You Have Been Watching

Topic

What have you been watching lately?

Replies

Christian wrote:

Watched Hobbes & Shaw this weekend with the kid. If all F&F are pretty much like this, I suppose the secret is that they feel like they’ve been written by a twelve-year-old and just don’t give a shit. The plot is so dumb you can’t even criticise it for it, you just have to go along with it. And the dialogue is daft and ridiculous, but it all happens so fast you don’t get to think about it anyway. I wouldn’t say that this was a good movie, but I did have a good time with it.

I had never seen any of the F&F before but Christel had seen some of them. She wanted to see H&S so I went with her.

It really was just a dumb popcorn movie. It was entertaining in the moment but quickly forgotten afterwards. It was entertaining but nothing I’d watch again.

Chris D wrote:

But I’ve only myself to blame. This is typically Snyder for me. He takes concepts I usually enjoy and then just makes them over-long, dour slogs. Really, the idea of a heist in the middle of a zombie quarantine zone sounds like a fine recipe for a 90 minute romp of a film. Instead it’s 150 minutes of overwrought nonsense where nothing pays off. Honestly it’s kind of impressive at this point.

Agree completely, but apparently everybody loves this movie and it’s the most-watched Netflix movie ever and there will be prequels and sequels and a TV show and we will get just so much more content just like this.

Isn’t it great?

2 users thanked author for this post.

Will_C, Chris D

Andrew wrote:

Prompted by the Rewatchables podcast episode we watched Lethal Weapon 2 on Friday night

“Leo Getz — whatever you want, Leo gets!”

2 users thanked author for this post.

Ben, Andrew

Conjuring 3 had potential but just went in the most generic directions. It almost seemed like whenever it got to an interesting moment or opportunity to do something unexpected, someone said – “that’s cool, but can we make it a bit more bland and predictable?”

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

njerry wrote:

Andrew wrote:

Prompted by the Rewatchables podcast episode we watched Lethal Weapon 2 on Friday night

“Leo Getz — whatever you want, Leo gets!”

They mention on the pod just how significant his casting here was (earlier picks were Joe Pantalonio and Danny DeVito) – Pesci was stuck in TV movie hell, but after this film he has a wild streak of Goodfellas, Home Alone, With Honours, Home Alone 2, My Cousin Vinny, Lethal Weapon 3 and Casino over a few years, certainly and strangely one of the biggest mainstream movie stars of the time.

2 users thanked author for this post.

njerry, Todd

We did a rewatch of Pink Floyd’s The Wall on the big screen with my daughter and her boyfriend. They had never seen it and it had been over 20 years for my wife and I. Absolutely amazing combination of imagery and music. One of the few movies that I remembered as “great” that held up to the expectation.

5 users thanked author for this post.

Rocket, Todd, DavidM, Andrew, njerry

Christian wrote:

Chris D wrote:

But I’ve only myself to blame. This is typically Snyder for me. He takes concepts I usually enjoy and then just makes them over-long, dour slogs. Really, the idea of a heist in the middle of a zombie quarantine zone sounds like a fine recipe for a 90 minute romp of a film. Instead it’s 150 minutes of overwrought nonsense where nothing pays off. Honestly it’s kind of impressive at this point.

Agree completely, but apparently everybody loves this movie and it’s the most-watched Netflix movie ever and there will be prequels and sequels and a TV show and we will get just so much more content just like this.

Isn’t it great?

I’m not surprised Netflix is all in on it, I guess. Snyder has a very vocal and devoted fanbase, after all. But I just don’t get how anyone could love the movie. It’s just so uninteresting. There really aren’t any memorable zombie kills. Like how does a guy like Snyder make zombie movie and not have a ton of awesome zombie killing visuals?

Also, I just read a synopsis for one of the prequels for it on IMDB and even that single sentence makes no sense in context of Army of the Dead.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Will_C

Chris D wrote:

There really aren’t any memorable zombie kills.

You mean kills by zombies or of zombies? there’s a couple of each either way…

Memorable ones? Have to agree with Chris, there weren’t any either way.

That’s really what surprised me most. I didn’t necessarily expect the story to blow me away or anything, but I was at leadt looking forward to some inventive visuals. Instead, it was just… random shooting, mostly.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Well… there’s the tiger bit, then there’s a few memorable kills during the opening credits (like the zombie that gets blown to bits by the high cal), there’s the ones in the safe… I mean, it’s okay to not like it, but come on, there was plenty of that much… a lot more than most, I’d say.

I’d say the opening credits was probably the best part of the whole movie, but by the end of the movie I’d mostly forgotten the opening credits. But sure there were some moments in there. Still, I expected something more from Snyder, visually, that I didn’t get. And that was a bummer.

1 user thanked author for this post.

too bad we don’t have titles like we did on the MW. Jon’s would be Carrier’s predominant Snyderphile

Jon wrote:

Well… there’s the tiger bit, then there’s a few memorable kills during the opening credits (like the zombie that gets blown to bits by the high cal), there’s the ones in the safe… I mean, it’s okay to not like it, but come on, there was plenty of that much… a lot more than most, I’d say.

I had already mentioned that the opening credits were the only part of the movie that delivered visually. The tiger just bit obvious traiter dude for a second, and the splashing zombies in the safe thing was kinda fun, but overall for almost three hours of zombie movie? No, I wouldn’t say that was more than most.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Chris D wrote:

Still, I expected something more from Snyder, visually, that I didn’t get. And that was a bummer.

