It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
When I went on a marathon throughout his films years back, I was quite excited for this one but pretty much walked away with the same feeling you did.
Fourth installment in my watching of Hayiao MIyazaki. This one surprised me : first, it was much shorter than the preceding movies (clocking at just one hour and 25 minutes), and a bit dark too, despite the glorious scenery, and the fantastic creatures that inhabited it (the last act was pretty much nail biting, and what was Satsuki's and Mei's mother suffering from ?). Still, I loved it very much. So far, Miyazaki Sama has not disappointed me.
The Sharkey's Machine novel is a cracking read. I enjoyed the film but it's not a patch on the book.
Sadly my experience as well.
Just about as brilliant as it's been made out to be for the last 18 years.
It’s not my favorite film, but it has grown on me over time. Definitely a solid flick.
Was it the theatrical cut? I have both cuts on dvd it's been a while since I watched Mimic though I remember liking the directors cut more I recall it being much more atmospheric.
https://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=761564
I think theatrical. The huge problem is the characters/acting are quite unimpressive, which is bizarre for a del Toro film. Usually those are some of the best aspects of his movies.
There were alot of problems during production, I was curious about the film due to Del Toro. I think I'll see if i can get it on Bluray see how the visuals stand up.
I’ve become a Del Toro fan myself, though not all his films are my cup of tea (Mimic, Cronos). Shape of Water, Pan’s Labyrinth, and Devil’s Backbone are all sure-fire classics though and are among my favorite movies. And Hellboy was cool.
I watched Mimic not knowing it was Del Toro back in the 90's, Pans Labyrinth and Hellboy and Blade 2 are the films that made me pay attention to Del Toro. A Del Toro produced Spanish language film called The Orphanage as a side note is worth a look, it's a film I enjoyed.
As a movie it's fine enough but as a del Toro film there's something lacking.
So that was Del Toro? I remember not liking it.Don t remember anything else.
Thoroughly enjoyed this movie and I am pleased that it is performing so well at the box office. Just get a vibe that he may become the figure head of the Avengers going forward?
This version is surely the closest anyone has come to transferring the spirit and letter of Doyle's stories to film. And it stars what might be the best Holmes and Watson to ever appear onscreen, Jeremy Brett and Edward Hardwicke. The Sign of Four is a very close adaptation of Conan Doyle's novel, but that would count for nothing if it wasn't stylishly directed, sumptuously produced, and perfectly acted.
It was also made at the right time, when the Granada Sherlock Holmes TV series had proven a success and received the go-ahead and financial backing to expand its format. The Sign of Four was filmed in 35mm with a lavish (for TV) budget and presents a convincing vision of Holmes's world, from the cluttered Victorian furnishings to a steam launch chase down the Thames. Jeremy Brett was at the peak of his powers, before manic depression and heart failure permanently wrecked his health. His mercurial Holmes lives only for detection--without a case he's twitchy and irritable; on the trail he's suave and scintillating. Opposite him, Hardwicke's Watson is grizzled paragon of common sense and decency. The other players (Jenny Seagrove, John Thaw, Ronald Lacey) are a perfectly cast assortment of eccentrics.
Director Peter Hammond is over-fond of compositions involving mirrors, but he keeps the eye (and the actors) occupied. At its best the film is a catalogue of quintessential Sherlockiana: London fog, hidden treasure, the Baker Street Irregulars, and Holmes's outlandish disguises, violin playing, and elaborate deductions. The plot is classically Holmesian, involving Imperial misdeeds coming home to haunt their perpetrators. Some have criticized the film for the lengthy flashback near the end, but this is the emotional heart of the film, the why-done-it that comes after the criminal's apprehension and gives a tragic coloring to his crimes. It gives the literal Sign of Four an ethical resonance.
Like all of the Granada Holmes productions, The Sign of Four has been remastered and released on Blu-Ray (which prompted my re-watch). It looks great but whoever handled the color correction eliminated the day-for-night effects, so many scenes are brighter then they should be.
Weird. Also kinda crap. But most of all weird. You won't understand my loss for words unless you see it.
Starring: Sean Connery, Dustin Hoffman, Matthew Broderick
Directored by: Sidney Lumet
Not bad but i wish it was a bit better.
Yeah disappointing.
That was the time Connery had his throat operation so I don't think he was that well.
Connery still kicked ass but the script lacked something special.
Almost saw this yesterday, as I've really been looking forward to it. I enjoyed EX MACHINA and I like Natalie so I have good hopes for it.
That bad, ehh? Reviews seemed quite favorable, but it's not making any sort of dent at the box office. I wonder if it has to do with the Netflix deal, given that it'll be on Netflix internationally in, what, two weeks now? Can't blame people for not rushing out to pay to see it when they can catch it from the comfort of their home.
I won't be surprised if this is the state of moviegoing in a decade or two, max, or at least a consistent option. I can see Netflix and other platforms eventually shelling out to make deals like this, inevitably offering movies the day of their theatrical release.
Sky have done a similar thing with that Bruce Lee film and Monster Family,i think its called.
The day they came out in the cinema,they were also released on Sky Cinema the same day.
I know the aforementioned deal I brought up affects Netflix globally, sans the United States for some reason. Guess it's just part of the deal.
That new Shaft film is going to have the same deal: releases in theaters, drops internationally on Netflix just two or three weeks after release everywhere except for the U.S.
This cant be doing the cinemas any good.
I'll still probably go to theater to see it. I don't mind putting money towards auteur-driven studio projects when I think they look interesting. Not that it'll help, though. They seem to be doing less than well at the moment.
The cinemas are getting bullied by Disney these days.