It was. It's one of the most high-energy, kinetic movies I've ever seen. By that standard it was great.

Marijan detests Crank with a passion. How the hell are they going to work Crank 2 though?

And by every other, it was a stupid, misogynistic, homophobic piece of shit.

I'm not a Brit, but I thought this was as British as it gets. A major part of the film is the miner strike, a very important part of your recent history. It is a feelgood movie, but it's also a very serious one. That's what makes it a great film instead of just fluffy entertainment. Plus it has soul, something even its most fervent detractors can't deny. And on a personal note, I thought it was refreshing to see such non-judgmental inclusion of homosexuality in adolescents. But yeah, I see how one could think Crank was a better film...:|

I can't find Heartlands but I've queued the other two...thanks for the suggestions...;)

still, Watchmen on the way, Dave Gibbons was the advisor (according to wiki Alan Moore signed a contract for DG to receive his share of royalties), shoud be interesting. I wish they could have just left it alone!

adidasss watch Kes, that's as British as tearjerkers get and it's considered a classic. Good luck with some of the accents though because I live here and even I had to pay attention. It's like Billy Elliott with grit. And erm.. without dancing. Still this reminds me of school so much

He's seen it and didn't like it.
Said it was "formulaic"...made in 1969 and formulaic?
I told him to read the book cos it's a classic.
He declined.
He's a bit like the kids in that scene...a lost cause.

:laughing: I didn't say I didn't like it, it's just that I've been watching loads of Ken Loach films at the time and that one didn't stray much from his usual formula. Billy Eliot is in a different universe, stylistically and thematically. (And yeah, I had to put the subtitles on, but that was nout compared to the scottish accent in Sweet sixteen. :laughing: )

Good luck with Purely Belter then!

That's actually fairly comprehensible. I started laughing when I watched the start of Sweet sixteen, did not understand a single word...:laughing:

http://www.varley.net/Pages/images/F...ankenstein.jpg

Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: Igor, help me with the bags.
Igor: Soitenly. You take the blonde, I'll take the one in the turban.

:laughing:

8/10

Yeah, I saw the preview the other day and it didn't look very good. The first one was over the top and ridiculous but this new one looks maybe a little too ridiculous.

LOL @ super-serious moralistic interpretation of a B-movie about a bunch of criminals. :laughing:

http://homepage.mac.com/vanvdo/image...re-Sunrise.jpg

http://www.impawards.com/2004/poster...set_verdvd.jpg

This was a pretty interesting movie experience for me. If you ever plan on watching these watch them back to back, because they are somewhat meaningless alone. These are great movies, really interesting and unique. I much prefer Sunset to Sunrise though. I feel that Sunrise can get self-indulgent and pretentious at times with the script, and for some reason I can't stand Delpy in Sunrise. Sunset is the true masterpiece. Delpy and Hawke helped write the script and this is very apparent in the film. The acting is so realistic and I felt so much for the characters (actually shed a tear for Hawke's character at one point).

Highly recommend these movies to anyone who appreciates a good love story.

What can I tell ya, certain films should insult everyone's intelligence. Maybe it's cos I'm so gay so I can't really relate on a testosterone level. :\

Australia - Baz Lurhmann

It was bad. 4/10

http://www.white-russian.nl/main/blo...igLebowski.jpg
I luld.

Get the **** outta my cab!

It's been awhile these will be short.

The Limey- 9/10

The opening may just be the peak of badassery in the film industry. Tell Clint Eastwood he's ****in comin. The story revolves around Wilson, a recently released convict, who goes on a search for his daughter, who he learns is dead. He finds out it was her boyfriend who killed her and goes on a quest for revenge. He's British, it's in the title. He's in LA, that's in the movie. Luiz Guzman is in it, how can't you like it. Peter Fonda's in it, he's the villain/antagonist. The movie has such unique ways of filming it, mainly the part when Wilson's at Fonda's party and is thinking of what will happen when he shoots him. Then there's the end sequence of remembrance. I missed the very beginning so I just know Terrence Stamp (Wilson) goes on his mission to kill Americans. Watch this thing dawg.

