Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

What have you watched recently? 3D!

Options
17778808283112

Comments

  • Moderators, Arts Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 11,053 Mod ✭✭✭✭Fysh


    For anyone from a comics background, The Sadness is basically the Garth Ennis Crossed comics, but set in Taiwan. I caught it on Friday and had a similar reaction to El Gato De Negocios - the effects work is great and a majority (if not all) of it was practical as far as I could tell. Not one for the squeamials

    I also rewatched a couple of films over the weekend. Cruel Intentions is still a fairly sharp dark comedy about bored socialites, let down by its silly ending. Ryan Phillipe, Selma Blair and Sarah Michelle Gellar are all great in it, but as far as "updating classic story to set it in an American high school" films go, 10 Things I Hate About You remains my favourite.

    Ron's Gone Wrong, on rewatch, is still an enjoyably anarchic film. The whole "message" bit about how children's relationship with technology is clunky as hell, but luckily doesn't get in the way of the film too much, allowing Galafiniakis' turn as Ron to run rampant. The Mitchells Vs The Machines is the better film in terms of being a coherent whole, but RGW is still good enough to be worth watching.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,219 ✭✭✭Decuc500


    Only The Animals

    Another film from Dominik Moll that is firmly in the style of Hitchcock or Claude Chabrol.

    A missing woman in the snowy French countryside links several characters. The narrative constantly moves back and forwards in time so we see different scenes in a new light as the film progresses.

    That sort of thing has been done before in films but when it’s done right it’s clever and surprising. A third act swerve away from France adds to the oddness.

    A typically intriguing film from a director I always keep an eye out for.



  • Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭monkeyactive


    Marvelous and the black hole


    Pulls on the heart strings but also delivers laughs. Story of a Grieving young girl being brought back to life by a newfound passion for performing magic. Indie production swinging above its weight 8/10



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,469 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Midnight Run (1988)

    Great chemistry in this solid "buddy cop" film; Charles Grodin and Robert DeNiro made for a good pair of classically mismatched, bickering protagonists forced to travel the country together. The pacing was good, the action solid and unshowy, and there were some solid f-bomb enriched laughs throughout. This was a good ride and if there was a flaw, it was that the film lacked a little Hollywood flourish and showiness that might have made the adventure linger.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    The Fundamentals of Caring popped up in my feed earlier. Lots of fun. Rudd is so watchable.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,277 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    'The Northman'

    Robert Eggers' follow up to his unlikely successful 'The Lighthouse' has little of the skewed mania that was at the centre of that movie, although there's some of the craziness present in this Viking revenge drama, loosely based on a Scandinavian legend and starring a buffed up Alexander Skarsgard as Amleth, a Norse prince who is wronged and swears to avenge the ones he loves.

    Eggers' film opens with an obvious betrayal and a violent, myth infused, Bezerker attack on an eastern European village. But then quickly settles down into a more steady piece featuring Amleth's journey toward his preordained fate in which he must eventually face the person he has sworn revenge on.

    'The Northman' is more bombastic and "artistically licenced" in certain ways than the recent TV Viking fare, 'The Last Kingdom' and 'Vikings', and has a little too much hocus pocus malarkey going in it for its own good. Amleth's interactions with "seers" and "witches" let it down a little bit and a more straightforward approach probably would have served it better. Of course, Norse life was intertwined with gods and spooky nonsense of many types, but it just kinda doesn't work here. At least not upon first blush. But it's shoved to the background mostly and the bulk of the film is taken up with a relatively quiet middle section.

    It's this middle section, though, that may have some viewers feeling a bit short changed, especially if they go into 'The Northman' expecting a gung ho Viking battle movie, which it most certainly is not. But one couldn't be blamed for believing that it was, because of the promises that the trailer issued. But what the film ends up being is an entertaining but curious item that's a little bit Conan and a little bit Skyrim, which straddles the fence between what have previously seen from Eggers and a spectacular blockbuster, albeit beautifully shot and laced with lovingly detailed sets.


    7/10



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    You are getting kinder with age. 7/10 is a generous for you for something like this!



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,277 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    😁

    I thought it was decent enough. There's a bit too much guff with regards to how the Norse were supposed to have fought (as in there's no evidence that a Beserker was anything more than a ceremonial position and they certainly never went into battle skyclad) and the witchery elements left me cold. There's also a little bit too much "is this really happening or is it in his head" moments. There's also one or two things that had me go WTF. As in where did Olga get two fine horses from?

