Films! good, bad, recomendations, and general film talk

[Philly Q]

I quite fancied seeing The Wolfman, but now I've learned it's just a rip off of Twilight: New Moon

http://www.latinoreview.com/news/open-letter-to-universal-your-wolfman-ripped-off-twilight-9247

I don't see how you live with yourself for making it the way you did. If I made this movie, I would be ashamed to even admit that I owned it. How can a werewolf be killed with a silver bullet? Better yet, have you saw the transformation of the man that is "supposed" to be the wolf? He sits in some chair and his entire body turns in to some mutated freak.

Holy shite, what ridiculous ideas to include in a werewolf movie!!  What the $%&# were they thinking?   :roll:


It almost makes me want to go and see The Wolfman, even though it looks boring as hell.  Maybe I'll just watch the 1941 version instead.

[Fourth Feline]

It almost makes me want to go and see The Wolfman, even though it looks boring as hell.  Maybe I'll just watch the 1941 version instead.

Yes , Lon Chaney Junior did indeed set the standard - AND at least the Wolfman combed it's hair and used Brylcreem in those days:    " Very smart - now go out and attack somebody " ...

[Andrew W]

It almost makes me want to go and see The Wolfman, even though it looks boring as hell. 

It's not boring, can't be really as the running time is only about an hour and forty minutes.  In these days of two and half hour summer blockbusters this one is very svelte.

[Philly Q]

It almost makes me want to go and see The Wolfman, even though it looks boring as hell. 

It's not boring, can't be really as the running time is only about an hour and forty minutes.  In these days of two and half hour summer blockbusters this one is very svelte.

Agreed, 100 minutes can't be too painful.  But you still don't recommend it?

[Andrew W]

Agreed, 100 minutes can't be too painful.  But you still don't recommend it?

I can't really be objective about it but there are better movies out there for sure.  I think it could be enjoyable if you went in with a very tongue in cheek attitude but I couldn't manage that.

[Philly Q]

Well, I did watch a couple of old lycanthrope movies - Werewolf Of London (1935) and She-Wolf Of London (1946) (which isn't in London and there's no wolf, she- or otherwise  :roll: )

[Fourth Feline]

Well, I did watch a couple of old lycanthrope movies - Werewolf Of London (1935) and She-Wolf Of London (1946) (which isn't in London and there's no wolf, she- or otherwise  :roll: )

More importantly, was the Lady  a real fox !  :P

[Philly Q]

Well, I did watch a couple of old lycanthrope movies - Werewolf Of London (1935) and She-Wolf Of London (1946) (which isn't in London and there's no wolf, she- or otherwise  :roll: )

More importantly, was the Lady  a real fox !  :P

Nah, she was a soppy cow who became convinced she was a werewolf because of a family curse - but in fact she was being stitched up by her evil aunt who wanted to inherit the property (in the unlikely event that that's spoiled it for anyone, my apologies..... ).   

I've never heard so many terrible "British" accents in my life (especially from the incompetent comedy "bobbies").

[MrBump]

Anyone heard this fuss over the Alice In Wonderland film not being shown in Odeon cinemas?  Shame really, I love Tim Burton films (and more importantly Helana Bonham Carter... schwing!), but Odeon is my local...

[Fourth Feline]

Anyone heard this fuss over the Alice In Wonderland film not being shown in Odeon cinemas?  Shame really, I love Tim Burton films (and more importantly Helana Bonham Carter... schwing!), but Odeon is my local...

That is a shame, as the cast list looks excellent ! Nice to see an outing for some much beloved British character actors, like Christopher Lee, Micheal Gough, Frances De la tour and such.  Paul Whitehouse should bring a bit of 'pluck' to proceedings - and all those lovely Ladies.  I do sincerely hope that every other cinema - and cinema chain in Europe, absolutely 'clean up' on this one, leaving the politics of 'Odeon' in the shade.  Time for tea ?

[Philly Q]

I'm with Odeon on this one.  Why should they reduce the 17-week "window" to 12 weeks, just to suit Disney's planned DVD release date? 

Disney are going to make their money either way - and for years to come -  but the cinema's income stream ends straight after the film's theatrical run.  They're even trotting out the "helping to beat piracy" argument, as if 5 fewer weeks made any difference to that (as we all know, DVD piracy funds terrorism and the drugs trade  :roll: ). 

[Fourth Feline]

 As we all know, DVD piracy funds terrorism and the drugs trade  :roll: . 

Yes, why should London get all the money ?

[dave_mc]

if you aren't willing to pay £10 for the DVD, why would you be willing to pay a similar amount to see it in the cinema?

[Philly Q]

Because it's 1,000,000 times better seeing a film on the big screen than it is seeing it on DVD.


(Assuming you don't have an audience full of noisy chavs texting their mates)

[Fourth Feline]

That's the trouble with Cinemas ;  the public are there.