Well we can agree there, I also was expecting more, so I was also disappointed… I mean, it’s probably my least favorite Snyder flick (with the caveat I haven’t seen the owl one, and I’ll probably never see it).

 

THE LEGEND OF THE OWLS OF GILLIGAN’S ISLAND (was that the title?) was not bad. In fact, I found the story more interesting than the animation for a change.

However, it was no RANGO. Personally, I think both movies were a little under-appreciated. Especially RANGO, though. I didn’t want to see it for a long time, and when I finally watched it, I was amazed how enjoyable it actually was… and actually cinematic in ways that most animated movies, even today, do not achieve.

Anonymous wrote:

THE LEGEND OF THE OWLS OF GILLIGAN’S ISLAND (was that the title?) was not bad. In fact, I found the story more interesting than the animation for a change.

However, it was no RANGO. Personally, I think both movies were a little under-appreciated. Especially RANGO, though. I didn’t want to see it for a long time, and when I finally watched it, I was amazed how enjoyable it actually was… and actually cinematic in ways that most animated movies, even today, do not achieve.

The Ringer’s Sean Fennessey raves about Rango any chance he gets, I’ve heard about it so often on their podcasts – it must be some hidden gem.

Rango looks amazing – the quality of the CGI is truly stunning. But to say the story is loose, baggy and downright weird would be something of an understatement.

Jon wrote:

I mean, it’s probably my least favorite Snyder flick (with the caveat I haven’t seen the owl one, and I’ll probably never see it).

Yyyyeah, I think for me, as well. Sucker Punch comes a close second though. Visuals are more fun, but the story completely lost me very soon.

Watching some more Sweet Tooth, up to episode 6, and it’s holding up the quality.

There are some very nice easter eggs for Lemire books, the Essex County ones are pretty upfront and put into the plot but a Gideon road was fun and someone on Twitter said they have spotted a Plutona one (which I missed).

2 users thanked author for this post.

Andrew, Todd

Christian wrote:

Jon wrote:

I mean, it’s probably my least favorite Snyder flick (with the caveat I haven’t seen the owl one, and I’ll probably never see it).

Yyyyeah, I think for me, as well. Sucker Punch comes a close second though. Visuals are more fun, but the story completely lost me very soon.

Sucker Punch is still his worst, for me. I quite loathe it. But Army of the Dead is close simply in that it’s his least interesting. Again, I hope some day he finds the right writing partner who can compliment his strengths and cover for his storytelling weaknesses.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Christian, garjones

I really liked Sweet Tooth episode one. It has a nice 80s Spielberg vibe, family-oriented but still with a bite. I’m watching it with my wife so it’ll be a slow-paced watch as we work around her schedule but I’m very excited to see where it goes. It’s a good sign the pilot covered so much plot ground. I honestly thought it’d be like 3 episodes til he teamed up with Big Man. That’s modern TV for you; nice to see a show go against the grain.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Dave, Andrew

Will_C wrote:

It’s a good sign the pilot covered so much plot ground. I honestly thought it’d be like 3 episodes til he teamed up with Big Man.

I thought with that first episode they’d extended it to 90 minutes or something and then checked back after watching and it’s just 53 mins. It is rare nowadays to pack so much in.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Dave, Will_C

[Will_C]

A lot of shows now think they have to stretch what should just be the pilot to half a season or even a full season. If I don’t know what the hook of the show is supposed to be by the end of episode 1 then the show has failed.

The Sopranos pilot gives us Tony in therapy, the basic premise of the show (at least at that point, it of course became something much more as time went on). We see why he goes to Dr. Melfi in the pilot, but their subsequent sessions, and Tony’s experiences between sessions, reveal much more about him. A streaming show would try to draw out the experience(s) that initially gets him into therapy, jumping the gun on information and pathos that should ideally be delivered after the premise has been established.

• This reply was modified 3 years, 6 months ago by Will_C.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Dave, Todd, garjones

The Sopranos started at a time when episodic TV was still more or less the norm. As you say, if it started this year then they would have dragged that out for pretty much an entire season. Funny how TV went the same way as comics, dragging out a story from a single issue to a six issue arc.

Anyway, I just remembered that the prequel movie, The Many Saints of Newark, is finally due to be released in September. Here’s hoping they manage to recapture some of the magic of the original show.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Will_C

saga wrote:

The Sopranos started at a time when episodic TV was still more or less the norm. As you say, if it started this year then they would have dragged that out for pretty much an entire season. Funny how TV went the same way as comics, dragging out a story from a single issue to a six issue arc.

Anyway, I just remembered that the prequel movie, The Many Saints of Newark, is finally due to be released in September. Here’s hoping they manage to recapture some of the magic of the original show.

And even though The Sopranos set the template for “prestige TV” and its epic sagas, it remained an episodic show for all six seasons. There are subplots and character threads that continue over seasons but each episode has an arc, tells a complete story. It’s the best of both worlds and I wish more shows took that lesson of combining the strengths of the two approaches.

4 users thanked author for this post.

Ben, Dave, Todd

I watched the original Pete’s Dragon, which is just awful. It’s a movie from 1977, but feels like it’s from the 1950s. Aside from the one lead kid, most of the cast is old men and women pulling from the same vaudeville routines they’ve been doing for decades. Most bad kids movies are at least short, but for some reason this is over two hours long, and it’s filled with terrible songs that I’ve already forgotten. I didn’t love the remake, but my appreciation for it has gone up considerably after seeing this dreck.

The animation on the dragon is nice enough.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Martin Smith, Todd

I remember being really disappointed with that movie as a kid.

