|
|
Post by mecano04 on Mar 6, 2018 3:00:04 GMT
Just saw it and I feel like this is the Atomic Blonde of 2018. It's an espionage movie that is beautiful visually, has some pretty brutal and graphic violence scenes and you get to see boobies but in the end it leaves you with very little. Unlike Atomic Blonde, the pace is slow (it feels like an eternity) and the music isn't as exciting. The acting was alright but some scenes were slightly disturbing and maybe that's why Lawrence got 10 millions for it. As my first movie of the year, I must say I'm happy it starts better than 2017 even if I would only give it a 5/10. I mean, the pretty graphic violence (and some torture) kinda spoiled the fun a bit and overall it felt like I watched another Point Blank ( www.imdb.com/title/tt0062138/?ref_=nv_sr_1). Anyone else had the same impression? |
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Mar 6, 2018 5:16:11 GMT
the visual beauty is what annoyed me about it. same thing about Atomic Blonde. Thats what both movies got wrong. And what Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy got so wright. A real (good) spy wouldnt stand out of the crowd like this (like both JLaw and Charlize), not only with their looks but with their fashion, style, and mannerism. The absence of facial expression is NOT a good quality in a spy. Its attracting attention. Its weird. It kinda ruined a lot of it (together with her bad hair) for me. Joel Egerton also looks "wrong" for a spy, especially one thats supposed to blend in in Russia. Also - Rats in the hallways and patients shitting themselves in a generic Russian hospital in present day? COME ON. And flopyp discs being used by spies in this millennium? COME THE F ON. It had potential, I agree. (and I did enjoy the torture scenes the most) but it was missing some critical component - feels like it was a mainly script problem, but the lack of attention to detail a bit part of it too. I feel like I need to rewatch TTSS now just to feel better  |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Mar 6, 2018 10:18:15 GMT
the visual beauty is what annoyed me about it. same thing about Atomic Blonde. Thats what both movies got wrong. And what Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy got so wright. A real (good) spy wouldnt stand out of the crowd like this (like both JLaw and Charlize), not only with their looks but with their fashion, style, and mannerism. The absence of facial expression is NOT a good quality in a spy. Its attracting attention. Its weird. It kinda ruined a lot of it (together with her bad hair) for me. Joel Egerton also looks "wrong" for a spy, especially one thats supposed to blend in in Russia. Also - Rats in the hallways and patients shitting themselves in a generic Russian hospital in present day? COME ON. And flopyp discs being used by spies in this millennium? COME THE F ON. It had potential, I agree. (and I did enjoy the torture scenes the most) but it was missing some critical component - feels like it was a mainly script problem, but the lack of attention to detail a bit part of it too. I feel like I need to rewatch TTSS now just to feel better I haven't seen RED SPARROW yet, but want too. I liked ATOMIC BLONDE and the visual style was part of it's charm. I would say that would be the case here. TTSS is a realistic spy thriller and a superb one as well. It was exquisite in it's design and execution. I have only watched once, because I don't want to ruin the feeling it gave me the first time I saw it on blu ray. I was pleasantly surprised and Oldman was in top form. When I watch 007 films, I don't expect realism. Isn't that what these heightened and exaggerated spy films are about. |
|
|
|
Post by faustus5 on Mar 6, 2018 18:12:25 GMT
I liked it, didn't love it. The end was fantastic, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Mar 7, 2018 4:58:39 GMT
I liked it, didn't love it. The end was fantastic, though. agreed. that kinda made it worth it, the ending. |
|
|
|
Post by bluerisk on Mar 7, 2018 17:53:55 GMT
6/10 with a strong tendence to a 7. I watched it only because of Lawrence, and since I do not like spy movies (only the old Bond movies like Goldfinger), I was very, very spectitical, but it was better than expected. Sometimes it is very good to have low expectations. Lawrence was good but I wished they had skipped the Russian accent. But some lines completely in Russian to give us the idead how it actually might sound, but the rest in a proper language (Germin in my case, English for the most). As for Lawrence looks too good as spy: that was the idea of the sparrows - to gain the attraction and to seduce. If this idea is a good one is an other question. But the book the movies is based on suggested this idea, and we also know expamles that rich and powerful men fall for hot young girls. In the movie it was actually not even kept secret that she was a sparrow/Russian agent - aisde from her looks, she was too promiment as a former leading solist of of the Bolshoi ballet - many of them have even an own wikipedia entry: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolshoi_Ballet#Principal_dancers[15]It was about what we (Germans) call the "cat and mouse game" (Katz- und Mausspiel - I'm always siding with the cats). |
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Mar 7, 2018 20:46:06 GMT
