comment by Bill Nick (U23088)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by >💲Baz tard🦍+❄️=? (U19119)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Bill Nick (U23088)
posted 6 hours, 38 minutes ago
comment by >💲Baz tard🦍+❄️=? (U19119)
posted 19 minutes ago
I thought that the first time I watched it. The 2nd time (just a few weeks later) I thought it was great.


—
I’ve seen it twice, it didn’t improve for me, but I did appreciate the beautiful cinematography even more second time.

Actually think mendes should be A tier, 1917 blew me away it’s a masterpiece, and has incredible cinematography too
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah fair point. He uses a lot of CGI/greenscreen though. There's so much of it in 1917.

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

I guess it's a skill of its own and nothing wrong with it as such, but personally I prefer au naturale.

Also he wasted himself on those 2 bond films. I also don't think Revolutionary Road's a particularly great movie in spite of it being nice looking.

I want to give Road to Perdition a proper watch as that does look good. I also like 1917 a lot in spite of the CGI.

I think American Beauty's OK but over rated personally.

A good collection, but for me he's not doing anything outstanding (other than outstanding CGI) which some of those other directors are.

Just my own view.

There's directing talent about though.

I do think that Villeneuve has done some good stuff too btw. I don't think he can just be written off as rubbish (although I've not seen Oppenheimer).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dunno, in 1917 the one take perspective was awesome and very well done (Roger Deakins goat), but the bit where he wakes in the French town with the star shells going overhead is the most stunning bit of film I can remember, it floored me. Agree on Villeneuve, he’s done done top stuff, dune was fantastic
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Do you mean at 1 hour 09 - 1 hour 10?
I love him walking into the firey town immediately after that, but it's all green screen/CGI.
Maybe that doesn't bother you. Maybe it shouldn't bother me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure it was all cgi, it was astonishing anyway, the way it was lit, imagery cross on fire, beautiful but terrible at the same time.,

comment by >💲Baz tard🦍+❄️=? (U19119)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Bill Nick (U23088)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by >💲Baz tard🦍+❄️=? (U19119)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Bill Nick (U23088)
posted 6 hours, 38 minutes ago
comment by >💲Baz tard🦍+❄️=? (U19119)
posted 19 minutes ago
I thought that the first time I watched it. The 2nd time (just a few weeks later) I thought it was great.


—
I’ve seen it twice, it didn’t improve for me, but I did appreciate the beautiful cinematography even more second time.

Actually think mendes should be A tier, 1917 blew me away it’s a masterpiece, and has incredible cinematography too
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah fair point. He uses a lot of CGI/greenscreen though. There's so much of it in 1917.

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

I guess it's a skill of its own and nothing wrong with it as such, but personally I prefer au naturale.

Also he wasted himself on those 2 bond films. I also don't think Revolutionary Road's a particularly great movie in spite of it being nice looking.

I want to give Road to Perdition a proper watch as that does look good. I also like 1917 a lot in spite of the CGI.

I think American Beauty's OK but over rated personally.

A good collection, but for me he's not doing anything outstanding (other than outstanding CGI) which some of those other directors are.

Just my own view.

There's directing talent about though.

I do think that Villeneuve has done some good stuff too btw. I don't think he can just be written off as rubbish (although I've not seen Oppenheimer).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dunno, in 1917 the one take perspective was awesome and very well done (Roger Deakins goat), but the bit where he wakes in the French town with the star shells going overhead is the most stunning bit of film I can remember, it floored me. Agree on Villeneuve, he’s done done top stuff, dune was fantastic
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Do you mean at 1 hour 09 - 1 hour 10?
I love him walking into the firey town immediately after that, but it's all green screen/CGI.
Maybe that doesn't bother you. Maybe it shouldn't bother me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure it was all cgi, it was astonishing anyway, the way it was lit, imagery cross on fire, beautiful but terrible at the same time.,
----------------------------------------------------------------------



Yes it's CGI. I agree it's stunning though.

