Chat talk and light discussion

Re: last movie you watched

Sun Nov 10, 2013 10:30 pm

greystoke wrote:
rocknroller wrote:
greystoke wrote:I've always liked Cast Away, too, but haven't seen it in several years. It's a film I'll have to re-visit on Blu-ray. I've always like Robert Zemeckis as a director and rate Tom Hanks as highly as any actor, ever!
:smt023


I went to see Philomena enjoyed it and very funny,also seen captain phillips and loved it what a movie ! and tom hanks what can i say amazing !!!


Ken im looking forward to seeing gravity hopefully see it this week along with thor.


I'm glad you enjoyed Philomena. I'm sure it will remain memorable. Hanks really is outstanding in Captain Phillips. Which is a stellar film. What a great year 2013 has turned out to be for cinema.



It sure has been a great year.and having an Unlimited Card you can make the best of it !!!

Re: last movie you watched

Mon Nov 11, 2013 3:52 pm

Just saw "The Place Beyond The Pines" but wasn't particularly fond of it. I finally started to like Bradley Cooper but I think he is far from being an "stellar" actor. And a shame Ryan Gosling and Rose Byrne didn't get more screen time. I thought the film was okay but maybe my expectations were too high on that one.

Then I watched "Insidious 2" at a local theatre and was really disappointed by this mess. I have the feeling that James Wan is slowly but surely running out of steam and the lackluster performances by Wilson and Byrne left an impression on me that they didn't feel like but were forced to shoot this movie. A shame, for it took a lot of the magic that part one created for me away.

Yesterday I gave "World War Z" a chance and I must say I enjoyed it (although it was "only" the PG-13 version). For such a chaos project they came up with a pretty fair result in my opinion. I'll check out the Blu-ray someday soon as the cut featured there runs about seven minutes longer. That said, I had some bad nightmares last night... :wink:

Re: last movie you watched

Mon Nov 11, 2013 7:49 pm

I enjoyed The Place Beyond the Pines. There's an element of Greek tragedy abound within the story. Both with regards to its narrative and the structure of such. But I do like what Bradley Cooper is doing as an actor, The Hangover aside. I haven't seen Insidious 2 and can't say that I'm in a hurry to do so. But will likely catch it on TV when it airs. I'm not fond of James Wan's brand of horror, but I'm curious as to what he will achieve with Fast & Furious 7. Especially with a cast that includes Kurt Russell and Tony Jaa along with Jason Statham and Dwayne Johnson. Part 6 was turgid, but that's a dream cast for something of the nuts and bolts variety.

I quite liked World War Z. And credit to Brad Pitt for sticking with it through a troubled production. It doesn't do anything new for the zombie film and is a bit anaemic, but some of the set-pieces are impressive and Pitt does well in the lead. Ultimately, it harks back to the claustrophobia of old, but comes to an odd climax, I thought. Certainly in comparison to what came before. But I would also like to see the extended version.

Re: last movie you watched

Mon Nov 11, 2013 11:35 pm

rocknroller wrote:
greystoke wrote:I've always liked Cast Away, too, but haven't seen it in several years. It's a film I'll have to re-visit on Blu-ray. I've always like Robert Zemeckis as a director and rate Tom Hanks as highly as any actor, ever!
:smt023


I went to see Philomena enjoyed it and very funny,also seen captain phillips and loved it what a movie ! and tom hanks what can i say amazing !!!


Ken im looking forward to seeing gravity hopefully see it this week along with thor.

I loved it probaby my favorite film so far this year

Sent from my GT-P3110 using Tapatalk 2

Re: last movie you watched

Tue Nov 12, 2013 5:11 am

greystoke wrote:I enjoyed The Place Beyond the Pines. There's an element of Greek tragedy abound within the story. Both with regards to its narrative and the structure of such. But I do like what Bradley Cooper is doing as an actor, The Hangover aside. I haven't seen Insidious 2 and can't say that I'm in a hurry to do so. But will likely catch it on TV when it airs. I'm not fond of James Wan's brand of horror, but I'm curious as to what he will achieve with Fast & Furious 7. Especially with a cast that includes Kurt Russell and Tony Jaa along with Jason Statham and Dwayne Johnson. Part 6 was turgid, but that's a dream cast for something of the nuts and bolts variety.

