Bad boys for life 8/10
A big improvement on the second film hopefully it won’t take another 17 years for a sequel.
Bombshell 6/10
Great cast in a average film
Spies in disguise 6/10
Like a boss 4/10
Typical chick flick that doesn’t offer anything new.
Seen it on Saturday night in 4DX and it was incredible. The best movie I’ve seen in a long while. Powerful and stuck with me for a good few hours after it finished
Big 5 stars for me
I AM SO FUCKING HYPED.
I’m seeing it in IMAX, and I’ve never been to an imax cinema before, so I really cannot wait.
Come onnnnnnnn Thursday!
Charade (1963)
A young American woman, Regina, living in Paris just back from a holiday in Alps is immediately informed that her mysterious husband has been murdered. The murderers being co-conspirators in a robbery of US gold during the war with the murdered man and who had been double crossed by him. Now they pursue Regina, believing she has their fortune.
This film was called the “best Hitchcock film Hitchcock didn’t make”. It kinda did have a Hitchcockian feel to it with twist and turns galore and lots of comedic effect.
All I can say though is… Audrey. 
P.S. 1917 was shite.
You being straight on 1917 here. Just interested tbh not judgemental.
@Persona is an old man trapped in a young body. He’d have enjoyed 1917 more if it was made in 1917 
Persona has a very different taste in films to the average moviegoer so I’ll believe him if he says he thought it was shite. Doesn’t mean I agree with him but I believe him.
He’s a true purist cinephile.
All the more reason I’d like his opinion tbh.
I can’t really find the words to explain why I felt it was poor I just did. It never really gave me that feeling of what it seemed to want to be - an epic. The story felt weak and the pacing was just…off. The only parts I felt were strong were the cinematography (no surprise given it’s Deakins - The Assassination of Jesse James is one of the most beautifully shots films I’ve ever seen.) - especially the scene with the shadows - and I genuinely felt something towards the end with the dash into No Man’s Land to run down the lines to get to the Colonel.
Was the acting poor, too? I was taken out of it a bit by the actor who played Blake - his accent for sure was all over the place.
I am quite surprised at the ratings/reviews this film has received.
Haha. I’m anything but, I just normally post the better of the stuff I watch. 
For a genuine WWI masterpiece see:
I agree with a lot of this. I didn’t get the feel of horror which is usually guaranteed with anything ww1.
I was entertained but not enthralled.
Johnny Got His Gun (1971) is the scariest film I’ve ever seen. It honestly left me feeling distressed, even now when I think about it I feel unease.
Absolute classic.
Absolutely agreed, probably the most powerful film about war I’ve seen. I’ve never seen a film that so utterly depressed and distressed me as this one did, I felt like a mini cloud followed me for a day or two afterwards, it was really hard to shake off.
Knew after watching it that I’d never rewatch it, and I’ll often happily rewatch dark films, that doesn’t usually put me off.
I agree, you can absolutely tell 1917 is going to be nothing special, in fact war movies these days no longer have any culture about them at all. They’re just aimed at the popcorn audience, big explosions, no depth, and a barely coherent storyline with paper thin characters. Today’s war movies are essentially just Transformer type films wrapped up and packaged differently.
Now you’ve said that, I’m racking my brains to think of a good war film. Good because I like it, not because others tell me it’s good.
I’m going to see 1917 tomorrow evening and I have no idea what to expect now. That’s a good thing I suppose.
You couldn’t script it!