films you've seen recently and would NOT recommend

rubberdingyrapids

Well-known member
silence.

i dont really want to post too much about i cos i dont want to waste time getting into an argument with anyone. this film seems to bring out a lot of devotion from ppl who i previously never thought were religious. i almost imagine this film increasing church attendance (though prob not, i reckon ppl who like this film who dont go church are just religious nostalgics, longing for some mythical view of christianity, or who just want to be believers... but not in christianity, just the idea of believing).

scorceses a master, etc etc, well yes, thats pretty obvious, but i think it is a masterful piece of blinkered (or at least tunnel vision) filmmaking, that only asks the questions it likes the answers to.

though maybe i need to watch it again, less pissed off.
 

droid

Well-known member
Adam Roberts wrote something very good about it recently - the book not the film. Cant link it now.
 

firefinga

Well-known member
The Road (2009). I didn't see it when in the theaters but bought the dvd like one year after. Hadn't have the time to watch it but did over the Holidays and I thought it was really crap. Flawed from the very beginning meaning it was just the humans being the survivers of whatever catastrophy was very unlikely as a start. Then, two hours of drag.
 

rubberdingyrapids

Well-known member
the problem i had with the road was that it presented its future world and just expects you to believe and accept it, no questions asked. well thats what i think the problem was (cant remember it that well tbh). i just found it monotonous. as if rigidly sticking to its apocalyptic drudgery was enough. it also looked a bit too CGI based for me which made it harder to fully get into it as i felt i was watching a video game intro.
 

firefinga

Well-known member
jaws was one of the earliest summer sensation "scary" blockbusters (aka, the tip of the speilberg spear...), got to love how the shark now looks so fake compared to CG creatures today. almost as bad as sharknado, just this big lurching mechanical chomping thing with pointy teeth, LOL!

Well, I like Jaws a lot and sure, the movie is 40 years old by now and the Shark looks a bit clumsy. But it's avery good movie in other respects (tension build up, usage of music etc, in fact the Jaws Theme is one of the very best there is). But regarding CG creatures of today, I think a lot of these look just as fake really. But that's just personal taste I guess.
 

droid

Well-known member
the problem i had with the road was that it presented its future world and just expects you to believe and accept it, no questions asked. well thats what i think the problem was (cant remember it that well tbh). i just found it monotonous. as if rigidly sticking to its apocalyptic drudgery was enough. it also looked a bit too CGI based for me which made it harder to fully get into it as i felt i was watching a video game intro.

As in most post apocalyptic worlds, the apocalypse itself isnt hugely relevant, McCarthy was simply more honest about this. Whats difficult to accept about total breakdown of society and environment? There are hosts of all too plausible possible causes. The apocalyptic drudgery was kind of the point.

Didnt get a CGI buzz off it at all TBH. it was heavily graded though, I think.
 

droid

Well-known member
Well, I like Jaws a lot and sure, the movie is 40 years old by now and the Shark looks a bit clumsy. But it's avery good movie in other respects (tension build up, usage of music etc, in fact the Jaws Theme is one of the very best there is). But regarding CG creatures of today, I think a lot of these look just as fake really. But that's just personal taste I guess.

I tried to make a case for an enhanced version of jaws with just the shark being replaced a few years back. Watched it again recently and didnt strike me as that bad, though an 8 year old laughed.
 

droid

Well-known member
My problem with the road is that it's all too plausible. I think there's a very good chance that it's somebody's future.
 

firefinga

Well-known member
My problem with the road is that it's all too plausible. I think there's a very good chance that it's somebody's future.

Here I disagree. not with a possible apocalypse per se, but with one Humans appear to be the last survivors.
 

droid

Well-known member
What other animal is better equipped to survive? Do deer build bunkers and stockpile food?
 
Last edited:

firefinga

Well-known member
What other animal is better equipped to survive? Do deer and squirrels build bunkers and stockpile food?

Bunkers and stockpiles of food will keep you going a couple of weeks at best. Animals would survive in woods, in the mountains, caves and whatnot far more likely than "civilised" humans in cities which quickly would spiral into utter chaos if their supply of service would break down.
 

firefinga

Well-known member
im not a blockbuster hater, but star wars should die.

Star Wars is the EDM of cinema really, where the spectacle of the merchandise is all that matters not the actual film. Which is true for any blockbuster to some extent, but being a "Blockbuster" seems to be the only reason the Star Wars franchise is being kept alive. (That said, I liked the first two)
 
Last edited:

firefinga

Well-known member
That reminds me: the Blair Witch Project managed to completely avoid the usual Horror pitfall of showing too much and (for me, at least) was chilling right up to and after the final frame.

I realise many people find the Blair Witch Project tedious and/or absurd, but what can I say? I shat myself.

I am a huge horror fan and can honestly say, not a single horror movie ever scared me. That said, I saw Blair Witch when it was originally shown in the theaters (showing my age here) in my late teens and it was one of the most boring movies ever. Possibly bc it was hyped so much and totally didn't live up to it, it was alongside The Matrix the first movie really getting hyped over the internet before the actual release.
 

droid

Well-known member
Bunkers and stockpiles of food will keep you going a couple of weeks at best. Animals would survive in woods, in the mountains, caves and whatnot far more likely than "civilised" humans in cities which quickly would spiral into utter chaos if their supply of service would break down.

There's people out there, right now, with several years, possibly decades of food stockpiled - but apart from that, the characters in the road are rural based, not urban, and the journey depicted in the film takes place years after the apocalyptic event - the boy is born in the midst of it.

Animals may well survive a cataclysm better then humans, but would be far less likely to survive the following decade of nuclear winter, being unable to open cans or eat ash.
 

droid

Well-known member
After an asteroid strike or major nuclear war photosynthesis stops. The food chain collapses. Its called a major extinction event for a reason.
 

firefinga

Well-known member
After an asteroid strike or major nuclear war photosynthesis stops. The food chain collapses. Its called a major extinction event for a reason.

You love apocalypse too much, Droid. Life survives always, life even will survive the existance of humans.
 
Top