Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Yup. I watched the first two of the latest Star Wars films (big ones, not side stories like Solo or Rogue one), and on both occasions left the cinema with the conviction that they were perfectly serviceable star wars films and that if one liked the original three there's hardly any reason to dislike these new ones.

I think that we should definitely not try to be 10 year olds though; we're having a hard enough time as is to be adults. We should see what we enjoy and what we don't enjoy, then have an opinion, voice the opinion in a civlized manner and keep in mind to never ever ever be 'part of a fandom' or 'be fan of a franchise'. That way madness and mindlessness lie.

Jupiter Ascending is an interesting flick to me. On paper, it has everything it needs to be a great sci-fi story. Even watching it, the film has a lot of good scenes and ideas. Yet somehow, it just does not all hang together as a "good" movie. There is just something about the editing or the story beats that just do not land the way they should have.

I class Jupiter Ascending as an ambitious failure, but I would rather watch that than soulless content. There was some interesting ideas and concepts there.

Unlike Hellebore, as I have gotten older I want more substance to what I am watching. I have certain baseline ideas about story telling, editing, direction, blocking, story beats, character arcs, etc. However, I can also just enjoy a well-crafted, well-put together, and crafted film. To be great though, I find myself looking at the themes, messages, and sub-text much more than when I was younger.

Older movies can be just as well put together as younger movies, but most of us only get to see the cream-of the crop from previous generations, Less-than classic movies were produced every year too. This leads to a certain bias about older flicks because we are not bombarded and over-exposed to the dross. We only see the ones that survived the test of time.

Same with music, really.

As well as peculiar taste in movies, I’ve a peculiar taste in music. I’ve a strong preference for the era that basically runs from Glam Rock to 90’s “Britpop” Indy music. Many bands ran across the years, and their sounds adapted and changed, or members left and formed new bands.

It was a time of unparalleled musical creativity. But, and here’s the rub? Not much of it to commercial success.

So it’s easy to look at some of those bands, love their music, and assume all music of that era was superb. Except when you look at the charts? They barely bothered them. The Top Ten often occupied by disposable fashion music, rather than anything especially cool (though I do have a soft spot for junk pop music. Just….don’t tell anyone. It’ll query my dark, satanic exterior, revealing that inside I’m really about as hard as…..mashed potato).

What could be a fun thread, albeit a high maintenance one? First poster picks a year and a week in that year. Posts their country’s Box Office Top Ten. Peeps then pick a film from the list to go watch and provide a wee review on - ideally not a big on.

Or to simplify it? The week of your birth. Share the top ten, pick a film (for me, ideally one you’ve not seen or haven’t heard of).




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Twice Told Tales

Vincent Price, one of the greatest movie stars of all time, stars in this trilogy of short stories.

And he is predictably magnificent. Charming, debonair, screen dominating.

The copy I bought on Prime is a poor transfer, so I may be in the market for a fully restored version. But this little trilogy works really well.

@MDG - the number one films across my year of birth includes Empire strikes Back, Star Trek TMO, Apocalypse Now, Life of Brian, Kramer vs Kramer, Airplane, the Shining, Caligula and Flash Gordon! What a list!

Aha! I see we were born in the same year.

Poor, poor world ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Though of that list? Kramer vs Kramer I don’t think I’ve seen.

 Sigur wrote:
Yup. I watched the first two of the latest Star Wars films (big ones, not side stories like Solo or Rogue one), and on both occasions left the cinema with the conviction that they were perfectly serviceable star wars films and that if one liked the original three there's hardly any reason to dislike these new ones.

Oh, I have many reasons I don't like the new ones.
I just don't have time to list them for you.

Tucker & Dale Vs Evil

A supremely silly and highly entertaining spoof of the slasher genre. Our two protagonists are adorable goofballs who are just trying to fix up their cabin, only to have the teens keep getting themselves killed around them.

Top notch well done silliness.

One of the few films with Alan Tudyk playing a human.

We enjoyed it.