You’re all crazy. I loved that movie when I was a kid. I cried so hard at the end when Eliot went away.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Will_C

I watched an underappreciated Scorsese film from a few years ago, Silence starring Andrew Garfield, Adam Driver, Tadanobu Asano, Liam Neeson, & Shinya Tsukamoto (yep, of Tetsuo: The Iron Man). It’s about the Japanese Buddhist persecution of Japanese Catholics and Portuguese priests in the 1600s. Although what the Japanese authorities did to Catholics is horrible it also takes a critical view of the missionary presence in Japan, arguing in favor of a more humble and private relationship to faith. A great movie, probably top five Scorsese for me.

It includes some of his most graceful filmmaking; there’s a scene where Garfield’s priest is forced to do something so against his character that he collapses and the sound cuts out completely for the length of his slow motion fall that will stick with me for a while.

4 users thanked author for this post.

Christian, Andrew, njerry

Just watched the final Inside No. 9 for this series. This has easily been the weakest series so far – I can’t even remember the episodes I didn’t outright hate. The final episode definitely fell into the “hate” category – it started out okay, with a couple of uncomfortable laughs, but disappeared well and truly up its own arse by the end. I’ve no idea what they were trying to say – I’m sure they felt very clever with all the heavy-handed symbolism – but it was a confusing, obnoxious mess of an episode. Maybe it’s time to close the door to Number 9 for good.

On the other hand, I think this series has been pretty great all round. I haven’t watched last night’s yet but all the others have been entertaining – very imaginative, clever, funny and amazingly dense, I always marvel that they are able to pack so much into each half-hour episode.

Little on TV comes close, for me, and I’m looking forward to more – they can keep the door to Number 9 open for years to come as far as I’m concerned.

1 user thanked author for this post.

garjones

Will_C wrote:

I watched an underappreciated Scorsese film from a few years ago, Silence starring Andrew Garfield, Adam Driver, Tadanobu Asano, Liam Neeson, & Shinya Tsukamoto (yep, of Tetsuo: The Iron Man). It’s about the Japanese Buddhist persecution of Japanese Catholics and Portuguese priests in the 1600s. Although what the Japanese authorities did to Catholics is horrible it also takes a critical view of the missionary presence in Japan,

Yes, though not a documentary, it was fairly brutal though I thought the very end was a little off.

I also wondered how we would view native tribes in the New World if they had taken this same approach to Catholics and Spain back in the 1600’s.

Not exactly the same perspective, but there was another movie set in Japan directed by Bernard Rose about a Samurai Marathon instigated by a Daimyo in feudal Japan who was driven by paranoia over the technological superiority of Europeans and Americans during one visit from a trading ship in the 1800’s. It was similar in how unusually nuanced its Western perspective of Japan was compared to a show like SHOGUN or movies like BLACK RAIN or THE LAST SAMURAI.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Will_C

I’ve started watching The 100. It’s very YA, which I don’t necessarily mean as an insult, but the characters are quite stock – idealistic heroine torn between a charismatic bad boy with a mean streak yet a tarnished heart of gold and a charismatic, quirky good guy – but it works, it definitely gets that “just one more episode” thing going.

The premise is that a nuclear apocalypse befell Earth and survivors escaped to a cluster of space stations bolted together and called the Ark. Now, 97 years later, 100 juvenile offenders have been sent on a one-way trip to Earth to see if it’s survivable, a last ditch effort to escape the Ark’s impending systems failure. It reminds me of Doctor Who’s the Ark In Space a bit, (not just because of the name); there’s a bit in the following story, the Sontaran Experiment, where the Doctor’s gone down to Earth to see how it is and runs into a human from elsewhere in the galaxy, who refers to the people on the Ark as some weirdo secluded cult type thing. And there’s – very faintly – something of that here, as the 100 find that Earth is populated.

The other thing I like is that it’s got a fairly high body count. Not that I’m bloodthirsty, but the show (7 episodes in at least) isn’t afraid to build up and kill off its characters. Hopefully that continues.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Uncle Retrospective

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, though not a documentary, it was fairly brutal though I thought the very end was a little off.

I really loved the ending. Like the ending of The Irishman, the final 30-40 minutes is where the film reveals itself. Garfield’s faith becomes much deeper and more personal after he gives up the notion that he is obligated to spread the truth of Christianity, that this truth (as he perceives it, at least) is more important than human lives. He had always looked down on Kichijiro for repeatedly placing his own life over his faith but why should Kichijiro, or any other Japanese convert, have to die for a religion that foreign missionaries brought to their shores? That by the end he views Kichijiro as a friend and equal speaks to how self-aggrandizing his approach, and by extension the Christian missionaries’ approach, to faith had been.

1 user thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle

Martin Smith wrote:

The premise is that a nuclear apocalypse befell Earth and survivors escaped to a cluster of space stations bolted together and called the Ark. Now, 97 years later, 100 juvenile offenders have been sent on a one-way trip to Earth to see if it’s survivable, a last ditch effort to escape the Ark’s impending systems failure. It reminds me of Doctor Who’s the Ark In Space a bit, (not just because of the name); there’s a bit in the following story, the Sontaran Experiment, where the Doctor’s gone down to Earth to see how it is and runs into a human from elsewhere in the galaxy, who refers to the people on the Ark as some weirdo secluded cult type thing. And there’s – very faintly – something of that here, as the 100 find that Earth is populated.

