• The KillerFrogs

OT - Movies thread

BrewingFrog

Was I supposed to type something here?
Watched the Amazon/Guy Ritchie Young Sherlock production over the last couple of nights with Mrs. Brewingfrog. While the production values are excellent, as are the costumes, production design, sets, etc., the writing is utterly appalling. This is a series designed for those who know nothing of the ACD Sherlock. In fact, as Mrs. Brewingfrog noted, "They could have skipped all of the fuss and bother of naming it 'Sherlock' and just named everyone random names."
I added, "There's nothing Sherlocky about the main character at all. None of the quirks that ACD gave him, none of the quick deductive skill that kept him two steps ahead of everybody else, and the supporting characters are devoid of their special characteristics as well. Just a regular slam-bang stupid-fest, full of slow-mo and goofy camera action ala Guy Ritchie, all dressed up in Victorian clothing."
I got up and walked out of the room at the closing sequence of the 7th episode. The stupidity had reached levels (or depths) unbearable to this humble viewer, and I had had enough. About 10 minutes later Mrs. Brewingfrog came out to join me. "I should have followed you."
It was that bad.
I don't think we're going to bother finishing it. I don't care what happens, and I don't care about the characters, such as they are, enough to see their fates. It is honestly too dumb of a vehicle to continue to devote our valuable time.

Oh, and Natascha McElhone is still drop-dead gorgeous. So there.
 

Chongo94

Active Member
Watched the Amazon/Guy Ritchie Young Sherlock production over the last couple of nights with Mrs. Brewingfrog. While the production values are excellent, as are the costumes, production design, sets, etc., the writing is utterly appalling. This is a series designed for those who know nothing of the ACD Sherlock. In fact, as Mrs. Brewingfrog noted, "They could have skipped all of the fuss and bother of naming it 'Sherlock' and just named everyone random names."
I added, "There's nothing Sherlocky about the main character at all. None of the quirks that ACD gave him, none of the quick deductive skill that kept him two steps ahead of everybody else, and the supporting characters are devoid of their special characteristics as well. Just a regular slam-bang stupid-fest, full of slow-mo and goofy camera action ala Guy Ritchie, all dressed up in Victorian clothing."
I got up and walked out of the room at the closing sequence of the 7th episode. The stupidity had reached levels (or depths) unbearable to this humble viewer, and I had had enough. About 10 minutes later Mrs. Brewingfrog came out to join me. "I should have followed you."
It was that bad.
I don't think we're going to bother finishing it. I don't care what happens, and I don't care about the characters, such as they are, enough to see their fates. It is honestly too dumb of a vehicle to continue to devote our valuable time.

Oh, and Natascha McElhone is still drop-dead gorgeous. So there.
I think you may be confusing Guy Ritchie’s camera action with Zack Snyder. That said, that show looked fairly awful from clips so I’m glad your review confirms my initial thoughts.
 

Chongo94

Active Member
Peaky Blinders movie. Finding out Barry Keoghan is in this diminishes it a bit for me, just can’t stand that dude for some reason. But I’ll still watch because it’s Peaky Blinders.

Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man
 

SW toad

Active Member
Is no one watching "Paradise" on Hulu?
Well..... let us be REAL here. The governing board of the "Academy" has said you have to have zyz natives americans, abc british virgin islanders, xoz gender confused and so forth in the cast.

Is it any wonder that the film industry has dropped from 18/20 billion in revenue in 2003 to 8.3 billion today??

Think for a moment about this. For half a century, Oscars were awarded to men in their 50s and Oscars were awarded to women in their 20s 30s. Voila!!! you have an Oscar winner in his 30s. I seriously enjoyed the dudes chops in Friday night lights. He is talented and I like him. He is no Dustin Hoffman, Denzel, or others. Sinners was a "'In your face" moment to the majority of America. If you do not know what this movie was transmitting to you you are brain dead.
 

PurpleBlood87

Active Member
Well..... let us be REAL here. The governing board of the "Academy" has said you have to have zyz natives americans, abc british virgin islanders, xoz gender confused and so forth in the cast.

Is it any wonder that the film industry has dropped from 18/20 billion in revenue in 2003 to 8.3 billion today??

Think for a moment about this. For half a century, Oscars were awarded to men in their 50s and Oscars were awarded to women in their 20s 30s. Voila!!! you have an Oscar winner in his 30s. I seriously enjoyed the dudes chops in Friday night lights. He is talented and I like him. He is no Dustin Hoffman, Denzel, or others. Sinners was a "'In your face" moment to the majority of America. If you do not know what this movie was transmitting to you you are brain dead.

What does that have to do with "Paradise"?
 

Chongo94

Active Member
Definitely going to see this. A bit of a In Bruges type vibe maybe but with more action and intrigue. And talk about a cast!

Wild Horse Nine…
 

SW toad

Active Member
Absolutely nothing. He is in his own reality.
Probably, not possibly the most "nothing to see here moment" I mentioned in the above statements that historically the Oscars were awarded to Men in their 50s + and women in their 20s & 30s. You do not comment on that and I'll say that is stealth Misogynistic. Clever you. Avoid the real questions why don't you?

Furthermore, you don't respond to the film industry dropping to less than 9 BILLION in Revenue from 20 billion just a few short years ago.

I bet you are full on with the communists' dialogue statements regarding the others "Your Truth"
 
Top