I watched it, and I keep wondering if I missed something. To me it seemed like it was one of those films where they had an interesting idea and did it well up to the ~50-60 minute mark, and then caved in and made it a very conventional film in the end. But maybe I just didn't pay enough atttention towards the end.

@css: Sounds fair. I was OK with the two new ones. There were some things I liked (clunky bombers, red underneath the sandy stuff, Adam Driver's character), some i did not like (what was snape for? that telephone call in the beginning of #2).

 Sigur wrote:
@css: Sounds fair. I was OK with the two new ones.

I don't think the point of contention is whether you liked the newer films.

 Sigur wrote:
I watched it, and I keep wondering if I missed something. To me it seemed like it was one of those films where they had an interesting idea and did it well up to the ~50-60 minute mark, and then caved in and made it a very conventional film in the end. But maybe I just didn't pay enough atttention towards the end.

I can see this. I don't think its brilliant start to finish but really enjoyed the start enough to forgive the landing.

Watched a Marvel double bill:-

Thor:- The Dark World

I hadn't watched this one in ages because I remember it being pretty bad, but I actually quite enjoyed it this time around. It's not one of Marvels best but it's a decent mid-tier entry.
Thor's Thor-ing, Loki's Loki-ing, Frigga gets a brief moment of badassery, Sif and the Warriors Three get to do a little bit (I'll forever be disappointed that the movies never could work out what to do with them). Malekith and the Dark Elves are very one-dimensional villains, but that's a fairly common problem with Marvel movies in general (I did love those creepy doll masks they wore though).
Overall it's no longer languishing down there with Thor:- Love and Thunder, but has basically moved into the middle with the other two Thor films.

Fantastic 4:- First Steps

I was very surprised by how disappointed I was in this one. I loved the retro-futuristic 60's vibe everything had, but found the film itself extremely meh, and, annoyingly, I don't know why. Apart from a wish that the movie had covered something from that "Early days" montage instead of what we got, all I can say is that it didn't do anything for me.
It's probably pure nostalgia talking, but I'd say those two early Noughties F4 films were at least more entertaining if not better.

I also found F4 disappointing. It felt like a lot of the emotional connection I’d need to have with the characters was never established. Whole character arcs seem to have been cut, such as Ben and the teacher. The audience is supposed to accept the main duo as a couple who work as a team, but we only spend time with them when they are apathetic or arguing with each other, making them feel like a broken couple no one wants to spend time with.

The stakes were also pretty weak. The whole “he wants my child”/Omelas Dilemma was wiped away after five minutes with one improbable speech. The Silver Surfer’s sad destroyer schtick meant we all knew she would have a change of heart but had to twiddle our thumbs waiting for the movie to stretch out the ‘tension’. The final battle against Galactus was badly filmed and poorly paced; and there was no suspense that Sue might stay dead after all the buildup for Checkov’s magic baby. The team wasn’t endearing and their teamwork wasn’t compelling. The movie also felt pretty dour for a four-color mad-science space opera.


Thor 2 was pretty decent to watch as a comedy. Hemsworth is usually funny, but Skaarsgard and Denning were the comedy VIPs.

How come no one told me there was a "The Colour of Magic" movie?

I think Bob nailed a lot of the issues with Fantastic Four, but I also thought they did Galactus well, which was nice.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
How come no one told me there was a "The Colour of Magic" movie?

Because I have no idea what you are talking about. I know a Colour Out of Space (2019) starring the goat Nicholas Cage, but not one of Magic.

 Ahtman wrote:
I think Bob nailed a lot of the issues with Fantastic Four, but I also thought they did Galactus well, which was nice.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
How come no one told me there was a "The Colour of Magic" movie?

Because I have no idea what you are talking about. I know a Colour Out of Space (2019) starring the goat Nicholas Cage, but not one of Magic.

This is the Terry Pratchett novel-turned-film. Stars Sean Astin and Christopher Lee voices Death (So there are 2 LoTR actors in it)... don't recognize the actor who plays Rincewind.

It's so strange to see Sean Astin not being short or fighting a bald Bruce Campbell on a mountain top.

David Jason is one of the top UK TV actors. Famous for two main characters, the wheelierest of dealers Del Boy in a comedy series, and a hard bitten police detective.

