. Not something I would have chosen for myself but we need to get out of the comfort zone occasionally ;-)
|
|
Oldest son saw a preview yesterday (his company provided the helicopters) reckoned it was great with a number of classic references
|
|
Headline now edited. I thought the OP meant Iffy!!
|
"I thought the OP meant Iffy!!"
Even now he's masterminding his return to forum domination from his lair in an extinct volcano somewhere in the North East of England.
|
>> Oldest son saw a preview yesterday (his company provided the helicopters) reckoned it was great
>> with a number of classic references
>>
What, Phoenix being the tutor of Achilles, that kind of thing? Sounds great.
|
|
He has a 28 year old view of classics, old Bond movies from ancient times , like the last 10 - 15 years more like
|
After you've seen the film would one of you report back and tell my what this 'Skyfoal' is that Adele sings about?
Apparently it 'Crumboles' too.
;-)
|
>> that Adele sings about?
They say it's not over until the fat lady sings.
Oh dear! Is this finally the end for Bond?
|
|
The new Bond film is highly influenced by the Bourne films apparently. Didn't rate the Bourne Legacy that highly - sort of Bourne without Bourne but the originals were very good
|
>>Didn't rate the Bourne Legacy that highly
Tell me more.
I enjoyed the Bourne films and was considering Legacy for this evening. Not worth the effort?
I don't need realism or credibility, I'm looking for Audie Murphy-type heroism.
|
Last night watched - not for the first time - most of Sam Peckinpah's masterpiece Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia, set in a lawless seventies Mexico. Three terrific cars (the utter wreck being driven by the local police has to be seen to be believed), the real thing not stupid brand-new Dukes of Hazzard nonsense, and superb central performances too.
I also recommend Robert Rodriguez's gory violent comedy Machete.
Both a bit short on Audie Murphy heroism, and all the better for it if you ask me.
|
Audie Murphy .. genuine hero...
|
>>and all the better for it if you ask me.
I appreciate the warning. I'll make sure I don't.
Thank you for your openness.
|
>> Thank you for your openness.
Not at all FMR.
Don't bother with Bond. There's never been a Bond movie that wasn't crashingly naff. Bond and Jimmy Savile between them have turned us into a second-class nation.
There's a very funny Bond joke, a small cartoon, inside the current Private Eye. Well, it made me laugh anyway.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Fri 26 Oct 12 at 18:35
|
>>There's never been a Bond movie that wasn't crashingly naff
Mmmmm, well I tend to agree with that. However, being naff doesn't stop them being fun. And several of them have been great fun.
Some of them also relate to moments in my life, and I enjoy re-watching them for the memories.
However, I was asking about the Bourne Legacy. And Jimmy Savile wasn't in it.
|
We are going to see the Bond film next week.He is a good Bond blond hair blue eyes,>;)
Bourne also tops, different caracter not to mess with.
|
Go ahead and get the film. Its a decent enough action film with some stunning location shots. You could summarise the plots as "a man in search of his pills" Since Jason Bourne is not in it it's not really a Bourne film but its worth a watch. Final chase scene goes on too long.
|
Talking of chases, managed to see Ronin for the first time today. That's some serious car chases! My goodness.
Enjoyed it.
|
|
Kinda gown up with Bond Films, its always been a backdrop to my years of entertainment, off to see the latest Bond Film. Some have been crap for sure, some have been superb. I like Craig, he brings a raw, dark, flawed side to the character.
Last edited by: Zero on Fri 26 Oct 12 at 19:06
|
>> I like Craig, he brings a raw, dark, flawed side to the
>> character.
So do I. A worthy successor to my favourite Bond Sean Connery.
|
Sean Connery wasn't as bad as the smoothiechops with the cowlick who was also miscast as the saint.
Daniel Craig looks all right although I haven't seen him in a Bond movie. But he looked convincing in the Olympics opening ceremony.
|
|
Bond is not meant to be taken seriously, along with Batman. They are cartoons with live actors and all this dark brooding rubbish is out of place.
|
>> Bond is not meant to be taken seriously, along with Batman. They are cartoons with
>> live actors and all this dark brooding rubbish is out of place.
Not read the books then?
|
>> Not read the books then?
