Films you've seen recently and would unreservedly recommend:
- Thread starter Woebot
- Start date
-
- Tags
- beware the dog killer craner's got herpes damn well 'urts! don't be so basic eye-watering dick nailage gay cowboy death squad greek dudes herzog i went to oxford italo jamaican voodoo gang from marked for death jamaican voodoo gang from predator 2 rolling sultry voodoo sweat sex chicken stuff versioncore u know the score what's the frequency kenneth?
Tentative Andy
I'm in the Meal Deal
Finally watched Rosemary's Baby last night.
A++ stuff.
Love the weird, annoying neighbours.
Love the theme music.
Love the malevolent humour of the ending scene.
A++ stuff.
Love the weird, annoying neighbours.
Love the theme music.
Love the malevolent humour of the ending scene.
Last edited:
IdleRich
IdleRich
I thought that Antichrist was a bit of a dog's dinner to be honest. It did have some powerful scenes but too often bits that I think were supposed to be scary just had me lauhging and there is nothing that detracts as much from an atmosphere of horror as that. I wouldn't say that the film was terrible but for me there was just too much wrong with it for it to work as a whole.
yyaldrin
in je ogen waait de wind
A dogs dinner, that is funny, is that a popular phrase in England? I don't know, I rate films almost entirely on their looks, their visual appearance and for me some of the scenes stood out so perfectly, it's like photography almost. The male protagonist standing under those trees with acorns falling on him in slow motion. The child falling down with the snowflakes going harder than himself. The pictures of a person dressed in white going through that dark forest. It's so stylised, I can hardly believe this film is done by someone from the Dogme manifest, this film is the complete opposite.
grizzleb
Well-known member
Yeah, I didn't really think of Antichrist as a horror - the comical parts were as surreal as they were actually 'ha ha' funny, and so kept up with the bizarre tangent of the film. Thought it was great. I catagorise it along with something like Possession or Black Swan.
grizzleb
Well-known member
Reports aren't sounding good.
rubberdingyrapids
Well-known member
i saw it last night. its neither a masterpiece, nor a disaster really, but it is really thin on plot and general substance, spends about an hour building background and atmosphere, which i liked, but it doesnt really take it anywhere that interesting. it has 1 or 2 great scenes, but if youve seen the older alien films, youve prob seen similar stuff.
my main prob was that it throws in a few lines about BIG themes here and there for profundity, but they arent taken far enough, and the whole story about them being on the planet to 'meet their makers' is seriously repetitive and didnt seem to add up to anything. but then its by the guy who wrote lost, which was all about padding a few interesting ideas out for years, and was never quite as deep and meaningful as people seemed to think, so what dyou expect. its also based on a pretty knackered franchise, so its basically just a lot of waffle in an attempt to link itself to the first alien film.
BUT it is a brilliant looking film. the sets are some of the best sci fi sets ive seen in a while. lots of brits in it too - fassbender is typically great. idris elba seems to be in a diff movie entirely, and idk if it was just me, but i couldnt figure out what he was saying half the time. his accent was just weird. starting to think that if hes not playing stringer bell, hes bound to be hammy.
the whole thing is just bizarre though - all that money and effort and they couldnt even come up with a better story. there must be someone writing better fan fiction about alien than this.
my main prob was that it throws in a few lines about BIG themes here and there for profundity, but they arent taken far enough, and the whole story about them being on the planet to 'meet their makers' is seriously repetitive and didnt seem to add up to anything. but then its by the guy who wrote lost, which was all about padding a few interesting ideas out for years, and was never quite as deep and meaningful as people seemed to think, so what dyou expect. its also based on a pretty knackered franchise, so its basically just a lot of waffle in an attempt to link itself to the first alien film.
BUT it is a brilliant looking film. the sets are some of the best sci fi sets ive seen in a while. lots of brits in it too - fassbender is typically great. idris elba seems to be in a diff movie entirely, and idk if it was just me, but i couldnt figure out what he was saying half the time. his accent was just weird. starting to think that if hes not playing stringer bell, hes bound to be hammy.
the whole thing is just bizarre though - all that money and effort and they couldnt even come up with a better story. there must be someone writing better fan fiction about alien than this.
mistersloane
heavy heavy monster sound
Exactly this ^^^ except I liked Idris Elba and was much harsher about the plot when I came out. It's actually pro-creationist gibberish, and I expected more from Scott if not from that, that misinformation valve that wrote it. If you try and tie the plot together it completely falls apart, it's paltry.
IdleRich
IdleRich
I know what you mean - I loved the bit with the faun and the stuff about the shoes on the wrong feet is really creepy.... but still, on balance it didn't add up for me.
