[Film] Film 2017

[Uncle Spielberg]

Paddington 2 was bloody marvelous, even better than the first one and Hugh Grant stole the show with a comic performance and send up of himself that a joy to behold. 90 out of 100 for me

 

[Oscar]

For the first time in more than 20 years, I went and saw two films in one day over the weekend.

The first was Murder on the Orient Express. Went with the family and we all enjoyed it. I have to admit, I have never read the book nor seen any of the previous film or TV adaptations so I had no idea on the who done it. The conclusion did at least explain why all the suspects seemed to lack any depth in terms of the their character. The outside CGI scenes were a bit jarring too but quite enjoyed Sir Ken's Poirot. 7/10

Secondly, realising it may be my last chance before it slips off the schedule, I managed to finally catch Blade Runner 2049 while the folks watched Strictly. The original is a very special film to me for many reasons so I must admit I was as much concerned as I was excited when his sequel was announced. Encouraged by good reviews and thankfully having skipped any spoilers I sat down to this on my own and was blown away by it. It's a shame Blade Runner 2049 is being dubbed a box office disaster because this film is a work of art. From the performances and story to the design and score, it's everything and more I could have hoped for. I had forgotten how Blade Runner made me feel when I first saw it at the cinema when I was really too young to be watching it but this film captured that and made me remember. 9/10

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

I've just got back from watching Blade Runner 2049. Stunning film. Beautifully shot and acted, a real pleasure to watch. It's that rarest of beasts a long awaited sequel that is the match and compliment of the original.

And without wishing to be too look at me there's something ineffably cool about stepping out from watching Blade Runner into the rain sheened neon night of Tokyo.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

Paddington 2 was bloody marvelous, even better than the first one and Hugh Grant stole the show with a comic performance and send up of himself that a joy to behold. 90 out of 100 for me

I agree. It was a pleasure to watch.

I also saw Justice League last night. Whilst a jumbled mess with an awful villain, I enjoyed the characters (except Aquaman) and there was fun to be had there.

 

[Acker79]

Justice League
I went to this as someone who felt conflicted about Batman v Superman (the comic fan in me loved it, the film fan in me hated it). There seemed to be a conscious effort from Warner Bros to 'fix' the DC extended universe. I think part of the problem is they are struggling to find an appropriate vision. They let Snyder have a go, but his vision is simply visual. His attention to plot and character is where BvS fell down. Their best film so far has been the one in which he had least say - Wonder Woman. It's sad that it took a family tragedy to get some distance between Snyder and the DCEU, but with that separation they were given a chance to make some significant changes, and I'm not sure they really did all they could. I think a second problem WB have is that as well as not finding a vision, they also do that hollywood thing of "that worked for that film, let's do it for all films" and so they force things in that don't fit. The success of Nolan's Batman series is why they pushed for a darker grittier superman for man of steel. MoS works on a basis for world politics and the view the USA has of itself, but superman is not dark and gritty and that's not what people want from him.

Justice League certainly, after a tease, redressed that. I suppose technically it is a spoiler, but I fail to see how anyone can not expect Superman to return. And by the end of the film, we see the superman we should have had before, the one the fans were calling out for - a smiling, happy to help Superman. Unfortunately, WB seems to have extended this to other characters, so we see a smiling batman, which doesn't work as well (though I did like his bleeding line that was clearly part of the reshoots).

I had followed a lot of the behind the scenes news, and was aware of WB attempts to right the ship bringing in Joss Whedon would definitely be a good step in that direction, but I think it raised my hopes a little too high. Perhaps too much was set by Snyder before Whedon took over for him to truly rescue it. To be honest, I think either an entirely Snyder Justice League or an entirely Whedon Justice League would have been better than what we got.

For a superhero film, it is on the short side, coming in at 2 hours, and with several characters to set up and explain, you'd think it would be a rush of exposition from intro to intro, but it doesn't feel like that. It feels actually, quite boring for more than the first half. There were a few funny lines that made me chuckle, there were a few moments that made the comic book fan in me smile, but it didn't really come together until the final set piece (which in modern day cgi-heavy action movie fashion was a bit overblown, yet again the world is in danger!). It also lacked a sense that every hero had a part to play. It feels like if you take one of the heroes out of Avengers, they lose the final battle, with this, you could probably get by with two of them.

In a few ways there is a step in the right direction, but not enough ways, and not a large enough step. If you didn't like BvS you won't like this. If you've given up on DC movies and are sticking to Marvel, this won't change your mind.

I think some of the critics have overstated how bad this is (though I have seen a lot of superhero films including some straight to DVD, some tv movies and have an idea of how truly bad a superhero film can be), but I can't really make a strong case for it being particularly good. If you are part of the minority that liked BvS or Suicide Squad, you'll probably like Justice League enough, but it's not going to challenge for your favourite film.



