Last Film Watched

ddraver

2 simply because they came up on ITV-iplayer when I was watching the tour...

Requiem for a Dream - clearly I had this confused with something else. If it's passed you by as it had me then it is a must-watch. If you've seen it then leave it in the box in the dark corner of your mind it got put in years ago.

Adventureland - Superbad with fewer gags and a lot more heart. Very similar films made by the same people but this coming-of-age film is a bit more serious than it's more famous sibling. Strongly recommended Sunday evening film

RichN95.

ddraver said:

Requiem for a Dream - clearly I had this confused with something else. If it's passed you by as it had me then it is a must-watch. If you've seen it then leave it in the box in the dark corner of your mind it got put in years ago.

An utterly brilliant film and also the most bleak USA mainstream film of the last 30 years. And a great soundtrack from Clint Mansell - Lux Aeterna is sampled a lot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZMuDbaXbC8

laurentian

Oppenheimer - brilliant! go watch.

rick_chasey

Good - seeing it on Thursday.

Though am already a little annoyed it's 3 hours, but anyway...

laurentian

rick_chasey said:

Good - seeing it on Thursday.

Though am already a little annoyed it's 3 hours, but anyway...

Honestly didn't know it was 3 hours until someone pointed that out as we were leaving the cinema.

The sound engineering (if that's the correct terminology) and soundtrack are outstanding.

I'm sure you'll enjoy it.

seanoconn

laurentian said:

Oppenheimer - brilliant! go watch.

Mild spoiler alert.

Oppenheimer, minus the rapid scene changing first half required to weave together the tangled timelines, which felt like a barrage of sound bites, and the constant aggravating violin music used to ramp up the tension and convey the horrors we can’t see, the second half was ok. Great cinematography, some strong performances from a glut of A/B list actors dying to be in a Christopher Nolan movie. Overall Nolan did a good job with the subject matter but ultimately underwhelming.

vincesummerskRoxcBTr

Nobody seems to be admitting to have seen Barbie , well, I have 😄
Grown up family outing!
Enjoyed it much more than I expected, lots of adult orientated humour and it was well done and well cast. The ending was a bit drawn out.
I suspect a lot of the children went home a bit unimpressed and bored though.

Pross

vincesummerskRoxcBTr said:

Nobody seems to be admitting to have seen Barbie , well, I have 😄
Grown up family outing!
Enjoyed it much more than I expected, lots of adult orientated humour and it was well done and well cast. The ending was a bit drawn out.
I suspect a lot of the children went home a bit unimpressed and bored though.

I saw the trailer for it when I went to Indiana Jones and thought it looked even worse than I was expecting but then I heard the film reviewer on Jo Wiley's programme last week give it 5 stars and suggest that Ryan Gosling should be considered for a Best Supporting Actor nomination.

My daughter had a Barbie themed birthday party and went to watch it with all her friends - she was turning 20!! Unsurpisingly she thought it was amazing.

Pross

I can't decide whether to watch Oppenhiemer in the cinema or wait until it is available at home. I don't like sitting in the cinema for over 3 hours.

rick_chasey

Pross said:

I can't decide whether to watch Oppenhiemer in the cinema or wait until it is available at home. I don't like sitting in the cinema for over 3 hours.

Unless you have a pretty mega soundsystem and a huge TV you're not really gonna get the Nolan experience, if that's your thing.

I've specifically carved out time and am going to a terrible cinema in order to get the full IMAX experience for this very reason.

laurentian

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

I can't decide whether to watch Oppenhiemer in the cinema or wait until it is available at home. I don't like sitting in the cinema for over 3 hours.

Unless you have a pretty mega soundsystem and a huge TV you're not really gonna get the Nolan experience, if that's your thing.

I've specifically carved out time and am going to a terrible cinema in order to get the full IMAX experience for this very reason.

Yep! Saw this last week and, apart from anything else, the sound engineering merits watching at the cinema

Pross

I'll have to avoid drinking anything for a few hours beforehand then!

seanoconn

Pross said:

I'll have to avoid drinking anything for a few hours beforehand then!

