The Film Thread

[BOF]

4 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

To be honest, @BOF, between not liking that film, and thinking Ted 2 was anything other than garbage, I'm beginning to wonder whether this marriage is going to last.

Grrrr    Ted 2 had more standalone laugh out loud moments.  Whether the film overall was good or bad wasn't really the point I was making.  In the same way that I expect horror films to scare me, I expect comedies to make me laugh.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

The Witch is an interesting film because it asks a lot of a modern day audience, namely in the way it treats the faith of its characters. In some ways it reminded me of The Exorcist as that film also directly addresses faith although, because of its more recent setting, allows science to get a look in.

Both films leave the question of how much of what has been seen is 'real' or imagined by characters open, though The Witch moreso due to its formal trickery.

[omariqy]

39 minutes ago, BOF said:

Grrrr    Ted 2 had more standalone laugh out loud moments.  Whether the film overall was good or bad wasn't really the point I was making.  In the same way that I expect horror films to scare me, I expect comedies to make me laugh.

I'm with you.  I thought Ted 2 was much better. Ignore Stevo. He thinks its the done thing to not like sequels.

[Chindie]

I don't really much like either of the Ted movies but the second is absolutely weaker.

[Phumfeinz]

The amount of hate Ghostbusters 3 is getting because the lead roles are women is hilarious, and a bit pathetic. Every time I see a post about it pop up on my Facebook feed it's full of manchildren crying that Ghostbusters has been ruined forever, you guys 

[Designer1]

1 minute ago, Phumfeinz said:

The amount of hate Ghostbusters 3 is getting because the lead roles are women is hilarious, and a bit pathetic. Every time I see a post about it pop up on my Facebook feed it's full of manchildren crying that Ghostbusters has been ruined forever, you guys 

I've seen plenty of criticism but actually not too much about it being female lead. Most of it seems to be that the choice of cast and director is wrong and that the humour and warmth of the original will be lost. Plus of course there will always be people who don't want the memory of a stone cold classic sullied.

Having seen the trailer I can see where they are coming from tbh.

[Ginko]

Agreed. I have no issue with the cast being women (I'm a fan of SNL and particularly Kristen Wiig and Kate McKinnon), it's just that the trailer was incredibly unfunny.

I don't have an issue with the original film being tarnished though. Never got that school of thought. The old film will still be just as good when I watch it regardless of anything that came after it.

 

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

the original wasn't that great anyway tbh

[tonyh29]

16 minutes ago, Phumfeinz said:

The amount of hate Ghostbusters 3 is getting because the lead roles are women is hilarious, and a bit pathetic. Every time I see a post about it pop up on my Facebook feed it's full of manchildren crying that Ghostbusters has been ruined forever, you guys 

any film with Bill Murray in it being remade with someone replacing Bill Murray deserves all the hate it get

 

that and the fact women  aren't funny of course

[HanoiVillan]

58 minutes ago, CarewsEyebrowDesigner said:

the original wasn't that great anyway tbh

Such a deeply average movie. 

[Stevo985]

2 hours ago, omariqy said:

I'm with you.  I thought Ted 2 was much better. Ignore Stevo. He thinks its the done thing to not like sequels.

Haha, do I?

[Chindie]

I have genuinely never met someone who doesn't like Ghostbusters, it's an absolutely classic comedy.

[Stevo985]

2 hours ago, Chindie said:

Still need to watch the Witch. I'm not a horror movie fan, I can't bear anything that relies on jump scares because it's not really scaring you, it's promoting an involuntary reaction no different to if a shelf fell down in your house one night, but I can enjoy the more tense, unsettling horrors, with the Shining always being my favourite creepy film. So it should be right up my street.

I have been told it's heavy on 'scripture', which is inescapable given the premise I guess, so I'll have to drag myself through that, but I'm quite looking forward to the home media release.

I'm the same as you. I find Horror incredibly easy to do badly. But when it's good, it's really good. And I very much prefer the unsettling, psychological horror over the jumpy horror.

It is reliant on scripture, but (without giving too much away) I found it very much points out how batshit crazy it was to take that scripture so seriously.

It's a very scary and very clever film, imo. Well worth a watch.

