classic, although not sure if theyre quite as good as they used to be.
― mr x, Wednesday, 6 February 2008 17:58 (sixteen years ago) link
After years of irregularly looking at it, I realised a subscription would be a good thing to ask for as a Christmas present. So I did. I love the articles like the one a few issues about about Hidden, Birth and lots of recent films I'd never heard of that used surrealism and unexplained plot points to unsettle the audience, explore bourgeois complacency la la la. It made me want to seek them all out.
― Alba, Wednesday, 6 February 2008 20:23 (sixteen years ago) link
Also, it was nice the other day playing Scrabble online with mark s and then going to bed to read what S&S said about I'm Not There and finding he'd written the review.
― Alba, Wednesday, 6 February 2008 20:24 (sixteen years ago) link
damn son, i met the writer who wrote that one about 'hidden', she done a conference wot i spoke at.
― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Wednesday, 6 February 2008 20:27 (sixteen years ago) link
their review of the tim burton charlie and the chocolate factory was too kind though. or if not kind, just skirting around getting to why it wasnt actually that good.
― mr x, Wednesday, 6 February 2008 21:22 (sixteen years ago) link
haven't read kent jones' article on 'the wire' but really hate the -- usually fine -- frank kermode quote about its greatness being a tribute to the intelligence of its audience. i guess my kinsmen* kermode was saying that it was impressive that 'hamlet' could be done for a mixed audience in late tudor (or was it stuart) london. that is a bit different from bigging up hbo subscribers.
*it's a manx thing
― banriquit, Saturday, 5 April 2008 11:20 (fifteen years ago) link
I'm def in the irregular looking at stage w/ S&S. That article on Hidden, etc sounds fantastic! From which issue is it?
― xyzzzz__, Saturday, 5 April 2008 18:21 (fifteen years ago) link
http://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/feature/49266
― banriquit, Saturday, 5 April 2008 18:26 (fifteen years ago) link
the article on iraq-war films was good.
― mr x, Saturday, 5 April 2008 18:28 (fifteen years ago) link
aw i thought that was gonna be about Kyle MacLachlan hunting down an alien
― latebloomer, Saturday, 5 April 2008 18:28 (fifteen years ago) link
That's a great article, banriquit -- a very convincing reading of a film where, if I recall correctly, people at the time were far more preoccupied in solving the 'whodunit?'
The review of the Varda's DVD set is upsetting tho', but that's my fault for not having multiple region DVD player
― xyzzzz__, Sunday, 6 April 2008 11:09 (fifteen years ago) link
That's not the article on Hidden etc. that I was talking about, though it is perhaps the one referred to here:
The one I had in mind was by Michael Atkinson from last November, and it's not online.
― Alba, Sunday, 6 April 2008 11:32 (fifteen years ago) link
classic. not in response to anything in particular, just i find myself waiting for the next issue. it's so high-density, both the ads for new eureka titles and the rundowns of festivals and dvd releases are really rewarding.
― high-five machine (schlump), Wednesday, 6 January 2010 21:45 (fourteen years ago) link
the ads for new eureka titles
best thing in the mag imho
― Patriarchy Oppression Machine (history mayne), Wednesday, 6 January 2010 22:04 (fourteen years ago) link
i still love sight and sound and i don't even watch films any more.
― jed_, Thursday, 7 January 2010 01:35 (fourteen years ago) link
http://www.ultraculture.co.uk/2055-sight-and-sound.htm
lol
― the highest per-vote vag so far (history mayne), Tuesday, 2 February 2010 18:03 (fourteen years ago) link
otm!the last two issues have been awesome in a way that unannotated lists seldom are. the essays on trends last decade - slow cinema &c - were fascinating, and i'm checking out some costa on their recommendation.
i think re: snobbery, sight and sound is the only thing i ever find kinda too comprehensive or thorough; when they're printing the complete credits for some owen wilson film a month later because they weren't available when the last issue went to press it can seem a little OCD.
kinda OT but, did anyone see nowhere boy? it looked terrible but i usually trust their films of the month, it seemed anomalous
― schlump, Tuesday, 2 February 2010 23:40 (fourteen years ago) link
it's ok. why d'it look terrible?! better than the last brit-artist-turns-director film, 'hunger'.
they do the credits because 20 years ago S&S absorbed what was its sister publication, monthly film bulletin. they're both publications of what is in a complicated way finally a state body, and listing all the credits was the MFB's role from its inception. i have mixed feelings about it -- makes the mag seem a bit academic. some idiot wrote in this month saying why even review (bad) hollywood films, as if you could guess upfront which films will and won't be worth reviewing. owen's work has gone downhill since the mid-00s, but if they're going to print the credits of manifest frauds like lars von trier, i don't think he should be excluded.