I might be a grumpy fecker but the Oppenheimer sounds/music irritated the hell out of me, and that was just standard screen.

ddraver

Even I'm considering going to the cinema for Oppenheimer...

Last thing I saw in a cinema was a spur-of-the-moment/post-Covid novelty decision to see Zombieland 2...

pblakeney

Reviews for Oppenheimer aren't doing it for me. If I go to the cinema it will be the IMAX Mission Impossible. Trash but fun. Keeps a trend as the last one was Top Gun.

rick_chasey

Saw Oppenheimer. (don't worry, no spoilers here)

Overall it's a pretty good film, right? It's immaculately done, the soundtrack is, as usual for a Nolan film, one of the highlights.

Murphy's physical presentence on the screen, hollowed out, thin, almost skeletal face parts is his greatest asset, as a lot of the film involves him staring into the distance as he contemplates either the vagaries of quantum physics or the destruction of the world. That skull like head with ice-blue eyes does the job here.

Nolan's clearly fallen for Oppenheimer a little too much and gets carried away trying to include *all* the interesting bits of Oppenheimer, which eventually ends up making the film too long, flabby, yet makes various parts of the story, notably the women, not enough airtime to breathe. As a result, it can at times feel it lacks focus, and at a running time of 3 hours, that is a little much.

Damon gets the lion's share of the best lines, with Blunt getting a few choice ones too, perhaps to make up for the weirdly underdeveloped story there.

There is quite a bit of hollywood deification in the script which I always find annoying in biopics like this, especially with academics. "You are the greatest mind" blah blah gets said to his face far too often. Maybe it is the Brit in me that cringes at this stuff.

The courtroom drama at the end is too convoluted and too long; you're hanging on there deep into the third hour. Come on, Nolan, get on with it.

I did find myself rooting and getting excited for the bomb development; that was fun, thrilling, which is a clever trick but I never really felt the dread of it during the film; perhaps I am too young for this to register.

The cinemaphotography is top notch; it is rammed with detail, cleverly shot; giving you a real sence of the story with the Nolan auteur finish without distracting from what you're watching.

Finally, there is a definite lack of involvement and empathy with the characters. You are not rooting enough with the characters and you are not involved enough with what they're going through; Murphy plays Oppenheimer arguably too reserved here; really hard to connect with him, when so much of the acting is trying to hold down the conflict inside.

4 stars.


p.s. the imax cinema was so f*cking loud my ears were ringing afterwards.

Pross

rick_chasey said:

I did find myself rooting and getting excited for the bomb development; that was fun, thrilling, which is a clever trick but I never really felt the dread of it during the film; perhaps I am too young for this to register.

Isn't it more likely just due to the fact you have always known what the outcome and impact of it was?

rick_chasey

Pross said:

rick_chasey said:

I did find myself rooting and getting excited for the bomb development; that was fun, thrilling, which is a clever trick but I never really felt the dread of it during the film; perhaps I am too young for this to register.

Isn't it more likely just due to the fact you have always known what the outcome and impact of it was?

Yeah possibly. I've never really feared nukes.

Pross

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

rick_chasey said:

I did find myself rooting and getting excited for the bomb development; that was fun, thrilling, which is a clever trick but I never really felt the dread of it during the film; perhaps I am too young for this to register.

Isn't it more likely just due to the fact you have always known what the outcome and impact of it was?

Yeah possibly. I've never really feared nukes.

Growing up in the 70s and 80s it was obviously still a very real thing with films and TV shows such as Threads still ramping up the fear / paranoia and the sight of missiles being moved around the UK but it never felt real. I suspect it was very different back in the 1950s and 60s though especially around the time of the Cuban missile crisis.

pblakeney

rick_chasey said:

Saw Oppenheimer. (don't worry, no spoilers here)

Overall it's a pretty good film, right?...