This is quite similar to the plot of Seveneves by Neal Stephenson

lorcan_nagle wrote:

Martin Smith wrote:

The premise is that a nuclear apocalypse befell Earth and survivors escaped to a cluster of space stations bolted together and called the Ark. Now, 97 years later, 100 juvenile offenders have been sent on a one-way trip to Earth to see if it’s survivable, a last ditch effort to escape the Ark’s impending systems failure. It reminds me of Doctor Who’s the Ark In Space a bit, (not just because of the name); there’s a bit in the following story, the Sontaran Experiment, where the Doctor’s gone down to Earth to see how it is and runs into a human from elsewhere in the galaxy, who refers to the people on the Ark as some weirdo secluded cult type thing. And there’s – very faintly – something of that here, as the 100 find that Earth is populated.

This is quite similar to the plot of Seveneves by Neal Stephenson

The book came out in 2013, two years before Seveneves, and the TV series in 2014.

paul f wrote:

lorcan_nagle wrote:

Martin Smith wrote:

The premise is that a nuclear apocalypse befell Earth and survivors escaped to a cluster of space stations bolted together and called the Ark. Now, 97 years later, 100 juvenile offenders have been sent on a one-way trip to Earth to see if it’s survivable, a last ditch effort to escape the Ark’s impending systems failure. It reminds me of Doctor Who’s the Ark In Space a bit, (not just because of the name); there’s a bit in the following story, the Sontaran Experiment, where the Doctor’s gone down to Earth to see how it is and runs into a human from elsewhere in the galaxy, who refers to the people on the Ark as some weirdo secluded cult type thing. And there’s – very faintly – something of that here, as the 100 find that Earth is populated.

This is quite similar to the plot of Seveneves by Neal Stephenson

The book came out in 2013, two years before Seveneves, and the TV series in 2014.

I wasn’t accusing it of being a ripoff or anything, and I was pretty sure they were roughly contemporaneous. Just found it interesting. Plus, there are plenty of differences between the two works just based on Martin’s description.

I can’t speak to how similar they are or aren’t, but I can easily say “the 100” while “Seveneves” is leaving me adrift in the middle.

1 user thanked author for this post.

garjones

I really enjoyed The 100. It does start off with a  hot teens having fun at the end of the world feeling. But the places it goes with the characters, and what they have to do to survive, is intresting  and definitely moves past that initial set up to some quite dark places.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Martin Smith

I also enjoyed The 100 more than I expected to. Some plotlines work better than others, characters sometimes go off and do absolutely dumb crap and the final season didn’t do much for me, but overall it kept me pretty engaged. Probably in part because it was willing to get a bit darker than expected for a YA TV show from the CW.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Martin Smith, Rocket

I’ve started rewatching Evil, ahead of S2 finally starting. Love this creepy-ass show.

Onto season 4 of The X Files. Latest episode had the toxic waste guy from Robocop regrow his head because he was made out of cancer and eat cancer and then Scully got cancer. Weird. Stupid if you try to really think about it. Ultimately still quite fun. That’s overall been the experience. It would never be allowed in it’s format today. Each season is way too long and meandering with 20+ episodes a pop. It would benefit from either: having less monster of the week episodes and focusing on the big overarching conspiracy or binning the conspiracy and focusing on daft monsters each time (with a season dedicated to conspiracies later in the run).

2 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, Dave

I think if the X-Files turned up in today’s landscape it would be one story, entirely about the conspiracy, with them dropping breadcrumbs about it over a dozen episodes. The first season finale would not resolve it but would have Mulder and Scully kiss. There would be some sort of cliffhanger ending and then it would be cancelled by Netflix.

6 users thanked author for this post.

Ben, Bruce, Will_C, Ian Smith, Todd, Martin Smith

I think I’ve never watched the X-Files…

Oh wait no, I saw a couple of episodes of the recent reboot, it was horrible so I dropped it like a fat baby… I’m guessing it hasn’t aged well, overall.

All this talk of X-FILES makes me want to watch FRINGE again. Does anyone know if it is available on any streaming service?

1 user thanked author for this post.

Ben

[Uncle Retrospective]

Just finished the first season of Mythic Quest: Raven’s banquet. It’s by Rob McElhenney of It’s Always Sunny and is about working in a video games company. It takes a few episodes to find it’s feet but is well worth it. It swings from very funny to pure drama in a way I don’t remember any other shows doing. The supporting cast are amazing and the whole thing is well worth your time.

 

• This reply was modified 3 years, 5 months ago by Uncle Retrospective.

4 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, Will_C, Chris D, lorcan_nagle

@njerry Fringe is on IMDBtv which you get through Amazon Prime. Its free but has ads.

2 users thanked author for this post.

njerry

We watched Luca, the new Pixar movie on Disney+, with the kids tonight.

It’s a simple story that skews young and doesn’t have the depth of the great Pixar movies, but there’s heart there and in general it’s a likeable film. I was reminded of Ghibli at times by some of the ideas and relationships.

And like all these modern Pixar movies it looks beautiful, with a sunny Mediterranean vibe that occasionally feels quite clichéd (there are parts that feel like something out of a Dolmio advert) but makes for a nice bit of breezy escapism in lieu of actually being able to go on holiday.

There’s nothing really challenging here – everything happens a bit too easily – but it’s still a fun enough ride. Just don’t expect the sophistication of an Inside Out or the emotional heft of a Coco. This is more Good Dinosaur territory.

