Film The Redcafe Movie review thread

The Man from Earth - 8.5/10

Don't know if someone has already done a review of it. A riveting thriller. All taking place in a single room with intellectuals discussing an unlikely scenario, which if true, could well be the find of the millennium. Loved the movie, especially the ending. And no big names was the best part.
 
They're notoriously awful in the Harry Potter films, which are hardly Pinter. Yes it was probably quite demanding for them, but that doesn't improve their performances, loads of kids can act. The ginger kid can act, because he was the one cast on his ability to act, not whether he fit a certain cuteness factor (which is why he's now doing Theatre, while Watson is raking in money doing shite films.) Both Lohan and Culkin can act, which as Archie pointed out, isn't what they were "found out" for. Tonnes of films from the Goonies to Kick Ass have good to decent child acting in it.

Also the bar is so low for them that they'll get credit for putting in competent performances in things. "Oh look, that girl from Harry Potter has acted in a thing where she's a bit mean/slutty/american and she's not completely awful in all of it. Give her an award!" "Oh look, that guy from Harry Potter is in a play playing a tortured soul and he's sort of plausible as a human being in parts of it. Lavish him with praise!"

Acting is an incredibly high reward profession, and they'd never get close to the roles they get and fees they command now on their talent alone, without the popularity of Potter. So however much of a stress doing those films for however many years was on those poor widdle kiddies, they're still stealing a huge and lucrative living from it....They're winning!
 
Last edited:
NK86 said:
The Man from Earth - 8.5/10

Don't know if someone has already done a review of it. A riveting thriller. All taking place in a single room with intellectuals discussing an unlikely scenario, which if true, could well be the find of the millennium. Loved the movie, especially the ending. And no big names was the best part.
Click to expand...
Yeah quite a few on here have seen it, most enjoyed it. I saw it quite recently myself and loved it. Cracking little film.
Big-Red said:
How did you know I'd read this...
Click to expand...
Worth a punt! :lol:
 
Rooney in Paris said:
Yeah quite a few on here have seen it, most enjoyed it. I saw it quite recently myself and loved it. Cracking little film.

Worth a punt! :lol:
Click to expand...

Saw another movie recently, "About Time". Loved how the movie was made. Simple and beautiful.
 
Just watched The Man from Earth. Low production values, shoddy acting and a couple of weak characters (the student and the fundamentalist Christian and the rest too come to think of it, they just weren't as bad). Interesting concept though which managed to keep my attention throughout. 6/10.
 
Last edited:
Culcin is in the film The Wrong Ferrari, in which he appears alongside musicians/amateur actors and it's pretty obvious in it that he can act - mostly by making everyone in the film look like the amateur they are.

The reason he doesn't do films anymore is his penchant for doing hard drugs all the time, not because he's a bad actor.
 
Mockney said:
They're notoriously awful in the Harry Potter films, which are hardly Pinter. Yes it was probably quite demanding for them, but that doesn't improve their performances, loads of kids can act. The ginger kid can act, because he was the one cast on his ability to act, not whether he fit a certain cuteness factor too (which is why he's now doing Theatre, while Watson is raking in money doing shite films.) Both Lohan and Culkin can act, which as Archie pointed out, isn't what they were "found out" for. Tonnes of films from the Goonies to Kick Ass have good to decent child acting in it.

Also the bar is so low for them that they'll get credit for putting in competent performances in things. "Oh look, that girl from Harry Potter has acted in a thing where she's a bit mean/slutty/american and she's not completely awful in all of it. Give her an award!" "Oh look, that guy from Harry Potter is in a play playing a tortured soul and he's sort of plausible as a human being in parts of it. Lavish him with praise!"

