hungrywing
Full Member
Interested to see what Brannagh will do with this.
To be, or not to be. The live action clip was not very encouraging.
And the New Spiderman is...
A thirty-something yuppie.
Interested to see what Brannagh will do with this.
And the New Spiderman is...
To be, or not to be. The live action clip was not very encouraging.
A thirty-something yuppie.
And the New Spiderman is
Andrew Garfield.
No, I haven't. I wasn't trying to be glib. I just remembered reading they were going for a Peter Parker who 'really looked his age'. And Mr. Garfield looks in his late twenties at the youngest.
So this is the guy who's also going to be Spiderman in all the future Marvel movies?
Nobody cares.........
Now that's a film I might consider giving a look.
Looks as if a girl's been possessed, which could be a bit shitty. I hope they don't show the demon(or whatever is was). . .in any form.
Just type in best films of 2010 into google, that wil tell you. Not really been blown away by anything yet this year. Some rate Shutter Island as the best of the year so far. I found it dull, boring, predictable and a least 45 minutes to long. Still give it a whirl I guess. Inception, Predators, Expendables, Scott Pilgrim v the World, Machete, Wall St 2, Paranormal Activity 2, Nice guy and Tron Legacy gives me hope for the rest of the year.
Nahhh. Stil love Grand Prix though.I thought it was very well made and could've easily have been a film made by Frankenheimer, however
Nahhh. Stil love Grand Prix though.
Shutter Island confuses me...It's good. But I can't for the life of me see why it's great. Apparently it's great cos Scorsese directed it and it had Di Caprio in it, but nothing in it is evident that it's a great film by a great director with a great actor in it. In fact you could take both of those factors out and it'd be almost identical...It's an above decent thriller film but little more IMO, and not original or exceptional in any facet, and it's not by a long shot something like Pans Labyrinth or Children of Men, both of which are dripping with evidently excellent direction and acting whether you like them or not....Scorsese is overrated IMO. Hasn't done anything great for 20 years.
Seconds and Manchurian Candidate are masterpieces. Not seen Grand Prix, though.
Shutter Island praise confuses me...It's good. But I can't for the life of me see why it's great. Apparently it's great cos Scorsese directed it and it had Di Caprio in it, but nothing in it is evident that it's a great film by a great director with a great actor in it. In fact you could take both of those factors out and it'd be almost identical...It's an above decent thriller film but little more IMO, and not original or exceptional in any facet, and it's not by a long shot something like Pans Labyrinth or Children of Men, both of which are dripping with evidently excellent direction and acting whether you liked them or not....SI could really have been made by anyone, with anyway, at anytime. Scorsese is overrated IMO. Hasn't done anything great for 20 years.
Well worth seeing had many camera and editing firsts that are now standard in high speed race chase sequences. Putting the actors into the actual cars as instead of Green screen. Le Mans starring Steve Mcqueen copied its style and even took a load of film, they (Grand Prix) had done at the Nuremberg.
I liked the homage it paid to 50s/60s' psychological thrillers, I thought Di Caprio despite not having the presence of a classic actor like James Stewart or Rock Hudson, did a decent job of mimicking their style. I also thought it looked wonderful on the whole, and only let done by the use of CGI on a couple of occasions. However the reason why it didn't quite work for me was the plot itself. When you've seen this plot done before(and much better in some cases) it's like well. . . yes that was okay but so what? has it done or said anything that's not been done before? I think deep down it was a Scorsese film ie the sympathy for a tragic perhaps insane character but for some reason it didn't feel like a Scorcese film. . . which to be fair could've been due to the (unoriginal) unravelling plot.
Yeah no I liked it...I thought it was a good film...or a very very good B movie...But some people went mad for it. There were two threads on it here (TWO!!!) with people debating the ending like it was The Usual Suspects or something when not only did I find it perfectly straightforward and relatively unambiguous, also - as you mentioned - something that's been done about 4 billion times in cinema...many of them in the last 10 years, and much better. Though at least it did actually work with the film, unlike say Secret Window, where I just went "seriously? Oh feck off"
I didn't get the fervour. You could flick it on and it could literally be any psyc thriller from the last 20 years, whereas something like Children of Men (which I mention cos I did actually flick it on the other day) you'd would notice instantly was fantastically well made and worth getting excited by ...SI just wasn't great, but some people went mental for it like it was the only film they'd ever seen..which I can only assume is the Scorsese factor, which itself is hardly anything to be worked up by these days.....personal hang up I guess. It just seemed like a very run of the mill good film to be getting so excited about and 2 threads on it's amazingly uncomplex complexities. It was alright. Meh.
Oh I agree, it was fairly straightforward and as you said relatively unambiguous. I don't know. . .perhap they just don't watch many films. I suspect they probably liked the unravelling plot and twist. And I'm not sure it's even got a replay factor, usually these types of movies can be rewatched a couple of times, just to see the mechanics but I'm not sure this needs to be seen again.