Watched it last year, though it was very good also.
Film The Redcafe Movie review thread
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
The only thing I didn't really understand was..
at the start you can see her, as Scarlett, stripping the clothes off that woman (who looked eerily similar to herself). What was that all about? She already had a skin, did they kill her for her clothes alone? 
As far as I can tell she's copied that woman's appearance and killed her to prevent people seeing her as a double?The only thing I didn't really understand was..at the start you can see her, as Scarlett, stripping the clothes off that woman (who looked eerily similar to herself). What was that all about? She already had a skin, did they kill her for her clothes alone?
Hmmm, yeah dunno. I'll try to read up a bit about it.
Straight Outta Compton
Just really really well made. The portrayals, timing, production, dialogue, attention to detail; all excellent. Favourite scenes were all the performances on tour, particularly the Feck The Police one. 8.5/10
Just really really well made. The portrayals, timing, production, dialogue, attention to detail; all excellent. Favourite scenes were all the performances on tour, particularly the Feck The Police one. 8.5/10
Bare Behind Bars
A prison-based drama set at a women's correctional institution. The governess is a sadist and brutalises the inmates. A few strike up a friendship with the nice nurse. Can they break free? Contains giant pubic triangles.
@pauldyson1uk
5/10
A prison-based drama set at a women's correctional institution. The governess is a sadist and brutalises the inmates. A few strike up a friendship with the nice nurse. Can they break free? Contains giant pubic triangles.
@pauldyson1uk
5/10
The Duff
About a girl who realises she is the 'designated ugly fat friend' in her circle. Despite being quite a generic high school comedy, I thought it was pretty enjoyable all the way through; the two leads have good chemistry. Definitely has room for improvement on the comedy side though. Final thought: no way is Bella Thorne 17 in real life, surely not. 6/10
About a girl who realises she is the 'designated ugly fat friend' in her circle. Despite being quite a generic high school comedy, I thought it was pretty enjoyable all the way through; the two leads have good chemistry. Definitely has room for improvement on the comedy side though. Final thought: no way is Bella Thorne 17 in real life, surely not. 6/10
Gotti (1996): 7/10
Good drama about John Gotti, enjoyed watching it. Less known than the Godfather trilogy and Goodfellas but nonetheless a must-watch for people who like to watch mafia stuff. I have to say though...I know they're criminals and psychopaths but man the mafia was so insanely powerful back then, so well-organised, so wealthy yet still very violent when they had to. Evil guys but brilliant nonetheless, the gas tax scam they pulled off in the 80s was some serious money-making stuff.
Good drama about John Gotti, enjoyed watching it. Less known than the Godfather trilogy and Goodfellas but nonetheless a must-watch for people who like to watch mafia stuff. I have to say though...I know they're criminals and psychopaths but man the mafia was so insanely powerful back then, so well-organised, so wealthy yet still very violent when they had to. Evil guys but brilliant nonetheless, the gas tax scam they pulled off in the 80s was some serious money-making stuff.
Old film I know, I watched it half a year ago as well but 2001: A Space Odyssey stuck in my mind. It stuck in my mind because it is terrible. Now I've only watched it once so maybe I need to watch it again but I found it extremely boring - the slow pacing was excruciating. The characters are basically non-existent as well.
Now maybe back then people could be bothered to sit through looking at a space shuttle going down a lift for 5 minutes because there is some secret meaning behind it. But times have changed. And unlike great films, this film ages horribly.
It's not all bad, it's about 95% bad. 2 good things I can remember. The score, and HAL-9000. That's it.
Anyone else agree or do people actually like this?
Now maybe back then people could be bothered to sit through looking at a space shuttle going down a lift for 5 minutes because there is some secret meaning behind it. But times have changed. And unlike great films, this film ages horribly.
It's not all bad, it's about 95% bad. 2 good things I can remember. The score, and HAL-9000. That's it.
Anyone else agree or do people actually like this?
Kind of agree yeah. Definitely not all its cracked up to be anyway IMO!
I thought it was only me, I have watched it a couple of times and hated it.
The follow up, 2010 is a much better film.
2012 remains the worst of the trilogy.
2001 is amazing you peasants.
Please tell me why you like it. I would like to know the thoughts of a madman.
Lots of extremely slow movies are rated highly on the internet.
It's probably the standout production of all time. Made in the 60s and still makes other films look amateurish by comparison.
It's still lacking plotwise...
You're telling me its a good film without telling me why its a good film. Why is it a standout production?
It takes you from the birth to the fall of mankind, the feck more do you want?
Look at it.
I'm pretty sure ya'll didn't like it because you were expecting something else. I had a similar experience with Blade Runner but that's still amazing.
Yeah and that brings me to another thing. The ending? What is going on there?
For me it's the same as Blade Runner. Solid movies, I just personally don't think they're that special.
Plenty of theories, you can make up your own mind. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_of_2001:_A_Space_Odyssey
That's your problem not the movies. They're both amazing.
So where would you rank it compared to other films? Top 10, top 20?
I think some of you guys clearly need your movie plots spoon fed to you.
Occasionally a movie defies the need for normal plot structure and 2001 is one of those movies.
Occasionally a movie defies the need for normal plot structure and 2001 is one of those movies.
Not sure if serious.
I'm too fickle for that, it'd wind up quite high cos I'm thinking about it now, but it's definitely one of the many movies you could argue is the best ever.