I quite liked World War Z. And credit to Brad Pitt for sticking with it through a troubled production. It doesn't do anything new for the zombie film and is a bit anaemic, but some of the set-pieces are impressive and Pitt does well in the lead. Ultimately, it harks back to the claustrophobia of old, but comes to an odd climax, I thought. Certainly in comparison to what came before. But I would also like to see the extended version.


Is Jason Statham still masquerading as an actor? Someone really should sue him as part of the Trade's Description Act.

Re: last movie you watched

Tue Nov 12, 2013 10:50 am

Last night I gave the first "Kick-Ass" another spin (after turning it off after about an hour a few years ago) but I still think it's an boring, unfunny and trivial movie.

Re: last movie you watched

Tue Nov 12, 2013 5:30 pm

poormadpeter wrote:
greystoke wrote:I enjoyed The Place Beyond the Pines. There's an element of Greek tragedy abound within the story. Both with regards to its narrative and the structure of such. But I do like what Bradley Cooper is doing as an actor, The Hangover aside. I haven't seen Insidious 2 and can't say that I'm in a hurry to do so. But will likely catch it on TV when it airs. I'm not fond of James Wan's brand of horror, but I'm curious as to what he will achieve with Fast & Furious 7. Especially with a cast that includes Kurt Russell and Tony Jaa along with Jason Statham and Dwayne Johnson. Part 6 was turgid, but that's a dream cast for something of the nuts and bolts variety.

I quite liked World War Z. And credit to Brad Pitt for sticking with it through a troubled production. It doesn't do anything new for the zombie film and is a bit anaemic, but some of the set-pieces are impressive and Pitt does well in the lead. Ultimately, it harks back to the claustrophobia of old, but comes to an odd climax, I thought. Certainly in comparison to what came before. But I would also like to see the extended version.


Is Jason Statham still masquerading as an actor? Someone really should sue him as part of the Trade's Description Act.


I like him and his films. Not all of them, but that goes without saying. But Statham does what he does better than anyone in Hollywood or western cinema as a whole just now. He's self-aware, knows his audience and the strengths of his abilities, but will take risks. As with Blitz or Hummingbird. For action cinema, with a broad physicality, Statham's tops, in my opinion. Tony Jaa, on the other hand, would be th most exciting Asian star in martial arts/action cinema. How well he will get on in Hollywood is yet to be seen. It certainly took Jackie Chan long enough to translate, but his first time round was only a departure when the quality of his films in Hong Kong were of such a high standard. Jaa, I think, has done as much as he can with the Ong Bak series. So change may work to his favour, much in the same way it did Jet Li when moved to Hollywood.

Re: last movie you watched

Tue Nov 12, 2013 5:42 pm

luckyjackson1 wrote:Last night I gave the first "Kick-Ass" another spin (after turning it off after about an hour a few years ago) but I still think it's an boring, unfunny and trivial movie.


I'm fond of Kick-Ass. I think it's smart, creative and plays affectionately with the conventions of the superhero film. In the process, it does something new with the underdog story and fantasies of wish fulfilment writ large. In some ways, it's akin to Scream in the way it puts a new perspective on a particular genre, but in a knowing way. The performances are great, too, in my opinion. Mark Strong does menacing villain with the best of them, but Nic Cage channelling Adam West is brilliant. I can't say that I was as fond of the sequel. It lacked the same spark and invention, especially with aspects of the conventional grinding the film's gears to more than a few halts.

