You didn't answer me on Bare Behind Bars. I feel like you won't touch my film recommendations after that last one!
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.
I think we will have to agree to disagree about the movie being slow, I think it is perfectly paced in terms of the size and span its story and concepts as well as the ideas it is trying to explore.
However this is clearly a problem of purely artistic film making versus the more popcorn end of the market, so when you use the term "slow" I interpret that as you wanting to see more action and I'm afraid not all movies are made with that purpose in mind.
2001 is a film made with a deeper purpose in mind than just action, it is made to make the viewer think on an all-together deeper level about the world around them and the nature of existence itself, for that you need a more thoughtfully paced film and that is why whilst you might think it has a slow pace, I think the pace is perfect to allow the viewer ample time to consider some very profound ideas and to be able to take in the overall scope of those ideas.
Of course it in not necessary for a movie to have such a thoughtful pace in order to have meaning and to be ambiguous in some areas, however it is necessary if it is dealing with the kind of deep questions that 2001 is attempting to deal with.
I'm sorry but you can't argue in any way that the film is not slow. The film is very slow. The film being slow may not affect your enjoyment of the film, but the fact is it's still slow.
As I'm capable of liking films that aren't action movies. The whole reason I included The Green Mile and Downfall in my previous post was to show you that. Like I said It's just the way the film is put together, the way it's shot, the way it's directed, I just don't like it.
But to spare our fingers, I'll agree to disagree with you.
Not watched it yet, having trouble getting it from my normal places.
I always try and watch films recommended to me.
It's pretty low grade. Didn't realise these WIP (women in prison) films are actually considered a genre- Bare Behind Bars is very Jess Franco '70s exploitation in style.
Am assuming that a horror veteran like yourself has seen the original Wicker Man, Straw Dogs etc...Am sure I've seen most of the mainstays over the years and a few off the beaten track too- any hidden gems you'd recommend?
yeah I have seen those, Wicker Man is on of my favs , will have to think about a hidden gem , seen so many dodgy ones over the years.
I can argue that it is not slow as the answer to whether it is slow or not is relative to the viewer and I did not find it to be slow. Had it been considerably faster(in terms of pace of events or shorter running time) I would probably feel it had been rushed and needed to allow more time to explore its ideas, as it is I think it is perfectly paced due to the scope of ideas it is trying to encompass within its 2hours 41mins running time.
I would only consider a movie to be slow if I wasn't enjoying it or felt that it could have dealt with its events quicker or within a shorter running time; suffice to say I don't think it could have dealt with the scope of its ideas in a significantly shorter running time and I was never bored hence why I do not agree it is a slow film, however the thoughtful nature of its pace as a movie is not for everyone I will concede that.
Too tired to argue, but seeing 2001 on my laptop, and seeing it on the big screen both rank as among the most breathtaking cinematic experiences of my life. I love it. But I can also completely understand if people have no patience for the film as entertainment (outside of the middle/ HAL's act).
Ditto Wicker man and a mate's dad worked on the lighting, which is kind of cool. Have a think- would love to hear some recommendations.
2001 is in a very small category of movies. A category that goes beyond just a plot and entertainment. Like others have said, it's brilliantly made. You don't watch it purely for the entertainment value. It's not just a time filler.
Avengers: Age of Ultron
It was just what I expected, blowing stuff up and saving the world.
It was not a classic , film like this never are but it was a good 2 hours + of solid entertainment, what more do you need.
7/10
It was just what I expected, blowing stuff up and saving the world.
It was not a classic , film like this never are but it was a good 2 hours + of solid entertainment, what more do you need.
7/10
2001's brilliant, I think, though I completely get why some don't care for it. In comparison, I'm a Welles admirer but think that Kane doesn't hold the viewer's interest at all despite its technical charms.
I don't like either. At all.
I love Frances Ha.
Me too, the director has just released a new movie with the same lead actress: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/mistress_america/
Yeah, main reason I rewatched it. Will get to Mistress America eventually, bit worried I won't be able to adjust to Gretta Gerwig not actually being Frances.
Not only slow but the most pretentious bollocks ever put on celluloid. And half the themes it supposedly examines it either does in a 6th form mystic nonsense way (existentialism) or gets horribly wrong (the human evolution AI and human evolution themes). The only thing it got a bit right was some of the space travel stuff.
I'd take any of Dr Strangelove, A Clockwork Orange, Barry Lyndon, The Shining, Lolita and Paths of Glory over 2001.
Mad Max: Fury Road.
I like the colours.
I like the colours.
Anyone seen Legend, yet? Hoping to see it when im back off holiday.
Kubrick is definitely what you'd call a visionary director and 2001 is probably the film that encapsulates that the best, but I can definitely understand why some people don't enjoy it and I also prefer other films in his filmo.
I'm also constantly amused at film snobs' annoyance at Nolan being called a great director. Of course he's a great director.