    Overall, I was entertained. Can't say that I'll be forever signing its praises, though, and maybe a rewatch might have me knocking a point or two off in the future.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,469 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    I think it was worth praising insofar as it existed at all. A relatively high budget, wide release that was adult and hard R, helmed by a director with a keen visual eye. All the while presenting a bluntly vulgar, unvarnished portrayal of Norse life (at least, it felt authentic. Not sure if all the ceremonies were invented or not); there wasn't even an attempt towards romanticism of the era.

    My main fault with the story was how when we got to Iceland the story ground to a halt. The protagonist's Nemesis a bleedin' sheep farmer with a few guards yet the movie dithered like crazy.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Dithered is about the best way to describe it. I was loving the first half hour of it, the visuals, the style etc. I can buy into all the madness of witches and visions etc IF the story is good enough. But it was just no great shakes unfortunately. With all the Conan references and its obvious influence, how it became so small after starting so big, its beyond me how that was exciting for the producers, writer/director to pursue.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,277 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Yeh, a few people I've talked to have a problem with the middle section. That's the part I enjoyed the most. It was actually the most authentic feeling of the whole thing. Contrary to popular belief, most Norse weren't all violent warriors and they certainly were not the buffed up supermen that the beginning section of Eggers' movie would have you believe. They were farmers, traders, seafarers, businessmen. Viking settlements, including our own in Dublin, were based in trading with the locals (or at least the people who got there before they did). It wasn't about going somewhere and knocking the shit out of them all the time. The Vikings prospered the most when they built trading colonies and their raids (mostly on small, undefended, villages and towns) were often a poor return for the effort. But because of their mastery of the sea, the Norse could gather together valuable trade goods from distant lands, which the locals of a given country found exotic and very desirable. Indigenous people (or at least the wealthy landowners) would often be happy enough to let a Viking settlement stay if the trade remained healthy. The foreign trade goods would be then taken back to home and sold.

    As to the dithering that Amleth engages in, that's down to his indecisiveness over his surprise of finding his mother living with Fjölnir in Iceland, and like Hamlet, is somewhat at a loss on how exactly to proceed. Plus, his fate dictates that he must face his uncle on a "lake of fire" for a sure victory and entry to Valhalla, and anything else may go against the wishes of the gods. Amleth believes that an exact fulfilment of his fate must occur if it is to play out successfully.

    Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to have made its money back. So whether studios will be enticed by such a similar project in the near future remains to be seen.



  • Moderators, Arts Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 11,053 Mod ✭✭✭✭Fysh


    I think the main thing that is perhaps understated in the film is the degree to which belief in fate and its importance is built into the culture. Although thinking about e.g. Gladiator and its blather about the fields of Elysium etc, perhaps being understated is the better option...



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,277 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Sure. In Norse religious belief a person's fate was controlled by the Norns. A set of deities that had higher power than the gods. It's fair to say that Norse society, at the very least, paid significant lip service to their religious customs and ideas. But, like all ancient cultures, the degree to which everyone in Norse society actually believed whole heartedly in such things remains debatable. Much like today, there were probably a considerable number of people who merely hedged the bets, as it were, and were neither believers or non-believers. There were plenty who would simply nod to the priest and attend the odd mass to put it in today's understanding, but in private thought that the whole thing was a load of cobblers.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,469 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Just on the last point, apparently the film's doing very well for itself on VOD and steaming so may be one of those films that make its money there. I wouldn't lose heart this mightn't spawn a trend; it was always doomed anyway with Dr Strange 2 on the horizon like a Viking longboat.



  • Registered Users Posts: 417 ✭✭8mv


    We went to Everything Everywhere All at Once at the cinema last night. I wouldn't even attempt to describe it, but we thought it was excellent. It does what it says on the tin. My daughters made an interesting point that they were glad they saw it in the cinema because if we tried to watch that at home they would have their phones out and lose concentration.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Anyone watched Night Sky to the end? Sissy Spacek and J.K. Simmons. I'm a couple of eps in and they're both great together.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,238 ✭✭✭Spon Farmer


    I saw Psycho at the cinema last week.

    it is doing the rounds after a 4K restoration - which strangely spoils the big twist in the story

    as you can clearly see in the shower scene that “Mother” is Norman.

