What Films Have You Seen Recently?

[J Harker]

Originally Posted by Buboven

Watched Paul Hyam's Outland (1981)with Connery tonight, surprised how much I enjoyed it, never seen get much praise, might have to pick it up on Blu.

Anyone else seen it, gets a solid 8/10 from me.

Not in years. Can't say I remember a thing about it.

[J Harker]

Jonathan Rigby on The Strange Case of Dr.Jekyll and Miss Osbourne.

"Sadly, Borowczyk's trademark fetishisation of antiquarian bric-?*-brac, lingering fascinatedly over phonographs and Label equipment and such, did not translate into an interest in actors. Indeed, it quickly becomes clear that, once he'd assembled a set of suitably quirky faces, Borowczyk felt his task was complete. As a result even horror veterans like Patrick Magee and Howard Vernon, together with the baby faced Udo Kier, are made to seem rudderless and fatally unsure of what they're doing."

[iank]

Saw Outland about 20-odd years ago but can't remember it. Have the Blu but haven't watched it yet.

[Susan Foreman]

Originally Posted by Buboven

Watched Paul Hyam's Outland (1981) with Connery tonight, surprised how much I enjoyed it, never seen get much praise, might have to pick it up on Blu.

Anyone else seen it, gets a solid 8/10 from me.

Saw it at the cinema when it was first released

'High Noon' in Outer Space!

[mr 420]

Originally Posted by iank

Saw Outland about 20-odd years ago but can't remember it. Have the Blu but haven't watched it yet.

There's some nice gore to go along with Connery and co, including quite a realistic exploding head.

[Nosferatu@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by keirarts

Rogue one

***warning some minor spoilers*****


The main problem with the force awakens is that once you get past the fact its not one of the shitty prequels (to be fair episode 3 is ok) is that there wasn't a great deal going on with it. My personal theory is that they (disney and jj abrahms) were so scared of upsetting the militant fan base and tried a wee bit too hard to emulate the original film leaving it feel a little too like the original. Between that and the constant foreshadowing of future films it did marr an otherwise fun film.
Fortunately Gareth Edwards has been (mostly) allowed to go off on his own tangent with this and barring some annoying fan service in places manages to stand alone as a fun mash up of Dirty Dozen & star wars. essentially it acts as prequel to episode 4 with a gang of misfits and outlaws, some of who are classed as too extreme for the main rebellion, set off to steal the plans for the Death star.
I do have one or two problems with the film, but I'm going to start off with the positive. Donnie yen is totally bad-ass as a Zatoichi type warrior who mows down countless stormtroopers with a stick. The rebels are not nice, clean cut people and like han shooting first are not beneath killing people when its necessary. Forest Whittaker has loads of fun as the leader of a terrorist cell on Jaku and plays it like a cross between Kurtz from apocalypse now and a more subdued Frank Boothe. The ships feel run down and greasy and not the shiny new stuff from the prequels. We also get vader showing why people are so terrified of him.
Unfortunately by bringing back Peter Cushing as Tarkin Disney reveal the CG involved in putting dead/younger characters on screen is not quite there yet. As its a major part of the plot an not a throwaway scene it does become a little off-putting sadly.
Overall though its worth going to see.

I saw Rogue One this morning and am probably in complete agreement with kierarts. It definitely benefits from being largely fresh and not a retread of a previous film, explaining why the Death Star was able to be destroyed in A New Hope (the word 'hope' features a lot in the script, so it is a clear link to Episode IV), reminding you what a badass Darth Vader is and how much of the Rebel Alliance was splintered and not in complete agreement with the high command. I hated every scene in which Peter Cushing appeared because the CGI was jarring and a constant reminder that he is no longer with us – Governor Tarkin looked like he was from a different, animated, film and featured far too often.

From memory, the dogfights and other action sequences (many reminiscent of footage of Pacific warfare from World War II) were as good as in The Force Awakens and better than the prequel films, so that's another plus. I liked the casting of Riz Ahmed, Felicity Jones, Diego Luna, Ben Mendelsohn, Donnie Yen (basically as a Zatoichi-like blind Samurai), and Alan Tudyk as the voice of the main robot, but HATED the prominence of Peter Cushing. Because it was mostly fresh, I probably enjoyed it more than The Force Awakens, but don't think it is something I'll rush out to buy in a few months.

[trebor8273]

Originally Posted by Nosferatu@Cult Labs

I saw Rogue One this morning and am probably in complete agreement with kierarts. It definitely benefits from being largely fresh and not a retread of a previous film, explaining why the Death Star was able to be destroyed in A New Hope (the word 'hope' features a lot in the script, so it is a clear link to Episode IV), reminding you what a badass Darth Vader is and how much of the Rebel Alliance was splintered and not in complete agreement with the high command. I hated every scene in which Peter Cushing appeared because the CGI was jarring and a constant reminder that he is no longer with us – Governor Tarkin looked like he was from a different, animated, film and featured far too often.

From memory, the dogfights and other action sequences (many reminiscent of footage of Pacific warfare from World War II) were as good as in The Force Awakens and better than the prequel films, so that's another plus. I liked the casting of Riz Ahmed, Felicity Jones, Diego Luna, Ben Mendelsohn, Donnie Yen (basically as a Zatoichi-like blind Samurai), and Alan Tudyk as the voice of the main robot, but HATED the prominence of Peter Cushing. Because it was mostly fresh, I probably enjoyed it more than The Force Awakens, but don't think it is something I'll rush out to buy in a few months.

Off to see it tomorrow, will see if Tarkin is as bad as both as you said, was excited at the thought of Cushing back on the screen, now its sounds like a bad idea.

[Nosferatu@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by trebor8273

Off to see it tomorrow, will see if Tarkin is as bad as both as you said, was excited at the thought of Cushing back on the screen, now its sounds like a bad idea.

I hope you can look past it, but I thought it was a real distraction.

[trebor8273]

9.6/10

Next up.

[Demdike@Cult Labs]

The Ferryman (1974)

A horror novelist and his wife go to a house in the country for a short vacation. However, they soon find that one of his novels is coming true when they are haunted by the ghost of a drowned ferryman.

The Ferryman is a 50 minute ghost story starring Jeremy Brett and Natasha Parry. One of two ghost stories shown on ITV that Christmas of 74.

Intriguing and odd and very ambiguous in both it's ending and the idea that life follows fiction or perhaps the other way round, the film based on a work by Kingsley Amis is well acted and offers a couple of decent chills with an appearance from the ghostly Lesley Dunlop but fails to trouble MR James when it comes to Ghost Stories For Christmas.

The Pleasure Girls (1965)

A beautiful young girl arrives in London to pursue a modeling career, and finds herself caught up in the whole "swinging '60s" scene.

The premise above from IMDB basically does tell the whole story. I was hoping for another Beat Girl (1960) but this is way too breezy and lacks the drama from that film. Boasting a brilliant cast - Francesca Annis, Suzanna Leigh, Ian McShane, Klaus Kinski, Carol Cleveland, Mark Eden and Anneke Wills, who are wasted with such a light script that showcases the fun, music and fashions of the time but not the thrills and proves as cutting edge as a cheese sandwich.

The BFI's disc is lovely to look at but sadly there's not much substance to it all.