Gran Torino- 9/10

The main complaint I have is the white dude from that one scene and Thao's inability to show raw emotion (or that's how I viewed it). Otherwise, this was a wonderful movie. Eastwood slowly learns that he doesn't have to hate AZN's (though I have yet to understand why) and gets some friends that aren't honky whores. He helps our young Thao in life lessons, like how to be a man in many ways. Thao's sister obviously likes them old. Thao's grandma, like me, hate's honkies and chews tobbaco like no other. The gangbangers are annoying and try to scare and hurt Clint Eastwood, but as we all know, Clint Eastwood cannot feel pain. The final showdown contains one of the few instances where my heart jumps with anxiety for a cool guy (because they don't come cooler than Clint). OMG why aren't you watching this legally or illegally. Recommended.

http://www.moviesoundclips.net/pics/zulu.jpg

Zulu (1964) Dir: Cy Enfeld, starring Stanley Baker and Michael Caine

Watched this again recently having been obsessed with the Colonial period as a kid. It was Michael Caine's breakthrough, it's dreadfully inaccurate like most war films and I can see it getting a big Hollywood remake at some point. What would be interesting is to see how differently modern filmmakers would choose to handle the subject matter; the original was just out of the post-war era and it shows - a romantic depiction of an heroic last stand that what was in fact a bit of a freak occurrence in the context of 19th century warfare.

It doesn't disregard the Zulu or the fact that we were invading their country but it doesn't really acknowledge it either; there's some good old stiff-upper-lip respect of the Zulu warrior prowess by the end but that's about it. Still a nostalgic experience for me to watch and the kind of film that doesn't get made anymore. 7/10
Would be interested to hear what the other Brits (or anyone else) on MB think of this. The 70's flick Zulu Dawn with Bob Hoskins depicts the massacre at Isandlwana. The British army suffered worse defeats but it's fascinating how disastrous poor troop placement and bad timing can be...

I thought it was awful. I place too much importance on acting ability and originality and this one doesn't pass muster on either account.

I've seen all of Lurhmanns other films. Romeo + Juliet is the only good movie he's done. Moulin Rouge was a big bloated mess and Stictly Ballroom was pretty stupid too.

Says the Billy Elliot fan.

i'm not a fan but there wasn't anything wrong with the acting in Billy Elliott was there? Clint Eastwood doesn't act anyway, he just 'does Clint'

I actually like Strictly ballroom. But it's a campy comedy...how can you not like it?

Everyone did an excellent job in Billy Eliot, including Jamie Bell who is by far the least capable actor of the lot. Comparing anyone from that film to the complete amateurs of Grand torino is ridiculous. Clint excluded. And if you can name some other film that deals with such a topic, let me know.

http://www.cine-east.com/catalog/ima...dren-cover.jpg

This movie is utterly mesmerizing. The graphics are so spectacular I can't peel my eyes away from the screen. It's beautiful, IMHO. Even if you know nothing about the video games, this movie is still worth a watch.

9/10

I have trouble with Scots sometimes too when it comes to understanding them, especially the Glasweigans. Im alright 90% of the time but if the accent is really, really thick it'll go over my head. I understand that video, but not much of the first minute or two I have to admit. I think thats because there are so many voices though, over the top of one another.

Purely Belter (and Billy Elliot for that matter) is set in my part of the world, or not far away at the least. Im from Sunderland but I live roughly in the middle between Sunderland and Newcastle. Ive tried to show people from abroad Purely Belter before but they couldn't understand enough of it. My cousin said most of it went over her head but I think any thick English regional accent confuses her.

I hope Marijan gives Purely Belter a chance as it's such a great little movie.

Marijan will try to give it a shot, but since he couldn't find any subtitles, he will blame you if he doesn't understand any of it. ;)

Incidentally, I watched Breakfast on Pluto and I couldn't understand a lot of it, not just because of the Irish accent, but because they seemed to mumble a lot. That's why I prefer watching films with subtitles no matter what accent they speak with...just in case... :\

Yeah it is. I keep meaning to buy it on DVD but i do have it on video. Tim Healy in particular is great and it's very funny.

"I hope you're proud of yourself you, you big ****in twat!" :)

defiance was sick.

I saw Taken on Saturday, It was also sick.

As in bad? I had to turn it off after half an hour, I just couldn't take a movie with English/American actors speaking English with a Belarussian (Jewish?) accent seriously ...:laughing: Come on...:rolleyes:

I've been in a serious Ralph Bakshi mood lately. I just love his bizarre brand of animation.

Heavy Traffic - ***1/2

Great, highly imaginative cartoon film about the life of a lonely cartoonist in the ugly city. Bakshi's trademark lunacy has never been in finer form and theres some highly memorable set pieces here.

Wizards - ***

Flawed, but very damn interesting cartoon to say the least, and without a doubt the most disturbing and violent "kids" film I have ever seen in my life. Bakshi made this film on a low budget, it shows sometimes in the use of rotoscoping (which is a Bakshi trademark) stock footage which feels awfully out of place here. Still, an imaginatively concieved fantasy film with interesting visuals and a likable protagonist, overall the film is a dark comentary on propagonda and natures relationship with technology.

