Last Film You Watched

[tsubaki]

Skyfall on itv again the other day.

I've tried to like it, but I just think it's poor.
I would say it's an OK film, but an awful James Bond film. The plot could have come straight from the Die Hard franchise or similar.....



Megalomaniac bad guy, supposedly with the power to topple governments, start WWIII, etc.....decides to have mummy problems and goes after his old boss. And then, oh look, you fell into my plan and trapped me in this perspex box (Avengers & Dark Knight having done the same thing very recently previously), from which he escapes with help from the perfectly timed easy hacking of a super-dooper encrypted which is protected with just a simple password that Bond guessed. Then every trap he sets, Bond falls into, train, policemen etc.
I know films, esp. Bond, aren't supposed to be too realistic but this whole film had far too many conveniences too often.

And Bond is the ultimate spy, bloke, shagger, and general boss. He doesn't run away and lure enemies in with traps - he goes balls out and faces whoever. Going to Scotland and making lightbulb explosives, christ it's like Home Alone. Not saying the Pierce Brosnan and invisible cars type of things were any good btw, but some sort of cutting edge technology/gadgetry & creativity is part of Bond.

Not looking forward to Spectre at all tbh with Mendes in charge again.

TBH Skyfall suffered from similar problems as the The Man with the Golden Gun did; in that they went after and cast the best bad guy available, and then had to fit an absurd story around him rather than Bond. As you say the vast majority of it made no sense, the ending especially so.

That said it was miles better than Quantum of Solace was, and Naomie Harris was in it. Also to be honest there have been two genuinely great Bond films in the past forty years, perhaps we shouldnt expect too much from them.

 

[McBain]

Skyfall on itv again the other day.

I've tried to like it, but I just think it's poor.
I would say it's an OK film, but an awful James Bond film. The plot could have come straight from the Die Hard franchise or similar.....



Megalomaniac bad guy, supposedly with the power to topple governments, start WWIII, etc.....decides to have mummy problems and goes after his old boss. And then, oh look, you fell into my plan and trapped me in this perspex box (Avengers & Dark Knight having done the same thing very recently previously), from which he escapes with help from the perfectly timed easy hacking of a super-dooper encrypted which is protected with just a simple password that Bond guessed. Then every trap he sets, Bond falls into, train, policemen etc.
I know films, esp. Bond, aren't supposed to be too realistic but this whole film had far too many conveniences too often.

And Bond is the ultimate spy, bloke, shagger, and general boss. He doesn't run away and lure enemies in with traps - he goes balls out and faces whoever. Going to Scotland and making lightbulb explosives, christ it's like Home Alone. Not saying the Pierce Brosnan and invisible cars type of things were any good btw, but some sort of cutting edge technology/gadgetry & creativity is part of Bond.

Not looking forward to Spectre at all tbh with Mendes in charge again.

Spot on.

 

[ilikecheese]

TBH Skyfall suffered from similar problems as the The Man with the Golden Gun did; in that they went after and cast the best bad guy available, and then had to fit an absurd story around him rather than Bond. As you say the vast majority of it made no sense, the ending especially so.

That said it was miles better than Quantum of Solace was, and Naomie Harris was in it. Also to be honest there have been two genuinely great Bond films in the past forty years, perhaps we shouldnt expect too much from them.

Which two?

 

[ste d' indica]

Gothic - Ken Russell directing, starring Gabriel Byrne, Natasha Richardson, Timothy Spall in a lurid giallo style hallucinogenic imagining of the storm battered night on the shores of Lake Geneva where Byron and his libertine guests told each other ghost stories and Mary Shelley conjured up Frankenstein. What could go wrong?
Everything.
Given those ingredients it's astonishing how bad this film is; bungling direction, incoherent editing, ludicrous hammy script, terrible overacting and a soundtrack that appears to be from 2 or 3 different films at once.
Utter twaddle.

 

[dholliday]

Hello Mate, decent reply this, I'll try to explain my thoughts a bit better.

Almost perfect? I'm struggling to think of how a Harry Potter movie is perfect. For a ten year old, yes. What you find 'weird' is not weird mate. Your calling a Multiple Oscar Winning Critically Acclaimed film average and then comparing it to a Harry Potter kids film which made the least money in the entire series. That's weirder but that's your opinion which your more than entitled to express.

Yeah, almost perfect. Wonderful pacing, story, acting, atmosphere, sound, visuals, directing. It was just so joyously good. And I wouldn't say Harry Potter is a kids' film, it's a family film. Like how Doctor Who's family entertainment rather than just for kids.

What I find weird is how some people react when others criticise their favourite works: in that they can't quite believe someone doesn't appreciate it in the same way they do, so fabricate some weird hipster-conspiracy of folk who only pretend to not like something as they think it's cool. You get it a lot from Beatles fans too. They just don't believe you when you say you don't like their music.


And regarding Oscars, I think any film buff would agree that this isn't a reliable barometer for universally-liking films. Did everyone like Titanic, Schindler's List, English Patient or No Country For Old Men? And also how much money a film made is clearly no barometer either, otherwise we'd all be hailing these formulaic superhero films as the greatest works of cinema history.

You only have to look on the first page of Azkabahn reviews to see a 1/10 mate. Out of 1,490 user reviews. People troll.

Yeah, but it all averages out. There's the fanboys who rate their favourite films a 10, and the grumpy muffs who always go with a 1. IMDB is great because it lets all members up/downvote user reviews:

Prisoner of Azkaban: 5 highest-rates user reviews are all 9's and 10's.
Gravity: 4 of the 5 highest-rates user reviews are 1's.