You know, having watched a piece of crap like Kill Chain – recommendation is don’t watch it – even a film like Assassin’s Creed becomes a fun, moderately competant ride.  As does Ava.  It’s nothing you’ve not seen before, a tale of an assassin trying to get out of their terminal career choice. The casting elevates it quite a bit, with it only going awry at the end.

Had the discs for a while but only tonight got around to booting up Foyle’s War, which has quite a reputation – which, on the basis of its opening shot, it entirely deserves.  It’s also one of those series that no one said no to, with all manner of actors cropping up, including Rosmund Pike and James McAvoy.  I’d also forgotten how well the PS5 boosts even standard DVDs.  Going to be sticking with this.

 

Could’ve sworn I mentioned Guns Akimbo, but scanning the thread, apparently I haven’t? Anyway, that was that movie where Harry Potter gets guns nailed to his hands and has to fight for his life in a Running Man scenario. It does exactly what it promises, and it does so with a lot of verve. Fun ride!

Also, I wanted to say one last time, about the “memorable kills in Army of the Dead” thing: A few days after we talked about this, I saw an episode of the latest season of the Walking Dead that had way more memorable kills in both ways than that entire movie, and was also far more exciting to watch. It really was quite a contrast.

saga wrote:

The first season finale would not resolve it but would have Mulder and Scully kiss.

The total lack of romantic tension has been refreshing. The Mulder and Scully relationship has developed from work colleagues to work colleagues who care about one another without needing to rely on the old will they/won’t they trope. I’ve also enjoyed when things get a bit frosty between them in the occasional episode.

The last couple episodes we watched – Jodie Foster is q talking tattoo and Scully gets cancer treatment – have showcased how good an actor Gillian Anderson is. The first of the two was pretty rope in terms of story but both gave Anderson something different to do.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, Dave

I saw ’71 last night.

Good film. Very good soundtrack. Tense and thrilling.

I recommend it.

2 users thanked author for this post.

DavidM, lorcan_nagle

The title sounds promising…

1 user thanked author for this post.

Andrew

I finally finished Sweet Tooth this past week.

That was great! Strong performances all around. I was especially impressed by the kid who plays Gus. He is a hell of an actor.

I like how they changed the story structure. It really works for TV. The changes made enhanced the story.

While in some ways it’s a bit softer than the comic book, it also wasn’t afraid to be brutal (physically and emotionally) when it needed to be.

I can’t wait for Season 2!

Just me then who’s the lone voice of dissent with regard to Sweet Tooth?

I couldn’t really figure out who it was aimed at; it seems like a kid’s show (were we really supposed to take that weird animatronic/CG chipmunk thing seriously?) but then there are people being burned alive in their homes and hybrid kids being dissected, so

Also, I still don’t really understand how a virus causes hybrids – is that ever explained in the comics or is it just classic “comic book science?”

I didn’t even think the kid was that great – the moment he was called upon to do anything more dramatic than look slightly confused and cute, his shortcomings were glaring.

Like 90% of TV these days, I thought it took way too long to say nothing very interesting.

 

Steve Sensible wrote:

I couldn’t really figure out who it was aimed at; it seems like a kid’s show (were we really supposed to take that weird animatronic/CG chipmunk thing seriously?) but then there are people being burned alive in their homes and hybrid kids being dissected, so

This is just how a lot of media aimed at older kids and adults used to be. Raiders had faces melting off, Star Wars had a close-up of a bloody severed arm, etc.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, Dave

Finished up the second season of BLACK SUMMER last night. Man, that went by TOO quickly. Not a particularly unique storyline, but I really appreciate and enjoy the way it is presented.

Will_C wrote:

This is just how a lot of media aimed at older kids and adults used to be. Raiders had faces melting off, Star Wars had a close-up of a bloody severed arm, etc.

That’s not the same thing though. I’m not talking about the level of gore – both of those things are shock/gross-out moments. In Sweet Tooth there’s no gore – they’re terrible things done by ordinary people to ordinary people, not by or to cartoonish villains.

I haven’t read the comic, but the impression I get is that it probably isn’t aimed at kids, whereas the TV show feels and looks like it is – right up until it isn’t.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Will_C

Steve Sensible wrote:

whereas the TV show feels and looks like it is – right up until it isn’t.

Isn’t that contrast one of the unique selling points of the series?

1 user thanked author for this post.

Will_C

Watched Brightburn.

Like I think some people here said back when it came out, it was underwhelming. Nice idea, but really subpar script. Everybody is trying to do their best with what they’ve been given, but the result is really subpar.

[Will_C]

I watched two horror movies last night:

Crawl – Really enjoyed this. A very simple plot: a young woman drives through a hurricane to evacuate her father from his house, only to find him trapped in the flooding basement, hunted by alligators. Gets a lot of mileage out of its one location and the last 30 minutes is a masterful example of escalation as the hurricane goes full force. There’s a hilarious bit where they have to get to a speedboat across the street, and when they finally make it the levees break and a tidal wave smashes through the streets, sending the boat crashing back into the gator-filled house they just escaped from.

Night of the Demons – Terrible dialogue. Terrible acting. Terrific fun. A bunch of 80s teen stereotypes (and, inexplicably, one kid who talks and acts like a 50s greaser) throw a Halloween party in an abandoned funeral home that happens to reside over a portal to Hell. They accidentally summon some demons and get possessed or killed off. Despite the bad acting and script it’s directed stylishly. It’s going for campy fun and succeeds at that.

• This reply was modified 3 years, 5 months ago by Will_C.

1 user thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle

Finally watched Kingsman tonight and thought it was highly entertaining. Just really good fun throughout.