I haven’t seen this thing, but given that it also has Jeremy irons and Tim Curry, it’s probably glorious

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
How come no one told me there was a "The Colour of Magic" movie?

Because sadly it's not very good. :/ I liked Hogfather though.

 Flinty wrote:
David Jason is one of the top UK TV actors. Famous for two main characters, the wheelierest of dealers Del Boy in a comedy series, and a hard bitten police detective.

I haven’t seen this thing, but given that it also has Jeremy irons and Tim Curry, it’s probably glorious

And Dangermouse.

Bloodbath At The House of Death

Pamela Stephenson, Kenny Everett and Vincent Price (you read that right!) star in this sadly underrated comedy horror, spoofing the likes of Hammer, Tigon and Amicus films.

It is flawed, and not as funny as it could be with such a cast. But it’s still a lot of fun. Almost an early Scary Movie attempt.

 Sigur wrote:

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
How come no one told me there was a "The Colour of Magic" movie?

Because sadly it's not very good. :/ I liked Hogfather though.

And David Jason is just too old to be Rincewind, in the books he's around 31, compared to David Jason being 68 at the time.

Strange choice to cast a 68 year old as the character whose main actual skill is running away from every problem at high speed and for long distance.

 Easy E wrote:
[b].

Unlike Hellebore, as I have gotten older I want more substance to what I am watching. I have certain baseline ideas about story telling, editing, direction, blocking, story beats, character arcs, etc. However, I can also just enjoy a well-crafted, well-put together, and crafted film. To be great though, I find myself looking at the themes, messages, and sub-text much more than when I was younger.

Older movies can be just as well put together as younger movies, but most of us only get to see the cream-of the crop from previous generations, Less-than classic movies were produced every year too. This leads to a certain bias about older flicks because we are not bombarded and over-exposed to the dross. We only see the ones that survived the test of time.

In keeping with the thread. I'll use another movie as an example of what I value in films. I tend to judge them based on how they ask you to judge them.

Take Arrival. Loved the concept, acting atmosphere etc. but the reveal conceit was so absurd it ruined the film for me. The movie asked me to take it as a serious sci-fi alien anthropology encounter and then tried to sell magic words to me with a straight face.

Had it given me any sense that this kind of thing was possible in the universe I would have enjoyed it. But it was like ER randomly revealed it used homeopathy to cure people in emergency after being but by a car (see Mitchel and Webb skit of the same story)....

I enjoyed interstellar because it did something similar but wove it throughout the film rather rather than dropping it suddenly at the end.

I enjoy Joe dirt because it tells me what it's going to do and then does it passably well. I dislike Paul Blart because it didn't.


I enjoyed Tucker and Dale because i saw it when it came out and the idea was a lot fresher than now, but again it did what it was claiming to do.

I love Moon, but I actually didn't like it when i first saw it because the expectations the advertising created primed me for a different film. I realised I watched it through the wrong lens and watched it again and loved it.

Terror on London Bridge

A relocated to the US London Bridge (and not Tower Bridfe!)

Jack the Ripper’s spirit being rather miffed about the relocation!

David Hasselhoff!

I’m expecting this to be awfully good. But it might just be awful. Time will tell.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
OK. So. Background? This was a TV Movie, so I’ve adjusted my expectations accordingly in terms of expected level of gore and quality.

Got to say? This is surprisingly decent! They throw a red herring or two in, including Two Suspicious Posh Englishmen so it’s not clear who Jack The Ripper actually is.

It puts me in mind of Murder, She Wrote (a good thing!) but pushed a little further into the realms of horror. Not least because The Hoff is playing an amateur sleuth who of course knows better than the somewhat bumbling professionals.

Certainly whilst the product is necessarily tame? There’s plenty here that really could’ve been pushed further into the realm of Full Blown Competent Supernatural Slasher territory. The atmosphere is definitely here, with things being played pretty Poe faced, with minimal camp.