>>
The books and the films are a different breed.
|
>> Didn't rate the Bourne Legacy that highly
Well not written by Ludlum for a start. Should have left it at the three films based on his books. But quite a few books written to follow on by Eric Van Lustbader. How they can still refer to it as Robert Ludlum's Bourne series when someone else is writing. It's like me writing the follow up to Lord of the Rings with the same characters.
|
Just got back from a family outing to Skyfall. Very good. Recommended. Formulaic enough to be unmistakeably a Bond movie but perhaps the better for it.
Best one liner, "Welcome to Scotland !"
Best gadget, well, the DB5 again of course !
|
>> Best one liner, "Welcome to Scotland !"
Spot on - Salford's nearly in Scotland so Finney gets away with it nicely :-)
|
Saw it last night. Certainly one of the better and possibly the best Bond film. Visually stunning. Has it all really lots of chases, cars, trains, motorcycles and helicopters. Lots of explosions and plenty of guns Great locations, humour and great perfomances by Daniel Craig and Judi Dench who must surely be nominated for an Oscar. Javier Bardem is an excellent villain
Welcome back Mr Bond!
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Sat 27 Oct 12 at 23:58
|
|
Was Javier Bardem as scary as he was in 'No country for old men'?
|
|
No character can be that scary, not with that haircut.
|
|
I won't pay to see it, so that means waiting until it's available from other sources.
|
Saw this on Friday - they are getting closer and closer to Die hard (or vice versa)
Nice to see some Scotland though not sure when Glen Coe moved to the A9.....
|
Just back from the local cinema.
Very enjoyable but quite dark both visually and plot wise especially when compared to the last two outings which were filmed in much sunnier locations.
Puts Bond back on the old footings which the last two moved away from somewhat, but I hope they find a balance between the styles as I have just re-watched Casino Royal and Quantum of Solace and they were cleaver and multi - layered. This film did not appear to have quite as much depth as the previous two.
I would still recommend it though!
|
|
Good fun, recommended. Incredible of course, but just short of utterly silly which makes it more watchable. Diehard with humour.
|
|
I'm surprised so many of you go to the cinema. The last time I went was back in 1988 to see Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
|
>> I'm surprised so many of you go to the cinema. The last time I went
>> was back in 1988 to see Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
Perhaps you should try it again. No comparison with watching a film on a TV however big. £17 for two tickets makes cheap night out
|
I've just discovered a smaller local cinema - charges 4.99 for an adult ticket for the latest films. Has had some money spent on it so they now have seating like the ones in the new multiplex's plus if you ask for a coffee its only a couple of quid and you can have it in a china mug!
At a fiver a ticket I'm more inclined to go, but at nearly 9 quid it becomes a little to much, although Orange Wednesday is a good option
|
|
£17 for two tickets is an expensive night out.
|
|
You think so? Half the price of a modest restaurant meal or a few drinks each.
|
|
my local cinema is 12.99 an adult ticket. ouch
|
|
Four quid through SWMBO's work. Vue, and 2D only, but even so it's a bargain.
|
Top Gear tonight. 50 years of Bond Cars!
TV booked!
|
|
As in 3-wheelers Villiers powered, made in Preston, and initially Longridge? Impressive that you are keen. But puzzling....
|
>> Top Gear tonight. 50 years of Bond Cars!
>>
>> TV booked!
Entertaining little prog as it happens - worth watching it on iplayer if you didn't catch it live
Went to see Sky-foul last night and it certainly tum-bowls. Its Die Hard on steroids ok, slickly produced, and the villain is definitely a bit villainous, but It seems to have lost a bit on plot, edginess, darkness, as found in Casino Royale. Funny how the last few bond films have caught on to the homo-erotic threads to be found int he books, deliberate attempt to appeal to the pink pound perhaps? Could really have done without the "home alone" gothic hammer horror last gasp scenes at Skyfall. Contrived at best.
|
|
We have seen the film different than the others .Les gadgets in the film the usually fighting scenes.Don't forget the terrorist came into play.The baddy touching Bonds leg something for everybody.>:)
|
And all those that have went to see it - did you buy any food or drink from the cinema or did you bring in your own?
My cinema is next door to an Asda and you just see the majority of mpeople coming in with their ASDA carriers filled with sweets and juice.