    I hadn’t seen it in years and there was a lot that I had forgot like the PI, the sherrif and his wife and the conference at the end with the doctor. Lila being so sure that “something isn’t right” at Bates Motel without ever being there or meeting Norman is a bit annoying and Sam seemingly having never heard of the Bates or the motel in that small town is a bit silly.

    Sti great movie though after all these years. Was hoping it would lead to more Hitchcock at the cinema.

    It hadn’t occurred to me until seeing it this time that Psycho is the original slasher movie and has been copied countless times.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,469 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Love, Death & Robots (Volume 1)

    Somehow thought there were only 10 episodes, but kinda chaffed when I saw it was 18; got a became a severe chore by the end - though the very last episode was the best by far. When the stories weren't completely obsessed with tits and sexual violence as a plot device, some of the individual episodes were quite good: my favourites were Three Robots, When The Yoghurt Took Over, Suits and that last episode, Zima Blue. The Witness possibly the worst by far; that while it an interesting premise, it was undercut by spectacularly adolescent horniness. I'm no prude, nor often driven by "outrage", but there was a point where the constant T&A had just become plain gross.

    Not sure I'll watch volumes 2 and 3 if this is what they're going for half the time. The cute stuff like the Three Robots or Suits showed more potential, while Zima Blue showed some more meaningful, emotional registers. The episodes with Suicide Girls getting raped or abused I could do without.



  • Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 23,931 Mod ✭✭✭✭TICKLE_ME_ELMO


    I've only watched a handful, and not in season order, but I found the photorealistic animation style in a lot of them really off-putting. I know it's takes a lot of talent and time but I just don't see the point of it if it's not a video game.

    The Long Grass, and The Night Before from S2 were good ones though, and had a distinct style to them. From the S1 ones I've watched I liked When The Yogurt took over, and the Three Robots one too.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,469 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Yeah, I was surprised how many episodes leant into the photorealism; as you say it just made those stories feel like video-games (the horny tone didn't help that bias either). The only episode that didn't quite topple into the Uncanny Valley was The Secret War, and that smartly never lingered too long on its characters' grizzled faces.

    I see the subsequent seasons are only half as long, so maybe I'll try them later.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Arts Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 11,053 Mod ✭✭✭✭Fysh


    The latter two seasons have a strong feel of "one season, split into two to maximize marketing/draw". Haven't watched either yet but apparently each of them has a further 3 Robots story, which suits me as I thought it was one of the best.

    According to Wikipedia the project started as Miller & Fincher trying to get a reboot of Heavy Metal off the ground, which probably explains (but doesn't justify) the horniness of a lot of the S1 episodes...



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,469 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Ahhhhhh. Well suddenly it ALL makes sense. As you say, it doesn't justify the content but knowing now it's a Heavy Metal reboot with the serial numbers sanded off, it explains a LOT. And yeah, now that I think about it that's precisely what those episodes were; not sure how I didn't see it first time around. Was too busy going OMG guys I get it, you animated boobs and snatch, grow up.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,277 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    'Top Gun'

    A film I'd not seen since its original release in 1986 and I thought it was terrible then. It's still terrible. But what is most fascinating about it is the apparent hold it has over some people. There are those out there that truly love the movie and I'll never figure out why, because 'Top Gun' dribbles along inanely when everybody is on the ground and the only thing it has going for it is its aerial scenes which, in fairness, were relatively entertaining if terribly cliched. The Tomcats, Tigers and Skyhawks are all nice to watch flying around, but everything comes to a crashing halt back on Terra Firma.

    The reason for this is the unbelievably turgid story that plays out with lamentable predictably and Top Gun's juvenile dialogue doesn't help either. Its romance between Tom Cruise and Kelly McGillis never once feels like it's anything more than a 9 year old's impression of what men and women do and the obvious drama involving Cruse's "Maverick" and Anthony Edwards' "Goose" is just another layer of trope in a movie that's full of them. Cruise's "Maverick" is an insufferable git, into the bargain, but remains completely in line with the characters that Cruise had in his limited repertoire during his rise to megastardom in the 80's and his childish rivalry with the equally obnoxious "Iceman" (Val Kilmer) makes "Goose" all the more likeable. It's hard to believe, for a single second though, that Kelly McGillis's character would touch any of these clowns with a ten foot barge pole.