Re: last movie you watched

Sat Nov 16, 2013 4:47 pm

Yesterday I saw Don Jon and The Counsellor at the cinema. Don Jon, being Joseph-Gordon Levitt's debut as a director, and The Counsellor, representing the first original screenplay by Cormac McCarthy. Don Jon, also written by Levitt, is an acerbic romantic comedy that asks what would happen if two people with completely unrealistic expectations of the opposite sex happened to be in a relationship. Jon, played by Levitt, is someone who lives his life without asking questions, only indulges in what he knows and likes, especially an addiction to internet porn. Oppositely, Scarlett Johansson's Barbara is a girl whose idea of a real man and true love is what she sees in the most saccharine of Hollywood movies. Traits handed down from their parents, it seems, Jon's father played here by a gauche Tony Danza. Jon's walk down the proverbial corridor of life sees him as someone more interested in playing with himself than playing with others, and even when he's joined on that walk by Barbara, his compulsions and her single-mindedness come to drive a wedge between them. The narrative here is fairly simple, however, especially during the first half of the film, in which the usual conventions of romantic comedy are adhered to in spite of the central character's compulsory masturbatory habits. And this makes for a slightly hollow veneer, in my opinion, especially with some horribly outdated and quite banal exchanges in which girls are rated out of ten. Which, had the dialogue and design not seemed so false, it probably wouldn't have been one of many issues I have with this film. Jon's wonderment that he can view porn on his mobile phone also left me bemused at the writing of a film that's nowhere near as sharp as it would like to be. Basically, it doesn't ring true. However, the introduction of a third character, played superbly by Julianne Moore, changes the dynamics of the film. Her ever-excellent screen-presence finds her well cast as a genuinely three-dimensional character with an emotional core. Here is where the best of the film takes hold, and that's also noticeable in how Levitt directs Moore and the scenes in which she appears. Still, I was disappointed with Don Jon, which is tame next to something like Shame, and is more generic than its fledgling director may have desired. But it isn't without interest or merit, given Julianne Moore's performance. But it needed to be smarter, shorter and that bit more daring.

The Counsellor boasts an incredible pedigree, both behind the camera and in front. Cormac McCarthy has a towering renown in the literary world, whilst his material has proven ripe for big screen adaptation, especially the outstanding No Country For Old Men. Directing McCarthy's first original screenplay is Ridley Scott who, with a cast that includes Brad Pitt, Penelope Cruz, Javier Bardem, Cameron Diaz and Michael Fassbender, should have all the ingredients of something very special. But this is quite a muddle of a film, and one that must have lost something considerable in the translation from page to screen. Set in New Mexico, the aloof plot of The Counsellor concerns a drug deal gone wrong and the consequences of the actions which led to that. There's few what's, why's or wherefores, with little exposition as we're introduced to a world of shady characters who surround Michael Fassbender's counsellor. Those include Javier Bardem's ostentatious gangster, his predatory moll, played by Cameron Diaz and Brad Pitt as an underworld trader/dealer of sorts. Nothing here is actually made clear, including the reason any character does just about anything in the film. Which is by design, of course, especially with this leaning more towards character study than narrative. But with no hook and nothing to hang on to, The Counsellor becomes an increasingly protracted and pointless film. And it's not as though the direction is poor or that the performances are bad, simply that the themes of the film undermines the entire movie. Whilst, some truly risible dialogue and glaring plot-points only serve to hammer home an exercise in the banal. File this under "could do better!"

Re: last movie you watched

Sun Nov 17, 2013 2:46 am

Just finished watching the blu ray release of Fantastic Voyage. Hadn't seen this one in ages. A nice job was done on the transfer. The movie never looked better. You also can listen to the original mono audio or choose a 5.1 option. This one is worth the price. Of course you also get to look at Raquel Welch in hi definition.

Re: last movie you watched

Sun Nov 17, 2013 8:35 am

"Carnal Knowledge" (1971) starring Jack Nicholson, Ann Margret.