― the highest per-vote vag so far (history mayne), Tuesday, 2 February 2010 23:49 (fourteen years ago) link
i thought it looked terrible too. plus this whole thing with artists and fashion designers etc suddenly deciding to make films really gets on my tits.
xpost
― jed_, Tuesday, 2 February 2010 23:50 (fourteen years ago) link
who is owen?
― jed_, Tuesday, 2 February 2010 23:51 (fourteen years ago) link
to be honest i thought it looked terrible because i think that just about every film looks terrible plus i'm just instantly turned off it by the fact that it's made by sam taylor wood and even if it looked like the best thing ever i would never ever see it.
i still like the mag though.
― jed_, Tuesday, 2 February 2010 23:56 (fourteen years ago) link
wilson.
the thing with 'nowhere boy' is that STW's involvement is a red herring. it's a relatively anonymous period piece about being young in the 50s. kristen scott-thomas is very good in it. the guy playing lennon looks too old and handsome, but the other kids are very good too.
― the highest per-vote vag so far (history mayne), Wednesday, 3 February 2010 00:03 (fourteen years ago) link
anonymous seems likely. the lennon guy is currently 19, what age is he supposed to be? he's also the father of sam taylor wood's new baby (she's 43 and they re about to get married). this doesn't have anything to do with me not liking her btw, i only just read about it.
― jed_, Wednesday, 3 February 2010 00:14 (fourteen years ago) link
maybe s&s should have a gossip column
i just thought it looked schlocky, weird southern impressions of earthy accented cocky northerness, & also this guy:
http://flavorwire.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Picture-141.png
who i guess would be expertly cast if i was to bring my hatred of paul mccartney to the silver screen but in this i am guessing is just an irritant.
that's real interesting about the magazine credits history btw
oh & i liked hunger - at least it kind of vaguely constitutes some sort of reflective national filmmaking, an informative period piece like sophie scholl in germany or something.
― schlump, Wednesday, 3 February 2010 01:42 (fourteen years ago) link
i'd say 'nowhere boy' does better on that front, really. kind of respectable vs not within the lower-middle-class during the "age of affluence". was 'hunger' that informative? what did bobby sands want?
― the highest per-vote vag so far (history mayne), Wednesday, 3 February 2010 10:49 (fourteen years ago) link
the lennon guy is currently 19, what age is he supposed to be? he's also the father of sam taylor wood's new baby (she's 43 and they re about to get married).
it covers him from his uncle's death (when he was 14) till 1960. but its main focus is, i'd say, 1957-8. so when he was 17-18. macca was two years younger than lennon, but there's too much of a disparity in the film, and even if the actor was actually 17 when they shot it, he looks more like 21-22 imo. saw it w parents, so from my pov the shot of him expertly fingering his (also highly attractive) schoolgirl girlfriend from behind was a bit unnecessary.
― the highest per-vote vag so far (history mayne), Wednesday, 3 February 2010 10:58 (fourteen years ago) link
also i don't think schoolgirls gave blowjobs in 1956. or, really, in 1996, iirc.
― the highest per-vote vag so far (history mayne), Wednesday, 3 February 2010 11:03 (fourteen years ago) link
Never Been Slarved
― Tracer Hand, Wednesday, 3 February 2010 11:21 (fourteen years ago) link
I approve of Sight and Sound, though I have never bought an issue. I always think of it as being Not For Me.
― The New Dirty Vicar, Wednesday, 3 February 2010 14:26 (fourteen years ago) link
it's for everyone with vital organs and £3 to spare.
― the highest per-vote vag so far (history mayne), Wednesday, 3 February 2010 14:31 (fourteen years ago) link
*looks at cover*
£3.95
i bought the latest yesterday. its a good read but i wish the reviewers wrote with more confidence. its hard to get any sort of opinion from it. i mean, they were praising 4321 for being aware of its own farcical nature, which er, it really isnt. but a lot of the writing i find a bit 'damp' or just too reasonable. i prefer cineaste magazine from the states for reviews i think, its less self conscious.
― titchy (titchyschneiderMk2), Sunday, 20 June 2010 13:24 (thirteen years ago) link
kinda dipped in here while still wondering whether to voice my petty & insubstantial disappointment with the interrupters review in the september issue & then read the above, which kinda at least makes me feel like it would fit into a trend. i think their reviews are v good, though, generally, & often - struggling to think of examples, here, but i think usually with bigger, glitzier, studio/franchise stuff - the kind of idiosyncratic takedowns that it's good to have access to because they're personal enough to give you a counterpoint to your own opinion - like it'll be some particular reading that you're unlikely to have come away with yourself. (also, with this & film comment, the dvd reviews are always the better things to read, i think, i guess for various reasons).
but the interrupters review. it's one of those just-describe-the-film reviews, for the most part, which is p much the norm elsewhere but is frustrating in something as reliably interesting as s&s, particularly when it's their film of the month & not getting a lot of expository coverage elsewhere.
(sorry this is v self indulgent)
― (Chris Isaak Cover) (schlump), Friday, 26 August 2011 23:38 (twelve years ago) link
the dvd reviews are better as they seem a bit more personal and 'honest' somehow, maybe cos of time that has passed, or maybe just cos theres less pressure on having to present a certain view in a dvd review than a new film one
― titchy (titchyschneiderMk2), Saturday, 27 August 2011 12:36 (twelve years ago) link
There still needs to be a film mag on the level of current Cahiers du Cinema in English. The writing is exemplary.
― Vendo Caramelos A Veces Sin Dinero (Capitaine Jay Vee), Saturday, 27 August 2011 14:43 (twelve years ago) link
i don't think i've read any cahiers stuff. i was just reading that n+1 takedown of the cahier-centric bio of its 50s and 60s years. have you read it in translation or do you speak french? there are a few things that have been printed that i'm really keen to read, like a claire denis piece on kore-eda.
it maybe depends what you want from your film writing, i think; is cahiers more like, political, or philosophical, or? s & s's auteurist, slightly technical/process-based focus suits me pretty well.
― (Chris Isaak Cover) (schlump), Saturday, 27 August 2011 15:00 (twelve years ago) link
Do you read Cinema Scope, schlump? The writing isn't exactly consistent, but it is probably the best North American film mag and works in a largely auteurist mode. I don't have a particularly sophisticated sense of S&S because I almost never feel that it rewards the $10 it costs in the States.
― C0L1N B..., Saturday, 27 August 2011 15:11 (twelve years ago) link
I read French ok - with a dictionary I do even better. Current Cahiers seems to be less politically/philosophically orientated than I had expected based on the English translations of essays I had read from the 50s-70s. Their current reliance on perceptive and very process-based interviews with filmmakers (directors/cinematographers/editors...) is refreshing. The film reviews are great as well.
― Vendo Caramelos A Veces Sin Dinero (Capitaine Jay Vee), Saturday, 27 August 2011 15:18 (twelve years ago) link
That said, I do pick up S+S often but love reading 20-30 back issues even more when I can find them. They used to have folks like Rosenbaum and Penelope Houston writing for them on a seemingly monthly basis in the 70s.
― Vendo Caramelos A Veces Sin Dinero (Capitaine Jay Vee), Saturday, 27 August 2011 15:20 (twelve years ago) link
Do you read Cinema Scope, schlump
it's funny, i don't, but someone mentioned it on here maybe yesterday & i found myself on its website trying to get a sense of it, all while wondering whether i haven't read it because it & its website seem like graphic anachronisms, which obviously you shouldn't use to judge (don't judge a magazine by its masthead, etc). a bookstore in town - that i'm headed to in a sec! - carries it, so i'll go leaf through. i like film comment a lot, for the room it affords stuff like its selective dvd reviews (counterbalanced by the info-glut of the sidebars recommending stuff) & for its way-ott but super immersive features, cf the kent jones piece on tree of life. so many loanwords! so if you're recommending CS as > FC then i'm psyched.
yeah cahiers sounds good, jv, just a pity my monolingualism prohibits me from enjoying.
i feel like at this point, following in the example of the old cahiers dudes, i should just start making films rather than exclusively reading/arguing about them, so hopefully that's something that i'll be shifted into sometime.
xp (love rosenbaum)
― (Chris Isaak Cover) (schlump), Saturday, 27 August 2011 15:25 (twelve years ago) link
xp 20-30 year old
― Vendo Caramelos A Veces Sin Dinero (Capitaine Jay Vee), Saturday, 27 August 2011 15:25 (twelve years ago) link
Yeah, that last Film Comment on "Tree Of Life" was pretty great. Cahiers in June did a remarkable TOL special.
― Vendo Caramelos A Veces Sin Dinero (Capitaine Jay Vee), Saturday, 27 August 2011 15:27 (twelve years ago) link
touché, cahiers. et tu, sight & sound?
^^ my command of french. the s&s stuff was actually good & you might dig if you were interested -- it was a relatively rare interview (understandably) with the TOL cinematographer who previously worked on mexican stuff.
― (Chris Isaak Cover) (schlump), Saturday, 27 August 2011 15:32 (twelve years ago) link
Yeah - I have that issue. Very good. Learn French, Schlump! Those folks can write.
― Vendo Caramelos A Veces Sin Dinero (Capitaine Jay Vee), Saturday, 27 August 2011 15:35 (twelve years ago) link
Yeah, schlump, CS is like FC without the bullshit cover stories and sidebar dross. The articles are generally longer and their focus guided by festivals rather than North American distribution. I guess it depends to an extent on what you're interested in (which, lol, there is probably little more effete or rarefied than complaining about FILM COMMENT "cover stores", but I go with what I know).
― C0L1N B..., Saturday, 27 August 2011 15:46 (twelve years ago) link
I did three pieces for Cinema Scope within a couple of years of their launch (John Cazale, pop music in movies, and double-bills). They seemed to be open to that kind of stuff early on, then drifted more and more in the direction of festival coverage. For my own purposes, it stopped being of any use to me at that point, because I don't like reading about films I haven't seen; I would much, much rather read film criticism after I've had a chance to see whatever's being written about. With certain critics I'll make an exception, but even there I'd rather hold off reading them till I've caught up.
― clemenza, Saturday, 27 August 2011 16:28 (twelve years ago) link
i was just reading that n+1 takedown of the cahier-centric bio of its 50s and 60s years.
^^ totally epic, completely recommend this
― some jock-bully out to take down the hipsters (history mayne), Saturday, 27 August 2011 16:35 (twelve years ago) link
clemenza, I don't suppose the double-bills piece (or those other two) is online? or you could give me the vol/# and I could likely find it at the NYPL.
― incredibly middlebrow (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 27 August 2011 16:37 (twelve years ago) link
I've got them posted on my page--glad to.
CazalePop MusicDouble-Bills
Don't forget--as you may have noticed, you and I don't always see eye-to-eye on such matters.
― clemenza, Saturday, 27 August 2011 16:43 (twelve years ago) link
rrreally?
thanks
― incredibly middlebrow (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 27 August 2011 16:45 (twelve years ago) link
subscriptions to US are ungodly expensive so I just read the copies in my library a few weeks late. yeah, it's not what it once was, and as a kind of mild anglophobe the coverage of UK cinema is totally superfluous to me.
― espring (amateurist), Friday, 25 April 2014 16:32 (nine years ago) link
Looking for a new editor for the first time in 21 years. The chat about the move to 'digital first' doesn't bode well for the print edition:
https://www.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/sight-sound-magazine/editor-chief-film-digital-website-print-magazine-job-search?fbclid=IwAR0Hh6hEy8Wq2nsPz9GcMmBMx-k1dSvyWXFll6LV-9i45SZOW-_QN50uX8k
― Ward Fowler, Friday, 14 June 2019 12:52 (four years ago) link
maybe i shd apply, i'll mock up some ilx polls and hire morbs and fred to debate art-house and gazzara to post marvel memes
― mark s, Friday, 14 June 2019 12:54 (four years ago) link
"On its twentieth anniversary, Queen of the Dammed tops our poll of the greatest movies ever made"
― Ward Fowler, Friday, 14 June 2019 13:21 (four years ago) link
the only good film
― mark s, Friday, 14 June 2019 13:37 (four years ago) link
"Search and Destroy: John Ford"
"Satantango: Classic or Dud?"
― Anne Hedonia (j.lu), Friday, 14 June 2019 14:01 (four years ago) link
OPO: OZU
― Alba, Friday, 14 June 2019 14:08 (four years ago) link
"D.W. Griffith: Why Is He So Bad and Hated?"
