Bullets 'n' Babes

bradavon wrote:Intolerable Cruelty. I didn't see the point really mentioning it.

Interesting though.

That's one of their lame ones, you need to check out one of their ace comedies like The Big Lebowski and Raising Arizona before writing the Coens off

Blood Simple is brilliant - shame not good DVD exists of the original theatrical cut though.

Laitakaupungin valot (Finland, 2006) – 2/5
Sometimes stylish, sometimes only awkward.

Phase IV (USA, 1974) – 3,5/5
Intelligent ants attack may sound like a B-film plot but this sci-fi horror is actually quite intelligent and moody. The US / UK pg rating is misleading. There’s little graphic violence, but the atmosphere can be compared to films like Alien and The Thing.

I liked O Brother Where Art Thou? It was good fun and the music was very clever.

bradavon wrote:Intolerable Cruelty. I didn't see the point really mentioning it.

Interesting though.

I doubt you'd like Blood Simple much if you dislike No Country and Fargo, but you may enjoy Miller's Crossing, Big Lebowski, O Brother Where Art Thou?, or Raising Arizona.

I saw a few minutes of O Brother during a film class, it looked funny. Thanks I'll bear it in mind.

Milano calibro 9 (Italy, 1972) – 3,5/5
Di Leo’s opening episode in the Milano trilogy follows a criminal who is released from prison after 4 years. His old boss believes he stole 300 000 dollars from the gang, the man himself tells he was set up by someone. An intense thriller which however suffers from some unneeded supporting characters. The detectives only appear to be in the film because of Di Leo’s will to go political. The main story however works, and the last 15 minutes is terrific.

La mala ordina (Italy, 1972) – 3/5
Mario Adorf, who played a supporting part in Milano calibro 9, takes the lead in the follow up. He plays a pimp who gets the entire underworld after him without even knowing the reason. Again Di Leo’s supporting characters slow the film down (the famous assassin duo Henry Silva & Woody Strode ultimately has little to do in the film), but Adorf is good as a man who is forced to become a killer against his own wish.

Il boss (Italy, 1973) – 3,5/5
The final part in Di Leo’s Milano trilogy stars Henry Silva as a gun for hire in a world where loyalty doesn’t exist. The soundtrack is terrific, as you’d expect. Di Leo based the film on Peter McCurtin’s book but threw in references to real life events and persons which caused some problems with the censors... and made the director afraid for his life for years.

hey,

Killing Zoe 4/5 (Unrated Director's Cut)
Simple enough stuff. Roberry boy meets girl. Roberry goes wrong for all the reasons you can and can't think of. Violence and romance ensue. Still like it.

Hostel 2 - 1/5
Horrible film, an utterly bottom of the barrel production in all departments. A complete bore.

Almost fuck all gore and 90% of what little tit shots present were of a massively ugly girl; so it's not worth watching for those shallow merits.

Hancock unrated blu-ray 2/5

This film isn't bad,just rather dull. a strange film for a summer blockbuster,even Will Smith's undeniable charm doessn't lift this one above mediocre.even the film's few action sequences are mediocre.

EvaUnit02 wrote:Hostel 2 - 1/5
Horrible film, an utterly bottom of the barrel production in all departments. A complete bore.

Almost fuck all gore and 90% of what little tit shots present were of a massively ugly girl; so it's not worth watching for those shallow merits.

Hostel is far better in the boobies department! Barbara Nedeljakova is stunning and has a sexy accent!

saltysam wrote:Hancock unrated blu-ray 2/5

This film isn't bad,just rather dull. a strange film for a summer blockbuster,even Will Smith's undeniable charm doessn't lift this one above mediocre.even the film's few action sequences are mediocre.

It just turns to shit whenever Charlize Theron turns up, Worthlessacting, and a worthless character in a very poor story.

Hancock as a character, and how the character is handled in the movie, is brilliant.... but it's a shame they didnt give that very interesting character an interesting story to be part of, or an interesting villain to fight.

Charlize Theron is such a shite actress. She was horrible in The Devil's Advote, she was horrible in Astronaut's Wife, and here once again she's horrible. (although, in this case, you can also blame the horrible writing for her character)

Hancock is a movie of two halves, and as such it doesnt work as well. I liked Will Smith in it, some parts were very funny - but the makers should either have made a superhero comedy, or a darker, violent film about superheroes, not both. I still enjoyed it though. 3.5/5

Salty whats the difference between Hancock Unrated and the cinema version?

It says on IMDb:

The DVD and Blu-ray Versions of the movie has additional and modified scenes. The added scene includes Hancock bringing a girl to his trailer. In the modified scene Mary Embrey drives to Hancocks trailer instead of flying there (but the car is gone when they both fly off).

Thanks

It's 9 minutes longer than the theatrical cut, so there will be more differences that IMDb doesn't mention as well.

The Dead Zone: 3/5

I recall the book being better. I found my mind drifting away at various points as it felt quite by-the-numbers at times, but overall it was all right. I still haven't seen a better Cronenberg film than The Fly.

i havent seen The Fly yet. Have you seen Videodrome? That's excellent.

Peter Pan: Return to Neverland 2.5/5

Nice short movie about the daughter of Wendy, growing up during the war, and not believing in the stories of her mother anymore. Ofcourse, Hook comes, kidnaps the chick, Peter Pan rescues her, blahblah, and in the end she says "I'll always believe in you, Peter Pan", as she should.

Basically, it's just OK. there's hardly anything wrong with it, and I'm sure kids will enjoy it, and I enjoyed it as well. However, it feels awfully short, the story really doesnt have all that much value, and there really isnt anything worthwhile or memorable about the experience. It's a quickly made easy follow-up to the original classic, to make a few quick bucks.

So just a very mediocre 2.5, not because it's bad, but because it just lacks anything that would make it deserve anything higher than a 2.5.

Sword in the Stone 4/5

A Classic. Gorgeous handdrawn animation, great voice-acting, nice music, lots of humour, informative, and just lots of fun. Well worth watching.

I like Sword In The Stone, but its not among Disney's best. It's good fun though

grim_tales wrote:i havent seen The Fly yet. Have you seen Videodrome? That's excellent.

I have yeah, I thought it was OK, very weird haha. The Fly was on TV last night, I'd have watched it but The Dead Zone was on at the same time.

Yeah, agreed Videodrome was very wierd and a bit of a mindf*ck

The Fly is great. A rare example where the remake is much better than the original (which is rubbish).

The original has Vincent Price though.