Ay mi

Interstellar is a decent movie, I feel that many are overly negative to compensate for those who hail every Nolan movie as the best thing ever.

'Decent' doesn't exactly describe top 10 material. I kinda liked it for its imagery, but boy was it very flawed.

I like the rest of Nolans films but I thought Interstellar was bullshit.

Interstellar is a style over substance kinda movie. It's not a movie that's gonna come out well when time has passed and you start breaking it down to look for plotholes and inconsistencies and dumb or sappy moments. It's not a great movie but I had a great time watching it on the big screen. Not the masterpiece some hyped it up to be before release but as a popcorn movie I enjoyed it thoroughly and I think it's treated too harshly on the web nowadays.

I didnt relate to it, at all. Unlike Inception, which grabbed me in straight away.

Klaus wrote:

I'd like to meet whoever put The Dark Knight and The Wolf of Wall Street in their top ten so I can punch them in the face. It has to be the same person.

in fairness The Dark Knight has shaped mainstream Hollywood for the past 10 years.

I don't get Wolf of Wall Street.

The Wolf of Wall Street is like a full length Scorsese parody movie. If I didn't know better I'd think his whole idea behind the film was to take the piss out of himself and his style of directing. Especially considering the fucking thing is three hours. That goes for DiCaprio's performace too, a parody.

I gave this some more thought and it really is a Goodfellas parody. Take a brief summary of the two movies:

A young man gets involved in a criminal business where he's a fast riser and before long he's living the high life with money, drugs and prostitutes. He keeps pushing his luck until the government catches on to him and in a blaze of glory both his professional and personal life come crashing down. He then snitches on his cronies, serves his reduced time and spends the rest of his days alone. 

The skeleton of the films are identical, they even have the signature Scorsese narration. Both films run for three hours but where Goodfellas has memorable scenes, crisp dialogue, beautiful tracking shots, comedy, an exceptional supporting cast led by De Niro and Pesci, and a story to tell, The Wolf of Wall Street has what exactly? 

One of the most overindulgent films in the history of cinema.

Jens wrote:

One of the most overindulgent films in the history of cinema.

And when people say thats the point of the film it doesn't actually make it a better film. And above all else its extremely boring.

Huh, when I'm talking to people I know it'd be close to a crime not to love that movie. Not that I do, I completely agree with you.

Personally think Goodfellas is overindulgent. Wolf of Wall Street is feature length flatulence.

I felt goodfellas was too long. I could be wrong but i definitely felt it could have done with a few less scenes/narratives in the middle. Also dunno how this may sound but i found it a little too 'theatrical'.

EDIT: Agree with Burnsy. I was gonna say 'self important', though overindulgent may be a better word for goodfellas. WOW was trash

I really liked WoW, I also liked interstellar except for the bits towards the end, but I'm not a film snob...

Also just watched Gravity, worth the watch for the imagery alone.

Haven't watched Interstellar. I really liked Inception till like the the final 30 minutes. All that action kinda spoilt it for me.

goon wrote:

I really liked WoW, I also liked interstellar except for the bits towards the end, but I'm not a film snob...

Also just watched Gravity, worth the watch for the imagery alone.

Yeah, Interstellar was good, but the ending ruined it for me. 

Jens wrote:

Interstellar is a style over substance kinda movie. It's not a movie that's gonna come out well when time has passed and you start breaking it down to look for plotholes and inconsistencies and dumb or sappy moments. It's not a great movie but I had a great time watching it on the big screen. Not the masterpiece some hyped it up to be before release but as a popcorn movie I enjoyed it thoroughly and I think it's treated too harshly on the web nowadays.

Agreed with the bolded. Of course if you break down a movie for problems you'll almost always encounter them. But the problems with the movie were glaring without needing scrutiny - the pointless Matt Damon sideshow and epilogue, the 'hard but not really" science fiction, the odd vocalised moralising...

Qwiss! wrote:

Its incredible.

Watched the first 30 minutes before work, Caden is incredibly sad, it's a cool movie so far. I know it's going to get even deeper as time goes on.

Who the hell is that old man stalking Caden, it's frightening.

'Nice Guys'

Fun movie. Liked it! Reminded me of 'Spring Breakers'. Ryan Gosling is amazing in the movie IMO. Such a talented actor.

How on earth did it remind you of Spring Breakers?

Quincy Abeyie wrote:

How on earth did it remind you of Spring Breakers?

Haha! I asked the same myself when i wrote it! I guess the noir elements. Actually it reminded me of a host of movies like inherent vice, the limey, coffy etc! (and i am sure i am missing a few more!)

Big Willie wrote:

The more pertinent question would be "you actually watched Spring Breakers?"

I quite liked it! 

It reminded me of Spring Breakers because it was shit.

Saw 10 Cloverfield Lane and Green Room yesterday. Both were excellent.

10 Cloverfield Lane was great, yeah.

Looking forward to this one.

Watched the new Bourne last night, couple of really nice set pieces but overall a very bland, forgettable movie.

Watched X-Men: Apocalypse. First Class was great, Days of Future Past was decent, this was just bad. I really don't think Singer is a good director.

Lawless was worth a watch. I'll watch most things with Tom Hardy, and Guy Pearce is great as the hatable antagonist.

Quincy Abeyie wrote:

It's good, you should watch it just for Christian Bale. Don't know why this is in the TV thread though.

I'm not that big a Bale fan, like Steven Carrell very much though. I'm mostly interested in the plot though

I like Carrell as well, and Brad Pitt is underrated nowadays. Even if you don't love it, I doubt you will be thinking that it wasn't worth a couple of your hours.

I'll try and watch it somewhen then, thanks.

I wasn't that bothered with Bale in it, seems a bit superfluous but I agree its a very good movie. Makes some very dry economics entertaining.

Still holds up. 

Triple 9. Awful and boring. Only watched it because a friend put it on.

Segway wrote:

Saw 10 Cloverfield Lane and Green Room yesterday. Both were excellent.

Green Room on for being my #1 film of the year atm, I looooved it!

Planning a double bill on Sunday, Anthropoid and either Hunt For The Wilderpeople (the trailer looked great) or Hell Or Highwater. 

Hunt For The Wilderpeople is very very good in my opinion, one of the best films of the year.

Great fusion of quirky culturally specific comedy (with a dash of Edgar Wright about it), and strangely haunting, epic moments that reminded me of 80s kids films.

Waititi is the reason that Thor: Ragnarok, even though the Thor movies are known as the worst of the MCU, may be the most anticipated of the upcoming ones.

The first Thor film is easily one of the best of the MCU, I've always maintained.

Solid light action comedy with Connecticut Yankee style time travel humour, charismatic lead performances and a fun supporting cast.

The second one's pretty patchy though, partly because the finale is such a typical MCU building-destroying CG clusterfuck. But the plot twists are still fun.

Yeah the first Thor is really good. Better than a lot of MCU films. Especially at the point it was released. I thought the second was terrible but I wouldn't say the Thor films are any worse than the Iron Man films.

I thought the first Thor was poor tbh.

The first Iron Man movie was the best of the lot (particularly given the subsequent impact it's had), followed by the Winter Soldier. The rest have ranged from mildly entertaining to boring.

The worst thing about the Thor movies is Portman's character, and she's not in the next one.