What was the last film you watched?

[Torslanda]

So just as crap as a 'real cinema' then. Ho hum...

[redshift]

So just as crap as a 'real cinema' then. Ho hum...

Well, it does sound a bit shit, especially compared with Monday morning at Vue, where the latest and greatest can be seen for £3.99 plus the cost of a bag of snack from Wilkos round the corner, and you get an entire 50-foot screen (usually a Sony 4K, so not bad, but not great) to yourself.  Possibly the only good feature of shift work.

[mrcharly-YHT]

Being smuggled into the drive-in, in the boot; that was quite exciting when I was 5.

We thought it a big experience.

Mind you, we didn't have a TV at home.
We didn't have electricity for some years.

[LittleWheelsandBig]

I quite enjoyed drive-in movies as a kid and young driver. The wired mono speaker got replaced by an FM radio broadcast that meant surround sound on decent speakers. A warm summer evening classic movie double feature is pretty hard to beat. Sitting on the bonnet with some wine and cheese or cuddled up in the back seat.

[Asterix, the former Gaul.]

Talking of drive-in movies, my concept of them has always been warm Californian nights under  the stars, siting in a '55 BelAir convertible with tray table on the window, burgers, popcorn, soda etc. a girl on your arm/lap/whatever (other stereotypes are available)...

We had occasion to take #1 son to a Xmas 'do'. Somewhere called 'Inflatable World' or similar in Trafford Park. Imagine my surprise to drive past one of the Man Utd (a sportsball team m'lud) overflow car parks and discover it was a 'drive-in'. Illusion totally shattered. Going to the cinema is something I have long considered THTD, noisy people on phones, rustling sweetie bags, slurping fizzy drinks - the whole bit. So imagine having to sit there in your car, with a duvet jacket on, with the engine running, on a rainy December night, on an industrial estate in Manchester. All the atmosphere of a visit to Belsen without the entertainment value...

You want to try Auschwitz-Birkenau...

[Torslanda]

I was trying to avoid the obvious stereotype . . .

[citoyen]

Kong: Skull Island

To borrow someone else's review:

Kong: Skull Island Much better than I expected!. Very good VFX. Great design and a not totally terrible story for a monster movie.  Not saying that it's good, but it isn't terrible

That pretty much sums it up for me. I enjoyed it a hell of a lot more than the Peter Jackson bore-fest of several years ago. Clearly owes a debt to Apocalypse Now, but this is no bad thing. John Goodman is great. Tom Hiddleston does his matinee idol thing. Samuel L Jackson does his Samuel L Jackson thing. The monsters are big and scary. Not everyone makes it out alive. What more could you ask for?

(click to show/hide)

The ending is very obviously left open for sequels, with a strong hint in the post-credits scene that something large and reptilian will be involved - Godzilla vs Kong, perhaps? That could be fun.

ETA: just checked online - yep, Godzilla vs Kong is scheduled for release in 2020. How very unsurprising. There's also going to be Godzilla: King of Monsters next year, featuring the big lizard taking on Mothra, Rodan and King Ghidorah, who are also referenced in that post-credits scene - although the only one I recognised as such was Mothra.

[ian]

I think it was always a plan for a monster franchise. I never liked King Kong though, he's just a stupid over-sized monkey and I never understood how he could fight Godzilla, KK has to climb a building, Godzilla merely stomps them. King Ghidorah and Rodan are awesome though and always up for a fight. Do not spill their pints.

[citoyen]

I haven't seen the 2014 version of Godzilla so I don't know how the pair match up to each other in this universe. I think this Kong is somewhat bigger than Peter Jackson's version though. In the classic Toho Kong vs Godzilla, they're roughly the same size. Monster movies are rarely consistent with scale though - I'm sure Kong changes size a few times in Skull Island (this is not a criticism).

While we're on the monster theme, there's another Cloverfield movie due out sometime soon.

[ian]

I really enjoyed Cloverfield, probably my favourite monster movie.

Godzilla was OK, it started out strong with Bryan Cranston and Juliette Binoche but then discovers that they are sickeningly old people so switches everything to a duo of identikit Hollywood twenty-somethings with all the personality of discarded plastic bags. And Godzilla didn't even eat them.

[Pickled Onion]

And Godzilla didn't even eat them.

Spoilers!! I don't need to watch it now

[mattc]

I really enjoyed Cloverfield, probably my favourite monster movie.

I really don't enjoy monster movies, but Cloverfield was rather good! It seems to have sunk (almost) without trace in the movie world. Odd - there are MUCH worse films that get a lot more hype. I saw it by accident on the telly years after release.

(I suspect it wouldn't exist if it hadn't been for Blair Witch ... )

[T42]

Blackfish.  Excellent. Interesting to compare CNN's portrayal with the Wikipedia entry for the same events.

[citoyen]

Logan

Good. Decent story, and not too much of the turgid navel-gazing that afflicts so many superhero films these days. Also extraordinarily, stomach-churningly violent.

There’s a nice moment where Xavier ticks off Logan for swearing in front of the kid, which I took to be a wry comment on Hollywood’s squeamishness about naughty words that seems especially odd when you consider its relish for large-scale grisly slaughter.

[citoyen]

I really enjoyed Cloverfield, probably my favourite monster movie.

I really don't enjoy monster movies, but Cloverfield was rather good!