Surely must be worth the cinemas to reduce their prices to a more competitive level to get more, less profitable, sales?
|
|
Saw it at the local arts complex, so seats were only 7 quid a pop. Had a meal at Café Rouge before hand, had a 25% voucher!
|
|
My wife & I are members at the local Picture House, so we're going tomorrow evening for £4 a seat. This morning, we went to a free members' preview of the about-to-be-released 'Argo'. The film tells the story of the rescue of 6 US hostages from their embassy in Tehran when it was overrun by Islamist fanatics in 1980. The operation was aided by the Canadians and has become known as the 'Canadian Caper' (Google it). It's the most gripping thing I've watched since 'The Last King of Scotland' - it's well worth seeing.
|
|
Why do you have to eat in the cinema?
|
|
So you have a potty to use at the 2 hour mark.
|
Went to see it tonight - our showing was sold out - Cinema tickets a reasonable £8.00 for the De-Luxe screen at the local multiplex (well the only multiplex)...
Enjoyed it - good old fashioned romp - excellent roof-top bike chase (saw the Top Gear insight into this - real enough stunts). May well go and see that Argo film. Looks good to me.
"Why do you have to eat in the cinema?"
I felt a Conrad Black moment coming on at one point - guy next door to me stuffing his face with some foul smelling popcorn - he left half a bag behind....
|
No, did not buy drinks at pictures.
Saw it at the Picturehouse in Cambridge. Took a bottle of (tap) water with me, bottled plain water being the greatest marketing achievement of the last century.
The comestibles are a racket but they are clearly part of the economics of running a cinema, without which it probably wouldn't exist at expensive sites; but at least they are optional.
Had a nice Italian meal after at de Luca Cucina. Not bad. I consoled myself that I had £20 more to put towards it for not buying the four of us coffees and popcorn at the pictures.
|
Worked when I was a student at a UCI cinema around 1990.
Manager at the time told me that the Clydebank UCI (where I worked) was the only UCI in Scotland that turned a (small) profit from ticket sales.
The concession stand was where they real profit came from.
Interestingly when I saw Skyfall in Kilmarnock I joked to the concession guy (gaffer 'needed' some Revels and a coffee) that we should've bought some stuff at the nearby ASDA - the guy said 'It's ok to do that, we don't mind people bringing their own food in'.
Maybe the £8.95 ticket price has something to do with that!
|
>> Why do you have to eat in the cinema?
>>
+1
|
BTW we were pre-warned but the title song sung by Adele - she didn't seem to want to pronounce the letter L for some reason....consequently the sentence
"Let the sky fall, when it crumbles"
actually sounded like
"Let the trifle when apple crumbles"
Maybe she shoud do a duet with Gary Barlow.
|
"she didn't seem to want to pronounce the letter L for some reason.."
"Maybe she shoud"
Obviously infectious
|
www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeumyOzKqgI
Lyrics and song here - Count the missing T's and L's
|
Artistic licence. Seems OK to me. Given all the other racket going on it's quite intelligible, except maybe for "wennee crumbo" which sounds very odd now I've actually tried to listen to it.
I'm not sure you're really meant to listen to the words with this sort of thing anyway - a bit like looking for the detail in an impressionist painting.
I saw David Milliband on QT, he scarcely pronounced a t, and he probably thought he was communicating weighty ideas. Can't blame the girl with exemplars like that.
Last edited by: Manatee on Mon 5 Nov 12 at 10:17
|
|
We went down to the Picture House this evening to see Skyfall, but we had made the mistake of seeing 'Argo' yesterday - hence, in comparison, Skyfall was undemanding of any emotional involvement and a very lightweight piece of cinema. My advice is - go and see Argo.
|
|
I'd be interested to know your thoughts when you get to see it - I'll watch for a post!
|
|
Saw Bond last Thursday. Packed auditorium. Found it pretty dull and formulaic, bog standard Bond story. Disappointing.
|
>> bog standard Bond
>> story.
What else were you expecting in a Bond Picture?
|
>> What else were you expecting in a Bond Picture?
>>
I had been given to think that this Bond Picture was something special in comparison to previous offerings, something out of the ordinary, that I wouldn't believe my eyes. So I was expecting something other than a bog standard Bond story. Something extra. There was nothing of the sort.
I suppose I should be old and wise enough now to know that I shouldn't believe the hype. But there you go. One wants to believe sometimes.
|
Think you will find it was described as one of the best Bond movies. That means it has to stick to a formula to be a Bond movie.
