TV & Film Movie Lounge

Have not seen either but have recorded the Jim Carrey version....

The only Seuss cartoons I have seen so far were "The Lorax" and "Horton hears a who", but those were new ones. (Which might be because Seuss is not as popular in German-speaking countries...)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: KLS52
Have just seen "Mad Max" (the original movie) again - not bad!

Reminded me again how this kick-started Mel Gibson's career and possibly the dystopian post-apocalyptic movie genre....
 
I've never seen that one, only the sequel, The Road Warrior. I had never heard of Mad Max or Mel Gibson when I saw it, but I loved it. It's such a high-energy, kick-*** film. It's the only Mel Gibson movie I'm still willing to watch, although TBH I haven't seen it turn up on TV in a LONG time.
 
I saw Kiss Of Death (1947) on TV lat night. Stars Victor Mature and, in his screen debut, Richard Widmark, as gangster Tommy Udo. It was pretty good.
 
Finally saw The Martian.

Not impressed.

If I had not read the book (which was awesome!) before, I would not have known what was happening in a few scenes.

Also, changing Venkat Kapoor (Indian guy from the book) into Vincent Kapoor, a person of mixed Indian/African American heritage, so they could cast Chiwetel Ejiofor in the role, was beyond repulsive, IMO, as it was likely not done to increase the appearance of actors of colour in major movies, but rather simply to cast another major Hollywood actor as box office magnet instead of an unknown Indian actor.

The only thing that I find actually worse than that, is when people on discussion forums try to point out to me "Dude, but yeah, don't you know, there are also very dark Indian people". Yes. They have that little tidbit correct. But those dark-looking Indian people typically do not look like Chiwetel Ejiofor (who I otherwise like a lot).

Also, they missed

(.) (.) Boobies

Not that it was a major part of the story, but it simply illustrated how scared Hollywood producers can be....

I mean, it was a joke of the author on how Nasa are shitting themselves to have something like this appear on the general public's screen, the screenwriters non-inclusion into the movie makes it also a joke of the author on how Hollywood producers are shitting themselves.....
 
Last edited:
Andy_T said:
Finally saw The Martian.

Not impressed.

If I had not read the book (which was awesome!) before, I would not have known what was happening in a few scenes.

Also, changing Venkat Kapoor (Indian guy from the book) into Vincent Kapoor, a person of mixed Indian/African American heritage, so they could cast Chiwetel Ejiofor in the role, was beyond repulsive, IMO, as it was likely not done to increase the appearance of actors of colour in major movies, but rather simply to cast another major Hollywood actor as box office magnet instead of an unknown Indian actor.

The only thing that I find actually worse than that, is when people on discussion forums try to point out to me "Dude, but yeah, don't you know, there are also very dark Indian people". Yes. They have that little tidbit correct. But those dark-looking Indian people typically do not look like Chiwetel Ejiofor (who I otherwise like a lot).

Also, they missed

(.) (.) Boobies

Not that it was a major part of the story, but it simply illustrated how scared Hollywood producers can be....

I mean, it was a joke of the author on how Nasa are shitting themselves to have something like this appear on the general public's screen, the screenwriters non-inclusion into the movie makes it also a joke of the author on how Hollywood producers are shitting themselves.....
Click to expand...
Your criticisms of the film are on-target, but I did really like "The Martian", which I saw Thursday night. Granted, I was somewhat confused by casting Mr Ejiofor for the character of Kapoor: he didn't look Indian to me, although I assumed the character he was portraying was supposed to be. But he wasn't familiar to me as an actor anyway (I only knew of Matt Damon and Jeff Daniels), and not having read the book, I didn't catch what you mentioned in your spoiler.

Mainly: I could really get into a science-fiction movie which didn't have any real violence, apart from the injuries Damon's character Mark Watney suffers in the film (which he recovers from). Compare this to the original "Star Trek" and "Star Wars" films: In "Star Trek", two unfortunate Starfleet personnel die horribly in a transporter accident early in the movie, and shortly after, a Starfleet base station is destroyed with all lives lost. In "Star Wars".... well, where do I start?! (and I remember one glowing review of this movie mentioning that it had "only the merest dollop of bloodshed here and there"- did the reviewer sit through the whole film with their face stuck in a bucket of popcorn or something??!!)

I also liked the film score (even the disco worked!!) and the acting better than in most sci-fi I've seen, as well as the fact that the technology in the film was realistically close to what we can do today: no faster-than-light space travel, ray guns/blasters/phasers/lightsabers, transporters, etc.
 
We started watching a film called 'The Rover' because it has Guy Pearce & Robert Pattinson in it so we assumed it had to be alright. It was not alright. It was not good. It was not even OK. Had to turn it off & I can't remember the last time I didn't finish a film.

Although judging by its ratings some people enjoyed it.
 

Similar threads

R
Animals-Short film
Replies
2
Views
174
Animals
Emma JC
Emma JC
cherries7x
US Hello
Replies
5
Views
145
Introduce Yourself
Emma JC
Emma JC
Amy SF
TV & Film Describe your favourite movie In a boring way
Replies
4
Views
2K
Media & Entertainment
Emma JC
Emma JC
Second Summer
Announcement Gravatar disabled
Replies
0
Views
427
Announcements/News
Second Summer
Second Summer
C
Survey-Motivations & Barriers to Plant-Based Lifestyle
Replies
1
Views
1K
General
silva
silva
Top Bottom