Your review was my impression just going by reviews and trailers.
Quite happy to give it a miss.

seanoconn

rick_chasey said:

Saw Oppenheimer. (don't worry, no spoilers here)

Overall it's a pretty good film, right? It's immaculately done, the soundtrack is, as usual for a Nolan film, one of the highlights.

Murphy's physical presentence on the screen, hollowed out, thin, almost skeletal face parts is his greatest asset, as a lot of the film involves him staring into the distance as he contemplates either the vagaries of quantum physics or the destruction of the world. That skull like head with ice-blue eyes does the job here.

Nolan's clearly fallen for Oppenheimer a little too much and gets carried away trying to include *all* the interesting bits of Oppenheimer, which eventually ends up making the film too long, flabby, yet makes various parts of the story, notably the women, not enough airtime to breathe. As a result, it can at times feel it lacks focus, and at a running time of 3 hours, that is a little much.

Damon gets the lion's share of the best lines, with Blunt getting a few choice ones too, perhaps to make up for the weirdly underdeveloped story there.

There is quite a bit of hollywood deification in the script which I always find annoying in biopics like this, especially with academics. "You are the greatest mind" blah blah gets said to his face far too often. Maybe it is the Brit in me that cringes at this stuff.

The courtroom drama at the end is too convoluted and too long; you're hanging on there deep into the third hour. Come on, Nolan, get on with it.

I did find myself rooting and getting excited for the bomb development; that was fun, thrilling, which is a clever trick but I never really felt the dread of it during the film; perhaps I am too young for this to register.

The cinemaphotography is top notch; it is rammed with detail, cleverly shot; giving you a real sence of the story with the Nolan auteur finish without distracting from what you're watching.

Finally, there is a definite lack of involvement and empathy with the characters. You are not rooting enough with the characters and you are not involved enough with what they're going through; Murphy plays Oppenheimer arguably too reserved here; really hard to connect with him, when so much of the acting is trying to hold down the conflict inside.

4 stars.


p.s. the imax cinema was so f*cking loud my ears were ringing afterwards.

Fair review

Did you find the violins and stomping feet irritating? My wife was covering her ears but she is a bit of a drama Queen.

seanoconn

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

Saw Oppenheimer. (don't worry, no spoilers here)

Overall it's a pretty good film, right?...

Your review was my impression just going by reviews and trailers.
Quite happy to give it a miss.

I gave Any given Sunday a go after your suggestion on the tv thread. I’d never watched it in its entirety before and still haven’t 😂 Just couldn’t get into it 🤷‍♂️

rick_chasey

seanoconn said:

Fair review

Did you find the violins and stomping feet irritating? My wife was covering her ears but she is a bit of a drama Queen.

It was as loud as a gig in the cinema I went to, so it was properly loud but...

..I liked the stomping feet in the sense that it was the zenith of his work and he was struggling / wanted to be seen to be struggling with the implication of that. I also liked the idea that it linked his inner conflict and the performative side of it that conflict, which is the la reveal magnifico at the end of the film; that he was fully onboard with this, but wanted to come out as a martyr to save himself from the implications. So I thought it was a great motif.

photonic69

Barbie. Yup, that's right. Loved it. Went with my wife. We were probably the oldest couple there. I really should have bought a Ken T-shirt to wear though. Really good, mindless fun. I just loved looking at all those legs that went on for miles. Yumsk!

pblakeney

seanoconn said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

Saw Oppenheimer. (don't worry, no spoilers here)

Overall it's a pretty good film, right?...

Your review was my impression just going by reviews and trailers.
Quite happy to give it a miss.

I gave Any given Sunday a go after your suggestion on the tv thread. I’d never watched it in its entirety before and still haven’t 😂 Just couldn’t get into it 🤷‍♂️

If this thread has proven anything it is that my taste differs from most on here. Probably should factor that in. 😉

verylonglegs

rick_chasey said:

Nolan's clearly fallen for Oppenheimer a little too much and gets carried away trying to include *all* the interesting bits of Oppenheimer, which eventually ends up making the film too long, flabby, yet makes various parts of the story, notably the women, not enough airtime to breathe. As a result, it can at times feel it lacks focus, and at a running time of 3 hours, that is a little much.