bro just told me Napoleon is a big let down as well

As it’s Xmas I’ll let all this slide but come tomorrow the rules will re apply

comment by Cinciwolf----Old Trafford record attendance.....WOLVES V GRIMSBY. .......lolz (U11551)
posted 5 minutes ago
bro just told me Napoleon is a big let down as well
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Shame, looked good in the trailers I saw. A buddy said it was good but not amazing

Django Unchained is a better film than Unforgiven.

comment by Bill Nick (U23088)
posted 4 minutes ago
Django Unchained is a better film than Unforgiven.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

both good solid movies

just hate this over indulgent era we are in right now

And the drowning out of dialogue with background unnecessary music is ruining good stories.

comment by Cinciwolf----Old Trafford record attendance.....WOLVES V GRIMSBY. .......lolz (U11551)
posted 3 minutes ago
just hate this over indulgent era we are in right now

And the drowning out of dialogue with background unnecessary music is ruining good stories.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dunno, the flip side is Tarantino 95% filler dialogue that goes nowhere.,

I've called it a bit early tbf. Unforgiven has improved for me the last few minutes.
Although it's obviously controversial overall I do think DU is a very good movie. I've rarely been more invested in an outcome of a film than I have when Jamie Foxx is upside down in that outhouse.

comment by >💲Baz tard🦍+❄️=? (U19119)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Cinciwolf----Old Trafford record attendance.....WOLVES V GRIMSBY. .......lolz (U11551)
posted 3 minutes ago
just hate this over indulgent era we are in right now

And the drowning out of dialogue with background unnecessary music is ruining good stories.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dunno, the flip side is Tarantino 95% filler dialogue that goes nowhere.,
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Give me that any day, at least some memorable stuff has come from it over his movies.

Oppenheimer's court case was filmed in a discotheque apparently

comment by >💲Baz tard🦍+❄️=? (U19119)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Cinciwolf----Old Trafford record attendance.....WOLVES V GRIMSBY. .......lolz (U11551)
posted 3 minutes ago
just hate this over indulgent era we are in right now

And the drowning out of dialogue with background unnecessary music is ruining good stories.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dunno, the flip side is Tarantino 95% filler dialogue that goes nowhere.,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This.

I love Tarantino's small talk!
1/4 with cheese is some of my favourite dialogue!

the watch up the ass is another great one

comment by Cinciwolf----Old Trafford record attendance.....WOLVES V GRIMSBY. .......lolz (U11551)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by >💲Baz tard🦍+❄️=? (U19119)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Cinciwolf----Old Trafford record attendance.....WOLVES V GRIMSBY. .......lolz (U11551)
posted 3 minutes ago
just hate this over indulgent era we are in right now

And the drowning out of dialogue with background unnecessary music is ruining good stories.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dunno, the flip side is Tarantino 95% filler dialogue that goes nowhere.,
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Give me that any day, at least some memorable stuff has come from it over his movies.

Oppenheimer's court case was filmed in a discotheque apparently
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A few good lines, a lot of pointless stuff. I’m not a fan of his works, the filler dialogue annoys me, I’d rather see some bits left to the viewer to decide what’s being said (scene dependent)

Unforgiven 7.5.

Saltburn

8/10

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Density - 6/10

Didn't actually mind the premise but the action scenes were dull and didn't like the woman character.

Wonka - 6/10

Done quite well if you're into musicals, which I'm not particularly.

Die Hard 2 - 7/10. Solid sequel
Blow Out - 7.5/10. Decent 80's thriller

Catch me if you can - 9/10

Ghostbusters Afterlife 7/10

The Sound of Music 8/10

No Time to Die 8/10

Society Of The Snow

9.5/10

comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 4 days, 11 hours ago
Ghostbusters Afterlife 7/10

The Sound of Music 8/10

No Time to Die 8/10
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Sound of Music only 8.5?

8

Human Trafficking...9/10.

The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes - 7/10