As it happens I agree with you, it wasn't the best Bond movie.
|
>> Think you will find it was described as one of the best Bond movies. That
>> means it has to stick to a formula to be a Bond movie.
>>
>> As it happens I agree with you, it wasn't the best Bond movie.
>>
Well I heard/read several exhalations of the movie as THE best Bond ever. Which wouldn't be too difficult given that most of them are dreadful. The script of this one was lame and cliched, the "humour" was thin and unimaginative. I'd say that the only requirement for a movie to be Bond movie is that Bond is the lead character. It shouldn't have to stick to a formula and story we've seen 22 times before.
The wife wanted to see this one, so I did the honours. Next time there's a Bond movie, I shall give it a miss.
|
>> I'd say that the only
>> requirement for a movie to be Bond movie is that Bond is the lead character.
And there, you and I differ. Its not the name of the lead character. Its a style, a genre.
If you went to see a Conan Doyle Sherlock Holmes movie, and it was actually an Agatha Christie Hurcule Poirot renamed I would allow you to be disappointed.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 6 Nov 12 at 11:54
|
>> And there, you and I differ. Its not the name of the lead character. Its
>> a style, a genre.
It's a bit thin to be called a genre in my book (personal opinion, not stating a fact). It's the same story in differing scenery told over and over again, which is a bit different from a whole genre of cinema to my mind.
What I'm disappointed about is that despite the promises that we were going to see something wholly new based around the Bond character, we didn't. I'd like to see the "style", the story, evolve and change, but it refuses to do so, and no amount of spin about it conceals that fact. It has become hackneyed and boring. There were a few trifles in this new outing, mostly caused by the necessity of replacing ageing actors/resses in the franchise rather than any originality of thought in the plot or script.
I don't need anyone's permission to be disappointed. It's a matter of opinion after all. I guess it's just not for me, and I shan't be slavering at the prospect of the next Bond film, which will again tell exactly the same story with exactly the same characters in a few different bodies. It's past it's sell by date in my humble, they have failed to refresh and reenergise the character and the series, however given the mass approval and huge audiences at cinemas, I'm in my familiar position of flying in the face of public/media driven opinion. It's not deliberate, and often I find myself amongst the hooting masses on such subjects.
|
>> What I'm disappointed about is that despite the promises that we were going to see
>> something wholly new based around the Bond character,
What promise was that? I never saw any.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 6 Nov 12 at 12:30
|
|
That's the impression I got from press reviews and TV interviews, notably when Craig, Dench and Bardem were on Graham Norton's show. Obviously I was mistaken.
|
>>What promise was that? I never saw any.
"Skyfall director Sam Mendes has promised James Bond fans an “epic” film when it hits cinema screens this month."
Hackney Gazette. 04/10/2012
You should read more widely.
|
>> >>What promise was that? I never saw any.
>>
>> "Skyfall director Sam Mendes has promised James Bond fans an “epic” film when it hits
>> cinema screens this month."
>>
>> Hackney Gazette. 04/10/2012
>>
>>
>> You should read more widely.
And what part of that statement means "something wholly new based around the Bond character,"
You may read more widely than me, but clearly you don't comprehend much of it.
|
What after
"Director Sam Mendes was given the daunting task of carrying on the reign of cinema’s most iconic spy."
Part you mean?
Reinvent means "remaking the same thing"
Next?
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 6 Nov 12 at 13:05
|
>> Reinvent means "remaking the same thing"
...or (top google result) "Change (something) so much that it appears to be entirely new"
|
like re-inventing the wheel you mean?
Its round. Its a wheel.
|
>> Its round. Its a wheel.
And a film is... a film. All the same.
|
Actually I was just looking for a particular interview to annoy Zero, and then I found this.
www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/04/sam-mendes-skyfall_n_2074239.html
Interesting, but does seem to suggest that the film may not have hit the spot he was aiming for.
|
>> Interesting, but does seem to suggest that the film may not have hit the spot
>> he was aiming for.
But he was at least aiming for something different, and that's what quite a lot of the media (from what I've seen/heard) have picked up on.
|
>> But he was at least aiming for something different, and that's what quite a lot
>> of the media (from what I've seen/heard) have picked up on.