Lawrence was good but I wished they had skipped the Russian accent. But some lines completely in Russian to give us the idead how it actually might sound, but the rest in a proper language (Germin in my case, English for the most). As for Lawrence looks too good as spy: that was the idea of the sparrows - to gain the attraction and to seduce. If this idea is a good one is an other question. But the book the movies is based on suggested this idea, and we also know expamles that rich and powerful men fall for hot young girls. In the movie it was actually not even kept secret that she was a sparrow/Russian agent - aisde from her looks, she was too promiment as a former leading solist of of the Bolshoi ballet - many of them have even an own wikipedia entry: yes the russian accent was a really bad idea… I hate when they do that. Same problem with Anthropoid. I dont mind that she looked good, and understand that she is supposed to look super hot as a sparrow, what I mind is her inability to blend with a crowd in situations where a spy (including sparrows) would benefit from not attracting attention to him/herself. The lack of facial expression/mimics really stood out, together with the fashion choices she made when not in a direct sparrow mode trying to lurr men to her. Marta was much more believable that way. you could tell she was going to be able to clean up real good, but at the same time she would be able to pass for a regular (although still attractive) girl. same problem with Charlize in Atomic Blonde. Not her beauty but her manners and fashion choices. I dont mind it in Atomic Blonde as much (and not at all in John Wick) where they are not trying to make you really believe its reality. but Sparrow seemed to aim to compare with movies like Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (realistic portrayed of the spying world) and thats why I didnt like it. The balerina subplot actually ALSO bothered me, hehe now when you mention it. someone AS PROMINENT as a Balshoj Theatre primabalerina (who got even more famous because of the injury) is not going to have an easy time pulling of identity under a new name. Come on. Thats ridiculous. If she had stayed with her own name (and still was a spy) that would work. but why give her a new name? in the nowaydays wolrd of mobile devices and social media and the fame that goes with being a primabalerina / injured on stage? EVERYBODY IN RUSSIA would know her real name. Think about Nancy Kerrigan at the time of her biggest fame, after her injury, trying to become a spy UNDER A FAKE NAME. Just another thing that would attract unwanted attention to you. |
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Mar 7, 2018 20:50:34 GMT
It's good. Atomic Blonde is better.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluerisk on Mar 7, 2018 20:58:14 GMT
Lawrence was good but I wished they had skipped the Russian accent. But some lines completely in Russian to give us the idead how it actually might sound, but the rest in a proper language (Germin in my case, English for the most). As for Lawrence looks too good as spy: that was the idea of the sparrows - to gain the attraction and to seduce. If this idea is a good one is an other question. But the book the movies is based on suggested this idea, and we also know expamles that rich and powerful men fall for hot young girls. In the movie it was actually not even kept secret that she was a sparrow/Russian agent - aisde from her looks, she was too promiment as a former leading solist of of the Bolshoi ballet - many of them have even an own wikipedia entry: [...] The balerina subplot actually ALSO bothered me, hehe now when you mention it. someone AS PROMINENT as a Balshoj Theatre primabalerina (who got even more famous because of the injury) is not going to have an easy time pulling of identity under a new name. Come on. Thats ridiculous. If she had stayed with her own name (and still was a spy) that would work. but why give her a new name? in the nowaydays wolrd of mobile devices and social media and the fame that goes with being a primabalerina / injured on stage? EVERYBODY IN RUSSIA would know her real name. Think about Nancy Kerrigan at the time of her biggest fame, after her injury, trying to become a spy UNDER A FAKE NAME. Just another thing that would attract unwanted attention to you. On the other hand: how unlikely is it that such a prominent person is actually a spy?! The Americans had no hard time to find out her true indentity but were still unsure if she is truly a spy - too obvious and too unlikely at the same time. It's totally against the textbook. Last but not least: her uncle was a high ranking member of the Russian secret service (FSB?). A co-worker from Russia even explained me its Russian meaning...anyway: why did she live in a hellhole, if her uncle was a) that powerful (and in countries like Russia this always comes along with money) and b) she was so beautiful, successful and famous (=> the Oligrach interest). Too much a "Cindarella"-set up. But ok, it was based on a book, and I guess this book was a bestseller (or why making a movie about it)... |
|
|
|
Post by bluerisk on Mar 7, 2018 21:00:23 GMT
It's good. Atomic Blonde is better. Haven't seen it, for I'm a Lawrence fan, and Theron wasnever attracting my interest. And Berlin sucks big time. I would throw a nuke on it if it wasn't for some buildings and museums. But the city and its people suck big time. Drecksloch. |
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Mar 7, 2018 22:21:20 GMT
It's good. Atomic Blonde is better. Haven't seen it, for I'm a Lawrence fan, and Theron was atrracting my interest. And Berlin sucks big time. I would throw a nuke on it if it wasn't for some buildings and museums. But the city and its people suck big time. Drecksloch. whats so horrible about berlin to you? (thanks for not nuking it, and recognizing the museums and architecture value there) |