Lord of the Rings - **1/2

No, this dosen't touch Jackson's trilogy, especially when Bakshi picked a HORRIBLE place to leave you hanging (after the first half of the Two Towers book) for the sequel that never even got made. It's a darn shame too, because I really wish Bakshi made it, not without it's flaws and nowhere near as engaging as Jacksons version, but it still has a lot going for it, very well animated and Bakshi's use of rotoscoped stock footage for some scenes is actually highly effective. Jackson gave this film credit for inspiring his own version of the Tolkien books, so it's certainly worth a look for historical context.

Cool World - *

Just for fun, I thought, why not? This is such an awful movie, but it still has that Bakshi appeal. Cool World tells the tale of a cartoonist who is sucked into the crazy cartoon world of his creation and finds himself at odds with a cartoon vixen. First off the good points, the animation is excellent and the world itself, with it's twisted demonic buildings, is visually stunning, theres also some great techno tunes in the soundtrack, there's even a David Bowie song written specifically for this movie.

Well that's it for the good points, this movie defines style over substance, it's a shame, it had the potential to be a great vehicle for Bakshi's style, but the script is horrible, Bakshi wrote the original screenplay, and it was meant to be a cartoon horror film, but the creator of Friday the 13th rewrote it as a goofy farce and Bakshi had to complete the film for financial reasons. Proof that the intervention of producers can really f*ck up a movie. First off, how do you get talented actors like Gabriel Byrne, Brad Pitt and Kim Bassinger only for them all to give such mediocre performances? Like they phoned it in, Bassinger is especially horrible, which is a shame, because her cartoon counterpart (Holi Wood) is pretty f*ckng hot. The live action scenes are so out of place and poorly done (Bakshi is a good animated film director, live action not so much), the interactions between human and cartoon is not convincing, the dialogue is hella bad, the characters are unlikable, and worst of all, for such a farce, theres no real humor, just a lot of random goofiness. Where is the wit behind Bakshi's early films like Fritz the Cat, Heavy Traffic and Coonskin? What happened? Bakshi clearly had no idea what he was doing here, you don't know if he was trying to make something serious or comical, because he fails in both categories.

What a misfire, Bakshi gets points for being ambitious, but in the end this is just a lame ripoff of Roger Rabbit. Still has a lot of camp appeal though, seeing Byrne turn into a goofy cartoon superhero at the end delivers a few giggles.

Also, I just watched this tonight.

Taken - *

Horribly cliche and predictable, does that surprise me? Hell no. Despite that this could have still been enjoyable, but no, I just didn't have fun. Cheesy dialogue and excessive overacting were a given, but the fight scenes were dull and that brand of shaky cinematography popularized by the Bourne series really pisses me off. This movie was like a poorly constructed collage of every Harrison Ford movie from the past 20 years.

I wasted a perfectly good movie card on this crap because my family wouldn't let me watch Revolutionary Road because it was longer and they didn't want to wait for me.

Oh well, at least we didn't go see Mall Cop.

I watched a movie called the Visitor with Richard Jenkins...Great movie...check it out.

It's a terrible movie...:laughing: Seriously though, I fucking hate Oscar bait....:|

To each his own...I see your point I still like it:)

http://www.dreadcentral.com/img/news/apr08/asylumb.jpg

Maybe "From the director of Final Destination 2" should have been a clue as to the quality of this movie. The best part: the opening credits. They looked promising, creepy and maybe even a little artsy.

Then the movie started. Yawn.

http://media.movieweb.com/news/old/0...assion_dvd.jpg

Not something I was ever bothered about seeing but something I have had on DVD now for some time as it was £3 which seemed a fair price as i was slightly curious. I actually really enjoyed it, it is obviously a fairly graphic film given the subject matter but I remember the controversy surrounding it so maybe I was expecting more because it wasnt that bad really. Probably not something I will watch again but decent.

EDIT: I actually am not sure how i managed to double post there considering I was editing the last message.

^^^

It courted more controversy in america as religious fervour is considerably heightened comapred to over here in the U.K. A little story to go with the film is that Gibson tried to get financing everywhere for the film, nobody was remotely interested considering the subject matter and subtitles. So he made it with all his own money and made $600m at the box office. A lovely big fat index finger to the spineless saps in Hollywood.

I think it's the best Bible-based film ever made. I remember thinking how cool it would be if someone was to make a film in the original languages of the Bible. Imagine my excitement when a few months later I heard Mel Gibson was doing just that. That took some balls.

What I know from that movie is mostly what I learned from South Patk. :p

Is it true that it's antisemitic and mostly shows torture?

It's antisemitic insomuch as the Bible is. And yeah, it's pretty gory...:\