New Films 2009

[Jemble Fred]

One of them seemed to be definitely 20th century, with people dressed fairly normally, the other seemed to be dressed like wot them people did from the olden days. If a costume drama means a man putting on a suit, then James Bond is a costume drama.

But this is the 21st century. A film set in the 20th century (1960 in the case of 'An Education') is a period – ie 'costume' – drama. Yes, if they made a James Bond movie set in 1960 it would also be a period drama. Set in a period. With period costumes.

Why the hell anyone would have a problem with 'costume drama' of any kind is a mystery anyway.

[Paaaaul]

I saw Harry Brown today.

It's a nice looking, but horribly bleak OAP version of Deathwish.
It's got lots of blood, swearing and a ridiculously OTT council estate riot.

I'm not really sure why it exists though. It doesn't seem to make any real political points, while visually coming across as an arty intelligent film. The gap between what the visuals promise and what the narrative delivers left me feeling a bit hollow as I walked out at the end. I found it engrossing, but will struggle to remember any of it in 12 months time.

[lipsink]

Well, just saw 'Zombieland'. It was great apart from...

Spoiler alert

What the fuck were they thinking with that Bill Murray cameo? Shockingly misguided and clearly just some pissing about that was added at the last minute. It stuck out like flab and ruined the tight consistent pacing of the film up until that point. For zombie apocalypse films to work they need to make you believe the world has really come to an end and this scene just took us out of the movie and made everything afterwards seem pointless. Plus, why did they make out he was an old has-been that had only done 'Ghostbusters'? Or were they cleverly parodying tiresome 80s nostalga?

[close]

Spoiler alert

On the plus side the pre-credits opening is one of the best for a zombie film, ever. The credits were great and scene with the girl in his flat was flat-out fucking brilliant (like the Evil Dead).

[close]

[SavageHedgehog]

Spoiler alert

What the fuck were they thinking with that Bill Murray cameo? Shockingly misguided and clearly just some pissing about that was added at the last minute. It stuck out like flab and ruined the tight consistent pacing of the film up until that point. For zombie apocalypse films to work they need to make you believe the world has really come to an end and this scene just took us out of the movie and made everything afterwards seem pointless. Plus, why did they make out he was an old has-been that had only done 'Ghostbusters'? Or were they cleverly parodying tiresome 80s nostalga?

[close]

[/spoiler]

I was OK with it, aside from

Spoiler alert

the Garfield gag

[close]

which struck me as a slightly desperate bit of fanboy pandering and apologising.

I'm surprised you seemed to find it disrespectful, if anything it struck me as being a little sycophantic!

[lipsink]

I'm surprised you seemed to find it disrespectful, if anything it struck me as being a little sycophantic!

Spoiler alert

I thought it was both actually. It makes you lose a lot of respect for the debut director who plays his card and then gets starstruck and ruins the flow of his film. Imagine how self indulgent he'd be if he became successful!

[close]

[Small Man Big Horse]

I didn't mind it at all

Spoiler alert

(and quite enjoyed the Garfield gag) but my main problem was that it went on for too long, especially after Murray was shot, and the lack of remorse shown by Jesse Eisenberg seemed plain odd.

[close]

[Whug Baspin]

Why the hell anyone would have a problem with 'costume drama' of any kind is a mystery anyway.

The problem for me lies with films/shows which are set pre 2nd world war, it's almost impossible that anyone involved can remember details of the time that would make the thing accurate so it easily slips into a seeming parody of what people then might have been like. Also worrying more about the look and sound of the thing rather than the content it often suffers from the same genre problems as Sci-fi.

[non capisco]

If you like the idea of an alien abduction film with no on-screen aliens or abductions and are a fan of shit dialogue and being quite bored then 'The Fourth Kind' is the film for YOU.

[VegaLA]

If you like the idea of an alien abduction film with no on-screen aliens or abductions and are a fan of shit dialogue and being quite bored then 'The Fourth Kind' is the film for YOU.

Nice one Capisco, i'm THERE!

[Ballad of Ballard Berkley]

The problem for me lies with films/shows which are set pre 2nd world war, it's almost impossible that anyone involved can remember details of the time that would make the thing accurate so it easily slips into a seeming parody of what people then might have been like.

You are aware of the existence of films, photographs and artefacts (and still very much alive people) from before World War Two, right?

