Quantcast
Rate the last film you watched... - Page 1155 - GF - General Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
Elite

Rate the last film you watched...

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Shooter in the Motor said:

Several versions of Blade Runner have been shown. The original workprint version (1982, 113 minutes) was shown for audience test previews in Denver and Dallas in March 1982. Negative responses to the previews led to the modifications resulting in the U.S. theatrical version.[94][95] The workprint was shown as a director's cut without Scott's approval at the Los Angeles Fairfax Theater in May 1990, at an AMPAS showing in April 1991, and in September and October 1991 at the Los Angeles NuArt Theater and the San Francisco Castro Theatre.[96] Positive responses pushed the studio to approve work on an official director's cut.[97] A San Diego Sneak Preview was shown only once, in May 1982, and was almost identical to the U.S. theatrical version but contained three extra scenes not shown in any other version, including the 2007 Final Cut.[98]

Two versions were shown in the film's 1982 theatrical release: the U.S. theatrical version (117 minutes),[1] known as the original version or Domestic Cut (released on Betamax, CED Videodisc and VHS in 1983, and on LaserDisc in 1987), and the International Cut (117 minutes), also known as the "Criterion Edition" or "uncut version", which included more violent action scenes than the U.S. version. Although initially unavailable in the U.S. and distributed in Europe and Asia via theatrical and local Warner Home Video Laserdisc releases, the International Cut was later released on VHS and Criterion Collection Laserdisc in North America, and re-released in 1992 as a "10th Anniversary Edition".[99]

Ridley Scott's Director's Cut (1992, 116 minutes)[100] had significant changes from the theatrical version including the removal of Deckard's voice-over, the re-insertion of the unicorn sequence, and the removal of the studio-imposed happy ending. Scott provided extensive notes and consultation to Warner Bros. through film preservationist Michael Arick, who was put in charge of creating the Director's Cut.[101] Scott's The Final Cut (2007, 117 minutes)[102] was released by Warner Bros. theatrically on October 5, 2007, and subsequently released on DVD, HD DVD, and Blu-ray Disc in December 2007.[103] This is the only version over which Scott had complete artistic and editorial control.[101]

I think I did see the directors cut version then thanks mate 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Red Lead said:

The Invisible Man (2020) - 7.5/10

 

Really enjoyed this. It was suspenseful (first hour especially) with a few twists along the way. 

 

 

5/10 for me.

 

First half was decent. Second half atrocious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Scott_M said:


Incorrect. That was the first goal, the one where he skinned half the England team was the winner. 

Actually if you look carefully at the Maradona goal he does not score it. Its actually an own goal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, redheart said:

Actually if you look carefully at the Maradona goal he does not score it. Its actually an own goal

Fuck england. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spenser Confidential. You ask for a Mark Wahlberg film, you get a Mark Wahlberg film. This was probably the most Mark Wahlberg film of the lot. Boston cop... silly, watchable but ultimately not great. I was actually enjoying it until he went all Stallone - Over The Top at the end. 5.5/10

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I, Tonya - Half biopic, half mockumentary about Tonya Harding and the attack on Nancy Kerrigan. Not sure it's focus is correct as it frames Harding as a victim when the reality seems to be the opposite. It's passable, even if its tone is a little strange at times, and Margot Robbie is game as always. It doesn't really offer any insight though, possibly because it chose to use the 'unreliable narrator' style rather trying to obtain real facts. 6 out of 10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robocop (the original)

 

Some of the effects may have aged badly, but everything else is still ace. The news reports in particular feel very pertinent for these times. I miss the days when a blockbuster could keep a cracking pace and bow out at 1hr 40 minutes. No filler. Peter Weller deserves more credit for that performance, and Clarence Boddicker is a great baddie.

 

8 I'd buy that for a dollars out of 10

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/03/2020 at 17:31, redheart said:

Actually if you look carefully at the Maradona goal he does not score it. Its actually an own goal

Butcher swears he never got a touch, says he wished that he had just to deprive him of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holmes and Watson , the spoof with Will Ferrell and John C Reilly. Much as you would expect but some clever bits and quite enjoyed it despite getting a little tired of Ferrell's schtick generally. 6/10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, polymerpunkah said:

Running through a bunch of oldies.

 

Pick of the bunch so far is "House of Games" ('87).

 

A psychiatrist gets mixed up with a bunch of con-men. 

 

 

 

 

Great movie. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/03/2020 at 02:48, cloggypop said:

After the extension of Dutch no social gathering I finally got round to The Irishman. 

 

3 and a half hours out of the time until June 1st.

Is that the date you'se where given? Fuck... 

 

Anyway, back in topic 

 

We watched some utter rubbish movie with marky mark on Netflix the other day. 

 

To say it was shite is an insult to shite. 

 

It was so bad it took us two nights to watch, because I feel asleep the first night, we put it on at 8, and it wasn't even 2 hours long. So that shows you how long it could keep my attention for. 

 

The worst bit is there's clearly going to be a sequel, then the missus turns to me and says "ooh, I'm looking forward to that" 

 

If I could do a face palm emoji I would. It was shocking. 

 

I did watch that Maradona movie last Saturday, that was fucking brilliant. 10/10 for me. 

 

I was too young to remember him in his pomp, Italia 90 would have been my first world cup in memory. But I never realised how shit napoli where when he went there. This, in my opinion seperates him from the rest when guy talk about the best ever. Messi and Ronaldo have always been in great teams. Maradona, by all accounts dragged Argentina to a world cup win in Mexico 86, then helped a struggling team, in the best league in the world to win their first ever league titles and European Cup trophies to. That is the sign of an absolute genius. 

 

And he was off his box on narcotics in the process. What a guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dr sleep. If youre comparing it to the shining and the shining being a 10 then I'd give this a 5 but as a film in it's own right with out the weight of the original book or Kubricks genuis for entertainment purposes I'd give it a 7 I enjoyed it. The woman who plays Rose the hat is gorgeous too. Decent film not a classic by any stretch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, chrisbonnie said:

Is that the date you'se where given? Fuck... 

 

Anyway, back in topic 

 

We watched some utter rubbish movie with marky mark on Netflix the other day. 

 

To say it was shite is an insult to shite. 

 

It was so bad it took us two nights to watch, because I feel asleep the first night, we put it on at 8, and it wasn't even 2 hours long. So that shows you how long it could keep my attention for. 

 

The worst bit is there's clearly going to be a sequel, then the missus turns to me and says "ooh, I'm looking forward to that" 

 

If I could do a face palm emoji I would. It was shocking. 

 

I did watch that Maradona movie last Saturday, that was fucking brilliant. 10/10 for me. 

 

I was too young to remember him in his pomp, Italia 90 would have been my first world cup in memory. But I never realised how shit napoli where when he went there. This, in my opinion seperates him from the rest when guy talk about the best ever. Messi and Ronaldo have always been in great teams. Maradona, by all accounts dragged Argentina to a world cup win in Mexico 86, then helped a struggling team, in the best league in the world to win their first ever league titles and European Cup trophies to. That is the sign of an absolute genius. 

 

And he was off his box on narcotics in the process. What a guy

My concern with Napolis success domestically is the sheer strength of the Camorra at the time and the absolute corruption in Italian football. Plus he is a drug cheat if he's happy to take insane amounts of recreational drugs and not be arsed about testing I don't think he'd be arsed taking PEDs because he's a massive character he's always given a free ride on his drug use. Insanely talented player though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×