Now, I wouldn’t say this is a flick to base your evenings entertainment around. But if like me you want something on in the background whilst you potter around? This will do the job, a quite nicely too. Also tame enough for older children/early teens if you’ve got them scuttling about your abode.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Sigur wrote:

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
How come no one told me there was a "The Colour of Magic" movie?

Because sadly it's not very good. :/ I liked Hogfather though.

And David Jason is just too old to be Rincewind, in the books he's around 31, compared to David Jason being 68 at the time.

Strange choice to cast a 68 year old as the character whose main actual skill is running away from every problem at high speed and for long distance.

The whole project seemed to be a bit of a dud.

It felt like the filmmakers were attempting to wedge in as much of the book into the film without any real explanation of why we should care about any of the characters.

Except for evil Tim Curry. Who spoiler alert... is evil. Why? No clue, he's just evil.

I really wanted to enjoy this, but couldn't. I've heard from multiple people that Hogfather is a lot better... maybe I'll give that one a go in the future.

 Hellebore wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
[b].

Unlike Hellebore, as I have gotten older I want more substance to what I am watching. I have certain baseline ideas about story telling, editing, direction, blocking, story beats, character arcs, etc. However, I can also just enjoy a well-crafted, well-put together, and crafted film. To be great though, I find myself looking at the themes, messages, and sub-text much more than when I was younger.

Older movies can be just as well put together as younger movies, but most of us only get to see the cream-of the crop from previous generations, Less-than classic movies were produced every year too. This leads to a certain bias about older flicks because we are not bombarded and over-exposed to the dross. We only see the ones that survived the test of time.

In keeping with the thread. I'll use another movie as an example of what I value in films. I tend to judge them based on how they ask you to judge them.

Take Arrival. Loved the concept, acting atmosphere etc. but the reveal conceit was so absurd it ruined the film for me. The movie asked me to take it as a serious sci-fi alien anthropology encounter and then tried to sell magic words to me with a straight face.

Had it given me any sense that this kind of thing was possible in the universe I would have enjoyed it. But it was like ER randomly revealed it used homeopathy to cure people in emergency after being but by a car (see Mitchel and Webb skit of the same story)....

I enjoyed interstellar because it did something similar but wove it throughout the film rather rather than dropping it suddenly at the end.

I enjoy Joe dirt because it tells me what it's going to do and then does it passably well. I dislike Paul Blart because it didn't.


I enjoyed Tucker and Dale because i saw it when it came out and the idea was a lot fresher than now, but again it did what it was claiming to do.

I love Moon, but I actually didn't like it when i first saw it because the expectations the advertising created primed me for a different film. I realised I watched it through the wrong lens and watched it again and loved it.

Just to be clear, I did not mean any of that as a personal attack or anything.

I have also had similar experiences where I have come to a movie with different expectations about a movie based on advertising and what not, and could not appreciate it for what it was.

Watched Paul Thomas Anderson's Licorice Pizza(2021) and it is certainly a film. As always Anderson captures the look and feel of the time period he is working in, and the vignettes are engaging and interesting, but it all sort of feels skeevy since the core of the film is the blossoming romance between a fifteen year old boy and a twenty five year old woman. I appreciate that she is kind of a problematic person and dealing with arrested development, wanting to be carefree like teenagers, while also trying to grow and be more adult, but the very end of the film is them throwing everything off and accepting their kid/adult romantic relationship with a passionate kiss.

Bradley Cooper in a small role playing real life producer Jon Peters is intense and funny. Peters forced his name onto Cooper's remake of a Star Is Born (2018) because Peters produced the 1976 version of A Star is Born with his then girlfriend Barbara Streisand, so I imagine Cooper was having fun with this. Peters is probably best known in the fandom as the egomaniac who wanted the giant spider in Superman and got it in Wild Wild west.

That was the least worst idea he had for Superman.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
That was the least worst idea he had for Superman.

It ended up looking really cool when we got to see Nicolas Cage in the suit eye beaming said giant spider on the big screen.

My favorite part of The Flash.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
How come no one told me there was a "The Colour of Magic" movie?

You didn't ask & we didn't know you liked Disc world movies?

There's several more as well. Make sure you look up the full list.