Re: last movie you watched

Sun Nov 17, 2013 9:17 am

Last Vegas

Re: last movie you watched

Sun Nov 17, 2013 9:23 am

The Evil Dead, Machete

Re: last movie you watched

Sun Nov 17, 2013 9:43 am

greystoke wrote:Yesterday I saw Don Jon and The Counsellor at the cinema. Don Jon, being Joseph-Gordon Levitt's debut as a director, and The Counsellor, representing the first original screenplay by Cormac McCarthy. Don Jon, also written by Levitt, is an acerbic romantic comedy that asks what would happen if two people with completely unrealistic expectations of the opposite sex happened to be in a relationship. Jon, played by Levitt, is someone who lives his life without asking questions, only indulges in what he knows and likes, especially an addiction to internet porn. Oppositely, Scarlett Johansson's Barbara is a girl whose idea of a real man and true love is what she sees in the most saccharine of Hollywood movies. Traits handed down from their parents, it seems, Jon's father played here by a gauche Tony Danza. Jon's walk down the proverbial corridor of life sees him as someone more interested in playing with himself than playing with others, and even when he's joined on that walk by Barbara, his compulsions and her single-mindedness come to drive a wedge between them. The narrative here is fairly simple, however, especially during the first half of the film, in which the usual conventions of romantic comedy are adhered to in spite of the central character's compulsory masturbatory habits. And this makes for a slightly hollow veneer, in my opinion, especially with some horribly outdated and quite banal exchanges in which girls are rated out of ten. Which, had the dialogue and design not seemed so false, it probably wouldn't have been one of many issues I have with this film. Jon's wonderment that he can view porn on his mobile phone also left me bemused at the writing of a film that's nowhere near as sharp as it would like to be. Basically, it doesn't ring true. However, the introduction of a third character, played superbly by Julianne Moore, changes the dynamics of the film. Her ever-excellent screen-presence finds her well cast as a genuinely three-dimensional character with an emotional core. Here is where the best of the film takes hold, and that's also noticeable in how Levitt directs Moore and the scenes in which she appears. Still, I was disappointed with Don Jon, which is tame next to something like Shame, and is more generic than its fledgling director may have desired. But it isn't without interest or merit, given Julianne Moore's performance. But it needed to be smarter, shorter and that bit more daring.

The Counsellor boasts an incredible pedigree, both behind the camera and in front. Cormac McCarthy has a towering renown in the literary world, whilst his material has proven ripe for big screen adaptation, especially the outstanding No Country For Old Men. Directing McCarthy's first original screenplay is Ridley Scott who, with a cast that includes Brad Pitt, Penelope Cruz, Javier Bardem, Cameron Diaz and Michael Fassbender, should have all the ingredients of something very special. But this is quite a muddle of a film, and one that must have lost something considerable in the translation from page to screen. Set in New Mexico, the aloof plot of The Counsellor concerns a drug deal gone wrong and the consequences of the actions which led to that. There's few what's, why's or wherefores, with little exposition as we're introduced to a world of shady characters who surround Michael Fassbender's counsellor. Those include Javier Bardem's ostentatious gangster, his predatory moll, played by Cameron Diaz and Brad Pitt as an underworld trader/dealer of sorts. Nothing here is actually made clear, including the reason any character does just about anything in the film. Which is by design, of course, especially with this leaning more towards character study than narrative. But with no hook and nothing to hang on to, The Counsellor becomes an increasingly protracted and pointless film. And it's not as though the direction is poor or that the performances are bad, simply that the themes of the film undermines the entire movie. Whilst, some truly risible dialogue and glaring plot-points only serve to hammer home an exercise in the banal. File this under "could do better!"



I did not like the the counsellor found it boring.really enjoyed Don Jon i like joseph-gordon levitt think he is turning in to a fine actor.first seen him in the movie ten things i hate about you and always thought he would make a top actor.watched Prisoners last night with Jake gyllenhaal hugh Jackman and terrence howard i was really looking forward to seeing it but it turned out very slow.just did not step up the way ransom & taken had.it could and should have been so much better.although gyllenhaal & jackman played there roles very well.

Re: last movie you watched

Sun Nov 17, 2013 5:04 pm

I like Joseph-Gordon Levitt, too. I agree that he's a fine actor, who has grown in leaps and bounds. I first started to take notice of him in Mysterious Skin and Brick, but knew him from 3rd Rock from the Sun. He was great in Lincoln, Looper, 50/50 and Inception. He was also well cast in The Dark Knight Rises. I'm looking forward to Sin City: A Dame to Kill For, and think he'll bring a lot to the film.

