TV/Movies Megathread

[Admiral Yi]

I watched Wolf Hall. Finished the first series. It's pretty slow and plodding at times and takes some liberties with history

I thought that was the entire point of the exercise: that history is to a large extent a matter of narrative choice and interpretation and malleable.  Up to Wolf Hall the standard narrative was that Thomas More was a principled saint and Cromwell a slime.  Wolf had upended this narrative using, AFAIK, the same historical facts.

So I'm curious what liberties you thought they took.

[Josephus]

I think Carry-On was easily one of the worst films I've seen in some time.

When I was very young I snuck into Carry On Girls but got kicked out

[Darth Wagtaros]

Kinds of Kindness.  Not sure what to make of it beyond it being long as fuck.

[Josquius]

I watched Wolf Hall. Finished the first series. It's pretty slow and plodding at times and takes some liberties with history

I thought that was the entire point of the exercise: that history is to a large extent a matter of narrative choice and interpretation and malleable.  Up to Wolf Hall the standard narrative was that Thomas More was a principled saint and Cromwell a slime.  Wolf had upended this narrative using, AFAIK, the same historical facts.

So I'm curious what liberties you thought they took.

Oh yeah I get it was an alternative take from Cromwells POV.
Though they sort of overdid a bit with him being absolutely innocent and pure in everything and basically every woman right up to queens and princesses having the hots for him
Honestly though this slant on history does make a lot of sense as it would be expected some upstart commoner would get a bad writeup, is all to blame for misleading the dear king, etc...

In terms of liberties with history what I meant was they shifted around the timing of some events, compressed timelines, had some altered relationships (one that i can recall is Mary Boleyn as this forever doomed to be unmarried  super slag when she was actually married), and that sort of thing.

[Duque de Bragança]

Saw Gladiator II. Wasn't expecting much....but literally jumping the CGI shark?

Fixed! The alien mutant baboons were even worse. So bad that the US identity politics appropriation (black North African Macrinus) went almost unnoticed. Denzel Washington was also in a full American Gangster II mode, very entertaining. 

[Josephus]

Yeah the alien mutant baboons were bad, but laughable.

[Duque de Bragança]

Well, most of it was bad but laughable. Not as laughable as Ridley Scott's Robin Hood, however.

Probably going to rewatch the Duellists next Saturday since there is a screening in a arthouse (formerly grindhouse). After Highlander and before The Man who shot Liberty Valance. 
Yes, it's a special duel cinema-club.

[garbon]

I watched Wolf Hall. Finished the first series. It's pretty slow and plodding at times and takes some liberties with history

I thought that was the entire point of the exercise: that history is to a large extent a matter of narrative choice and interpretation and malleable.  Up to Wolf Hall the standard narrative was that Thomas More was a principled saint and Cromwell a slime.  Wolf had upended this narrative using, AFAIK, the same historical facts.

So I'm curious what liberties you thought they took.

Oh yeah I get it was an alternative take from Cromwells POV.
Though they sort of overdid a bit with him being absolutely innocent and pure in everything and basically every woman right up to queens and princesses having the hots for him
Honestly though this slant on history does make a lot of sense as it would be expected some upstart commoner would get a bad writeup, is all to blame for misleading the dear king, etc...

In terms of liberties with history what I meant was they shifted around the timing of some events, compressed timelines, had some altered relationships (one that i can recall is Mary Boleyn as this forever doomed to be unmarried  super slag when she was actually married), and that sort of thing.

Welcome to historical fiction?

[mongers]

Man, gotta love some 70s TV, things were so different then, like this Parkinson chatshow episode from 1974, worth watching the first ten minutes, to get the picture:

Parkinson - Michael Caine and Helen Hayes

And Also Michael Caine is very entertaining even though he's not promoting anything and just seems along for a chat!

[HVC]

There was an xmen marathon on tv today. Caught about half of apocalypse. I mean, it's not great cinema by any stretch, but it passes the time.  I started thinking about X-men dark phoenix. I didn't watch it when it first came out, either in theater, or streaming, because the reviews were so bad. But it came out just before peak pushback on superhero movies and thought maybe critics were extra, well, critical.

No. It's just bad. Sad when the 6 year old actor is a better Jean Grey the the adult. Also, weird and oddly placed rah rah women stuff peppered in ("should be called x-women!). So that's two swings and two misses on the phoenix saga. Wonder if they'll ever try a third.

[HVC]

Man, gotta love some 70s TV, things were so different then, like this Parkinson chatshow episode from 1974, worth watching the first ten minutes, to get the picture:

Parkinson - Michael Caine and Helen Hayes

And Also Michael Caine is very entertaining even though he's not promoting anything and just seems along for a chat!

A lot of those actors grew up to be weird, and/or despicable ... oh, the actual 70s. Never mind.