10 Cloverfield Lane is great too, though not a monster movie. Looking forward to the new one, which apparently moves the action to space. Expecting to see many nods to Alien.

[Asterix, the former Gaul.]

Logan

Good. Decent story, and not too much of the turgid navel-gazing that afflicts so many superhero films these days. Also extraordinarily, stomach-churningly violent.

There’s a nice moment where Xavier ticks off Logan for swearing in front of the kid, which I took to be a wry comment on Hollywood’s squeamishness about naughty words that seems especially odd when you consider its relish for large-scale grisly slaughter.

Colonel Kurtz: We train young men to drop fire on people, but their commanders won't allow them to write "fuck" on their airplanes because it's obscene!

[Eccentrica Gallumbits]

Maleficent.

Quite dull, but Angelina Jolie is so beautiful.

[ian]

I really enjoyed Cloverfield, probably my favourite monster movie.

I really don't enjoy monster movies, but Cloverfield was rather good!

10 Cloverfield Lane is great too, though not a monster movie. Looking forward to the new one, which apparently moves the action to space. Expecting to see many nods to Alien.

Yes, I really enjoyed that too. John Goodman doing what he really does best. Some folks complained about the ending, but I thought it was perfect. It helped, as with Cloverfield, by going to cinema with no idea about the movie. These days it's hard to encounter a film without knowing the a-to-z of the plot.

I did watch Monsters the other day, which I've seen before, but remains quite good considering the budget (I see what you did there with the octopuses). Not really a monster film per se. Don't watch the sequel though, it's just an awful, cynical attempt to cash in.

I also rewatched Rogue One on the back of seeing the latest SW at the movies. Rogue One really is a lot better for being a bit darker, having a stronger plot, and to be honest I thought a better cast.

[citoyen]

I did watch Monsters the other day, which I've seen before, but remains quite good considering the budget (I see what you did there with the octopuses). Not really a monster film per se. Don't watch the sequel though, it's just an awful, cynical attempt to cash in.

I also rewatched Rogue One on the back of seeing the latest SW at the movies. Rogue One really is a lot better for being a bit darker, having a stronger plot, and to be honest I thought a better cast.

Of course, Monsters and Rogue One were both directed by Gareth Edwards, as was the 2014 Godzilla. The Monsters sequel and The Last Jedi were not. He's involved with Godzilla: King of the Monsters too, but only as a producer, which is a shame.

[mattc]

So we went to see The Very Last Jedi Ever Ever Ever.

Highlights: The thing that Laura Dern's character did. And the mashup of trailers with rock/punk classics playing in the lobby. As we came out, the screens were showing the Ferdinand trailer (some sort ofcartoon about the adventures of a young bull), but the PA was playing Pretty Vacant - a winning combo, which Disney should seriously consider as a model for future trailers.


_{Oh Yeah, the review; I give TVLJEEE 5/10 as a film, but 7/10 as a film to see in a decent sized cinema. There was at least an hour of dross that could be cut out, but enough nice bits to earn our cash.}

[mattc]

Oh, and why didnt anyone tell me about Downsizing? What a cracking idea! And sonmehow casting Matt Damon just makes the whole concept more hilarious. It can't possibly live upto expectatins, but the trailer really made me smile

[Jaded]

Dunkirk

Well that was an experience. I knew that it had critical acclaim and also its detractors.

I felt that it was a very good paper thin way of looking at Dunkirk, paper thin because we were only actually looking at a very thin part of the event. I imagined that was what the director actually wanted, and not for us to say what a low budget he must have had.

The soundscape was extraordinary, and I think worked very well. Some gritty realism, and the odd flight of (unpowered) fancy.

Will have to watch again.

[Wascally Weasel]

I really enjoyed Cloverfield, probably my favourite monster movie.

I really don't enjoy monster movies, but Cloverfield was rather good! It seems to have sunk (almost) without trace in the movie world. Odd - there are MUCH worse films that get a lot more hype. I saw it by accident on the telly years after release.

(I suspect it wouldn't exist if it hadn't been for Blair Witch ... )

Maybe, but I’m not so sure.

Blair Witch wasn’t the first found footage film* and I doubt it will be the last, because as you probably know, it’s a good way of making a relatively cheap film while explaining why it’s made that way.


*Apparently Cannibal Holocaust has the honour of being the first found footage film although my personal favourite is 84 Charlie Mopic, a film about a cameraman following a Long Range Recon Patrol during the Vietnam War (for nested movie references I feel pretty sure that the writer of that film based it at least in part on the film Sea of Sand).

[citoyen]

(I suspect it wouldn't exist if it hadn't been for Blair Witch ... )

Maybe, but I’m not so sure.

Blair Witch wasn’t the first found footage film* and I doubt it will be the last, because as you probably know, it’s a good way of making a relatively cheap film while explaining why it’s made that way.

The technique is used to particularly good effect in Cloverfield - especially with the touching pay-off at the end, which works well even if it is signposted well in advance.

Never seen Cannibal Holocaust, only know it by reputation. For some reason, I've never come across it in the TV listings...

[T42]

I really like Cloverfield - watched it 3 times (so far).  Only bit I found hokey was that

(click to show/hide)

someone who'd been skewered through the shoulder with a reinforcing rod could be unskewered and not need to be carried. In Hollywood, people have internal-anatomy-free bodies full of that green stuff flower-arrangers stick stalks into.