Dogs' dinner, I dunno, I think it's popular, maybe slightly old fashioned. It's clear what it means I hope.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dog's+dinner
grizzleb
Well-known member
Read a summary of the plot and some of the stuff happening in it sounds completely ridiculous.
rubberdingyrapids
Well-known member
LOL
what i found weird about the film was how certain pivotal events that would come with much more drama in most films occured with so little fanfare. like the scene where - im trying not to spoil it here - naomi rapace enters the surgical cubicle, theres virtually no resistance from anyone or build up. one second shes having a minor argument with david, the next shes getting it done, there was so much more that could have been made of that (esp as what actually follows was prob the best/tensest scene in the whole film). and then the scene where that white mummified zombie human thing, whatever it is, reaches what should be the ultimate climax, it happens with next to no drama. its just like 'oh right... ok'. that would be cool and interesting if there was something ELSE even more important and crucial to the plot coming up but there wasnt. which makes me think that this might be one of those times when they could actually have done with more script doctors on board.
mistersloane
heavy heavy monster sound
It's funny isn't it? You come out of the film going 'well, that looked good but the script wasn't up to much..' and then you think. Hang on. The script IS the film. It happened with Avatar as well, it's just such a rip off really.
It was the beginning that got me. Actually what was that about? It wasn't ever explained. And all the DNA stuff just means...oh god actually I can't go there. American psychosis.
I didnt get to watch it in the end, my card wasnt working in the machines told my friends to go on in so I could go to the bank, still didnt work, came back, then queued up and the swipey thing didnt work either, got annoyed and went home. fuck it, it was going to be a 3D vierwing anyway and I fucking hate 3D, it makes everything look all shimmery and tacky
baboon2004
Darned cockwombles.
I saw clips of it on TV and the sets looked like they'd been inspired Star Trek:The Next Generation. It was in the morning so I was probably tired and unfocussed.
I'm sure Martha Marcy May Marlene has been discussed before but can't find the discussion right now. It could've been so good, and yet in its inability to expand upon any of the narrative strands it started (and in moments that stretched credulity), ended up feeling like a really exploitative film. A depressing experience all told. Elizabeth Olson was excellent though.
Invasion of the Bodysnatchers (70s version with Donald Sutherland) is brilliant. I wasn't expecting much to be honest, but it was brilliantly entertaining. Nice art project to restage it in the streets of London this past weekend, too.
I'm sure Martha Marcy May Marlene has been discussed before but can't find the discussion right now. It could've been so good, and yet in its inability to expand upon any of the narrative strands it started (and in moments that stretched credulity), ended up feeling like a really exploitative film. A depressing experience all told. Elizabeth Olson was excellent though.
Invasion of the Bodysnatchers (70s version with Donald Sutherland) is brilliant. I wasn't expecting much to be honest, but it was brilliantly entertaining. Nice art project to restage it in the streets of London this past weekend, too.
IdleRich
IdleRich
How many versions are there of Bodysnatchers? The fifties(?) one and the Donald Sutherland one are both ace. Isn't there a third? I love the bits with the ghostly singing in the first one, so creepy.
Then again I also liked Martha Marcy May Marlene - I agree it seemed half-finished, or simply sketched at times but that added to the mystique for me. What makes you say it's exploitative?
Then again I also liked Martha Marcy May Marlene - I agree it seemed half-finished, or simply sketched at times but that added to the mystique for me. What makes you say it's exploitative?
baboon2004
Darned cockwombles.
Apparently Abel Ferrara directed a version in 1993. Never knew that.
MMMM - I think it felt that way to me because it ultimately seemed so uninterested in the narrative themes around the abuse, and that the whole abuse/cult themes were there to provide gruesome 'thrills' rather than any genuine interest in the themes (or the central character) on behalf of the director.
You could of course say that this was because of inexperience in direction. The film ended up feeling a bit unnecessarily nasty to me though, the abuse and violence used in a titillating way. I think though that maybe the feeling was compounded by the separate issue that the director was playing with the audience by continually leaving things mysterious instead of risking explanation, so it felt manipulative in a different way also and those feelings became confused.
MMMM - I think it felt that way to me because it ultimately seemed so uninterested in the narrative themes around the abuse, and that the whole abuse/cult themes were there to provide gruesome 'thrills' rather than any genuine interest in the themes (or the central character) on behalf of the director.
You could of course say that this was because of inexperience in direction. The film ended up feeling a bit unnecessarily nasty to me though, the abuse and violence used in a titillating way. I think though that maybe the feeling was compounded by the separate issue that the director was playing with the audience by continually leaving things mysterious instead of risking explanation, so it felt manipulative in a different way also and those feelings became confused.
Last edited: