Birdman

did anyone see this load of old tosh.
Had a good cast and apparently did well in the awards shows but it really does not go anywhere and is terribly tedious. If you saw it at the cinema then you probably feel a little ripped off. I downloaded it and still feel ripped off.

2/10

It may be my age but I find very few films these days have any depth in the story or characters.
I know there has been rubbish produced all along the line but when you have a film with two or three characters with the action set in one or two locations only and the actors have to act and enunciate (thankfully) to get the story over and it keeps you riveted for 90 mins like some of the old movies did.
It would be a nice suprise to have the start of the film announcing that there were no flashing lights, violence, swearing, adult themes and scenes with sexual content. Films now rely too much on all that at the expense of the story. I suppose we wouldn't get far without a bit of violence and sexual content though. Seems I'm becoming quite the curmudgeon.

Flix wrote:It may be my age but I find very few films these days have any depth in the story or characters.
I know there has been rubbish produced all along the line but when you have a film with two or three characters with the action set in one or two locations only and the actors have to act and enunciate (thankfully) to get the story over and it keeps you riveted for 90 mins like some of the old movies did.
It would be a nice suprise to have the start of the film announcing that there were no flashing lights, violence, swearing, adult themes and scenes with sexual content. Films now rely too much on all that at the expense of the story. I suppose we wouldn't get far without a bit of violence and sexual content though. Seems I'm becoming quite the curmudgeon.

I know what you mean. I knew nothign about this film, I had just heard it was well received during the oscars and other awards shows. with Michael keaton and edward norton I expected better.

I also watched a movie called tears of the sun yesterday which I did like. It starred bruce willis and was set in nigeria and involved a navy seal team rescuing an american doctor from a mission and having to get her out and many people from the mission who were not part of the plan. good story with some harrowing action

I have seen Tears of the Sun, I did enjoy it. After all I said I do like action movies, disaster movies and sci fi but even those made these days aren't a patch on the oldies. Earthquake with Charlton Heston, I think Gina whats her face and Genevieve Bujold? set in Los angeles was pretty good, now its the same themes - bolshei kids hate dad/mum who happens to be a top scientist/police officer who spends more time at work than home. As far as tv goes I'm enjoying the Nordic series its entertaining without the Holywood lips and chests.

Flix wrote:I have seen Tears of the Sun, I did enjoy it. After all I said I do like action movies, disaster movies and sci fi but even those made these days aren't a patch on the oldies. Earthquake with Charlton Heston, I think Gina whats her face and Genevieve Bujold? set in Los angeles was pretty good, now its the same themes - bolshei kids hate dad/mum who happens to be a top scientist/police officer who spends more time at work than home. As far as tv goes I'm enjoying the Nordic series its entertaining without the Holywood lips and chests.

I remember going to see earthquake in sensoround.
I want to get to see Jurassic world some time this week. San andreas looks like a good romp as well.
I quite like the hollywood blockbusters.
I would rather pay good money to see them on the big screen and wait for the DVD or download of other films.
A couple of films I have enjoyed without knowing anything about recently were horrible boss's 1 & 2