[Jemble Fred]

It's also unlikely that Shakespeare was that au fait with life in Iron Age Britain, but he certainly knocked up a pretty entertaining four hours or so with King Lear. Dreaded 'costume's and all.

[Whug Baspin]

Yeah of course, I was just trying to describe why the bad stuff might have made it a bit of a turn-off. Shakespeares' a good example, done badly it's probably the worst way to spend a few hours. I know the recreation of an era doesn't fail all the time, but when it does it kills the the suspension of disbelief. If however people just enjoy watching things where people dress up like some long lost decade then I'd say it suffers the same problem as sci-fi, as long as there's laser guns and space ships then the quality of the story takes less precedent.

[lipsink]

This has the potential to be awful or actually pretty damn good:

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=26273

I really enjoyed both 'Meet the Parents' and 'Meet the Fockers' so hopefully they don't balls this one up. DeNiro and Keitel haven't had great track records for quite some time now. Keitel doesn't do comedy very well does he?

[Ignatius_S]

This has the potential to be awful or actually pretty damn good:

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=26273

I really enjoyed both 'Meet the Parents' and 'Meet the Fockers' so hopefully they don't balls this one up. DeNiro and Keitel haven't had great track records for quite some time now. Keitel doesn't do comedy very well does he?

More money for Emo Phillips... or not!

To be honest, I haven't seen Keitel in the few comedy films he's done - but he was rather good in Mother, Jugs & Speed.

[Santa's Boyfriend]

The problem for me lies with films/shows which are set pre 2nd world war, it's almost impossible that anyone involved can remember details of the time that would make the thing accurate so it easily slips into a seeming parody of what people then might have been like.

When that does happen it's usually a stylistic choice.  After all, whenever you see stuff today that's set in the 1980s it's practically parody, and it's not like the people directing it weren't around back then.

[gigolo aunts aren't gentlemen]

It's also unlikely that Shakespeare was that au fait with life in Iron Age Britain, but he certainly knocked up a pretty entertaining four hours or so with King Lear. Dreaded 'costume's and all.

Shakespeare wasn't trying to recreate an era accurately anywhere though, it was always (apart from the Roman plays where there'd be a concessionary toga every now and then over their normal clothes) contemporary dress. Lavish - some costumes cost half as much as his house - but contemporary. Historical detail is always very very secondary to story or dramatic effect - pre-Socratic Greeks quoting Aristotle in Troilus & Cressida for example. The Anthony Hopkins Titus Andronicus captured this quite nicely with its mixture of settings and tones, motorbikes next to centurions etc

[non capisco]

I saw Harry Brown today.

It's a nice looking, but horribly bleak OAP version of Deathwish.
It's got lots of blood, swearing and a ridiculously OTT council estate riot.

I'm not really sure why it exists though. It doesn't seem to make any real political points, while visually coming across as an arty intelligent film. The gap between what the visuals promise and what the narrative delivers left me feeling a bit hollow as I walked out at the end. I found it engrossing, but will struggle to remember any of it in 12 months time.

I thought it was a bit like a bad dream you might have if you fell asleep reading the Daily Express with Get Carter on in the background.

[ThickAndCreamy]

I thought it was a bit like a bad dream you might have if you fell asleep reading the Daily Express with Get Carter on in the background.

I feared it may be something along the lines of this. I'm in two minds whether to see it or not now, I may just watch 9 or 2012. Actually just 9, 2012 looks painfully shit.

I was also scared it was going to appeal to twats like these which it has obviously done. Gah.

[morgs]

Just got in from 2012 which was quite shockingly bad.  I loved it - cliche-ridden, plot-holes, poor acting, White House destroyed etc etc - everything I expect from the creator of Independence Day and The Day After Tomorrow.  Absolutely hilarious.  If you enjoyed the two aforementioned films then this is no different.  Really, not different at all!

[non capisco]

Just got in from 2012 which was quite shockingly bad.  I loved it - cliche-ridden, plot-holes, poor acting, White House destroyed etc etc - everything I expect from the creator of Independence Day and The Day After Tomorrow.  Absolutely hilarious.  If you enjoyed the two aforementioned films then this is no different.  Really, not different at all!

Top unintentionally funny bit, John Cusack's character and his kid are driving hell for leather away from an imminent fuck-off great explosion in Yellowstone Park
*FUCK-OFF GREAT EXPLOSION*
Kid: What was that?
Cusack: Nothing.

