Author Topic: Rate the latest movie you've seen. (Read 99742 times)

SGOS · « **Reply #2325 on:** July 20, 2017, 06:33:28 PM »

Free Fire 8/10

I don't think this one made it to the theater, but if you're a fan of gunfights, you're gonna love this. It's the weirdest gunfight I've seen in a movie, but somehow it struck me as believable, but in a really strange way. I kept saying to my self, "Are these people all nuts?" The plot for the movie is that a bunch of guys are in a gunfight. That's about it. No, really. That's it. I thought it was unique. It could be a new genre in film.

Baruch · « **Reply #2326 on:** July 20, 2017, 06:38:14 PM »

Quote from: SGOS on July 20, 2017, 06:33:28 PM

Free Fire 8/10

I don't think this one made it to the theater, but if you're a fan of gunfights, you're gonna love this. It's the weirdest gunfight I've seen in a movie, but somehow it struck me as believable, but in a really strange way. I kept saying to my self, "Are these people all nuts?" The plot for the movie is that a bunch of guys are in a gunfight. That's about it. No, really. That's it. I thought it was unique. It could be a new genre in film.

That would be cutting to the chase, if it was a car chase movie ;-)

caseagainstfaith · « **Reply #2327 on:** July 20, 2017, 09:20:21 PM »

So, I'm the first kid on the block to see Dunkirk! It is a good movie. And incredible filming. Yet, at least for me, it wasn't as good as I hoped. Or perhaps it wasn't quite as what I expected. I was told that it would be draining and high tension. And, there was moderate tension, and some moments of fairly high tension. But, it wasn't as consistent high tension as I was expecting. And, very little plot, though that much I understood. Still a good movie but wasn't quite as good as I expected. 3.5/5

Baruch · « **Reply #2328 on:** July 20, 2017, 10:00:07 PM »

Quote from: caseagainstfaith on July 20, 2017, 09:20:21 PM

So, I'm the first kid on the block to see Dunkirk! It is a good movie. And incredible filming. Yet, at least for me, it wasn't as good as I hoped. Or perhaps it wasn't quite as what I expected. I was told that it would be draining and high tension. And, there was moderate tension, and some moments of fairly high tension. But, it wasn't as consistent high tension as I was expecting. And, very little plot, though that much I understood. Still a good movie but wasn't quite as good as I expected. 3.5/5

It is all in the directing and editing and intensity of the actors engaged in pretend. Think the recent James Bond movies. They make me constipated with tension ;-)

SGOS · « **Reply #2329 on:** July 20, 2017, 10:14:17 PM »

Quote from: caseagainstfaith on July 20, 2017, 09:20:21 PM

It is a good movie. And incredible filming. Yet, at least for me, it wasn't as good as I hoped.

I only read one review out of a around 100, and it was pretty much what you report here. The reviewer said he felt other reviewers over hyped it, and people would experience a negative reaction when their highest expectations weren't met. He didn't diss the movie, and said it was worthwhile, just not great.

I've seen the same trailer 4 times at the theater in the last month, and my reaction each time was, "Gee, I hope the movie is better than this." I'm going to see it tomorrow, and my expectations are not very high, so maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised. I'd be happy with that.

Baruch · « **Reply #2330 on:** July 21, 2017, 06:46:43 AM »

Dunkirk - Part of the reason for seeing a historical movies, is for the history. And war usually can't be described as entertaining. The real thing is long boredom punctuated with terror.

Mike Cl · « **Reply #2331 on:** July 21, 2017, 11:24:27 AM »

Quote from: Baruch on July 21, 2017, 06:46:43 AM

Dunkirk - Part of the reason for seeing a historical movies, is for the history. And war usually can't be described as entertaining. The real thing is long boredom punctuated with terror.

The average Joe does not realize that about war. It is boring. And when it is not, it is simply terror. And when the action does start, it is so terrorizing that if in a well trained squad of 10, it is working it's best efficiency if 3/4 soldiers are firing at the enemy. It is usually less than that. In doing research, it is apparently the same for much of modern history. War is boring. Then when chaos hits, it is panic educing. Even well trained soldiers panic at times. It is not unusual for more soldiers in a typical squad to be moving away from the action than are firing at the enemy. The war movies tend to not show what combat is really like.

Baruch · « **Reply #2332 on:** July 21, 2017, 01:42:37 PM »

Quote from: Mike Cl on July 21, 2017, 11:24:27 AM

The average Joe does not realize that about war. It is boring. And when it is not, it is simply terror. And when the action does start, it is so terrorizing that if in a well trained squad of 10, it is working it's best efficiency if 3/4 soldiers are firing at the enemy. It is usually less than that. In doing research, it is apparently the same for much of modern history. War is boring. Then when chaos hits, it is panic educing. Even well trained soldiers panic at times. It is not unusual for more soldiers in a typical squad to be moving away from the action than are firing at the enemy. The war movies tend to not show what combat is really like.

