Streaming Recommendations

[one-armed dwarf]

I haven't seen The Irishman yet but Netflix seems such an odd venue for this film. Been reading some comments of people skipping over scenes they find boring, or splitting the film up into separate viewings. Then finding the whole film pointless but I mean how could you not if you dilute it into parts like that or skip entire scenes .

 

I don't know if Netflix's content delivery strategy has set in this way of watching stuff. Maybe the film just isn't that good. But I can't imagine breaking a film into chunks unless I had to (which is why I'm waiting until Christmas break to watch it)

[Craymen Edge]

I just looked it up, the film is three and a half hours long.

I don't think splitting a long film up into multiple sittings is a Netflix thing, people have been doing that since VHS.

[one-armed dwarf]

Fair enough, I didn't mean that to come across like a Big Brain comment. Just imo it would ruin things like pacing and upset the structure, in most other films anyway

 

I've dropped really long movies for what it's worth (Once Upon a Time in America, which is what I think about when I read about Irishman)

[smallofbooty]

It's an excellent (very Scorsese) film. Joe Pesci's performance I particularly liked. It's a story with depth, history and time lines so you need to pay attention.

 

It's 3 hours 29 minutes so it's not unreasonable to have a break unless you've been catheterised. However watching any film in bits while playing with your phone and whatever isn't really doing it justice.

 

When I was a kid a long film at the pictures always had a break and the choc ice woman came  down the isle, so it's not a new idea to split your viewing.

[one-armed dwarf]

Tbh though that's more like an intermission, which isn't a new thing (more common back when films were a lot longer). Lots of films used to have a conscious 'cut' like that (2001 had one, I think) before the next chapter or part.

 

I was talking more along the lines of this guide I saw to cutting the film into 45 minute chunks spread across a few days, which is something I hadn't heard before. I'll accept I'm wrong here though.

[DisturbedSwan]

I watched The Irishman in 1 sitting, with all the lights and my phone turned off. 

 

A film like that by such an esteemed accomplished director deserves that kind of respect and undivided attention in my view.

[Jimboxy]

I had issues with The Irishman, mainly to do with the wonky aging of De Niros character (from what I could work out he's meant to be late 30s early 40s for a good portion of the film but still looks like an old man, everyone keeps calling him boy) that threw me out of the film. I thought Pacino was good as Hoffer and it's good to see Joe Pesci back on screen. It doesn't have the grandiose feeling that Scorsese so often does well, like in The Departed or Goodfellas (my phone wanted to correct that to Goodfellows which is a film I'd like to see), and visually feels like a TV mini series imo. 

36 minutes ago, Blakey said:

A film like that by such an esteemed accomplished director deserves that kind of respect and undivided attention in my view.

 I sort of take issue with this sentiment. That respect is something that needs to be earned on each new film, and not something that is assumed because of the people attached to it. Marty has made some amazing films, this isn't one of them.

[DisturbedSwan]

RDN’S CGI was pretty bad and I don’t think he acted particularly well apart from the last hour but it never took me out of it personally. As I said previously Pacino and Pesci’s CGI was done far better.

 

Fair enough @Jimbo Xiii I disagree. A director like Scorsese has earned that respect because of countless incredible films over decades of cinema history. If this had been in the cinema it would have to be watched uninterrupted in the dark without any distractions so I chose to watch it in that way in my own home as I feel that would give me the best experience for this kind of Oscar-worthy movie. 
 

I don’t think this is up there with my favourite films of his (The Departed, Goodfellas, Wolf of Wall Street, Taxi Driver) but it is close and still a phenomenal film for me, will be right up there at the Oscars in my view.

[mfnick]

Changing subject but I’ve just started watching Hip Hop Evolution. Just finished first season and it’s really really good so far. Highly recommended. 

[Jimboxy]

On 06/12/2019 at 19:24, mfnick said:

Changing subject but I’ve just started watching Hip Hop Evolution. Just finished first season and it’s really really good so far. Highly recommended. 

The first series was great, I struggled with the second and haven't gone back to it yet, but it was a area of hip hop I had no prior knowledge in, third series looks good.

[mmmark]

 

[DisturbedSwan]

Cannot recommend Don’t Fuck with Cats enough.

 

It’s a tough watch at times due to some of the subject matter but if you can get through that (or fast forward through it) then it is a gripping thriller that keeps you on the edge of your seat. 

 

Absolutely amazing television.

[HandsomeDead]

I watched the doc Hail Satan? the other day.  I don't know much about satanism so it was an interesting watch.  I thought it was just edgelords being edgelords but It's actually something I can get down with. 

[shinymcshine]

Watched the first two episodes of The Witcher and it seems quite promising so far.

[shinymcshine]

Episode 3 of The Witcher was fantastic, but I then watched Ep 4 straightaway, and that just didn't seem as good (perhaps it was fine, but Ep 3 was just so good).

[Jimboxy]

We watched the first one and a half. I dunno, it seems ok, but it's so slow and plodding. Henry Superman makes it a bit tough as well, I'm not sure I like him all that much.

[shinymcshine]

I don't have much of an issue with Cavill (in terms of acting) but just that because he's portraying younger Geralt (than in the W3) he looks a bit too much like Orlando Bloom's Legolas.

 

Other cast seem fine, but the casting of Triss seems a bit odd (again, no problem with the actor, just a distinctly different look from the game - but I've no idea how accurate the game was to the books).

[Jimboxy]

We finished episode 2 and started episode 3. I think my main issue is it feels a bit like a Sci Fi channel original both visually and also in terms of script and acting. 

[shinymcshine]

Ep 5 was pretty good too.

[DANGERMAN]

I think it picks up (from what I've seen) after episode 3, at the very least it starts to get a bit more of Witcher's bleakness seeping in. It's made me pine for a live action Berserk with the same sort of budget and care ?

 

Cast wise, there's more black people in the first episode than there was in the entire 100+ hour Witcher 3, which I probably only picked up on because of the controversy. Dandelion is less annoying in this than the games, but his dialogue is a bit too modern, Geralt too sometimes. 

 

I don't mind Superman as Geralt, he's maybe a bit too bulky but he's been fine. Tris is fine from what I've seen of her, doesn't look exactly like her but she seemed alright. Yen I'm not keen on, she's too young and a little plain looking for how striking Yennifer is supposed to be 

 

One thing I do think they've got wrong, they really could have done with a bit of an explanation of the lore. Most people on here will know why Geralt sometimes looks really pale and has black eyes, particularly if they played Witcher 2 where there was more focus on potions, but they don't bothering explaining it for people new to the series