What films have you watched this week?

[NemesiS]

Watched The Sorcerer's Apprentice last night. Was really looking forward to it from the trailers. Hmmm, it was OK but not up to my own hype.

The dweed they had as the 'hero' really spoilt it for me

Watched this myself last week and felt exactly the same. The "Hero" was a complete and utter tosser and i can't seriously believe there are actual human beings on the planet that are this much of a tool IRL.....

Film was meh tbh and i thought it would be better than it actually was as the trailer and premise made it look pretty good. But the young lad ruined it..

[apatia77]

Watched "Wall Street - Money never sleeps" last night - I enjoyed watching it but at the end it's just an average film. 6/10

[Sane]

Red Riding: The Year of our Lord 1980 and 1983. Part 2 and 3 of the trilogy, absolutely brilliant. Highly recommended to anyone who likes crime/drama.

[Neil]

Watching Commando right now best Arnie film called Commando ever.

"Yon know Sully when I promised to kill you last.......I lied"

"What did you do with Sully?"

"I let him go"

How he didn't win an oscar for this is beyond belief.

[SuperBeatBoy]

After watching the exorcist for the billionth time I then watched the pretty good exorcist 3.

[nickgodfrey]

Enter the Void: What an odd film....

[nickgodfrey]

Easy A: Bloody awful....

[smokedog]

Easy A: Bloody awful....

Just watched this too, didn't think much of it.

[noobish hat]

Watched Deathly Hallows last night. Really poor adaptation. They omitted far too much.

->Open Spoiler<-

What the **** happened to Regulus' backstory? Leaving that out is unforgivable when they piss so much screen time up the wall. We don't get to see the Dudley's farewell (a very touching moment in the book), but we have to watch five agonising minutes of Harry and Hermione dancing? What did that add to the film?

They just totally messed up every little thing that could possibly be messed up. Why did they make it seem like they rushed to the ministry 2 minutes after they found out who had the locket, rather than after months of planning as in the book? Because they wanted to trivialise the hunt for the horcrux, the single most important aspect of the plot of the movie? Sure seems that way.

And I swear to god, Pettigrew had better show up AND die in part 2, or it will just go to prove what I have suspected all along - that Yates and Kloves read the book when it came out three years ago, and then attempted to adapt it completely from memory because they were damned if they were going to read it a second time. It was over 20 pages long! And it didn't even have any pictures!

One of the biggest flaws though is that they totally ****ed up the structure of the story. By splitting it in two? No - by not portraying how devastating a moment it was after Harry and Hermione escape from Nagini. This is a very simple element to story structure. You need a 'darkest moment' for the characters before things start to get better. Ron has abandoned them, they have no leads, no sword, they were inches away from death, they missed their best chance to destroy the snake horcrux, Harry inadvertently shows Voldemort the identity of the boy whole stole the Elder wand, and Harry's own wand, his greatest weapon against Voldemort, is destroyed - and movie Harry just shrugs it off and say it doesn't matter. Oh, it's good to know we, the audience, don't need to care about this. Thank god, I was almost stirred emotionally for a minute there.

They should have given that scene maximum impact, and ended the film there, on a devastating downer. Again, did Yates never see a little film called THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK? The audience would be left hanging, wondering how on Earth they are going to fulfill their mission - a feeling that was criminally lacking from the end of the HBP movie because they didn't explain anything properly and once again failed to place any weight on the discovery that the horcrux was a fake. It all goes back to this ludicrous and insulting notion that every film has to end on a positive note, which was most obvious at the end of Goblet of Fire, when their friend has just been murdered and Voldemort has just be resurrected, signalling a terrible and uncertain future for them all, and Hermione says something like "Everything's going to be different now isn't it?" and Harry CHEERFULLY replies "Yes!". These people don't know ANYTHING about film making, or storytelling, and if you think they're good films, you're an idiot.

If they ended DH where I suggested, they could have spent the Malfoy Manor screen time more wisely, showing what happened to Regulus. As it is, I don't know why they even bothered mentioning him. They could have just replaced RAB with Kreacher and it would have made more sense.


Having said all that, I did like the effects (although it's kind of a given now that a film should have good effects, there's no excuse not to), but epsecially the Tale of the Three Brothers segment. When Hermione started reading, I actually thought "how amazing would it be if they did this bit in some kind of stylised 2D animation? I hope she doesn't just sit there reading the entire thing" - and lo and behold, I got my wish. A pleasant surprise.

[Neil]

These people don't know ANYTHING about film making, or storytelling, and if you think they're good films, you're an idiot.

I think they're good so does my wife and kids. You wanna rethink that sweeping statement of total bollocks?

[noobish hat]

I will when I have been presented with some evidence to the contrary.

[Neil]

I will when I have been presented with some evidence to the contrary.

I just want to make sure I understand what you are saying.
Anyone. ANYONE who likes these films is an idiot correct?
I just want to be clear you are insulting me and my family before I proceed any further here.

[Darwock]

I watched a big pile of gash called "New York: I love you". I expected I was going to hate it from the title but thought I might be wrong. I wasn't.

Self indulgent pap of the highest order. It's just a load of unconnected short films (by different directors) strung together, so no story to speak of. Also nothing insightful, funny or interesting. Natalie Portman goes bald again. A black man has a white daughter and takes her to the park. Old people walk down the street. That sort of thing.

Did 9/11 cause New Yorkers to crawl so far up their own arses that they forgot that it isn't the only place in the world which has old people and parks?

I got the feeling that it was trying to imitate "Blue In the Face". In comparison that film was a masterpiece - unpretentious, witty and spontaneous, and actually did make New York seem like an interesting place to live. The celebrity cameos in it were also surprising and entertaining (Michael J. Fox asking how much money to eat a bowl of **** was a highlight). This just felt like it was showing off it's cast list.

[Dogg Thang]

I just want to make sure I understand what you are saying.
Anyone. ANYONE who likes these films is an idiot correct?
I just want to be clear you are insulting me and my family before I proceed any further here.

Are you guys fighting over a film with a teenage wizard in a magic school with magic wands and stuff?

[abigsmurf]

serious business