The changes made from the book worked for the movie and mostly I thought it captured the spirit of the comic really well.

4 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, lorcan_nagle, Ben

Top 3 movies I watched last week:

1. Black Mass. Johnny Depp on form, in a tense and well-directed gangster movie with an overall fantastic cast. I’m legit surprised how good it was.

2. A Quiet Place. Would’ve nabbed the number one, but it’s a rewatch. What a great movie this is. Not much for horror movies, but this one somehow makes me really care for the family. Amazing what they did with limited dialogue.

3. ’71. I mentioned this earlier. What really stood out in this movie is that it’s so morally opaque. The movie doesn’t really take sides the way these movies normally play out. With all the shifting allegiances on the one side and the undercover military unit doing its own thing it almost felt like a gangster/crime drama.

1 user thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle

On Sweet Tooth I would say in a huge sample of two I watched it with the kids (aged 10 and 12) and they kept asking me to watch the next ‘Gus’ and loved it.

I agree there are some dark bits in there, the burnings of the sick and the concept of dissecting the cute little hybrids, mostly kept off camera but in truth a lot of stuff aimed at kids has that. I tend to agree with Will that the target is that 80s Amblin feel and that tends to have that stuff too, like Pat Roach’s horrible deaths in the Indiana Jones movies. The idea of dissecting a cute character we’ve come to love is present in ET.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Will_C, Todd

A Quiet Place part 2 is just as good as the original. In some parts, it’s better. In some other parts, it’s not quite as good. But all the important parts are there, with a bonus of getting to see day 1 without it becoming an origin piece.

Still plenty of mystery and suspense here. If you liked the original, give this one a go!

Message #movies

2 users thanked author for this post.

njerry, garjones

I may have said this before and I have no idea where it is available but this series is exceptional drama. I watched again, I enjoyed and wept and celebrated and everything in the middle.

 

garjones wrote:

I may have said this before and I have no idea where it is available but this series is exceptional drama. I watched again, I enjoyed and wept and celebrated and everything in the middle.

Yeah, it’s great. It’s on Channel 4’s site over here, and HBO Max in the US.

garjones wrote:

I may have said this before and I have no idea where it is available but this series is exceptional drama. I watched again, I enjoyed and wept and celebrated and everything in the middle.

That video cannot be shown here in the US. Can you at least mention the title so that we know what we’re missing? Thanks.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Sean Robinson

Russell T Davies’ Years and Years.

1 user thanked author for this post.

njerry

Martin Smith wrote:

Russell T Davies’ Years and Years.

The series is called It’s a Sin.

Years and Years is the lead actor Olly Alexander’s band (though I think it’s just him now).

1 user thanked author for this post.

njerry

[Martin Smith]

Ah, I only saw a small corner of the video’s thumbnail on my mobile, saw “Years &” and assumed it was RTD’s Years and Years. Which, thinking about it, was on BBC, wasn’t it?

• This reply was modified 3 years, 5 months ago by Martin Smith.

It’s a Sin is available on HBO Max here, so I’m not sure why the video above was blocked.

I’ve started in on season 3 of the 100 now and it’s definitely a different show to the one it started as. I suppose that’s inevitable and the change is fairly organic, but it’s lost a lot of the Lord of the Flies vibe it had and feels more generic now. Still engaging, mind.

And it’s still slaughtering characters with gleeful abandon, which is brave, though as it’s settled down, it’s limited that to recurring cast members (well, mostly). Actually, season 1 did really well in how it juggled its recurring cast across the season, especially to play with expectations on who the main characters were. It’s a bit of a cliche to kill off someone who seems to be a main character in the pilot now, but the 100 makes it work by building those red herring characters up across a few episodes rather than just the first. Instead of creating an illusion that anything can happen to anyone at any time, it genuinely creates that. There are quite a few solid actors in supporting roles that the show fools you into thinking will be a steady presence, just to discard them. It’s brave and never feels as cheap as, say, the way Supernatural would throw out Sam and Dean’s allies after a while.

njerry wrote:

It’s a Sin is available on HBO Max here, so I’m not sure why the video above was blocked.

Regionally blocking trailers and promotional material is and always has been fucking stupid. I get it rights ownership varies by region but it’s not the whole show, it’s a video with clips.

I get the confusion from Martin. Years & Years are a band who’s lead singer is also the lead actor in Russell T Davies’ ‘It’s a Sin’. Years & Years is also the name of the last show Russell T Davies did which is completely unrelated to the band.

Years & Years the TV show is a ‘speculative fiction’ thing where Emma Thompson is elected as populist Prime Minister in the UK which leads to a creeping fascist takeover.

It’s a Sin is his next show which looks at the AIDS epidemic in 1980s Britain.

Both are well worth watching, RTD has his writing tics, as do people like Aaron Sorkin or Joss Whedon, but I happen to like those tics and there will be one amazing monologue waiting for you in any show he does.

These should be okay to watch as the are from the HBO channel:

For anyone who starts watching It’s A Sin, make sure you have five hours spare – you might end up needing all of it.

1 user thanked author for this post.

garjones

The Adventure of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert

What a fantastic movie this is. It’s been many, many years since I watched and rewatching it this morning I realise it’s much better than I remember. The three main actors are superb, the costumes are wonderful, the dialogue is snappy and the story is both heartwrenching and fun as hell. This movie is absolutely fabulous!