|
|
|
Post by THawk on Mar 8, 2018 23:19:57 GMT
1/10. One of the very worst movie I have ever had the displeasure of seeing (was dragged along to this.) A complete embarrassment for everyone involved from the bottom up. The hilarious thing is Hollywood-America loves to talk about how much brainwashing and propaganda other countries are involved in, yet the entire movie was just hate-filled garbage pissing down on Russia. Russian people were basically presented as soulless, ruthless, robotic whores, while the Americans the "enlightened" saviors. And the bad dude was the likeness of a young Putin. Har-har. I mean even if the Russian government is indeed horrible; this movie's storyline just stuck out as a sore turd of hate against anything and everything Russia. Bloated "twist and turn" plot that goes nowhere interesting, and characters without any real personality. Not a single redeeming quality of any kind.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Mar 8, 2018 23:46:04 GMT
1/10. One of the very worst movie I have ever had the displeasure of seeing (was dragged along to this.) A complete embarrassment for everyone involved from the bottom up. The hilarious thing is Hollywood-America loves to talk about how much brainwashing and propaganda other countries are involved in, yet the entire movie was just hate-filled garbage pissing down on Russia. Russian people were basically presented as soulless, ruthless, robotic whores, while the Americans the "enlightened" saviors. And the bad dude was the likeness of a young Putin. Har-har. I mean even if the Russian government is indeed horrible; this movie's storyline just stuck out as a sore turd of hate against anything and everything Russia. Bloated "twist and turn" plot that goes nowhere interesting, and characters without any real personality. Not a single redeeming quality of any kind. are you Russian (or CIS) yourself? (both yes or no would set another question from me so why not just go ahead) A) if yes - can you think of any recent (hollywood movie) where you were happier or even happy about the portrayal of Russians? B) if no - have you seen HardCore Henry? What did you think? |
|
|
|
Post by THawk on Mar 8, 2018 23:57:49 GMT
1/10. One of the very worst movie I have ever had the displeasure of seeing (was dragged along to this.) A complete embarrassment for everyone involved from the bottom up. The hilarious thing is Hollywood-America loves to talk about how much brainwashing and propaganda other countries are involved in, yet the entire movie was just hate-filled garbage pissing down on Russia. Russian people were basically presented as soulless, ruthless, robotic whores, while the Americans the "enlightened" saviors. And the bad dude was the likeness of a young Putin. Har-har. I mean even if the Russian government is indeed horrible; this movie's storyline just stuck out as a sore turd of hate against anything and everything Russia. Bloated "twist and turn" plot that goes nowhere interesting, and characters without any real personality. Not a single redeeming quality of any kind. are you Russian (or CIS) yourself? (both yes or no would set another question from me so why not just go ahead) A) if yes - can you think of any recent (hollywood movie) where you were happier or even happy about the portrayal of Russians? B) if no - have you seen HardCore Henry? What did you think? No I am not Russian, nor is my observation in any way a defense of Russia, in reality the Russian government does way worse things than what's in the movie. And yes obviously Hollywood films have been spoofing and villainizing Russians for many decades; but here they went the extra mileage to be as purposefully revolting and degrading as possible. Russian people as a whole are pretty much presented either as trash, or at best as American-supporting trash. You'd expect to see a movie made like this during the Cold War, serving not as artistic expression but as one-note propaganda. When is Hollywood going to make a movie about US drone-operators who bomb entire villages and hospitals killing women and children in their hunt for the enemy? Is that not worth exploring? |
|
|
|
Post by mecano04 on Mar 9, 2018 15:06:32 GMT
are you Russian (or CIS) yourself? (both yes or no would set another question from me so why not just go ahead) A) if yes - can you think of any recent (hollywood movie) where you were happier or even happy about the portrayal of Russians? B) if no - have you seen HardCore Henry? What did you think? No I am not Russian, nor is my observation in any way a defense of Russia, in reality the Russian government does way worse things than what's in the movie. And yes obviously Hollywood films have been spoofing and villainizing Russians for many decades; but here they went the extra mileage to be as purposefully revolting and degrading as possible. Russian people as a whole are pretty much presented either as trash, or at best as American-supporting trash. You'd expect to see a movie made like this during the Cold War, serving not as artistic expression but as one-note propaganda. When is Hollywood going to make a movie about US drone-operators who bomb entire villages and hospitals killing women and children in their hunt for the enemy? Is that not worth exploring? Well there was Eye in the Sky ( www.imdb.com/title/tt2057392/?ref_=nv_sr_1) that did brought up the question but not to the extent you described. |
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Mar 9, 2018 16:01:34 GMT