And again, thats not what I have inferred from what I read and heard. The general consensus was that Craig brought a different side to Bond in Casino Royale, but that most agree Quantum of Solace was a complete Turkey, so SkyFowl was a return (re-invention if you like) back to the basic Bond formula albeit with a grittier lead.
Nowhere, was it said or implied this was a different Bond that would appeal to those who dont like the Bond formula. Sam Mendes may well like to have made a completely different Bond, but he wasnt allowed to by the franchise.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 6 Nov 12 at 13:46
|
|
That's what I heard as well, Zero, in all the aural bumf about this film on the radio and the telly. I went to watch it to be entertained, and I was ! Not to be analysed beyond that. I reckon that Huw Edwards should be the new Bond.
|
>> I reckon that Huw Edwards should be the new Bond.
Jason Statham.
|
>> Jason Statham.
Good Lord no. Bond needs a whiff of the posh about him. But not in a Hugh Grant stylee.
|
|
The next Bond will be openly gay. A few hints in "Skyfall".
|
>> The next Bond will be openly gay.
Alan Carr?
|
>>Bond needs a whiff of the posh about him
Does he? The idea of a hard-nosed, violent thug in a dinner jacket seems kind of appropriate.
|
I've just read that interview with Mendes and it fits completely with my opinion of the film - more of a thriller, with more humour in it, than I expected.
Of course it was still a Bond movie - that was what it was billed as. If you were offered a new recipe shepherd's pie, you wouldn't be expecting liver and onions.
Normally I wouldn't go out of my way to see a Bond, but I enjoyed it.
My expectation of serious films OTOH is that they will be over long, overacted, over noisy and over-produced - books are much better at thoughtful stuff.
My favourite film, for what it's worth, is Twelve Angry Men**. I doubt that a film like that could be made now. Perhaps I'm wrong, I don't see enough to be a film critic.
** when it's not The Big Sleep, Bogart version, which is remarkably like a Bond film in some ways - an improbable plot, violence, some good jokes, and a lot of women seemingly fascinated by the hero
|
>> Disappointing.
Shaken, not stirred then?
|
|
Went to see Argo tonight - not an 'alf bad film. Seems there was spme dramatic licence and liberties taken with the truth, but a good film nonetheless.
|
We watched Untouchable last week - French film with subtitles. It was very good. In our opinion but also many others.
www.imdb.com/title/tt1675434/
We try to support our local cinema - hence this was out a while back. We are waiting for Bond to come there on 30th Nov.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Sun 11 Nov 12 at 22:37
|
Last week it dawned on me that I haven't seen any of the Bond Films with Daniel Craig in.
I intended going to see either Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace with the ex girlfriend (she wasn't the ex at the time btw) but never got around to it.
I've got Casino Royale on my hard drive somewhere after downloading it. Still never got around to watching it. I saw Sky Movies were showing a few Bond movies the other day and downloaded the 2 ones above to watch sometime.
|
|
I guess there are some cam versions of Skyfall around on torrent tracking sites, but I imagine the quality will be poor.
|
|
Pay to go and see it then and supoprt the British film industry.
|
pay? PAY!!!!! MWA AHHH AHHHHHA AHHHHH HAAAAAA < evil laugh >
The is Jolly roger, the pirate, we are talking about.
|
>> support the British film industry.
The film makers of Skyfall aren't British though.
|
>> >> support the British film industry.
>>
>> The film makers of Skyfall aren't British though.
Yes they are.
The producers and backers are not.
|
If you are a fan, or even half a fan of Quentin Tarantino films, you have just got to see Django Unchained. Its a wierd wacky and highly entertaining piece of film making. Its a mixture of Gone with the Wind, Uncle Toms Cabin, The Good The Bad and The Ugly, Blazing Saddles and Pulp Fiction. At 2 hours and 45 minutes its remarkable that it only drags for a 5 minute slot or so. Fantastic performances by Samuel L Jackson, Leonardo Di Caprio, and a comic cameo by Don Johnson.
Go see.
|
Tarantino's "work" is hateful junk. IMHO, of course. The FT agreed recently in its review of his latest outspewing of effluent:
www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fb2e5468-55b7-11e2-bdd2-00144feab49a.html#axzz2HZyA26P1
|
|
As long as it has sex & violence it must appeal.
|
Yes, the Django movie is thought to be very good. I look forward to it coming round on the box, or DVD.