Re: last movie you watched

Sun Nov 17, 2013 9:45 pm

greystoke wrote:I like Joseph-Gordon Levitt, too. I agree that he's a fine actor, who has grown in leaps and bounds. I first started to take notice of him in Mysterious Skin and Brick, but knew him from 3rd Rock from the Sun. He was great in Lincoln, Looper, 50/50 and Inception. He was also well cast in The Dark Knight Rises. I'm looking forward to Sin City: A Dame to Kill For, and think he'll bring a lot to the film.


im looking forward to Sin City: A Dame to Kill For too loved the first movie,shame we have to wait late next year for its release !!! i also loved Joseph in Premium Rush it was such a good movie !!!

Re: last movie you watched

Mon Nov 18, 2013 4:57 pm

luckyjackson1 wrote:Just saw "The Place Beyond The Pines" but wasn't particularly fond of it. I finally started to like Bradley Cooper but I think he is far from being an "stellar" actor. And a shame Ryan Gosling and Rose Byrne didn't get more screen time. I thought the film was okay but maybe my expectations were too high on that one.

Then I watched "Insidious 2" at a local theatre and was really disappointed by this mess. I have the feeling that James Wan is slowly but surely running out of steam and the lackluster performances by Wilson and Byrne left an impression on me that they didn't feel like but were forced to shoot this movie. A shame, for it took a lot of the magic that part one created for me away.

Yesterday I gave "World War Z" a chance and I must say I enjoyed it (although it was "only" the PG-13 version). For such a chaos project they came up with a pretty fair result in my opinion. I'll check out the Blu-ray someday soon as the cut featured there runs about seven minutes longer. That said, I had some bad nightmares last night... :wink:


I watched the extended cut of World War Z on Blu-ray last night, and could pick out a few scenes that certainly add to the sense of danger and intensity in the film. And it's a good film, one that is flawed and does have its problems, but entertains through the size and scale of some excellent set-pieces. The premise isn't new, of course, neither is the execution, but this is the zombie film at its most commercial, writ large and with a bona fide movie star in the central role. I still find the ending to be unusually out of synch with the rest of the film. For something so big and costly, the climax is more subdued and akin to a B-movie horror than the runaway budget of this film. A more elaborate ending was abandoned during filming, and it's a pity a more in-depth documentary on the film's problems throughout production isn't on the disc. But there's some good behind the scene stuff. However, for anyone who didn't like World War Z first time around, chances are the extended version won't improve the overall experience.

Re: last movie you watched

Wed Nov 20, 2013 1:39 pm

Rob wrote:Last Vegas


Me too! I went with the viewer reviews.

You can say it's "predictable" but the fact is that I enjoyed it. I had a good time at the movies.

It's funny, sweet, great actors. People will watch this years from now.

rjm

Sent From My Phabulous Galaxy Note II Phablet Using Tapatalk 4

Re: last movie you watched

Wed Nov 20, 2013 6:24 pm

I finally got around to seeing the 2nd Percy Jackson film last night. I'm not quite sure where it all goes wrong with this series. Logan Lerman is an extremely talented and charismatic young actor, as anyone who has see Perks of Being a Wallflower will know. And the supporting cast is generally also of a relatively high calibre. But then it all just falls to bits, partly because it doesn't know who its audience is. The Greek God mumbo jumbo must leave the kids totally bemused, but the formulaic, episodic quest nature of the narrative is too simplistic and obvious for teenagers and adults. There is nothing inherently wrong with the films, but they just never quite manage to take off - which is a shame, because everyone seems to be trying so hard. Poor Jake Abel, who was so good as the 3rd brother in a series or episodes of Supernatural, has found himself saddled with a character who has turned into a Bond villain but without any good lines of dialogue.

What should be great summer blockbuster fare at the cinema turns out to be a bland-but-watchable piece of fluff for an autumn evening at home with a cup of tea and a piece of swiss roll.

Re: last movie you watched

Thu Nov 21, 2013 12:16 am

I saw The Butler at the cinema today. The fictional account of an African American butler's years spent working under eight administrations in the White House. Based on a true story, the film's wide timeline stretches from 1927 to 2008, following the life of Cecil Gaines, a young slave boy who works his way from the cotton fields to hotels, and then, the White House. Directed by Lee Daniels, who's previous work is a mixed bag, and written by Danny Strong, who hasn't penned a great deal, this film's main attributes are its cast and the historical significance of the periods that encompasses. Primarily, pivotal moments in social history for black America. Forest Whittaker stars as Cecil Gaines, with Oprah Winfrey playing his wife, and both Kenny Kravitz and Cuba Gooding, Jr. as co-workers. The narrative structure of The Butler won't unusual to anyone who has seen Forrest Gump. The primary character being present as snapshots of history are played out in various chapters. Here, a string of actors portray various presidents; from Robin Williams as Dwight Eisenhower to James Marsden as John F. Kennedy, Leiv Schriber as Lyndon Johnson, John Cusack as Richard Nixon and Alan Rickman as Ronald Reagan. Rickman is the least believable here, but Jane Fonda is excellent as Nancy Reagan. Throughout the film, well-known and sensitive moments in history, such as Kennedy's assassination, Watergate, the war in Vietnam and racial segregation in the south, are depicted with care as Gaines family and work life come to show the human and political sides of turbulent times in America. Gaines, in a sense, is emblematic of everything that happens, with Whittaker's assured and sincere performance proving to be a study in dignity. Oprah is excellent as his wife, and should find an Oscar nod coming her way. And although the film is knowing, calculated and pushes all the right buttons, it treats history with respect and never undermines the poignancy of its subject matter. It's also worth mentioning Mariah Carey, who plays Gaines' mother. She's only in two scenes, but, as with her performance in Precious, acts without vanity or the burden of her image. She may find a career in acting yet. Which was unthinkable after Glitter. Lenny Kravitz is also moving in the right direction, and is very good here.

Re: last movie you watched

Thu Nov 21, 2013 7:55 pm

I saw The Hunger Games: Catching Fire at the cinema today. The second in what's set to be four films based on the popular series of novels. Taking off from where the first film ended, Catching Fire retains the tone of its predecessor, but delves deeper into the psyche of its hero, Katniss Everdeen, who is played by Jennifer Lawrence. Now a hero and a figurehead for the oppressed, Everdeen doesn't wallow in the glory of her victory during the previous Hunger Games, but is traumatised by the events.

Directed by Francis Lawrence, who has graduated from being a top director of music videos, to big budget action films, such as Constantine and I am Legend, the scope of this film and a bold narrative make for a genuine treat. If you haven't seen the first film, the premise is much like a conglomerate of Roller Ball, The Running Man and Battle Royale. It many ways it's familiar, but this is so well-written and established, without condescending to younger audiences, or feeling the need to appease more mature film-goers through exploitation. Primarily, The Hunger Games works on the strength of Jennifer Lawrence's performance. She's an outstanding actress, who commands the screen without chewing scenery and does so with a genuine combination of tough and tender.

Catching Fire isn't without its flaws. Some characters are a bit one dimensional, whilst others, such as Liam Hemsworth's Gale Hawthorne, don't seem to have much purpose. Although, I suspect that will change as the series progresses. Additionally, some viewers may find the character's names and a garish sense of style rather quizzical. But there's a great deal of heart and sincerity within these films. More so than your average action blockbuster, and although this will be a shorter series, the November/December film schedule hasn't looked this promising since the days of Harry Potter.

Re: last movie you watched

Fri Nov 22, 2013 4:09 am

A recent DVD release is Ferzan Ozpetek's A Magnficant Haunting. Ozpetek is best known for his queer films, and this one has a gay protagonist but that barely has an effect on the narrative; it's not a gay film. Instead a young man moves into a house only to find out it is haunted by a complete drama company who seemingly went missing back in 1943. The film is a light comedy-drama-mystery, held together by a lovely understated performance by Elio Germano. It's not the director's best work by any means, but it is a sweet and inoffensive way to spend nearly two hours, even if the ending is a little too open-ended for my liking (for reasons I can't go into here as it would give the plot away further). An unexpectedly quiet film given the director, but a little gem nonetheless.

