jedisearcher said:Dead pool - great movie, plenty of laughing out loud, loved it!
MM Fury Road - decent, can't really understand how it got so much love at the oscars but what do they know :lol: , liked the 'real' special effects a lot, it's a nice departure from cgi based films, story was very dull and what was Tom Hardys grunting all about? The original MM had a speaking part didn't he?
Batman v Superman - a confused film trying to do way too much, feels like 4 or 5 films mashed into one. Makes the Marvel post film Easter eggs look genius, I mean trailing the Justice League toons by finding them on a data stick? Is that the best they could do? Thought Affleck was pretty decent, Lex was more like Son of Lex and was pretty terrible, and Wonder Woman got a good introduction. I've got a high tolerance for crap films so I thought it was passable, but I'm not surprised many people thought it was a dud.
stormcab said:Always laugh when people praised Mad Max for not using CGI :lol: :lol:
jedisearcher said:stormcab said:Always laugh when people praised Mad Max for not using CGI :lol: :lol:
Point? I said it wasn't a CGI based film and I'm pretty sure real actors, real props, real action in real environment don't constitute a CGI based film.
Shall we remind ourselves what a real a real CGI based film looks like. :roll:
x-pack said:Scott said:x-pack said:Eyes wide shut
If there are any Kubrick fans I need to discuss this film :shock:
I thought it was underrated when it was released. But years later it is very respected. Same with Barry Lyndon.
I haven't got round to a second viewing but will do soon. Eyes Wide Shut had me gripped. It was kind of hypnotic, like a dream. On the surface you've got a hot couple having relationship struggles, she either intentionally or not makes him jealous, then he goes on a two night bender of bizarre sexual encounters during which he doesn't actually have sex with anyone, which is quite funny. That in itself was brilliant but I have a feeling there's more to it.
Just got myself a copy of Barry Lyndon so don't tell me anything. I have an idea what it's about. Even if the film sucked and I hated the story I know it will be visually stunning with such an amazing director. The reason I picked this up is because it's referred to in The Shining documentary Room 237 as "the work of a bored genius". in fact that's also the reason I picked up Eyes WIde Shut, because it's constantly referred to in that documentary.
Cazza said:My wife took me to see Civil War yesterday for my Birthday. Enjoyed it, but I'm definitely starting to feel a little Marvelled-out, especially after seeing the new X-Men trailer. It's all starting to feel a little samey. Hope SW doesn't go the same way...
Scott said:x-pack said:Scott said:I thought it was underrated when it was released. But years later it is very respected. Same with Barry Lyndon.
I haven't got round to a second viewing but will do soon. Eyes Wide Shut had me gripped. It was kind of hypnotic, like a dream. On the surface you've got a hot couple having relationship struggles, she either intentionally or not makes him jealous, then he goes on a two night bender of bizarre sexual encounters during which he doesn't actually have sex with anyone, which is quite funny. That in itself was brilliant but I have a feeling there's more to it.
Just got myself a copy of Barry Lyndon so don't tell me anything. I have an idea what it's about. Even if the film sucked and I hated the story I know it will be visually stunning with such an amazing director. The reason I picked this up is because it's referred to in The Shining documentary Room 237 as "the work of a bored genius". in fact that's also the reason I picked up Eyes WIde Shut, because it's constantly referred to in that documentary.
Have you seen Barry Lyndon yet? I'll keep mum if not. A good pub quiz question is "What was the film Stanley Kubrick made after 'A Clockwork Orange' but before 'The Shining' ?". I've seen self proclaimed "film buffs" baffled by this :lol:
I saw Room 237 for the first time recently on Film 4. I thought the theory about the genocide of the Native Indians very convincing, the Holocaust theory less so and the Moon Landings conspiracy I took with a barrel of salt :!:
Cazza said:I'm definitely starting to feel a little Marvelled-out.
stormcab said:jedisearcher said:stormcab said:Always laugh when people praised Mad Max for not using CGI :lol: :lol:
Point? I said it wasn't a CGI based film and I'm pretty sure real actors, real props, real action in real environment don't constitute a CGI based film.
Shall we remind ourselves what a real a real CGI based film looks like. :roll:
In that second photo it shows CGI has added several hundred more people. I've read up that both people, vehicles, backgrounds, and depth were added with CGI. I don't know why people are labeling it as non CGI on a technicality. Why would that be so important anyway? If the CGI is so good we can't see the difference. Is it because they want to know the actors were in real danger of being injured or killed? I personally think it's a sort of fraud as it's like the company saying "there's no CGI in this film, so it really needs to be seen".
Scott said:I saw Room 237 for the first time recently on Film 4. I thought the theory about the genocide of the Native Indians very convincing, the Holocaust theory less so and the Moon Landings conspiracy I took with a barrel of salt :!: