Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 
 Posted:   Sep 12, 2019 - 3:58 PM   
 By:   Octoberman   (Member)

I do like Pennywise being a metaphor for sexual abuse of children, spousal abuse, homophobia, and bullying.


Is that not the raison d'etre for every clown?

 
 Posted:   Sep 12, 2019 - 8:28 PM   
 By:   solium   (Member)

I do like Pennywise being a metaphor for sexual abuse of children, spousal abuse, homophobia, and bullying.


Is that not the raison d'etre for every clown?


Bozo always scared the sh*t out of me.

 
 Posted:   Sep 12, 2019 - 9:43 PM   
 By:   Mr. Marshall   (Member)

Your Vice is a Locked Room and Only I have the Key - 5/10

Watched on my phone via YouTube on the train between Leeds and London yesterday morning, the circumstances weren’t ideal. None the less, this was quite a decent little thriller, allegedly a giallo, starring Luigi Pistilli (Tuco’s big brother) and various attractive women. The identity of the killer is the film’s only real twist but was actually pretty obvious. Regular sex scenes amongst the murdering, some of which were NSFT, but I think I largely managed to hide the screen in cupped hands. Some not very good model work (so brief that it would probably work in the cinema but not on any medium that can be slowed down or stopped for more examination). A good Morriconian score by the great Bruno Nicolai.


NFSt?

Not suitable for....trainspotters?

 
 Posted:   Sep 12, 2019 - 9:44 PM   
 By:   Mr. Marshall   (Member)

I do like Pennywise being a metaphor for sexual abuse of children, spousal abuse, homophobia, and bullying.


Is that not the raison d'etre for every clown?


Bozo always scared the sh*t out of me.


IT sucked. Big time!

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 12, 2019 - 10:19 PM   
 By:   Octoberman   (Member)

IT sucked. Big time!


I sure hope you aren't referring to Tim Curry.
That man is a treasure.

 
 Posted:   Sep 12, 2019 - 11:19 PM   
 By:   BillCarson   (Member)

"NFSt?

Not suitable for....trainspotters?"

You mean Not For Suitable Trainspotters?

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 13, 2019 - 5:05 AM   
 By:   Tall Guy   (Member)

Nice finding stunning travellers....

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 13, 2019 - 11:12 PM   
 By:   Xebec   (Member)

Spider-Man Far From Home
7.2/10
Can't really say too much without spoiling things but the first half was entertaining and the second less so.
The humour and character interplay was fun. I like Zendaya in her role.
The film gets a big too big. A lot of nice effects though. Score was pretty good in places.
Nice set up for a sequel at the end.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 14, 2019 - 4:59 PM   
 By:   henry   (Member)

MOONRAKER (1979) - 7/10

I first saw this film on broadcast TV, and in all the years since, I couldn't remember if I had ever seen it on the big screen, so when the opportunity came around last week, I took it. This was Roger Moore’s fourth outing as James Bond, and I think, one of his lesser efforts. Perhaps that is because it came between the two best Moore Bonds--THE SPY WHO LOVED ME and FOR YOUR EYES ONLY.

Of course MOONRAKER has something neither of those two films did--a John Barry score. And whenever "Jaws" (Richard Kiel) turns up in the film, the fun quotient increases commensurately. Although this one is just a tad on the silly side, it was great to see it in a sparkling 4K rendering. When it comes to sheer spectacle, that space station set rivals the hollowed out volcano in YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE or the submarine pen in THE SPY WHO LOVED ME.


Love this film! Its got everything but the kitchen sink in it. Immensely entertaining. The effects and model work were amazing for its time. Enjoyed all the action sequences. One of my favorite Barry scores. Jaws had the hottest nerd girlfriend ever. It helps I'm not a "Bond fan". Meaning I have no particular love for the film series, just a casual viewer. This one tickles my fancy.


Hi solium! I too love MOONRAKER, it's a lot of fun. It's kind of like THE SPY WHO LOVED ME in space instead of underwater.smile

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 15, 2019 - 12:09 AM   
 By:   Xebec   (Member)

Yesterday
6/10

A failed singer gets hit by a bus and wakesup in a world without the Beatles.

I don't like Danny Boyle's directorial style and the dutched angles he dumps in. Ed Sheeran can't act. His music is also rubbish. I don't care about the Beatles.

But the film is a fun light watch. Lots of nice humour. The main guy is very wàtchable in a stevecoogan/alan partridge type way. Lily James and the best friendRocky are good too. Worth a watch even if it won't last long in the memory and feels like a tv film.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 15, 2019 - 10:04 AM   
 By:   Tall Guy   (Member)

The Name of the Rose - 7.5/10

One of three recent Ecos that I’ve read, and the film obviously jettisons some of the finer detail of the dense and absorbing career-making novel, especially the solving of how to move around the labyrinthine library. It still captures the main characters pretty well, especially Connery as William of Baskerville (surely an Ecovian joke) a few short years after “Never Say Never Again”, and Michel Lonsdale at the height of Fivehouse fame as the Abbott. Rumour has it that allowing the tonsure to grow out caused filming of “The Alan Fivehouse Murders” to be delayed, and even then Lonsdale’s adoption of a panama in various unrelated scenes caused consternation amongst fans.

Christian Slater debuts as Adso of Melk, Williams’s novice and the film’s narrator, and Ron Perlman threatens to steal the film as the thoroughly-puddled Salvatore, speaker of all languages and none. A cast of other grotesques support the main players and F Murray Abraham causes chills as the Inquisitor who seeks answers through torture and sophistry while William does so by deduction.

The film loses more than a point for the score. I gather that James Horner was directed by Jean-Jacques Annaud to use poor-sounding synths on his otherwise dark and lyrical score, so that must have been the sound he wanted, but it set my teeth on edge several times.

Great fun apart from that, shot through with Eco’s particular brand of humour. It seems that there’s a series in production based on the novel. I hope they make a better fist of it than they did with Catch-22.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 17, 2019 - 10:46 PM   
 By:   Xebec   (Member)

Child's Play (2019)
2/10
It's at least only 90 minutes long. Aubrey Plaza is decent. It tries to differentiate itself from the original but is less interesting and successful for it. It feels like an underwhelming Black Mirror episode.

Alita Battle Angel
3/10
Some interesting looking world building but it feels and looks like a generic 2010s sci-fi film. CGI varies from great to poor. Main character is rather charming. Felt like a YA novel but with added violence. Well, sort of violence. Someone gets chopped in half but it's bloodless and cut quickly. Most of the action is generic is like that; forgettable punchy smash.


Dragged Across Concrete
0 out of 10

A great title in search of a film. Absolutely hideous "cinematography". Flat direction that makes Kevin Smith look like an action auteur. "Cool dialogue". A tired plot and characters. Terrible pacing. And it's about 2.6 hours long. Unwatchable garbage.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 17, 2019 - 11:25 PM   
 By:   Octoberman   (Member)

IT (2017)-1/10

S*it.

Ugh. Three hours gone.
I awarded 1 point because Netflix is paid for, whether I watched it or not.
I just knew going in that Tim Curry had set the bar too high.

 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2019 - 1:09 AM   
 By:   BillCarson   (Member)

At the time, i expected it to be heavy going but I really liked In the Name of the Rose, TG. I concur with your score.

Xeb - never in the field of film watching has anyone suffered such relentlessly awful garbage movies since i watched every vhs tape in our local video shop in 1984! smile

 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2019 - 6:53 AM   
 By:   solium   (Member)


Alita Battle Angel
3/10
Some interesting looking world building but it feels and looks like a generic 2010s sci-fi film. CGI varies from great to poor. Main character is rather charming. Felt like a YA novel but with added violence. Well, sort of violence. Someone gets chopped in half but it's bloodless and cut quickly. Most of the action is generic is like that; forgettable punchy smash.


Spot on review though I would rate it a bit higher. I really loved the performance by the actress who played Alita and I liked the father. But yes, its not as good as its cult following would have one to believe.

Its based on a Manga which was made into a OVA. Ive gone back to the OVA and its one of the weaker ones of that period. The film is almost a carbon copy of the OVA.

 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2019 - 9:44 AM   
 By:   BillCarson   (Member)

The Predator
2018
Was looking forward to this but what an utter load of tosh. Possibly the worst Predator-related movie ever made. Particularly the silly moment where a snarling space rottweiler turned into a soppy playful space puppy. Daft.
4? Would 4 be too mean? 5 maybe.


 
 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2019 - 5:13 PM   
 By:   Advise & Consent   (Member)

IT (2017)-1/10

S*it.

Ugh. Three hours gone.
I awarded 1 point because Netflix is paid for, whether I watched it or not.
I just knew going in that Tim Curry had set the bar too high.


Unsurprising, but disappointing nonetheless. Having read the novel back in the day, I could only imagine how difficult it would to adapt. Part 1 was an honest effort, and it did have a few effective moments (and the kids were good), but it did fall short of the mark, and nothing allowed one to anticipate something better in Part 2.

However, I don't blame that on the absence of Tim Curry as he was far, far, far more obnoxious than scary in the 1990 version, so obnoxious that it took me three separate attempts to finally get through it. Not a comment on Curry's talent though.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2019 - 6:50 PM   
 By:   Octoberman   (Member)

Unsurprising, but disappointing nonetheless. Having read the novel back in the day, I could only imagine how difficult it would to adapt. Part 1 was an honest effort, and it did have a few effective moments (and the kids were good), but it did fall short of the mark, and nothing allowed one to anticipate something better in Part 2.
However, I don't blame that on the absence of Tim Curry as he was far, far, far more obnoxious than scary in the 1990 version, so obnoxious that it took me three separate attempts to finally get through it. Not a comment on Curry's talent though.



Tim Curry's absence was only a part of it.
The kids in this new one were another big part of my dislike.
I fully cop to how hard it is to find good child actors, but I gotta say I thought these were pretty sub-par (not every minute, but most).
Perhaps my thoughts will change upon seeing Part 2.
That might make a big difference, because the TV movie had the advantage of telling the past story and the present story all in one shot.

This is probably my favorite moment in the whole first movie--especially right at the 1:02 mark when he looks right at the kids:

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2019 - 6:51 PM   
 By:   Xebec   (Member)

Moon of the Wolf

4 out of 10

A reasonably watchable 1972 TV movie. So you know what you're getting. But it has a very watchable cast, including Geoffrey Lewis, Bradford Dillman and David Janssen, plus a few faces familiar from TV shows of that period. This was a good enough copy watched on youtube.

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2019 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.