No I am not Russian, nor is my observation in any way a defense of Russia, in reality the Russian government does way worse things than what's in the movie. And yes obviously Hollywood films have been spoofing and villainizing Russians for many decades; but here they went the extra mileage to be as purposefully revolting and degrading as possible. Russian people as a whole are pretty much presented either as trash, or at best as American-supporting trash. You'd expect to see a movie made like this during the Cold War, serving not as artistic expression but as one-note propaganda. When is Hollywood going to make a movie about US drone-operators who bomb entire villages and hospitals killing women and children in their hunt for the enemy? Is that not worth exploring? Well there was Eye in the Sky ( www.imdb.com/title/tt2057392/?ref_=nv_sr_1) that did brought up the question but not to the extent you described. and other movies like that exist. Btw how great was Eye in the Sky, right? I really enjoyed it. (tearing up over the loss of Rickman though) |
|
|
|
Post by mecano04 on Mar 9, 2018 19:58:00 GMT
and other movies like that exist. Btw how great was Eye in the Sky, right? I really enjoyed it. (tearing up over the loss of Rickman though) To be honest, I do remember watching it and the story in general but I can't remember much fine details. Somehow on IMDB I see that I gave it a 6/10. I'm also sad for the loss of Rickman. Still, what I remember is how it raised the question on the cost of all those actions. I would have to dig quite a bit but yeas ago there was a newspaper article about helicopter pilots missions in Afghanistan. They talked about their expectations and missions in general and what choices they have to make in their fight. One thing that really struck me was when one pilot talked about what the civilians should expect from them and the fact they should be "understanding". He talked about being reassigned, with his partner piloting a 2nd helicopter, to another objective while in flight but they were too heavy (or something like that) so they had to drop weight. The solution was to empty some of their fuel tanks while in flight. The thing is, as the pilot said, at times it gets really hot (even at night) in Afghanistan people sleep outside. It turned out they had to drop fuel over populated areas knowing people are out there and knowing the effects ( www.interiorhealth.ca/yourenvironment/emergencypreparedness/documents/jetfuela1healthsummary.pdf). He knew it wasn't good but he hoped those people would "understand" that it's a price to pay for the job he is doing out there. I mean, what? Let's do that to his wife and kids while they are lounging by the pool in his backyard and let's see if he is "understanding" once the effects set in... This is madness, plain and simple. |
|
|
|
Post by bluerisk on Mar 10, 2018 12:18:00 GMT
are you Russian (or CIS) yourself? (both yes or no would set another question from me so why not just go ahead) A) if yes - can you think of any recent (hollywood movie) where you were happier or even happy about the portrayal of Russians? B) if no - have you seen HardCore Henry? What did you think? No I am not Russian, nor is my observation in any way a defense of Russia, in reality the Russian government does way worse things than what's in the movie. And yes obviously Hollywood films have been spoofing and villainizing Russians for many decades; but here they went the extra mileage to be as purposefully revolting and degrading as possible. Russian people as a whole are pretty much presented either as trash, or at best as American-supporting trash. You'd expect to see a movie made like this during the Cold War, serving not as artistic expression but as one-note propaganda. When is Hollywood going to make a movie about US drone-operators who bomb entire villages and hospitals killing women and children in their hunt for the enemy? Is that not worth exploring? The depiction of the Russian people was far too friendly....because their women look like ugly toads too. |
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Mar 10, 2018 19:35:35 GMT
I liked it, didn't love it. The end was fantastic, though. agreed. that kinda made it worth it, the ending. I feel like i need to see this again to gauge how I truly feel about it. Right now its about a 6/10 for me. Not horrible but very middling and all those gotcha! Twists. And what you say about her blending in is the problem for certain actors and why they are movie stars lol. They stand out compared to an average citizen which is troubling actually. |
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Mar 10, 2018 23:25:42 GMT
agreed. that kinda made it worth it, the ending. And what you say about her blending in is the problem for certain actors and why they are movie stars lol. They stand out compared to an average citizen which is troubling actually. but i dont think its about her look/beauty. A) she looks like an average slavic/Russian girl, in eastern Europe she wouldn't really stand out this much just for her looks. Every other young girl there looks like that but more importantly B) its not about the looks. its about her lack of facial expressions/gestures and choice of fashion. THAT is what separates her from the crowd. And I get there were scenes where that was what she wanted/needed (the hotel bar, maybe even the pool etc). But there were many other scenes where she (as a spy) would benefit from not being so visible, and she was not able to adjust to it - by having a human expression on her face (smiling or frowning, doesn't matter but something other than the blank stare), and dressing a bit differently. thats all. |
|
