Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Just finished Trumbo on Netflix. Brian Cranston gives his usual strong performance. Very good movie about an interesting man during a shameful period of our history.

We watched The Lovebirds on Netflix.  It was a very bad movie.  I give it one star out of four.   That's being charitable.   Poorly written, not funny, implausible.   Supposedly it's a rom-com, but the lead actors are not the least bit attractive, or funny, or appealing, or interesting.  

I read that before the pandemic, they were planning to release this turkey into theaters.  That's insane.

(05-27-2020, 07:11 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]We watched The Lovebirds on Netflix.  It was a very bad movie.  I give it one star out of four.   That's being charitable.   Poorly written, not funny, implausible.   Supposedly it's a rom-com, but the lead actors are not the least bit attractive, or funny, or appealing, or interesting.  

I read that before the pandemic, they were planning to release this turkey into theaters.  That's insane.

The lead actor is from the show Silicon Valley which is awesome.

Sucks the movie isn’t very good.

Anyone watch the movie made of the Thai kids in a flooded cave? I was going to add it to my watch list but haven't heard anything about it's worthiness of my soooo precious time.

My husband and I watched The Outpost today. Starring Scott Eastwood, Orlando Bloom and several sons of big name entertainers (Gibson, Jagger, Attenborough to name a few), it's based on the true story of the deadliest battle in Afghanistan at Combat Post Keating in 2009. I'm sure I heard about it back in the day as it would have been all over the news but I don't remember.

It was a surprisingly good movie. I honestly thought it would be a B movie but it was definitely not. Some have complained of the language, the "cliches" that are in every war movie, and even the editing. I'll say this. The military, especially in high stress situations, is one of the most profane jobs there is. Yes, the F bomb is dropped all the time, so to complain about it in a war movie is stupid. The editing did seem a bit choppy at first but I believe it was done on purpose so you never get comfortable in a scene and it works. They also did a lot of long takes during the battle scenes so you're following the soldier as he's running from the armory to the guys who need ammo as he's getting shot at. Also very effective.

It was very well done and credit goes to the director and the director of photography did an awesome job. Scott Eastwood did really well in his role, his best one yet. It was freaky at times to look at him and hear him speak and think you're watching and hearing a young Clint Eastwood. I've seen him in a few movies but this is the first time his voice sounded just like his dads. All of the actors did a really good job. It's a movie I'd watch again.

Netflix has a limited series called Medal of Honor telling the stories of eight (I think it's 8) MoH recipients and Clint Romesha, played by Scott Eastwood, is featured in one episode. His fellow soldier and MoH recipient, Ty Carter, is featured in his own episode. This was the first time two living troops from the same battle were awarded the MoH. I'm currently watching the Romesha episode.

(07-04-2020, 09:02 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]My husband and I watched The Outpost today. Starring Scott Eastwood, Orlando Bloom and several sons of big name entertainers (Gibson, Jagger, Attenborough to name a few), it's based on the true story of the deadliest battle in Afghanistan at Combat Post Keating in 2009. I'm sure I heard about it back in the day as it would have been all over the news but I don't remember.

It was a surprisingly good movie. I honestly thought it would be a B movie but it was definitely not. Some have complained of the language, the "cliches" that are in every war movie, and even the editing. I'll say this. The military, especially in high stress situations, is one of the most profane jobs there is. Yes, the F bomb is dropped all the time, so to complain about it in a war movie is stupid. The editing did seem a bit choppy at first but I believe it was done on purpose so you never get comfortable in a scene and it works. They also did a lot of long takes during the battle scenes so you're following the soldier as he's running from the armory to the guys who need ammo as he's getting shot at. Also very effective.

It was very well done and credit goes to the director and the director of photography did an awesome job. Scott Eastwood did really well in his role, his best one yet. It was freaky at times to look at him and hear him speak and think you're watching and hearing a young Clint Eastwood. I've seen him in a few movies but this is the first time his voice sounded just like his dads. All of the actors did a really good job. It's a movie I'd watch again.

I would question the accuracy of any movie depicting combat sans profanity.

I enjoyed The Siege of Jadotville on Netflix. It the story of an Irish Army detachment doing peacekeeping duty in the Congo in 1961 with some decent dialogue and action scenes. Worth the two hours.

(07-05-2020, 12:07 AM)rollerjag Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-04-2020, 09:02 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]My husband and I watched The Outpost today. Starring Scott Eastwood, Orlando Bloom and several sons of big name entertainers (Gibson, Jagger, Attenborough to name a few), it's based on the true story of the deadliest battle in Afghanistan at Combat Post Keating in 2009. I'm sure I heard about it back in the day as it would have been all over the news but I don't remember.

It was a surprisingly good movie. I honestly thought it would be a B movie but it was definitely not. Some have complained of the language, the "cliches" that are in every war movie, and even the editing. I'll say this. The military, especially in high stress situations, is one of the most profane jobs there is. Yes, the F bomb is dropped all the time, so to complain about it in a war movie is stupid. The editing did seem a bit choppy at first but I believe it was done on purpose so you never get comfortable in a scene and it works. They also did a lot of long takes during the battle scenes so you're following the soldier as he's running from the armory to the guys who need ammo as he's getting shot at. Also very effective.

It was very well done and credit goes to the director and the director of photography did an awesome job. Scott Eastwood did really well in his role, his best one yet. It was freaky at times to look at him and hear him speak and think you're watching and hearing a young Clint Eastwood. I've seen him in a few movies but this is the first time his voice sounded just like his dads. All of the actors did a really good job. It's a movie I'd watch again.