I did see the other night Tarantino's fairly recent effort Inglourious Basterds. I thought that a very bizarre and fanciful piece of work, strangely disrespectful too since Hitler and most of his leading henchmen are incinerated in it. Perhaps it might seem more 'relevant' to a younger audience. Hitler himself was played very well, cackling evilly while watching the Nazi version of Sergeant Yorke and congratulating a tearful Goebbels with the words 'The best film you've ever made, my dear.' It seemed to be essentially about movie making, with special reference to Sergeant Yorke. The night after that I saw The Pianist on DVD, a more realistic take on the nazis. That wasn't nearly as funny.
|
|
Went to see Impossible last night. Cheesy.com Ewan McGregor particularly bland . The trailer for Django Unchained was on it appealed to both of us, as was the more worthy one Lincoln
|
|
Well I'm now disabused of the impression that the film is in any way connected with the music of Mr Reinhart!!
|
|
Its got a good musical sound track - a bit of jazz in there.
|
>> a bit of jazz in there.
>>
Which, of course, can only go to make an execrable film even worse.
I see I'm in the minority as usual. At least the FT journo agrees with me on that poseur.
|
|
so is the FT jour no, you make a fine pair. No doubt some of Tarentinos work is rubbish, and he become lazy of late, but DU is in another league.
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 10 Jan 13 at 14:45
|
|
I've given up on QT films and on the strength of that Times review I'll not be changing my viewpoint. It sounds the opposite of entertaining, informative or thought provoking.
|
|
Yup, good idea, make your mind up on one out of kilter review. Your loss.
|
>> Yup, good idea, make your mind up on one out of kilter review. Your loss.
Not really, I've still got my 8 quid!
|
|
His films are all the same under the hood. Seen one, seen 'em all. And one should be enough for most intelligent beings. I've seen most of them out of curiosity or happenstance (except Kill Bill Vol2, Vol 1 told me all I needed to know). Prurient guff on the whole. Unedifying in the extreme.
|
>> a bit of jazz in there.
>>
>> Which, of course, can only go to make an execrable film even worse.
'Straordinary feller... some sort of immigrant probably. None too kulturny anyway...
|
|
Thinking about this thread on the way home - Inglorious Basterds was a load of nonsense.
|
|
It was yes, very poor Qt output, I would rate Django as better than Pulp Fiction tho.
|
Hooray. Another one for our side. Won't be long before you realise all the others are gutter trash too, RP!
;-)
|
|
Won't prevent me from watching Django - most likely on DVD. My wife likes Western type films - but they have to be a decent watch.
|
Set in the South two years before the Civil War, Django Unchained stars Jamie Foxx as Django, a slave whose brutal history with his former owners lands him face-to-face with German-born bounty hunter Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz). Schultz is on the trail of the murderous Brittle brothers, and only Django can lead him to his bounty. Honing vital hunting skills, Django remains focused on one goal: finding and rescuing Broomhilda (Kerry Washington), the wife he lost to the slave trade long ago. Django and Schultz's search ultimately leads them to Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio), the proprietor of "Candyland," an infamous plantation. Exploring the compound under false pretenses, Django and Schultz arouse the suspicion of Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson), Candie's trusted house slave. -- (C) Weinstein
R, 2 hr. 46 min.
Western, Drama
Directed By: Quentin Tarantino
Written By: Quentin Tarantino
In Theaters: Jan 18, 2013 Wide
US Box Office:£106.3M
The Weinstein Co.
The Rotten Tomatoes review. This would encourage me to go and see it - read reviews on their for years and it seems to match my experiences most times
|
|
That's not a review. That's a précis.
|
|
Well it's the user reviews that do it for me.
|
>> Inglorious Basterds was a load of nonsense.
Not quite. It had an interesting side, but that was exclusively concerned with cinema and movie making - clearly the director's real interests. The WW2 side was frivolous and disrespectful despite the Jewishness of the heroes. So really it was an extreme piece of self-indulgence, like many other efforts from Hollywood especially in recent years. An effect of the decline of the big studios and the rise of extremely powerful individual film producers, some of them former actors.
As with music, giving the artists absolutely free rein is often a very bad idea resulting in a lot of self-regarding twaddle. If we are going to be lectured and 'enlightened', let it be by someone bright who still has their eye on the ball.
|
He's Back! - Manatee
