Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Rate the last film you watched...


Elite

Recommended Posts

Di Caprio has been in some brilliant movies.

 

Wolf Of Wall St

The Departed

Catch Me If You Can

Django Unchained

Shutter island

Aviator

and the massively underrated Blood Diamond

 

Ive not seen Inception or The Revenent yet but i've heard they are both great.

 

Nothing not to like about him, he is living the dream and fair fucking play to him.

He is genuinely brilliant in What’s Eating Gilbert Grape and - even more so - Romeo and Juliet.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. There is a bizarrely artistically crude scene with McC and DiCaprio at the beginning which serves to get that out of the way, by telling us, you think WS are cunts, I (we) think WS are cunts, now get on with the film. Which than does not show what he had McC tell us but instead talks about a guy who went on to work for a company which is not part of WS, it sells a different type of stocks to different type of investors for huge commission, because it is in fact now defrauding people. Film doesn't show you how they are the same, this is somehow implicit, and what little interest Scorsese has in his characters can be interpreted as even a kind of admiration for DiCaprio and these small timers around him because they are making like bandits without being Ivy League educated sons of the elite with a fast track to best WS firms. Which are basically doing the same, but we don't know how because the film does not show it since it is a lot easier to keep and keep and keep showing how they party.

 

This is why the film does not dwell on the victims who are financing all that, because we would then have to establish some moral framework or basis, compass in the film, which would than make it more complex, endanger the above premise and which ultimately, as Mook says, Scorsese is not interested in here.

 

I like (mostly old) Scorsese, Di Caprio since the Departed (great point Stickman) and watch all films about financial markets and was bored shitless after about half an hour and had to watch to film in two sittings. Scorsese made me care what happens with DiCaprio only after he began losing it and there are so many aspects of his character the director is somehow not interested in ( for instance, why is he so loyal to these obnoxious people who surround him and who are quite obviously inferior to him in every aspect, is this supposed to be insecurity on his part, a redeeming feature, leadership complex what?) which makes the film incredibly tedious to watch.

 

I think I made a point about "old" Scorsese somewhere, that his recent films are all much too long because he insists on showing you the same things over and over again, like an old man telling you the story he forgot he already told you.

Needless to say, I completely disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wolf of Wall Street is based on a book. The book doesn't mention anything about the victims either - Scorsese is faithfull to the book.

 

It is about excess and greed not Wall Street. Pretty good and portaying that.

 

I have not read the book, but this is not how you make films. It's a different medium.

 

I admit that the film is visually impressive, but  excess and greed gets tedious after half an hour or an hour. Then you want the film to show you  who are those people, why are they so successful in doing what they are doing, even though they are surrounded by equally greedy but better educated competitors.

 

Last time we discussed the WOWS I mentioned a much lesser film, Boiler Room with Ribisi which actually manages to explain what they are doing and how, and tells you more about the characters, even if it is visually inferior and simpler in its storytelling.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Pistonbroke

Tale of Tales. 6/10. Weird retro style fantasy fairy tale made for adults (tits in it). In fact, 3 tales woven into the one film. Real slow and ponderous in the beginning but entertaining enough. Then things start to speed up a bit as the director adds a bit of gore, but each story peters out before intertwining.  Even Salma Hayek is a bit drab in this one. Weird, wonderful with unexpected humour at at times, but also unsatisfying. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assassin's Creed - Anyone who's played the games will tell you that the dullest, most incomprehensible parts of them are the modern day sequences. So of course the movie is set 70% in the modern day. The Spanish 15th century scenes were mostly decent, props to the film-makers for having everyone speak in Spanish with subtitles during these sequences, but there was too much CGI used to 'enhance' backgrounds when there was no need and not enough of the game's signature assassinations in them. The action sequences were fine but not enough parkour was used, when you compare a film like District 9, which is full of thrilling parkour sequences, this feels like a missed opportunity given how much the games rely on it. The plot is overstuffed and confusing and the film wastes a really good cast with dialogue that feels like it came out of the games, rather than an actual scriptwriter. The other thing was the film just sort of ends, there's no big set piece or explanation about what the macguffin really is, it's just over and that's it. It's not terrible but it wastes its premise by utilising the modern day rather than the past (guessing because one was cheaper than the other but then this cost $125m to make so *shrug*), gives bad dialogue that even good actors can't use, has Marion Cotillard speak with an odd English accent and has a silly plot. 3 out of 10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Pistonbroke

Falcon Rising. 6.5/10. Much your typical action adventure. Ex Marine with PSTD travels to Brazil to take on an Army of enemies after his sister gets seriously injured for snooping around stuff. Has all your typical flaws you expect from these type of films (and some serious mistakes if you take enough notice) but if you take it for what it is you'll enjoy the ride enough. First film (I think) I've seen with Michael Jai White as an action hero and to be fair he is pretty decent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure I just stumbled across it. Without spoilers it doesn't look like it will be the last. But it was not a series if thats what you mean.

It is a series, mate. It’s season 3 of The Trip. First is the Lake District, second is Italy, third is Spain.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trip_(2010_TV_series)

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...