I would question the accuracy of any movie depicting combat sans profanity.

Yep. As much as I cringe now at hearing the F bomb being dropped every third word it's accurate to how we spoke to each other in my day and how they speak now. We didn't talk like that 'back at the office' but during training exercises and other high stress situations, or even in our downtime we were very.....creative with our language. 

The biggest issue I have with foul language in movies and tv today is it's often written for shock value or due to lazy writing. If it fits with the situation, as it does in this movie, then I can accept it.

---

(07-05-2020, 09:54 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]I enjoyed The Siege of Jadotville on Netflix. It the story of an Irish Army detachment doing peacekeeping duty in the Congo in 1961 with some decent dialogue and action scenes. Worth the two hours.

I have that in my queue to watch. My stepdad said it was good.

I'm not a movie watcher at home because there is a universal law etched in stone that whenever homie wants to watch a movie in the comfort of his own living room, everyone and everything must do what it can to interrupt me. I detest being interrupted while watching a movie and was repeatedly interrupted today. Still, I soldiered on and watched a movie I've been wanting to see for a long time, Knives Out. I loved it. Daniel Craig was especially impressive. He did a marvelous job with the dialect. I've always thought he was entirely miscast as James Bond because he looks more like a Russian mobster rather than a suave British spy. 

Why can't they make more quality movies like this than the 236th incarnation of a comic book?

(07-05-2020, 09:16 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not a movie watcher at home because there is a universal law etched in stone that whenever homie wants to watch a movie in the comfort of his own living room, everyone and everything must do what it can to interrupt me. I detest being interrupted while watching a movie and was repeatedly interrupted today. Still, I soldiered on and watched a movie I've been wanting to see for a long time, Knives Out. I loved it. Daniel Craig was especially impressive. He did a marvelous job with the dialect. I've always thought he was entirely miscast as James Bond because he looks more like a Russian mobster rather than a suave British spy. 

Why can't they make more quality movies like this than the 236th incarnation of a comic book?

I haven't watched any of those comic book movies beginning to end except the Batman with Michael Keaton.

Been catching up on old movies on Amazon and NetFlix the last few nights. I watched Ghost and the Darkness last night. I forgot how much I enjoyed that movie. It was the second half of a double feature. We watched Bagger Vance first, always a good choice.

We watched Signs with Mel Gibson and Joaquin Phoenix on inauguration night. Hubby had never seen it. I had forgotten how movies were before cellphones were everywhere. It's also kind of weird to see actors in movies that are 20 years old, especially the kids who have had steady careers for the most part.

(01-22-2021, 08:54 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]We watched Signs with Mel Gibson and Joaquin Phoenix on inauguration night. Hubby had never seen it. I had forgotten how movies were before cellphones were everywhere. It's also kind of weird to see actors in movies that are 20 years old, especially the kids who have had steady careers for the most part.

That's funny.  We just watched that two nights ago.

It was filmed in Bucks County in PA in a little town called Newtown, where I was married (the first time).  The church is actually in one of the overhead shots in the movie's intro.

(01-22-2021, 08:54 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]We watched Signs with Mel Gibson and Joaquin Phoenix on inauguration night. Hubby had never seen it. I had forgotten how movies were before cellphones were everywhere. It's also kind of weird to see actors in movies that are 20 years old, especially the kids who have had steady careers for the most part.

I like M Night Shyamalan movies in general, very distinctive style although he can occasionally go off the deep end story wise. Signs has the vibe of an extended classic Twilight Zone episode or 50s cold war paranoia sci fi. Break out the popcorn!

Signs is a really good movie which most people misinterpret. They want to see a horror alien film, but noticeably the space aliens play a very small part in the movie. They are merely antagonists in a story of tragedy, failure, redemption and rebirth. If you watch it in that mindset it becomes more understandable and enjoyable.

(01-23-2021, 10:42 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Signs is a really good movie which most people misinterpret. They want to see a horror alien film, but noticeably the space aliens play a very small part in the movie. They are merely antagonists in a story of tragedy, failure, redemption and rebirth. If you watch it in that mindset it becomes more understandable and enjoyable.

Exactly. All of his early movies had subtle issues happening right in front of you but there was also misdirection to throw you off. The first time I watched The Sixth Sense was in the theater and at the big reveal everyone was tripping. It was right in front of us the whole movie, we just didn't see it.

(01-23-2021, 10:42 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Signs is a really good movie which most people misinterpret. They want to see a horror alien film, but noticeably the space aliens play a very small part in the movie. They are merely antagonists in a story of tragedy, failure, redemption and rebirth. If you watch it in that mindset it becomes more understandable and enjoyable.

The great thing about it (like most good movies) is that the events aren't the important part of the story, it's the relationships and interactions of the characters. That describes "smart" science fiction at its best, ala "Arrival" or "Children of Men". MNS's directorial style is really a throw back to the 50s and 60s though and I mean that in a good way. In those days they didn't have glitzy special effects to create tension so they had to do it with atmosphere and cinematography and soundtrack and that's what he does really well. It makes the movies "work" even when the writing is really cheesy (like "Lady in the Water").

I’d there an MPAA rating we need to adhere to on our recommendations?

(01-24-2021, 09:25 PM)Jags Wrote: [ -> ]I’d there an MPAA rating we need to adhere to on our recommendations?

Well, our foul language gets censored here so take a wild guess.