Movie review thread...
-
Ghostbusters Afterlife. Tbh this was more of a kids film. But still entertaining and far better than that abomination from a few years back. At the same time pretty pointless and won't rejuvenate the franchise.
-
@mn5 said in Movie review thread...:
Don’t look up
Well, I pointed out that Jennifer Lawrence looked surprisingly unrootable in this and the other half said the same about Leo……brilliant acting from both.
Kind of a crazy satire on a lot of what is going on the world today, top notch performances from EVERY single actor and pretty entertaining and thought provoking all round. I honestly can’t really give it a rating other than it’s worth seeing but I still haven’t decided if I really “liked” it or not.
Definitely not everyone’s cup of tea to be fair.
Yeah, enjoyed it as well.
Savage satire and darkly comic and, as you say, some great acting.
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in Movie review thread...:
Ghostbusters Afterlife. Tbh this was more of a kids film. But still entertaining and far better than that abomination from a few years back. At the same time pretty pointless and won't rejuvenate the franchise.
Paul Rudd has a GIGANTIC head in relation to his body. It’s freaky.
-
Dune
Eventually went yesterday with the girl which was cool (didn't think she'd hang with the daggy old man).
Early session. Only a total of 7 in the cinema including us.
Overall was slightly disappointed. Think it was because of lot of the dream/vision sequences were difficult to decipher. Too much indistinct whispering. You got the idea but it wouldn't hurt to be just a tiny bit obvious.
I read the book back in like 3rd Form, and have a couple of times since, so know the story, and was looking for the wow factor on the visuals, but it seems paradoxically there were too many visuals between the narrative bits (for me anyway).
Liked the actors except for Jason Momoa. Thought he was a bit weak.
Having said all that am looking forward to Part Two.
A disappointing 3 why are they using swords in the age of interstellar travel out of 5 those helicopter things look like mosquitos.
-
@booboo said in Movie review thread...:
Dune
Eventually went yesterday with the girl which was cool (didn't think she'd hang with the daggy old man).
Early session. Only a total of 7 in the cinema including us.
Overall was slightly disappointed. Think it was because of lot of the dream/vision sequences were difficult to decipher. Too much indistinct whispering. You got the idea but it wouldn't hurt to be just a tiny bit obvious.
I read the book back in like 3rd Form, and have a couple of times since, so know the story, and was looking for the wow factor on the visuals, but it seems paradoxically there were too many visuals between the narrative bits (for me anyway).
Liked the actors except for Jason Momoa. Thought he was a bit weak.
Having said all that am looking forward to Part Two.
A disappointing 3 why are they using swords in the age of interstellar travel out of 5 those helicopter things look like mosquitos.
Ha I watched Dune for a second time today with the other half.
A bigger nerd than me like @NTA might know but I think they use swords because everyone has shields so guns are rendered useless ? Also pretty sure some technology was outlawed hence they use scrolls and paper instead of tablets.
I’ve gotta say I didn’t enjoy it quite as much second time round, it is very well set up for the sequel though.
It’s better than the 80s version overall, but I wouldn’t have minded seeing the Emperor and the guild navigators.
-
@mn5 said in Movie review thread...:
@booboo said in Movie review thread...:
Dune
Eventually went yesterday with the girl which was cool (didn't think she'd hang with the daggy old man).
Early session. Only a total of 7 in the cinema including us.
Overall was slightly disappointed. Think it was because of lot of the dream/vision sequences were difficult to decipher. Too much indistinct whispering. You got the idea but it wouldn't hurt to be just a tiny bit obvious.
I read the book back in like 3rd Form, and have a couple of times since, so know the story, and was looking for the wow factor on the visuals, but it seems paradoxically there were too many visuals between the narrative bits (for me anyway).
Liked the actors except for Jason Momoa. Thought he was a bit weak.
Having said all that am looking forward to Part Two.
A disappointing 3 why are they using swords in the age of interstellar travel out of 5 those helicopter things look like mosquitos.
A bigger nerd than me like @NTA might know but I think they use swords because everyone has shields so guns are rendered useless ?
That was my understanding and thought they explained that in the movie and book
Interesting a idea starwars seems to have nicked in the knights of the old republic game, personal shields so people use blades
-
@mn5 said in Movie review thread...:
A bigger nerd than me like @NTA might know but I think they use swords because everyone has shields so guns are rendered useless ?