Acting is an incredibly high reward profession, and they'd never get close to the roles they get and fees they command now on their talent alone, without the popularity of Potter. So however much of a stress doing those films for however many years was on those poor widdle kiddies, they're still stealing a huge and lucrative living from it....They're winning!
Click to expand...
Radcliffe, to his credit, has done some theatre, some you could even say was challenging. I haven't seen anything from Watson, apart from the occasional insufferable interview, to suggest she has the means or desire to do anything other than be famous, but not famous.
 
I worked on Equus in a very small capacity, he was perfunctory. He learnt the lines and hit the marks but he was always just sort of going through the motions like an alien aping human activity. It always felt like he was acting, if that makes sense. I mean, he got his cock out every night, which takes guts, and certainly a desire to be a proper 'act-tor' but he was always being judged by these low Potter expectations. "Wow, isn't it amazing that this wooden chump from Harry Potter can sort of, just about, do this theatre thing to a certain unexceptional level? Well done millionaire professional actor for being passable!"

Again, he would never have got that gig in any other capacity than "it's Harry Potter doing a play! We can sell that!" but yes, you have to admit he's taken interesting roles, which at least makes him a more interesting person.
 
That's how the business works though, you use star power to sell your product. They probably could have gotten a better actor no ones ever heard of in Equus, but would that actor have been able to go on Graham Norton and talk about getting his willy out?

Obviously that doesn't make him a good actor by any stretch, but it's not their fault they're famous - and if I were one of the Harry Potter kids I'd probably be doing the same thing. While it'd be honorable of them just to retire with their millions, they're having the time of their life on great big movie sets and are meeting some of the most interesting people in the world on a regular basis.
 
It wouldn't be honourable to retire with their millions. They should stick to it, use their privileged position to try and improve themselves, and be daring in their choices. But directors as talented and shrewd as Darren Aronofsky shouldn't be casting for key roles.
 
I'd assume they already are working on improving themselves, I mean, like, almost everyone does that - regardless of how privileged or otherwise they are. That's not going to make them good overnight.

And what's daring? Does Radcliffe have to be a ****** in one of Almodovar's films to be considered good? Because I can't really see him pulling that off.

And even Aronofsky has to send someone on Graham Norton to sell his films, it's just how it works. You're not going to get a $150m budget on a film purely on its artistic merits, what investor would be that mental?
 
hungrywing said:
Nope. No idea of any background. Unless you're talking about the link with the first movie.

My problem with it wasn't the thing itself-

-it was the heavy "bwahahahahaha we've been the baddies all along and you never even knew it!" sort of Saturday morning cartoon type vibe it needlessly gave off, which kind of lampooned the SHIELD-has-rotted-on-its-own-and-needs-a-rebirth thing it had going up until then. I thought it was a great angle at first; thought they were going to play it a bit more subtly. So it's just the particular way it was executed.

They had a good, menacing "hang on a minute, isn't SHIELD pretty much HYDRA" storyline built up, informing the Captain character's choices leading clearly towards the dissolution of SHIELD, and they didn't need to resort to OMG SHIELD ACTUALLY IS HYDRA which just turns into a not-quite-satisfying* excuse to go third-act smackdown mode on the now blatantly evil baddies.

*Again, for adults that is.
Click to expand...
BAMSOLA said:
Not really, I liked the original and can fully understand the background of said computer but just found that whole scene and the subsequent back references poorly handled. Still it is at heart a kids movie that threatened to be a reasonably grown up thriller in the first half but settles back down to kids level too often for my liking. Decent/good movie but could have been much more.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I was meant to say a background of the character in the Marvel universe / comics itself, not just the movies. But even knowing that, the reasons for the computer were executed far too quickly and not enough background on the character is given at all. But that could change.
Very valid point regarding the HYDRA / SHIELD storyline, that could of gone much further than just the one film when you think about it. There was no need to push this out into one movie - keeping people guessing what the 'conspiracy' or how deep the corruption level was, not revealing Alexander Pierce's role keeping him in the shadows of HYDRA and CA trying to clear his name could of been drawn out across the Avengers: AoU and maybe climaxed in CA 3. Seems Marvel needed this changes quickly for whatever they have lined up for the end of Phase 2 and leading on to Phase 3.
 
