NOW WATCHING

Perun said:
Just returned.
What can I say, in terms of tension and intensity, the film delivered what it promised. I knew I wasn't to expect a regular film in terms of plot or character development, so what I got was fine for me. The film had a lot of moments. The second StuKa attack at the beginning had me shiver all over, I could really feel the horror and dread that the sound of these things alone must have spawned. The scenes with the trapped soldiers in the boats (the one that got torpedoed and then the fishing boat) were equally terrifying, and the air scenes were brilliantly shot. The film perfectly conveyed the message that all these soldiers who are turned into demi-gods by historical memory were basically just regular guys who were lucky if all they had to watch out for was that they wouldn't shit themselves. The fact that we were with the soldiers made the experience so personal that in the end, I was equally puzzled as the soldiers when they were celebrated at home, when all they did was survive, rough and dirty.
However, one thing I'm not convinced of is that the non-linear narrative made it better. It's true that it does something to confuse things and therefore gets you in one line with the people onscreen in the sense that you don't know what the hell is going on, but I am not sure that it added to the intensity of the film. For example, we already saw the guys abandon the fishing ship before we even saw them got on it, and I don't know if that was helpful for this particular subplot. Wouldn't it have been more intense if we hadn't actually known how far out in the sea they already were? I appreciate the skill with which three narratives of different lengths (one week, one day, one hour) were woven together, I'm just thinking - maybe I saw a bit much of that lately. The novelty has worn off, and it starts raising the question whether it really is a necessary dramatic device. I know it's a Christopher Nolan trademark, but he really has to be careful not to go Shyamalan about it.
Anyway, despite that, the film as a whole was great and delivered what it promised. It's a truly intense war film that portrays the horror of war without having to go into Saving Private Ryan territory, and does not surrender to hero worship or aesthetic wankery the way Fury did.
Click to expand...
Without the non-linear structure it wouldn't have worked as well as it did.

- The air sequences would have been all at the end of the movie instead of throughout the film.
- We get to see things from several perspectives. Cillian Murphys arc was really powerful. And you have the bit where the guy lands his plane in the ocean, and waves. But later you see he actually tries to escape.
 
MV5BMWIwYTI1ZDItMjlkNi00ZjJiLWEzY2MtN2NjNzg0N2UzMDlhXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMjI4MjA5MzA@._V1_.jpg


This one really deserves to be a classic. It's not a typical horror, per se, but it still gave me a chill, because the (admittedly simplistic) story was well told and Burton was appropriately demonic. Lino Ventura as the investigator was quite charismatic and the whole movie manages to subtly unnerve you in a rather unique way. The airplane scene was very uncomfortable to watch. I think I'm going to remember this one for quite some time. Also, we picked it up randomly, not really knowing what it's supposed to be about - so now when we read Carrie and saw three movie adaptations already, we just had to come across another suspense movie with telekinesis as its main theme. :D But this one is certainly better. I'd recommend it to anyone who'd like some of that old school terror. Creepier than Omen, but less so than Rosemary's Baby or The Innocents. Also, the amount of moral repugnancy made me think of There Will Be Blood from time to time, but that's probably just me.
 
My son and I saw The Dark Tower last weekend. I have read the seven books (haven't read Wind Through the Keyhole yet) and I knew there was no way to adapt all the books in one film so I went in expecting liberties to be taken. I knew ahead of time that most of the Ka-tet would not be there. This film is just the basic concept of the books (Roland tracking the MIB who wants to bring down the Tower). Too basic for Dark Tower purists for certain.

From that point of view, we enjoyed it. So what if Roland is not black in the books; Idris is a great actor and I enjoy his every role. Matthew I also have been a fan of and this is a rare chance to see him as the antagonist. Pure evil, no empathy; only desires pain and death. Probably the best cast role was Jake; the one who was closest to the books. Yes, this would have been better as a mini-series adapting all the books, but not meant to be. Sounds like the TV series that is being planned will concentrate on the flashbacks in the books (if it is actually produced).
 
terrell39 said:
My son and I saw The Dark Tower last weekend. I have read the seven books (haven't read Wind Through the Keyhole yet) and I knew there was no way to adapt all the books in one film so I went in expecting liberties to be taken. I knew ahead of time that most of the Ka-tet would not be there. This film is just the basic concept of the books (Roland tracking the MIB who wants to bring down the Tower). Too basic for Dark Tower purists for certain.

From that point of view, we enjoyed it. So what if Roland is not black in the books; Idris is a great actor and I enjoy his every role. Matthew I also have been a fan of and this is a rare chance to see him as the antagonist. Pure evil, no empathy; only desires pain and death. Probably the best cast role was Jake; the one who was closest to the books. Yes, this would have been better as a mini-series adapting all the books, but not meant to be. Sounds like the TV series that is being planned will concentrate on the flashbacks in the books (if it is actually produced).
Click to expand...

I'm going to see it when it premieres in Sweden next week. Glad to hear you enjoyed it, I was never expecting anything else than this kind of adaptation, really. Going to be interesting, some describe it as "a complete disaster" and others seem to find it okay. I'm perfectly happy with just okay.
 
Just came back from The Dark Tower.