There were more. We were sitting in front of a group of teenage girls who found literally everything laugh-out loud hilarious, starting from the first scene. Normally I'd get the hump but in this case it really made the film, probably saved it for me to be honest. It's loooooong.

Emmerich really does have a hard-on for the White House getting destroyed, doesn't he? It's his version of Tarantino's women's feet shots.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Trailer/website for new biopic Gainsbourg - Vie Héroïque:

http://www.gainsbourg-lefilm.com/

(NSFW)

Blimey - the bloke they've got playing him is a dead ringer.  Wonder if it'll get a UK release..?

[Santa's Boyfriend]

That looks like a very sexy film indeed!  I look forward to seeing it.

[Marty McFly]

2012 then.. Independence Day with natural disasters instead of aliens?

Fantastic!

[mr. logic]

I saw Harry Brown today.

Written by a guy who lives on my street.  Just seen him in the newsagents buying some ribenna and a newspaper.  Told him that Mark Kemode didn't much like the film and that I'm yet to see it.

[wheatgod]

Written by a guy who lives on my street.  Just seen him in the newsagents buying some ribenna and a newspaper.  Told him that Mark Kemode didn't much like the film and that I'm yet to see it.

Kermode didn't like the message, but I think he said that as a film it was alright though.

[Vitalstatistix]

At Night of the Dead in Leeds, I saw:

Seventh Moon - Borefest from the director of Blair Witch. Shit actors in China get chased by demons. Lots of shaky cameras, no excitement.

Invitation Only - Distractingly gorgeous Asian women get chased and tortured by rich men. Long and pretty boring torture porn, but...



Vampire Girl vs Frankenstein Girl - Dude who made Tokyo Gore Police (which is fucking awesome) shoots another load. Not as good as TGP but still lots of fun and similarly bonkers. Involves some bizarre blacking up sequences which we were pretty uncomfortable with!

and.....

The Revenant -

This is the best horror film I've seen in years. It really deserves its own thread, but its only played at horror festivals so only a smattering of people have seen it yet. I'm tellin' ya - this has cult classic dripping all over it, you will all love this film, so keep an eye out for it.

It's a dark comedy about a dead US soldier who returns to life as a vampire/zombie. Sounds cliched, but its so fresh and different. It's part buddy comedy (as his friend helps him find blood), part horror pastiche (it's full of movie references), part satire (the ending is wonderful) and part gorefest (hints of Braindead-esque visual comedy).

Whilst you can feel influences from Shaun of the Dead, Tarantino etc, imagine a surreal and intelligent live action graphic novel; it's very dialogue heavy and the plot takes many very unpredictable turns. It's even quite poignant in places, and the music's great too. Gets the vitalstix seal of approval!

[Paaaaul]

Kermode didn't like the message, but I think he said that as a film it was alright though.

While I didn't particularly like the message - I don't think it was put across strongly enough!
The biggest problem with the film is the fact it has a right-wing reactionary plot, but the actual contents aren't that morally focussed, making it feel a bit wishy-washy. I think Kermode went in with Guardian-tinted glasses on looking to *react*. I didn't - I had no idea what it was about when I saw it - I got some free tickets and presumed,from the name, it was a gangster film.

[mr. logic]

Nah, Kemode seemed lukewarm on the whole thing.  He didn't giving an impression of liking it despite the message, he just seemed to hate the message and think the film was crap anyway.  Well, certainly that's the impression the writer was left with after my big gormless mouth and I had finished with him.

[Artemis]

Just back from 2012. My god, this movie was genuinely awful. Worst movie I've seen in a long time, apart from.... the effects. Which were as good as the rest of the movie was bad. They were absolutely amazing. I knew the rest of it wasn't going to be up to much, but I wasn't quite prepared for just how shit it was.

I left wondering whether the half hour eye-treat was worth the two hour slog. Ultimately, probably not actually.

[SavageHedgehog]

2012 is pretty bad; two good set pieces, a lot of suspense-free CGI destruction, and an overstuffed cast of characters that you've mostly forgotten about by the time they reach moribund status, and thus couldn't possibly care about. Not as dull or melodramatic as The Day After Tomorrow though.

Harry Brown I really enjoyed even though in many ways it was the film I was afraid Eden Lake would be.