I'm also constantly amused at film snobs' annoyance at Nolan being called a great director. Of course he's a great director.
2001 and Eyes Wide Shut are Kubrick's worst films.*
*Well, there are a couple in the 50's that are pretty terrible, but I always forget about them.
*Well, there are a couple in the 50's that are pretty terrible, but I always forget about them.
The Silence of The Lambs
I rate every film I watch on IMBd, and it's extremely rare that I hand out a 10/10 - but last night I just had to after finishing this two hour long masterpiece. I know I'm probably the last person in this thread to have seen this movie but I loved it so much I simply had to dive in here and sing its praises.
Hopkins was amazing. It says it all that he won the Best Actor Oscar despite just 24 minutes of screen time. Potentially the best performance I've seen in a film. Jodie Foster was an excellent protagonist, I really rooted for her and felt everything she was going through. During her tense exchanges with Lectar I seemed to disappear into the screen and forget I wasn't actually in the dungeon with the two characters.
I enjoy lots of movies, but very rarely does a story captivate me and pull me in like this one. I knew about 30 minutes in that I was going to fall in love with this film and the character of Hannibal Lectar.
10/10
I rate every film I watch on IMBd, and it's extremely rare that I hand out a 10/10 - but last night I just had to after finishing this two hour long masterpiece. I know I'm probably the last person in this thread to have seen this movie but I loved it so much I simply had to dive in here and sing its praises.
Hopkins was amazing. It says it all that he won the Best Actor Oscar despite just 24 minutes of screen time. Potentially the best performance I've seen in a film. Jodie Foster was an excellent protagonist, I really rooted for her and felt everything she was going through. During her tense exchanges with Lectar I seemed to disappear into the screen and forget I wasn't actually in the dungeon with the two characters.
I enjoy lots of movies, but very rarely does a story captivate me and pull me in like this one. I knew about 30 minutes in that I was going to fall in love with this film and the character of Hannibal Lectar.
10/10
Stanley Kubrick. Flawless filmography. Who cares about his worst/
It is a shame that in this age of instant gratification some people can't appreciate a film like 2001 for the masterpiece it is, however I've never seen that as a reflection on the movie itself so much as a reflection on them. The best movies give back what you bring to them.
Last edited:
Can I ask you in terms of pure entertainment, not if you admire it as a work of art or whatever, but in terms of pure entertainment, what would you score it out of 10?
Probably on their iPad while watching it on their laptop while taking a selfie of how they are defying the films boredom with their phone.
2001's always been polarising to be fair, but the amount of things available so easily is clearly a big reason why films like Avengers or Transformers are banking in the money when it used to be films like The Godfather. Among other things of course. I mean film length clearly isn't an issue like some used to claim .... "It's 3 hours, feck that"
2001's always been polarising to be fair, but the amount of things available so easily is clearly a big reason why films like Avengers or Transformers are banking in the money when it used to be films like The Godfather. Among other things of course. I mean film length clearly isn't an issue like some used to claim .... "It's 3 hours, feck that"
9/10 possibly 10 in terms of the most immersive experience I've had in film.
I think the term you've used "entertainment" is subjective because as I've said earlier most people derive entertainment from different sources/factors.
If you wanted to specify exactly what defines entertainment for you personally then that would probably help me to understand where there might be a difference of opinion between the two of us.
I googled entertainment:
The action of providing or being provided with amusement or enjoyment.
Can't admiring something as a work of art give you enjoyment?
I think if we were both to list the things we do for enjoyment during our own personal time both lists would be very different, therein lies the problem.
There's always been rubbish films that have done well at the box office and there will always be critically acclaimed films such as The Godfather doing well too. You just have to look at The Wolf of Wall Street, Boyhood, Birdman who all achieved great box office success despite being very different types of viewing experience (one thing they had in common was the majority of people who watched it, liked it).
Have you watched the TV show? As good as Hopkins is, I think Mads Mikkelsen who portrays Lecter in the show is actually better.
Planning to watch it sometime during the week.
I have them to watch , I think Mads is brilliant.
How incredibly condescending. I agree to a certain extent with what you're trying to say, but this part is so unnecessary.
I rewatched it a while back for the first time in years. Great, great film that hasn't aged. Prepare for disappointment with the sequels!
The Warriors
Really bizarre yet fun cult gangster film. Like someone decided to take acid and then make a mash of West Side Story and a GTA game.
8/10
Really bizarre yet fun cult gangster film. Like someone decided to take acid and then make a mash of West Side Story and a GTA game.
8/10
I've looked at the sequels on IMDb and think I'm gonna steer clear.
Looks like they completely ruin Clarice Starling while I'd prefer my memory her character to remain how it was in 'Silence'.
When you see that Jodie Foster declined them, it does ring alarm bells. Probably sound like I'm backtracking now, but Hannibal is perfectly watchable tbf, given Hopkins has such great screen presence. Red Dragon is better and worth watching from memory, although it was years ago that I saw it.