I could’ve framed this as “I started Pride month by watching…” (and I did frame it like so on twitter), but in truth I didn’t realise it was Pride month until about halfway into it.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Andrew, njerry, lorcan_nagle

garjones wrote:

a ‘speculative fiction’ thing where … populist Prime Minister in the UK which leads to a creeping fascist takeover.

So not really all that speculative.

9 users thanked author for this post.

garjones, Uncle Retrospective, Will_C, Martin Smith, Dave, lorcan_nagle, Todd, Ben

Started today with The Invisible Man (the 2020 one). Wow, that was surprisingly effective and good. Some of those long shots where you don’t know exactly where to look at first really sells the idea that you’re trying to see something invisible. Great way to stack the tension. Recommended!

1 user thanked author for this post.

Will_C

Ahhhh motherfuckers… I KNEW they were gonna pull that shit with the War of the Wolds series… goddamit!!!

Ah well, in their defense, they probably planned it that way all along, but holy crap that’s disappointing.

DavidM wrote:

So not really all that speculative.

Well it was at the time it was written to be fair.

1 user thanked author for this post.

DavidM

DavidM wrote:

So not really all that speculative.

Emma Thompson> Boris Johnson

You could put literally any name first and that would still work.

Well… apart from him.

Dave wrote:

Well… apart from him.

?

Been bingewatching The Real Ghostbusters on YouTube. Just started the second season.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

[Sean Robinson]

I’m up to episode #5 (out of 9) of The Stand.

Seemed like everyone hated it, so I just didn’t bother.
Then a friend of a friend talked him into finishing it (he watched 2 and dropped it) and he enjoyed it.
So he suggested I tough it out.

I am enjoying it. But it does make you work for it at the beginning. A little jarring until you figure it out.
In retrospect, I don’t mind the way they go about it, but I can also see someone dropping it early.
Sometimes not a good idea to confuse the audience, or make them feel stupid they didn’t catch on earlier.

The cast is really good, almost awesome. Just has a noticeable 10 % that detracts from what you just appreciated.
Bryan Cranston as the voice of the President, and a good J.K. Simmons cameo scene always good.
And hey, where is that guy from? Legion! I like that guy!

Like I said, I’m enjoying it, and will finish early next week.
But I’m not going to go to bat for it either. It’s not perfect.

If you dropped it, you probably made your decision.
But if you need something to watch, give it a try.
Or at least if you were interested, don’t let other people that didn’t finish talk you out of it.

• This reply was modified 3 years, 5 months ago by Sean Robinson.

1 user thanked author for this post.

njerry

[DavidM]

I’ve been bingeing an old British TV series Public Eye. It ran from 1965 to 1975, and I would have been too young to watch it originally but I have a vivid memory of the title sequence so my parents probably watched it.

The series is about a private investigator, Frank Marker, and it’s all refreshingly low key and real. Marker doesn’t solve murders for the police, he doesn’t get involved in shootouts with international terrorists, he works divorce cases and tracks lost property. There’s never a shoot-out with the baddies, and I think there’s been only one punch thrown in all the episodes I’ve seen so far.

What you do get is beautiful character writing. Honestly, it’s a joy to listen to the dialogue regardless of the plot. The plots are, as I said, down-to-earth, but there’s always some kind of sting in the tail that tends to leave the episode on a down-beat note.

And the guest cast is a who’s who of British character actors from the period. Literally everyone you see, you go “Oh he’s … thingy.” Just last night featured Roj Blake and the sixth Doctor in bit parts, with Norman Clegg as the main guest star.

Really, really good series. I’ve come into it at around 1971 (every week the complain about the “new money”) and I need to try to see all of it from the start.

• This reply was modified 3 years, 5 months ago by DavidM.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

Watched The Tomorrow War. It’s a total watchable action film, just don’t expect a good script or for the time travel element to add up. But it has some good action and I liked the design and execution of the monsters. The last half hour is a bit pants, but other than that i had fun with it.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Ben, Dave

Thinking we might give that a look tomorrow.

Dave wrote:

Thinking we might give that a look tomorrow.

That’s what you said next week.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, Dave, DavidM

Anonymous wrote:

Dave wrote:

Thinking we might give that a look tomorrow.

That’s what you said next week.

You will have been saying that for years.

1 user thanked author for this post.

I gave The Tomorrow War a go late last night. A decent break from my current Robin Williams binge.

It’s decent entertainment. Sure, it’s in many ways quite predictable but tbf it also went directions I didn’t expect. Chris Pratt anchors it decently, I must say it’s probably the first movie I’ve seen with him, since his Parks and Recs days, where I don’t find him grating. (I don’t like him as Star-Lord, to each his own.)

Props for the design of the enemy, and giving thim a lot of screen time.

Just like Ian said above;

Ian Smith wrote:

a total watchable action film, just don’t expect a good script or for the time travel element to add up.

Enjoy!

1 user thanked author for this post.

Dave

DavidM wrote:

The series is about a private investigator, Frank Marker, and it’s all refreshingly low key and real. Marker doesn’t solve murders for the police, he doesn’t get involved in shootouts with international terrorists, he works divorce cases and tracks lost property. There’s never a shoot-out with the baddies, and I think there’s been only one punch thrown in all the episodes I’ve seen so far.

That sounds interesting. Predates ROCKFORD FILES which is one of the best private eye series in TV history, too. Also, one of the most notable early series where the detective was gritty, working class and often strapped for cash. Originally, Rockford was supposed to be more dashing, but when James Garner got ahold of it, he wanted to make him much more relatable to the people who would be watching it at home.