Murder on the Orient Express
I'm sure I probably saw the David Suchet episode of this when it aired (I used to love that show), but I don't really remember it. I never read the books, so I didn't going in with any idea for how it would go, who the killer was etc. and I didn't find it predictable. I like Sir Ken, so enjoyed his performance. Self-indulgent, perhaps, but still fun. It had a generally strong cast and they all did fine jobs. Stories don't tend to stick around for so long, get remade so often if they aren't generally good stories. So all the ingredients are there, which makes it a little disappointing it wasn't a 'knocked it out the park' great film. Don't get me wrong, it's decent enough, it just feels like it could have been more.

I saw the 1974 version on ITV4 this afternoon. It's interesting the differences. The casting of a black actor in one in the new version role changing the dynamic of certain relationships, adding layers that weren't there originally. The Armstrong Case bookends the 1974 version, but is something that we learn more about as the new version progresses, which has a significant impact on 'those playing along at home'. Obviously with the finances and technology advances, this years version certainly looked sleeker and more glossy.

Overall, it was fine.



Paddington 2
By this point I was getting a little movie fatigue, and I think it probably dampened my enthusiasm for Paddington 2. I liked it, I just see the other comments on here as more gushing and I didn't have that sort of enjoyment. It wasn't any notably worse than the first film, Brendan Gleeson looks to be having fun, as did Hugh Grant, and generally so did the audience.

 

[Oscar]

Justice League - Unoriginal, dull and ridiculous, even for a film about superheroes. At least Batman Vs Superman had some original ideas. I think DC have made a big mistake trying to move towards more of a Marvel type of movie. This has none of the charm, wit or humour of say a Guardians of the Galaxy or Avengers. 4/10

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

Justice League
I went to this as someone who felt conflicted about Batman v Superman (the comic fan in me loved it, the film fan in me hated it). There seemed to be a conscious effort from Warner Bros to 'fix' the DC extended universe. I think part of the problem is they are struggling to find an appropriate vision. They let Snyder have a go, but his vision is simply visual. His attention to plot and character is where BvS fell down. Their best film so far has been the one in which he had least say - Wonder Woman. It's sad that it took a family tragedy to get some distance between Snyder and the DCEU, but with that separation they were given a chance to make some significant changes, and I'm not sure they really did all they could. I think a second problem WB have is that as well as not finding a vision, they also do that hollywood thing of "that worked for that film, let's do it for all films" and so they force things in that don't fit. The success of Nolan's Batman series is why they pushed for a darker grittier superman for man of steel. MoS works on a basis for world politics and the view the USA has of itself, but superman is not dark and gritty and that's not what people want from him.

Justice League certainly, after a tease, redressed that. I suppose technically it is a spoiler, but I fail to see how anyone can not expect Superman to return. And by the end of the film, we see the superman we should have had before, the one the fans were calling out for - a smiling, happy to help Superman. Unfortunately, WB seems to have extended this to other characters, so we see a smiling batman, which doesn't work as well (though I did like his bleeding line that was clearly part of the reshoots).

I had followed a lot of the behind the scenes news, and was aware of WB attempts to right the ship bringing in Joss Whedon would definitely be a good step in that direction, but I think it raised my hopes a little too high. Perhaps too much was set by Snyder before Whedon took over for him to truly rescue it. To be honest, I think either an entirely Snyder Justice League or an entirely Whedon Justice League would have been better than what we got.

For a superhero film, it is on the short side, coming in at 2 hours, and with several characters to set up and explain, you'd think it would be a rush of exposition from intro to intro, but it doesn't feel like that. It feels actually, quite boring for more than the first half. There were a few funny lines that made me chuckle, there were a few moments that made the comic book fan in me smile, but it didn't really come together until the final set piece (which in modern day cgi-heavy action movie fashion was a bit overblown, yet again the world is in danger!). It also lacked a sense that every hero had a part to play. It feels like if you take one of the heroes out of Avengers, they lose the final battle, with this, you could probably get by with two of them.

In a few ways there is a step in the right direction, but not enough ways, and not a large enough step. If you didn't like BvS you won't like this. If you've given up on DC movies and are sticking to Marvel, this won't change your mind.

I think some of the critics have overstated how bad this is (though I have seen a lot of superhero films including some straight to DVD, some tv movies and have an idea of how truly bad a superhero film can be), but I can't really make a strong case for it being particularly good. If you are part of the minority that liked BvS or Suicide Squad, you'll probably like Justice League enough, but it's not going to challenge for your favourite film.