    'Top Gun' is an incredibly cheesy movie and one that drips with cheap machismo to a point where it all becomes extremely camp. But not camp in a funny way, like 'Plan 9 From Outer Space', but more in a way that seriously makes you ask yourself what was director Tony Scott going for here? It all serves to create quite a bizarre world where navy pilots ponce around locker rooms and play beach volley ball when they're not gripping tightly to their joysticks. You wonder who, exactly, was the target audience that this movie was intended for.

    The soundtrack, too, is deeply entrenched in terrible 1980's AOR and throwaway pop and the likes of Kenny Loggins, Harold Faltermeyer and, one hit wonders, Berlin fill out the audio when the jet engines are switched off and it's amazing to think that the mediocre music from the movie also made a ton of money as well. It's also astonishing that 'Top Gun' was the No1 movie of that year, when in reality it's an incredibly bland, ho-hum, by-the-numbers Reagan era junk.

    3/10


    'The Maltese Falcon'

    For me the best film of the 1940's, John Huston's 'The Maltese Falcon' never fails to entertain. A classic in the true sense of the word, Huston's film remains as engrossing today as it was over 80 years ago and features Humphrey Bogart as Sam Spade, a wise cracking San Francisco P.I. who gets entangled with a strange bunch of nefarious characters who are all looking for a mysterious ornamental bird of great value and will do anything to get hold of it.

    The Dashiell Hammet story may not sound like much, but it's the characters that bring it all to life and coupled with its slow unfolding, it makes for a compelling view. Alongside Bogart, who is at the top of his game, are the likes of Mary Astor as the scheming and thoroughly untrustworthy Femme Fatale, Peter Lorre as the equally dodgy Joel Cairo, Sidney Greenstreet as the leader of the pack and Elisha Cook Jr. as his young gunsel. Everyone is brilliant and there isn't a step out of place. The actors in the film embody their characters so well, that it's impossible to imagine anyone else doing these parts, even though Huston's effort was actually the third time Hammet's story was put through the Hollywood mill. Plus the fast talking dialogue is never anything but excellent, albeit within the confines of a 1940's Hollywood noir. Of course, nobody in real life would have ever talked like people do in 'The Maltese Falcon', but it completely suits the story's setting and feel.

    'The Maltese Falcon' is rightly hailed as one of the best Hollywood movies ever made and it's difficult to believe that anyone wouldn't get some joy out of in in some way, regardless of what their general tastes may be.

    10/10



  • Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 23,931 Mod ✭✭✭✭TICKLE_ME_ELMO


    I caught An Cailín Ciúin in my local cinema today before it's entirely taken over by dinosaurs and cartoon spacemen.

    Can't say much about it that hasn't already been said. A really beautiful and moving story of love and kindness, and a real pleasure to see a film in Irish be about something other than the famine.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,311 ✭✭✭santana75


    On her Majesty's secret Service

    I'd never seen this and Omniplex are having a Bond season at the moment so off I went........I absolutely loved it. Really didnt expect to. I thought George Lazenby was a great Bond, he had the physicality in spades, I mean the opening scene just hooked me in. Very well paced, I wasn't bored for even second. The stuff with him undercover as a genealogist at a secret base, high up in the Swiss Alps, surrounded by a bevy of supermodels, was gas. It was like that movie The Beguiled.......a film within a film so to speak. Anyway I thought it was a belter, shame Lazenby shot himself in the foot and refused to go again, I think he could've had a good innings as Bond.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    30 Hail Marys, and 10 Acts of Contrition for you.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,277 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    That ain't gonna work El. I'm beyond redemption. 😁



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I would have to agree. To get past the pearly gates, disdain for Costner and watching Wonderwoman would already have cost you years in purgatory. Surely now after an attack on Kenny Loggins you are on the downward escalator!



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,277 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Just wait til you hear what I have to say about 'Iron Eagle'. ☺️



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 14,922 ✭✭✭✭loyatemu


    It's a good Bond movie but I don't really agree about Lazenby, he's pretty wooden and for all his faults, Roger Moore was a much better Bond (after Connery had donned the tuxedo and wig one more time).



Advertisement