A well made film which is a very loose adaptation of Stephen King's 7-book series. I wasn't sure what to expect when the reviews were mostly negative, but I'm very pleased with this adaptation in the end. I think they have done an interesting take on the material, and done it well - it feels respectful, no matter what someone might say about the casting of Elba. It was never going to be The Lord of the Rings, and the critics who expect such epic storytelling aren't really familiar with the material. The Dark Tower is a very different animal. Overall, I think the choices made here have been mostly wise. It's been criticized for its undefined central conflict. I ask myself why? We've got a lead who's trying to convince his surroundings that he's not going insane, and that the end of the world is coming. We've got a hero who does not care about the end of the world, only about revenge against the villain. Easy. Couldn't be clearer. Saving the world is secondary, what's the problem?

Idris Elba (for all the talk of the wrongness of having the white Clint Eastwood-esque Roland Deschain being played by a black actor) is fantastic. Matthew McConaughey is the most camp he's ever been, but I think it works most of the time (if not, it's Razzie time). However, no one but Tom Taylor is really facing much of a challenge here, but he is up for every bit of it - Jake Chambers is really the lead here, and it works well. A more traditional take than King's way of starting with the unfamiliar (sort of reversing the trope, only to back down and do it straight in the second book). Film does the setup really well, and the worldbuilding manages to fit a surprising lot of stuff into this rather short film. The only thing that saddens me a bit is that it boils down to action by the numbers in the final act, but considering the amount of films falling in that trap these days it's more a sign of the times we're living in than a fault with this film in particular.

Perhaps it's Elba being so bloody good as Roland which makes me blind to other faults, but I thouroughly enjoyed this and would see it again. 8/10.
 
Just realized this thread existed so...

Night before last I sat down and watched The Wicker Man (the original one). It was a very good film. Well-executed suspense-wise, that final scene is everything it's cracked up to be. Words really can't do it justice (and neither can the Maiden song), it's gotta be seen to be believed. 9.5/10. Very good film.
 
Watched a few films & stuff...

Watched A Cure for Wellness (Wiki) yesterday. An interesting horror film which I enjoyed a lot; the plot it's actually quite Lovecraftian. The lead roles were unobtrusive (i.e. not annoyingly well-known) & there was literally nothing in this that was poorly executed. Pacing was nice, good mood & feel about it, and just decently directed without any of the usual horror directing horseshit. Cool 1920/30's setting to the institute (filmed in Germany); had a real Bioshock snappy-snaps feel to it. All in, one of the best horror films I've seen in a long time. Probably not odd/weird enough for me (in terms of acting & directing) to be truly great, but pretty damn good.

Watched The Levelling (Wiki) a few days ago. Low budget British film; slow, dreamy (swimming imagery of a hare), bordering on enigmatic at times. Just the type of film I have time for. Involves a family on a rural farm & the suicide of their son. Nothing much happens but I quite liked it.

Watched 2014 film Pompeii (Wiki) too. Never going to get that time back. Total shite.

Watched indy film A Dark Song (Wiki) yesterday too. The plot, if I'd read it beforehand, would probably turn me away from this type of film; sounds like horror film stock occult bullshit. The exact opposite though. Very slow & moody; nothing flashy. Heavy in occult references without the film really being about that; in fact the acting & directing sort of downplays this aspect of it. Just two actors dominate most of the screen time. Ending a bit disappointing in terms of how the plot had played out (special effects a bit amateurish, as might be expected for production); but the god figure was quite bizarre. Decent effort & worth watching.

Saw Spider-Man: Homecoming (Wiki) the other week in the cinema. First of all I enjoyed it. I agree with what Mosh said a few pages back; the young cast playing Parker's school friends were genuinely funny; endearingly so. Aside from this it was, as has been commented on (& is part of the plot), less epic in scope & more "super hero in your neighbourhood"; the action takes place (in the main) in the mundane setting of Parker's immediate geographical life. Probably more refreshing because of that; maybe. I didn't find any of the plot (not particularly strong) or story (Spider-Man generally) even faintly interesting; all this stuff is now tedious as fuck. Bad guy (Keaton) was just okay; no idea why people think he was so good or the character is interesting. The humour was really the only thing holding this together for me; not laugh out loud but I couldn't help having a smirk on my face for quite a lot of this. The Captain America stuff was pretty funny. All in decent, but my expectations were unbelievably low for this one before stepping into the cinema.

Watched Outlander (Wiki) series one & two back to back. Hadn't read anything much about this prior to watching & was pleasantly surprised. The SF time-travelling frame is quite interesting & they play it quite well; it's very un-SF feeling because of the 18-century setting of most of the action. Half-way through season one my general thought was that they had managed pretty admirably not to include multiple boring scenes of fighting/violence. But boy do they make up for that with their never ending threat of sexual violence & then (at the end of series one) actual acts of sexual violence. Pretty grim stuff. The settings were very enjoyable; we had a great time identifying all the places they'd filmed in Scotland. And the plot, while riddled with pitfalls, was handled pretty well (all things considered); it was almost as enjoyable debating the Scottish historical issues that are dealt with in the series, as it was watching the drama. Overall, pretty enjoyable.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top