Finally, there is a definite lack of involvement and empathy with the characters. You are not rooting enough with the characters and you are not involved enough with what they're going through; Murphy plays Oppenheimer arguably too reserved here; really hard to connect with him, when so much of the acting is trying to hold down the conflict inside.

I agree with these two points in particular, my knowledge of the project comes from reading the Richard Rhodes book about the making of the bomb so I struggled with the sole focus on Oppenheimer (yeah I realise the clue was in the title of the film).

I didn't get the feel from the portrayal of the characters they had any sense of the scale of what they were creating when they surely were aware and there was only a short scene where a group of them actually questioned what is was they were about to unleash as it neared completion.

mrb123

morstar said:

County Lines on one of the Sky channels last night.

British, gritty drama based on the subject of the film title. Follows a young lad getting drawn in to County lines.

Does what it says on the tin. It’s not an uplifting watch but it’s well done.

Just watched it. A pretty grim 90 minutes.

ddraver

So, post Oppenheimer. I haven't been to a cinema for a good 2 years + so I will not pretend that I am a film buff/cinephile in any way.

Yeeeaaahhhh...was ok. I thought it would be a nerdy science film (as am I) so I was surprised that there was none of that but the political story/McCarthyite controversy that I wasn't aware of at all. (One of the nerdy things I picked up is that the physicists working on quantum physics were crazy young. He was 24-25 when he gave the lecture in Leiden!)

A lot of arty-farty w@nkiness I wasn't expecting. There are only so many loud bang scares I can take before I get bored of them. Yeah Chris it's a bomb, we knew that already! (Sitting in Plymouth thinking about how similar a target to Niroshima or Nagasaki it could have been still didn't help...).

Similarly, I get the whole thing about not using CGI (it's proliferation is one of the things that has stopped me going to the cinema so much) but the lack of a mushroom cloud shot for the test is jarring. It's an iconic image and not seeing it is strange.

Robert Downy Jr was fantastic and Remi Malik can steal a whole scene with one facial expression. Matt Damon is Matt Damon. Sorry, Cillian but I'm not sure you did enough to win an Oscar there mate. Florence Pugh?...well they're lovely but I'm, not sure why they were there, why they were lingered on for so long (well...only for that reason), or what they added to the story.

I dunno if it was just cos the IMAX was fairly empty but by Christ Almighty it is was loud!! Also, the ticket said 1950 and it didnt start until 2020 (yeah I said it had been a while)

ddraver

verylonglegs said:

I agree with these two points in particular, my knowledge of the project comes from reading the Richard Rhodes book about the making of the bomb so I struggled with the sole focus on Oppenheimer (yeah I realise the clue was in the title of the film).

Is there any evidence for Einstein being a doddery Jiminy Cricket style conscience to the project?

rick_chasey

ddraver said:

verylonglegs said:

I agree with these two points in particular, my knowledge of the project comes from reading the Richard Rhodes book about the making of the bomb so I struggled with the sole focus on Oppenheimer (yeah I realise the clue was in the title of the film).

Is there any evidence for Einstein being a doddery Jiminy Cricket style conscience to the project?

A bit greyer than all that. He wrote a letter to Roosevelt saying he believed the nazis were working on an atom bomb, so America better get on with it.

He was also denied security clearance, and I get the impression he leaned into his (enforced) distance from the manhattan project to take a more moral stance.

So i'm not sure. He did claim he regretted sending the letter to Roosevelt, but it seems most high profile physicists of that era, save for teller, were rather regretful about their role in the cold war once the Nazis had been beaten. They didn't seem to have the same reservations for Soviet gulags, but what ya gonna do.

As ever, these things are complicated and people aren't consistent nor free from hypocrisy.

The best bit about Oppenheimer is the final twist and realisation that you were not watching it through the lens of a reliable witness.