Re: last movie you watched

Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:56 am

greystoke wrote:I saw The Hunger Games: Catching Fire at the cinema today. The second in what's set to be four films based on the popular series of novels. Taking off from where the first film ended, Catching Fire retains the tone of its predecessor, but delves deeper into the psyche of its hero, Katniss Everdeen, who is played by Jennifer Lawrence. Now a hero and a figurehead for the oppressed, Everdeen doesn't wallow in the glory of her victory during the previous Hunger Games, but is traumatised by the events.

Directed by Francis Lawrence, who has graduated from being a top director of music videos, to big budget action films, such as Constantine and I am Legend, the scope of this film and a bold narrative make for a genuine treat. If you haven't seen the first film, the premise is much like a conglomerate of Roller Ball, The Running Man and Battle Royale. It many ways it's familiar, but this is so well-written and established, without condescending to younger audiences, or feeling the need to appease more mature film-goers through exploitation. Primarily, The Hunger Games works on the strength of Jennifer Lawrence's performance. She's an outstanding actress, who commands the screen without chewing scenery and does so with a genuine combination of tough and tender.

Catching Fire isn't without its flaws. Some characters are a bit one dimensional, whilst others, such as Liam Hemsworth's Gale Hawthorne, don't seem to have much purpose. Although, I suspect that will change as the series progresses. Additionally, some viewers may find the character's names and a garish sense of style rather quizzical. But there's a great deal of heart and sincerity within these films. More so than your average action blockbuster, and although this will be a shorter series, the November/December film schedule hasn't looked this promising since the days of Harry Potter.

Very interesting, thanks for the review, greystoke!

I didn't like the first film and wasn't very keen on watching the sequel but after reading your post I might reconsider it.

Re: last movie you watched

Fri Nov 22, 2013 10:10 am

luckyjackson1 wrote:
greystoke wrote:I saw The Hunger Games: Catching Fire at the cinema today. The second in what's set to be four films based on the popular series of novels. Taking off from where the first film ended, Catching Fire retains the tone of its predecessor, but delves deeper into the psyche of its hero, Katniss Everdeen, who is played by Jennifer Lawrence. Now a hero and a figurehead for the oppressed, Everdeen doesn't wallow in the glory of her victory during the previous Hunger Games, but is traumatised by the events.

Directed by Francis Lawrence, who has graduated from being a top director of music videos, to big budget action films, such as Constantine and I am Legend, the scope of this film and a bold narrative make for a genuine treat. If you haven't seen the first film, the premise is much like a conglomerate of Roller Ball, The Running Man and Battle Royale. It many ways it's familiar, but this is so well-written and established, without condescending to younger audiences, or feeling the need to appease more mature film-goers through exploitation. Primarily, The Hunger Games works on the strength of Jennifer Lawrence's performance. She's an outstanding actress, who commands the screen without chewing scenery and does so with a genuine combination of tough and tender.

Catching Fire isn't without its flaws. Some characters are a bit one dimensional, whilst others, such as Liam Hemsworth's Gale Hawthorne, don't seem to have much purpose. Although, I suspect that will change as the series progresses. Additionally, some viewers may find the character's names and a garish sense of style rather quizzical. But there's a great deal of heart and sincerity within these films. More so than your average action blockbuster, and although this will be a shorter series, the November/December film schedule hasn't looked this promising since the days of Harry Potter.

Very interesting, thanks for the review, greystoke!

I didn't like the first film and wasn't very keen on watching the sequel but after reading your post I might reconsider it.



'Ditto' i was thinking the same thing.i did not get in to the first movie but thanks to greystokes wonderful review i will go along and see the new one.

Re: last movie you watched

Fri Nov 22, 2013 10:16 am

Went to see Gravity, my daughter did not like it but that did not put me off i really enjoyed the movie.not really a movie to buy and revisit but a great one off watch.also seen the The Butler loved it,some amazing performances !!!