Pretty much. In the books, they go into a more detailed description about how shields work - essentially a fast blade or projectile gets stopped by the shield, so the technique is to beat your opponent with a fast move but a slow finish.
Lasers exist in hand-held and other forms, but they produce unpredictable results if they hit a shield - up to and including nuke-level devastation.
Also pretty sure some technology was outlawed hence they use scrolls and paper instead of tablets.
The Butlerian Jihad is mentioned in the books, as the great war against thinking machines - AI computing. AI brought war to a new level that was deemed too dangerous for the Empire, so they stopped that shit.
There are a couple of dudes in shot who are mentats - human computers, trained from an early age to run complex computations at sprred. When their eyes roll back in their heads, they're doing stats, retrieving inventory, or calculating probabilities.
Paper is used but isn't exclusive. There are data storage formats and ways to read them E.g. at the start where Paul is using a firm of projector to learn about the Fremen, but nothing really resembling what we see as a computer.
-
@nta said in Movie review thread...:
@mn5 said in Movie review thread...:
A bigger nerd than me like @NTA might know but I think they use swords because everyone has shields so guns are rendered useless ?
Pretty much. In the books, they go into a more detailed description about how shields work - essentially a fast blade or projectile gets stopped by the shield, so the technique is to beat your opponent with a fast move but a slow finish.
Lasers exist in hand-held and other forms, but they produce unpredictable results if they hit a shield - up to and including nuke-level devastation.
Also pretty sure some technology was outlawed hence they use scrolls and paper instead of tablets.
The Butlerian Jihad is mentioned in the books, as the great war against thinking machines - AI computing. AI brought war to a new level that was deemed too dangerous for the Empire, so they stopped that shit.
There are a couple of dudes in shot who are mentats - human computers, trained from an early age to run complex computations at sprred. When their eyes roll back in their heads, they're doing stats, retrieving inventory, or calculating probabilities.
Paper is used but isn't exclusive. There are data storage formats and ways to read them E.g. at the start where Paul is using a firm of projector to learn about the Fremen, but nothing really resembling what we see as a computer.
You sure didn’t let me down. Great post nerdlinger !!!
-
-
@mn5 said in Movie review thread...:
@nta said in Movie review thread...:
Have been meaning to ask, did you think the 80s version was any good ? To me it actually had a couple of scenes the more recent one missed and the Baron was a bit more fun.
Those days are long gone.
-
@catogrande said in Movie review thread...:
@mn5 said in Movie review thread...:
@nta said in Movie review thread...:
Have been meaning to ask, did you think the 80s version was any good ? To me it actually had a couple of scenes the more recent one missed and the Baron was a bit more fun.
Those days are long gone.
No not him, he never was
-
@mn5 said in Movie review thread...:
@nta said in Movie review thread...:
Have been meaning to ask, did you think the 80s version was any good ? To me it actually had a couple of scenes the more recent one missed and the Baron was a bit more fun.
Been years since I watched it. Just so camp ..
-
-
@nepia said in Movie review thread...:
@booboo said in Movie review thread...:
Liked the actors except for Jason Momoa. Thought he was a bit weak.
Wow, I thought he was great.
Maybe it was one of those instances where I was expecting awesome things and he was just great?
-
@nta said in Movie review thread...:
@mn5 said in Movie review thread...:
@nta said in Movie review thread...:
Have been meaning to ask, did you think the 80s version was any good ? To me it actually had a couple of scenes the more recent one missed and the Baron was a bit more fun.
Been years since I watched it. Just so camp ..
You sure you not thinking Flash Gordon ?
-
@mn5 said in Movie review thread...:
@nta said in Movie review thread...:
@mn5 said in Movie review thread...:
@nta said in Movie review thread...:
Have been meaning to ask, did you think the 80s version was any good ? To me it actually had a couple of scenes the more recent one missed and the Baron was a bit more fun.
Been years since I watched it. Just so camp ..
You sure you not thinking Flash Gordon ?
No.
-
@nta said in Movie review thread...:
@mn5 said in Movie review thread...:
@nta said in Movie review thread...:
@mn5 said in Movie review thread...:
@nta said in Movie review thread...:
Have been meaning to ask, did you think the 80s version was any good ? To me it actually had a couple of scenes the more recent one missed and the Baron was a bit more fun.
Been years since I watched it. Just so camp ..
You sure you not thinking Flash Gordon ?
No.