We can take from this that Gravity disappointed more filmgoers than what is critically-regarded as the best Harry Potter film.

This is just to demonstrate that my view is hardly unique.

I don't think you can see any deeper meaning. That's not to say it isn't there, you were just too busy not liking it to see anything else.

There really wasn't anything deep going on there. Feel free to say otherwise.

Let me ask you this. Was azkabahn -

A: the best Harry Potter film
B: your favourite Potter film, or
C: the one you referenced because it was the same Director?

All of the above.

 

[dholliday]

Gothic - Ken Russell directing, starring Gabriel Byrne, Natasha Richardson, Timothy Spall in a lurid giallo style hallucinogenic imagining of the storm battered night on the shores of Lake Geneva where Byron and his libertine guests told each other ghost stories and Mary Shelley conjured up Frankenstein. What could go wrong?
Everything.
Given those ingredients it's astonishing how bad this film is; bungling direction, incoherent editing, ludicrous hammy script, terrible overacting and a soundtrack that appears to be from 2 or 3 different films at once.
Utter twaddle.

really liked this film. weird atmosphere, in a good way. Lots of things wrong with it to the point that I agree with your criticisms, but not to the point where it's-so-bad-it's-good...I still just really enjoyed it just the way it was. You could say similar about John Boorman's Excalibur and that's one of my all-time favourites.

 

[Prevenger17]

Almost perfect? I'm struggling to think of how a Harry Potter movie is perfect. For a ten year old, yes.

That's a little condescending, no? The Harry Potter films have entertained people far over the age of ten. For the record, POA was my favourite Potter film and I genuinely can't think of a film that used time travel so logically and satisfyingly as a plot device. Maybe Primer.

 

[dholliday]

Skyfall on itv again the other day.

I've tried to like it, but I just think it's poor.
I would say it's an OK film, but an awful James Bond film. The plot could have come straight from the Die Hard franchise or similar.....



Megalomaniac bad guy, supposedly with the power to topple governments, start WWIII, etc.....decides to have mummy problems and goes after his old boss. And then, oh look, you fell into my plan and trapped me in this perspex box (Avengers & Dark Knight having done the same thing very recently previously), from which he escapes with help from the perfectly timed easy hacking of a super-dooper encrypted which is protected with just a simple password that Bond guessed. Then every trap he sets, Bond falls into, train, policemen etc.
I know films, esp. Bond, aren't supposed to be too realistic but this whole film had far too many conveniences too often.

And Bond is the ultimate spy, bloke, shagger, and general boss. He doesn't run away and lure enemies in with traps - he goes balls out and faces whoever. Going to Scotland and making lightbulb explosives, christ it's like Home Alone. Not saying the Pierce Brosnan and invisible cars type of things were any good btw, but some sort of cutting edge technology/gadgetry & creativity is part of Bond.

Not looking forward to Spectre at all tbh with Mendes in charge again.

Agree with all you said, in that once you think about the film it just becomes preposterous. Despite all that I enjoyed the ride while it was on. Daft entertainment Bond like Roger Moore era.

From Russia With Love best Bond film for me, followed by Casino Royale.

 

[Deleted member 28206]

You hate bond

Spot on.

@McBain

 

[ste d' indica]

really liked this film. weird atmosphere, in a good way. Lots of things wrong with it to the point that I agree with your criticisms, but not to the point where it's-so-bad-it's-good...I still just really enjoyed it just the way it was. You could say similar about John Boorman's Excalibur and that's one of my all-time favourites.

Feel like I've pooped on your corn flakes a bit there mate, sorry! I know what you mean though, there's loads of films that are, by any definition, dreadful movies, but I've got a soft spot for. I think with Gothic, I was disappointed as there was potential for something really excellent.
Excalibur is one I've not seen for yonks, Helen Mirren's in it isn't she?

 

[dholliday]

Feel like I've pooped on your corn flakes a bit there mate, sorry! I know what you mean though, there's loads of films that are, by any definition, dreadful movies, but I've got a soft spot for. I think with Gothic, I was disappointed as there was potential for something really excellent.
Excalibur is one I've not seen for yonks, Helen Mirren's in it isn't she?

no pooping here, kidda...i love me a bit of film debate...lots of different tastes and interpretations about.

aye...Helen Mirren was fit-as-fook in it...if you like your girls to be dark witches, that is. Aside from Ms Mirren, the other 5 leads are now RIP (Arthur, Merlin, Guinevere, Lancelot, Mordred). Worth a rewatch just to pay homage, I reckon.

 

[flo]

TBH Skyfall suffered from similar problems as the The Man with the Golden Gun did; in that they went after and cast the best bad guy available, and then had to fit an absurd story around him rather than Bond. As you say the vast majority of it made no sense, the ending especially so.

That said it was miles better than Quantum of Solace was, and Naomie Harris was in it. Also to be honest there have been two genuinely great Bond films in the past forty years, perhaps we shouldnt expect too much from them.

Skyfall was good, but it wasn't great. Casino Royale was better imo. Quantum of Solace was a disaster. I also had doubts about Mendes directing Spectre, but he got me with the first teaser trailer and now I'm absolutely looking forward to it.

 

[tsubaki]

Which two?

Casino Royale and Goldeneye (apart from the absurd bit with the plane at the start).

 

[The Mighty Quint]

Watched The Gunman this aftey, decent, similar in type to Taken although Penn is a much better actor.

6.5/10, worth a watch for sure.

 

[Zatara]

Not a bad movie and a star turn from idris elba.

Watched The Gunman this aftey, decent, similar in type to Taken although Penn is a much better actor.

6.5/10, worth a watch for sure.