Last edited:
Chris Nolan is a brilliant director and he can entertain you with confusing plots. I loved Interstellar and Inception. 2001 just doesn't invite me in, its like interstellar but in slow motion so we can count every star in the sky or something.
Just remembered you're the guy who likes Entourage, so I'll just leave you with your shitty tastes alone.Yes. Yes I am. Do you have a problem with that?
Get off your high horse you pretentious swine
Chris Nolan is a good not a brilliant director, he has never directed a single scene in any of his movies that you won't find has been directed in a similar fashion by a director before him, he is simply cine-literate and knows how to direct a scene well. Kubrick on the other hand was a genius who was directing whole movies the like of which hadn't really been seen before he came along and invented it. The two are night and day in terms of caliber of director.
The key point here is where you derive entertainment from, and Kubrick's plot's were not really confusing (or at least they shouldn't be if you give the material the required length of thought) they were complexed and did not yield easy answers as they required the watcher to think which is different altogether from being confusing, as that implies that the meaning is muddled which it really isn't in any Kubrick movie.
Again the problem you seem to be having in comparing Nolan to Kubrick indicates to me that you want to be watching more of a popcorn movie rather than one which allows you the freedom and credits you as the viewer with the intelligence to construct the film for yourself. If that is your preference that is fine, I like popcorn movies myself, however you simply can't put any part of Nolan's work on par with Kubrick's. One was inventing cinema using material we simply had not seen before the other is trying (and not always succeeding) to reinventing it using material we have seen before many times.
The two are miles apart in terms of talent and 2001 is arguably the most influential sci-fi movie ever made.
Whilst I do agree with your point, do you think it's fair to say that with the obvious time difference between them?
I think it was easier to do something which hadn't been seen before, cinema wise, in the 60's. Especially if you're comparing to 2014 anyway.
I Disagree. Memento was ground braking in terms of how it handled its plot. I don't know how you can they that a film had portrayed anything like that before, it was shot brilliantly.
Now coming to The Dark Knight trilogy. The Dark Knight itself is influenced by Heat but the trilogy as a whole completely changed the way superhero movies are shot and made. It was the first superhero movie to portray a realistic universe in which the hero lived in. Film's like Man of Steel and Watchmen have tried but ultimately failed to replicate this. Possibly the whole reason we have the Marvel and DC cinematic universe is because the popularity of this trilogy. Also it showed film makers that a superhero movie can explore different theme, not just be a campy.
It all again comes back to this I want a film that entertains. Whether that be The Green Mile, The Dark Knight or Downfall (Which are all films I adore). If I don't enjoy this film then I'm not going to say its good.
I have no problem about what Kubrick was aiming for but its the way he went around making his film which I found puzzling - and just boring.
Yes and that is a fair point, but that is Nolan's loss for being born later.
You also cannot compare the type of movies both are trying to make, Nolan's movies fit the mould of popcorn movies (albeit that they normally require a slightly higher intelligence level than the norm in that genre to fully appreciate).
Kubrick was for the most part making art-house movies that were not necessarily driven by linear plot structure. Although you could say Nolan started out making something close to art-house films with Following and Momento he has since moved on to much more action orientated popcorn films such as The dark Knight Trilogy and Inception, for me he is simply no longer attempting to make timeless mould breaking films.
Yeah, I agree with this.
On the subject of Nolan making movies that are not timeless/mould breaking. I feel in his body of work he does have a few of those, Memento and arguably TDK IMO are examples.
I am not saying that Momento was not beautifully shot however if you researched more closely you will find that it has actually been accused (not by me as I haven't seen the movie in question) of being very similar to a french film called Je t'aime, je t'aime. Having not seen the film myself I can't say how similar the two are however its a bit of a stretch to call Momento an entirely original piece of work in terms of plot if that is what you are attempting to do.
I won't argue too much of that other than adding that it needed to make that shift and had everything in its favor to do so as Batman himself has no super powers so didn't really need to be existing in a world too different from our own. Also if you chart the progress of the Batman animated series which appeared on TV, you will find them making a similar shift long before Nolan brought his trilogy to screen. The biggest failing of the mid 90's Batman movies were that they didn't seem to understand that there had been a shift in the comics towards a more gritty, realistic and less camp interpretation of Batman in the DC comic books, so they hadn't kept up with the comics where as both the animated series of the late 90's and Nolan's work has. So not original in terms of the fact that the source material was already pointing the way, but influential in terms of the fact that most of the superhero movies on the big screen after it have been influenced by it.
I think most people don't find 2001 puzzling, most people find it challenging in term of the questions it is asking and how to construct and interpret it as an overall piece of work, but I can assure you that all the answers are there on screen so perhaps if you find it puzzling you should give it a few more viewings (sometimes it can take a while for films to grow on people) me personally I didn't find it to be anything more than challenging on first viewing (at about 15+ years ago) and after a couple of views I had constructed the movie for myself and now feel I fully understand 99.9% of what happens on screen.
As for being entertained by the rank schmaltz fest that is The Green Mile, you should be ashamed of yourself.
Last edited:
I thought 2001 was a bit of a masterpiece when I watched it: superb, unique movie overall, but it was excruciatingly slow in parts as well. Can see why people would dislike it.
I meant I was puzzled by the way the film was made, and the reasoning for it being so slow. There are much faster paced films that have meanings behind them and have ambiguous endings. It's more of a painting than a film.
and thats what the problem is with it, take them away and it would be more watchable, but if you take them away you change the film, I accept the film is a classic but I just dont like it.