Also, FWIW, the other half did a couple of modules on witchcraft at uni as part of her history degree including her dissertation, and she also enjoyed it a lot, which would suggest it's fairly "accurate", if that's the right word to use. Although she did say it made it a tad predictable for her being somewhat more of an expert on the subject than the layman.

[omariqy]

32 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Haha, do I?

You're always trying to be cool Stevo, don't deny it. That's how you won BOF over.  I see divorce on the horizon.

On ghostbusters - Agree never met anyone who doesn't like it. Classic 80s movie.

[BOF]

40 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

I'm the same as you. I find Horror incredibly easy to do badly. But when it's good, it's really good. And I very much prefer the unsettling, psychological horror over the jumpy horror.

It is reliant on scripture, but (without giving too much away) I found it very much points out how batshit crazy it was to take that scripture so seriously.

It's a very scary and very clever film, imo. Well worth a watch.

Also, FWIW, the other half did a couple of modules on witchcraft at uni as part of her history degree including her dissertation, and she also enjoyed it a lot, which would suggest it's fairly "accurate", if that's the right word to use. Although she did say it made it a tad predictable for her being somewhat more of an expert on the subject than the layman.

Yeah the one thing I took from it was how 'scary'(sic) it was to live back then because of how easy it was to be deemed a witch and there be very little you could do about it.  That they were all pretty much batshit religious loonies.  So almost as a social history lesson it was interesting if accurate.  Plus poor old Kate Dickie does tend to get those batshit mental roles a lot.

[Ingram85]

2 hours ago, Phumfeinz said:

The amount of hate Ghostbusters 3 is getting because the lead roles are women is hilarious, and a bit pathetic. Every time I see a post about it pop up on my Facebook feed it's full of manchildren crying that Ghostbusters has been ruined forever, you guys 

I'm fed up of not being able to criticise this film without being called sexist. Starting to piss me off.

I like Wiig, I like McKinnon but I hate McCarthy and the black lady is one of the most shallow, stereotypical and lazily 'I'm fat & sassy' boring characters I've ever seen.

The tone of the movie is off, the cgi looks shite and from the trailers it's just not for me.

But it's not because women are in it, it's just that I think it looks like bridesmaids reskinned with ghostbusters fancy dress and it looks awful and full of cliched tropes. Plus I think Paul Feig is a **** hack who couldn't create a good film to save his life.

Tbf, like Simon says, most of the criticisms I have seen have been balanced and fair, it's just that the films blind supporters are as bad as the blind haters and use YouTube comments as a defence/rule.

Im not saying there aren't people who dislike it for the reasons you posted but to tar everyone with the same brush is **** lazy, easy and grossly unfair. It's time to find a new counter argument to bash the films detractors with because I'm **** sick of it.

 

 

Edited April 26, 2016 by Ingram85

[coda]

Really enjoyed Midnight Special. Can see it dividing opinion with some ohnoyoudidnt towards the end.

[troon_villan]

Yeah the one thing I took from it was how 'scary'(sic) it was to live back then because of how easy it was to be deemed a witch and there be very little you could do about it.  That they were all pretty much batshit religious loonies.  So almost as a social history lesson it was interesting if accurate.  Plus poor old Kate Dickie does tend to get those batshit mental roles a lot.

What does your (sic) mean?

[villa4europe]

7 hours ago, Phumfeinz said:

The amount of hate Ghostbusters 3 is getting because the lead roles are women is hilarious, and a bit pathetic. Every time I see a post about it pop up on my Facebook feed it's full of manchildren crying that Ghostbusters has been ruined forever, you guys 

Is the automatic response to a shit Ghostbusters film...

Said before my biggest problem with it is that the trailer and the cast implies they've made it a comedy, the original imo wasn't a comedy, it was a film starring naturally funny people which is a big difference, you then add in the fact that it looks so lazily written, the black woman is Winston amplified, I'm not questioning winstons original role in the film (I'll leave that to the likes of south park) but the new film has the black lady playing the same role only even more obvious, it has hemsworth in what will be a blatantly sexist role for cheap comedy, no doubt the film will be full of hypocritical bollocks about sexism

I have a slight problem with them remaking the film anyway, you then throw in unfunny actors and horrible writing...I'm out 

[BOF]

What does your (sic) mean?

In that context it means that the scary is not literally scary, so I'm acknowledging that I'm using it slightly incorrectly, instead of giving the horror film some credit for scaring me.