Movie review thread...
-
@voodoo said in Movie review thread...:
@MN5 said in Movie review thread...:
@voodoo said in Movie review thread...:
Finally got around to seeing Saving Private Ryan
Bit shit really.
Opening scene goes way too long, only a few of the good guys survive the game of water bullrush against the machine guns
The guy from Sleepless in Seattle makes it through
Silly plot and they lose about 17 soldiers trying to save the astronaut.
About an hour too long.
No boobs
2 friends characters out of 5 exposed intestines
No he doesn’t
He makes it through the game of bullrush
Well if he didn’t then someone like Kevin Spacey, Bill Paxton or Bill Pullman would have starred in the movie wouldn’t they ?
Good God man, stop whining and stop disrespecting a classic.
-
-
@dogmeat said in Movie review thread...:
@MN5 actually I agree with @voodoo
Saw it when it came out thought it was OK-ish but failed to reach the bar of expectations set by all the hype.
Typically Spielberg. Technically proficient but overly mawkish and sentimental with gratuitous sermonising plot lines and too long.
I reckon Band Of Brothers was better. But of course they had 10 episodes to get their story across. But still, Saving Private Ryan still raised the bar for WW2 films IMHO
-
@dogmeat said in Movie review thread...:
@MN5 actually I agree with @voodoo
Saw it when it came out thought it was OK-ish but failed to reach the bar of expectations set by all the hype.
Typically Spielberg. Technically proficient but overly mawkish and sentimental with gratuitous sermonising plot lines and too long.
Well put. If the opening sequence wasn't what it is, people would never talk about it. Especially given the ridiculous emotional appeal at the end. Sappy twaddle.
-
@antipodean but it did exactly what you would want/expect a movie to do, engage you from the outset, then they can pretty much meander along at will, throw in a few other battle scenes to keep the engagement, and over 2 hours later, done.
-
@dogmeat said in Movie review thread...:
@MN5 actually I agree with @voodoo
Saw it when it came out thought it was OK-ish but failed to reach the bar of expectations set by all the hype.
Typically Spielberg. Technically proficient but overly mawkish and sentimental with gratuitous sermonising plot lines and too long.
You’re getting him confused with Martin Scorsese
-
@MN5 said in Movie review thread...:
@dogmeat said in Movie review thread...:
@MN5 actually I agree with @voodoo
Saw it when it came out thought it was OK-ish but failed to reach the bar of expectations set by all the hype.
Typically Spielberg. Technically proficient but overly mawkish and sentimental with gratuitous sermonising plot lines and too long.
You’re getting him confused with Martin Scorsese
I agree with @dogmeat. Spielberg's early shorts were great.
He seems to get a lot out of child actors and knows his way around action movies for families. But the Kubrick-started A.I. Artificial Intelligence and other Spielberg movies are definitely up for the sermonizing, long-winded criticism. -
A.I. Artificial Intelligence was a truly amazing movie, revolving around dilemmas and problems most people were not even able to understand. But it was creepy as hell and always game me the chills
-
@omgherryan said in Movie review thread...:
A.I. Artificial Intelligence was a truly amazing movie, revolving around dilemmas and problems most people were not even able to understand. But it was creepy as hell and always game me the chills
A.I. is one of my least favourite Spielberg films, but that is unsurprising as there's something I dislike about Kubrick as a filmmaker (I do like some of his films but I'm not a huge fan in general), but I only saw it when it first came out so I'm wondering if I should watch it again to at least give it the second watch test.
-
@canefan said in Movie review thread...:
Ghostbusters Afterlife.
I'd heard some bad reviews for this movie, but I enjoyed it. The story has lots of references to the original film, with some great cameos. Four crossed streams out of five ecto wagons
Just watched it and thought it was a worthy inclusion. Really entertaining and hit just the right amount of homage to the original.
If people don't like it, then they're dead inside.
-
@antipodean i still havent seen it, missed it at the cinema (uncertain if i wanted to pay to see it)...and havent seen it on streamers yet
-
@Kiwiwomble I didn't know it existed until I read @canefan's post and as luck would have it I noticed it was available on this flight.
-
Heart of Stone.
Incoherent espionage (ish) action pic with Jamie Dorman playing yet another unlikeable creep. Gal Gadot saves the day. God knows how those two were convinced to take part in this keech, I doubt it was just money as there simply isn’t enough of that in existence to make it worthwhile. Ridiculous plotting, disjointed writing, ludicrous coincidences to “help” the story along and a great deal of shit/crazy action scenes.
But… it has Gal Gadot in it, so it gets 2 hot Israeli chicks out of 5 stupid wastes of time.
-
@Catogrande said in Movie review thread...:
Heart of Stone.
Incoherent espionage (ish) action pic with Jamie Dorman playing yet another unlikeable creep. Gal Gadot saves the day. God knows how those two were convinced to take part in this keech, I doubt it was just money as there simply isn’t enough of that in existence to make it worthwhile. Ridiculous plotting, disjointed writing, ludicrous coincidences to “help” the story along and a great deal of shit/crazy action scenes.
But… it has Gal Gadot in it, so it gets 2 hot Israeli chicks out of 5 stupid wastes of time.
It was on my Netflix feed and I was going to watch it. Probably still will, after all it has GG in it