There is a series from England called Strike that is on HBO currently. Watching it, it does feel a lot like an English Rockford Files where the protagonist is equally beset by everyday worries and even the cases he handles reminds me a lot of what Rockford would deal with.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

[DavidM]

DavidM wrote:

I’ve been bingeing an old British TV series Public Eye. It ran from 1965 to 1975, and I would have been too young to watch it originally but I have a vivid memory of the title sequence so my parents probably watched it.

The series is about a private investigator, Frank Marker, and it’s all refreshingly low key and real. Marker doesn’t solve murders for the police, he doesn’t get involved in shootouts with international terrorists, he works divorce cases and tracks lost property. There’s never a shoot-out with the baddies, and I think there’s been only one punch thrown in all the episodes I’ve seen so far.

What you do get is beautiful character writing. Honestly, it’s a joy to listen to the dialogue regardless of the plot. The plots are, as I said, down-to-earth, but there’s always some kind of sting in the tail that tends to leave the episode on a down-beat note.

And the guest cast is a who’s who of British character actors from the period. Literally everyone you see, you go “Oh he’s … thingy.” Just last night featured Roj Blake and the sixth Doctor in bit parts, with Norman Clegg as the main guest star.

Really, really good series. I’ve come into it at around 1971 (every week the complain about the “new money”) and I need to try to see all of it from the start.

• This reply was modified 3 years, 5 months ago by DavidM.

This sounds interesting. What’s it airing on?

[DavidM]

Martin Smith wrote:

DavidM wrote:

I’ve been bingeing an old British TV series Public Eye. It ran from 1965 to 1975, and I would have been too young to watch it originally but I have a vivid memory of the title sequence so my parents probably watched it.

The series is about a private investigator, Frank Marker, and it’s all refreshingly low key and real. Marker doesn’t solve murders for the police, he doesn’t get involved in shootouts with international terrorists, he works divorce cases and tracks lost property. There’s never a shoot-out with the baddies, and I think there’s been only one punch thrown in all the episodes I’ve seen so far.

What you do get is beautiful character writing. Honestly, it’s a joy to listen to the dialogue regardless of the plot. The plots are, as I said, down-to-earth, but there’s always some kind of sting in the tail that tends to leave the episode on a down-beat note.

And the guest cast is a who’s who of British character actors from the period. Literally everyone you see, you go “Oh he’s … thingy.” Just last night featured Roj Blake and the sixth Doctor in bit parts, with Norman Clegg as the main guest star.

Really, really good series. I’ve come into it at around 1971 (every week the complain about the “new money”) and I need to try to see all of it from the start.

• This reply was modified 3 years, 5 months ago by DavidM.

This sounds interesting. What’s it airing on?

It’s on Talking Pictures TV, Thursday nights: https://www.tvguide.co.uk/search.asp?title=public+eye+&submit.x=0&submit.y=0

1 user thanked author for this post.

Martin Smith

Anonymous wrote:

That sounds interesting. Predates ROCKFORD FILES which is one of the best private eye series in TV history, too. Also, one of the most notable early series where the detective was gritty, working class and often strapped for cash. Originally, Rockford was supposed to be more dashing, but when James Garner got ahold of it, he wanted to make him much more relatable to the people who would be watching it at home.

Funny you should say that, as it reminds me of Rockford quite a bit. Same kind of down-at-heel “everyman” character.

paul f wrote:

This sounds interesting. What’s it airing on? It’s on Talking Pictures TV, Thursday nights: https://www.tvguide.co.uk/search.asp?title=public+eye+&submit.x=0&submit.y=0%5B/quote%5D

I’m watching a batch I recorded six months ago and never got around to watching. I get the impression that Talking Pictures repeat in on constant loop, so eventually I’ll catch it from the start.

Talking Pictures has become my most-watched channel at the moment. I’m not sure what that says about  the state of contemporary television   (For those who don’t know, Talking Pictures is exclusively re-runs of mostly forgotten 60s and 70s programmes and obscure black-and-white movies.)

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

DavidM wrote:

I’m watching a batch I recorded six months ago and never got around to watching. I get the impression that Talking Pictures repeat in on constant loop, so eventually I’ll catch it from the start.

Yeah, they’re great. They showed a bunch of Laurel and Hardy this weekend, which I haven’t seen since I was a kid.

Beyond Skyline / Skylines

This is a surprisingly good duo of low budget SF.  On the first film you know you’re in for an interesting ride when less than 20 mins, a tactical nuke is used on the invading aliens, with massive collateral damage to LA. There’s nothing that really tops that but what follows is a fun action flick.  If you ever wanted to see Iko Uwais take out an alien twice his size with a pair of knives, this is the film for you.

Skylines finishes off the trilogy and manages to deliver some rather neat surprises along the way as it goes all-out to finish the story conclusively – and it does.  There are some very, very satisfying villain fates here too.

Lot of fun.

Holy shit, they added Golden Girls to Disney+. I remember watching it with my gran back in the day, being utterly baffled as to what was going on but enjoying the show with her nonetheless. I might have to indulge in some nostalgia viewing.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Andrew

We watched The Tomorrow War tonight. It’s like a mash-up of a dozen (better) movies and video games, and if you have a problem with plot holes in movies you’ll have a field day, but for all that it’s still a reasonably entertaining sci-fi monster-movie romp.

It did feel like it could have done with a slightly lighter touch though – the acting and direction all feels like it’s taking it all very seriously, and doesn’t capitalise on the script’s lighter moments. Someone like Shane Black would have nailed this.

1 user thanked author for this post.