That's all well and good Silva, but it doesn't stop them being crap actors, or excuse a world where famous mediocrity sells ahead of talent.

Archie Leach said:
What were you doing working on Equus, Mockney? And how big is Radcliffe's cock?
Click to expand...

I was an assistant to the sound engineer. I also had to film the dress rehearsals, meaning there was a point, at the height of his fame and before he'd done anything else, where I had a video of Harry Potter's willy. I could've sold that to the tabloids if I was a cnut.
 
I watched Mud, Jeff Nichols' latest tale of wounded masculinity in rural America. I really enjoyed it, even when it went a little mad in the last act. However for the first time Mud did make me think that Nichols' approach to his characters and settings could perhaps be seen as a little patronising. There is a consistent poor as nobility theme running through his work and some of the characters exist, somewhat infantalised, in a fairytale milieu. The acting is brilliant, particularly the main boy and the one who was playing River Phoenix.
 
New World
Gangster film by the writer of I Saw The Devil. Absolutely brilliant gangster epic about betrayal and the struggles between one man caught between the crime syndicate and law enforcement. Very intense, violent, funny and well crafted all round really. It seems that the Koreans have nailed down the formula for a great spy/revenge film. Met the director (Park Hoon Jung) and spoke to him for a while after the film, was a great guy, helped me with my next script! I would highly recommend this to fans of gangster/revenge/spy films 8/10
 
Searching for Bobby Fischer(1992) 8/10

I cannot believe it took me so long to watch this film. A lovely tender story about a father who dreams of big things for his child who is a chess prodigy. I suggest this film to parents of the caf, just brilliant in every aspect.
 
Noah. Thoroughly enjoyed it. A bit disjointed and confused and tries to do too much, but a good spectacle. Definitely one to see at the cinema. An 8/10 (7.8 to be precise). And yes, Emma Watson was a huge weak link. Not to harp on, but I genuinely don't understand why/how she would have been cast, unless she knocked the screen test out of the park. Her fanbase are the wrong demographic for the movie, so she wouldn't have been brought on board for the investors. It will be because DA thought she was right for the part. But she is so out of her depth next to the likes of Crowe it beggars belief.
 
Bowling for Columbine - Plot was all over the place and Heston really phoned in his performance. How did this win an Oscar? 5/10.
 
Dirty Schwein said:
New World
Gangster film by the writer of I Saw The Devil. Absolutely brilliant gangster epic about betrayal and the struggles between one man caught between the crime syndicate and law enforcement. Very intense, violent, funny and well crafted all round really. It seems that the Koreans have nailed down the formula for a great spy/revenge film. Met the director (Park Hoon Jung) and spoke to him for a while after the film, was a great guy, helped me with my next script! I would highly recommend this to fans of gangster/revenge/spy films 8/10
Click to expand...

Saw it last night... excellent movie. A solid 8 sounds about right.
 
Rooney in Paris said:
I'm putting on The Room. Better be good @R.N7
Click to expand...
tumblr_meb2zaicJN1raj8mk.gif
 
CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE WINTER SOLDIER

Overall rating: 7.5/10 (Very Good)

One of the better superhero movies in recent times. Enough plot twists to keep you interested throughout and sufficient all out action scenes inter spread with cheeky dry humour makes it quite enjoyable. Being a pivotal character, Winter Soldier could have been developed more.

Overall definitely a must watch!

I'm not quite sure why SHIELD knows about Winter Soldier yet keeps Captain America uninformed till date.

On the plot where 'humanity has to voluntarily give up freedom for protection', I don't see how killing a million in public would achieve that. It would just create mass hatred against Hydra imo.

Again when WS saves CA at the end, could have handled the 'past recollection' bit better. Quite melodramatic, imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.