Murder on the Orient Express
I'm sure I probably saw the David Suchet episode of this when it aired (I used to love that show), but I don't really remember it. I never read the books, so I didn't going in with any idea for how it would go, who the killer was etc. and I didn't find it predictable. I like Sir Ken, so enjoyed his performance. Self-indulgent, perhaps, but still fun. It had a generally strong cast and they all did fine jobs. Stories don't tend to stick around for so long, get remade so often if they aren't generally good stories. So all the ingredients are there, which makes it a little disappointing it wasn't a 'knocked it out the park' great film. Don't get me wrong, it's decent enough, it just feels like it could have been more.

I saw the 1974 version on ITV4 this afternoon. It's interesting the differences. The casting of a black actor in one in the new version role changing the dynamic of certain relationships, adding layers that weren't there originally. The Armstrong Case bookends the 1974 version, but is something that we learn more about as the new version progresses, which has a significant impact on 'those playing along at home'. Obviously with the finances and technology advances, this years version certainly looked sleeker and more glossy.

Overall, it was fine.



Paddington 2
By this point I was getting a little movie fatigue, and I think it probably dampened my enthusiasm for Paddington 2. I liked it, I just see the other comments on here as more gushing and I didn't have that sort of enjoyment. It wasn't any notably worse than the first film, Brendan Gleeson looks to be having fun, as did Hugh Grant, and generally so did the audience.

I think the biggest problem with JL is that you can tell which scenes are Whedon scenes and which are Snyder scenes, and as a result, the feel/tone of the film is just all over the shop. I actually got more pleasure out of it than BvS which was a complete mess with awful characterisation and poor CGI (the first 10 minutes aside), but the poor villain, bad CGI and poor Snyder scenes hurt the whole film more than it probably would have had they just given directorial duties to Whedon from the get go.

Still, I totally agree re Superman. If Cavill had given us this Supes from the get go, I'd probably be a fan.

 

[Meade's Ball]

Cinema for me now is a rarity. I wish for a chance to catch something on the way home from work, but thoughts of the rather tired eyes, and the rage toward me that might accompany them, of my loved one looking after wee Albi each day, has me continue my cycle on, and minutes of vapid television take the big screen's place. However, at just over 3 months, we decided to nip down to our local a weekend ago to witness whatever they showed for parents with under-1s with them. PADDINGTON 2! I'd not seen Paddington 1, and won't rush to absorb the history of the characters now, but I rather enjoyed it. Yes, it's been months since I've really seen anything, but, as Uncle Speil says, Hugh Grant's self-effacing villainy was wonderfully kitsch and playful, and brought a correctly comical sense to the adventure. A good bunch of actors come in for brief enough spells inside, and they make it consistently fun.
The overall winner was probably me, for going, but the 3 of us won too, I think, by Albi being the only non-crying baby in attendance. Pow! Good boy.
This weekend we have Justice League.

 

[Is it PotG?]

Pretty short, full of middle class idiosyncrasies and a great cast.

Mr Peaky Blinders shows his versatility as a coke-head banker, Barry from AWP is wonderful

Very good.



I give it 28.5 / 33

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Here is my final list for 2017

Here are my top 10 films seen at the Cinema in 2017. Star Wars may get in the list but I think this is it. La La Land wins it for me, I saw it 3 times in a week when it came out. I know there is a lot of hate for it which is sad but I still stick to this. Worst film of the year for me was Detroit, it was vile to watch and any message it was meant to carry was lost in the torture porn hour in the hotel. Shame from such a talented director. If you want to see her best film, watch Strange Days

What about you ? G x

2017 ratings

1. La La Land 94
2. Victoria and Abdul 91
3. Dunkirk 91
4. Paddington 2 90
5. Lion 90
6. Beauty and the Beast 88
7. Hacksaw Ridge 87
8. Wind River 84
9. Get Out 82
10. A Dog's Purpose 82

Last

Detroit 28

 

[Bold Seagull]

In terms of Family Film, 'A Dog's Purpose' is the best family film we've sat down and watched together for a long time where everyone was engrossed. 7, 11, 13 plus 2x40 somethings, its just one of those heart warming good old fashioned films. Reminded me of my own childhood and everyone sitting down to watch Lassie or Black Beauty. On Amazon Prime at the moment. Recommended. We don't sit down often and everyone's happy!

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

In terms of Family Film, 'A Dog's Purpose' is the best family film we've sat down and watched together for a long time where everyone was engrossed. 7, 11, 13 plus 2x40 somethings, its just one of those heart warming good old fashioned films. Reminded me of my own childhood and everyone sitting down to watch Lassie or Black Beauty. On Amazon Prime at the moment. Recommended. We don't sit down often and everyone's happy!

LOVE that film