Hollywood, except for the movie version of Red Badge Of Courage, romanticize everything, including war. The Romans understood this ... you were on the front line for only minutes, then rotated to the back of the cohort, so fresh men could advance. This way the front line was always fresh. Barbarians throwing themselves on Roman steel (typically) didn't understand this. Disciplined units fighting face to face ... that is the hard thing to beat ... early Roman forces weren't so disciplined, but they got better, and their opponents didn't.

Of course FPS games take all the boredom out, and edit the terror to be more interesting.
Mostly the British got to play targets, not shooters ... at that time. Evacuating 300,000 men is amazing.

Cavebear · « **Reply #2333 on:** July 22, 2017, 03:23:51 AM »

War is long times on tedium broken by short bursts of terror. Unless you control a drone from home. I would love to do THAT!

Baruch · « **Reply #2334 on:** July 22, 2017, 07:45:17 AM »

Quote from: Cavebear on July 22, 2017, 03:23:51 AM

War is long times on tedium broken by short bursts of terror. Unless you control a drone from home. I would love to do THAT!

Says it all, doesn't it?

Hydra009 · « **Reply #2335 on:** July 24, 2017, 12:19:29 AM »

Dunkirk. 9/10

Dismal, terrifying, extremely nerve-wracking.

This isn't one of those idealized, upbeat war movies where the good guys kick Hitler in the nuts and then later have a pint together in a pub. This is a movie where some asshole is taking potshots at a sinking ship and the survivors are desperately trying to avoid pissing their pants long enough to come up with some sort of strategy to get the hell out of there in one piece.

This isn't a war film. This is a goddamn slasher film with the Luftwaffe as Jason Voorhees and every day is Friday the 13th. People die in increasingly horrific ways. Not for the faint of heart.

I looked up the historical Dunkirk and the movie seemed fairly true to life, though obviously dramatic liberties were taken. Thankfully, the real deathtoll wasn't as gigantic as the impression given by the movie. Out of 400,000 troops, 338,226 successfully evacuated. It wasn't like everyone was getting blow away or strafed or drowning then crushed or burning while drowning (jeez).

I'd also like to point out that there was a Russian equivalent to Dunkirk which wasn't quite as miraculous and incurred much higher casualties (proportionately speaking)

SGOS · « **Reply #2336 on:** July 24, 2017, 05:43:07 AM »

Quote from: Hydra009 on July 24, 2017, 12:19:29 AM

I'd also like to point out that there was a Russian equivalent to Dunkirk which wasn't quite as miraculous and incurred much higher casualties (proportionately speaking)

We tend to focus on ourselves and our English speaking allies when thinking about sacrifices in WWII, but the Russians paid dearly with their lives, and took huge losses. I put off seeing Dunkirk until tomorrow, when the "cheap seats" are available and popcorn goes on sale.

Baruch · « **Reply #2337 on:** July 24, 2017, 06:54:31 AM »

Quote from: SGOS on July 24, 2017, 05:43:07 AM

We tend to focus on ourselves and our English speaking allies when thinking about sacrifices in WWII, but the Russians paid dearly with their lives, and took huge losses. I put off seeing Dunkirk until tomorrow, when the "cheap seats" are available and popcorn goes on sale.

Enemy At The Gates didn't do Stalingrad justice.

trdsf · « **Reply #2338 on:** July 26, 2017, 12:45:44 PM »

Quote from: SGOS on July 24, 2017, 05:43:07 AM

We tend to focus on ourselves and our English speaking allies when thinking about sacrifices in WWII, but the Russians paid dearly with their lives, and took huge losses. I put off seeing Dunkirk until tomorrow, when the "cheap seats" are available and popcorn goes on sale.

Pretty much, although a significant number of Soviet losses were due to mismanagement from the top -- Stalin's own Great Purge essentially blew the brains out of the Soviet military, and many of those promoted to lead in the wake of that were proponents of traditional forms of warfare, even though World War I had definitively industrialized and mechanized war.

Even some of our English-speaking allies look askance at American claims of "winning" World War II. The US came three years late to both world wars, and both the Battle of Britain and the Blitz were over before even the attack on Pearl Harbor, much less the actual involvement of any American troops. In some of the BBC radio comedies from the 60s and 70s, there is a tendency to refer to American involvement in the European theater as 'having shown up late to help with the mopping up'.

News:

Author Topic: Rate the latest movie you've seen. (Read 99742 times)

SGOS

Re: Rate the latest movie you've seen.

Baruch

Re: Rate the latest movie you've seen.

caseagainstfaith

Re: Rate the latest movie you've seen.

Baruch

Re: Rate the latest movie you've seen.

SGOS

Re: Rate the latest movie you've seen.

Baruch

Re: Rate the latest movie you've seen.

Mike Cl

Re: Rate the latest movie you've seen.

Baruch

Re: Rate the latest movie you've seen.

Cavebear

Re: Rate the latest movie you've seen.

Baruch

Re: Rate the latest movie you've seen.

Hydra009

Re: Rate the latest movie you've seen.

SGOS

Re: Rate the latest movie you've seen.

Baruch

Re: Rate the latest movie you've seen.

trdsf

Re: Rate the latest movie you've seen.