― Anne Hedonia (j.lu), Friday, 14 June 2019 14:14 (four years ago) link
where is the love for HUGH HUDSON
― mark s, Friday, 14 June 2019 14:16 (four years ago) link
"no, that's detrius, stop changing it"
― mark s, Friday, 14 June 2019 14:18 (four years ago) link
"French films are shit. Pourquoi?"
― Uptown VONC (Le Bateau Ivre), Friday, 14 June 2019 14:19 (four years ago) link
Be sure to keep before and after copies of the in-house style guide..."ROXOR," "YOU POXY FULE," "KORITFW"...
― Anne Hedonia (j.lu), Friday, 14 June 2019 14:21 (four years ago) link
― RUSSIA’S SEXIEST POKER STAR ELECTROCUTED BY HAIRDRYER (bizarro gazzara), Friday, 14 June 2019 14:26 (four years ago) link
no
― mark s, Friday, 14 June 2019 14:43 (four years ago) link
It was a real "oh, ok!" moment when I moved to London and realised S&S is mostly just a publicity rag for whatever retrospective the BFI have going.
― Daniel_Rf, Friday, 14 June 2019 14:47 (four years ago) link
the BFI DC retrospective is off
― mark s, Friday, 14 June 2019 14:55 (four years ago) link
"i'll mock up some ilx polls and hire morbs and fred"
Bad not good
― xyzzzz__, Friday, 14 June 2019 14:58 (four years ago) link
forget it alph, it's S&Stown
― mark s, Friday, 14 June 2019 15:09 (four years ago) link
british film institute otm that dc’s best movies are still to come, a retrospective would be premature
― RUSSIA’S SEXIEST POKER STAR ELECTROCUTED BY HAIRDRYER (bizarro gazzara), Friday, 14 June 2019 15:11 (four years ago) link
They definitely need to improve on that lame dennis the menace movie that didn't even feature gnasher and walter the softy.
― calzino, Friday, 14 June 2019 15:21 (four years ago) link
beano origin stories
― mark s, Friday, 14 June 2019 15:23 (four years ago) link
hmmm
We're excited to welcome Mike Williams (@itsmikelike) as Sight & Sound's new Editor-in-chief ☞ https://t.co/7tSRZkz3gh pic.twitter.com/Fg8GFkq8df— Sight & Sound (@SightSoundmag) July 26, 2019
― devvvine, Friday, 26 July 2019 12:53 (four years ago) link
can't say i was paying attention to nme during this era but does seem odd that none of the film writers i follow have tweeted anything about this
― devvvine, Friday, 26 July 2019 13:07 (four years ago) link
I only took a peak at this guys twitter feed, but doesn't really seem to have that many opinions on film?
― Frederik B, Friday, 26 July 2019 13:19 (four years ago) link
Catching up on films I've missed due to there being too many babies in my house for movie watching. Watched What We Do In The Shadows and You Were Never Really Here the last two nights (both 👍👍👍). Gimme recommendations of stuff from 2015-2018 I probs aint seen please, twits 🙏— Mike Williams ✊ (@itsmikelike) March 5, 2019
― devvvine, Friday, 26 July 2019 13:22 (four years ago) link
to be fair the man staged the brand’s three most successful NME Awards
― devvvine, Friday, 26 July 2019 13:23 (four years ago) link
Lol, presented out of context:
Ah yeah, I put that on my watchlist last night actually. It passed the important test of being under two hours long 👌📽️— Mike Williams ✊ (@itsmikelike) March 5, 2019
― Frederik B, Friday, 26 July 2019 13:28 (four years ago) link
I mean, the editor of the equivalent magazine in Denmark has run it into the ground insisting on turning it into an MRA / semi white supremacist platform, so in my eyes he seems like exactly what a film editor should be.
― Frederik B, Friday, 26 July 2019 13:30 (four years ago) link
maybe i'm asking too much but i feel like the editor of a respected film magazine should know more about film than me, a man who knows not very much about film
― devvvine, Friday, 26 July 2019 13:35 (four years ago) link
just 4 editors in 70 years!
gavin lambert: 1949-55 = 6 years penelope houston: 1956-90 = 31 years philip dodd: 1991-97 = 6 years nick james: 1997-2019 = 22 years
― mark s, Friday, 26 July 2019 14:14 (four years ago) link
There are reviews of some new releases now that are two paragraphs or @200 words.
― Heavy Messages (jed_), Tuesday, 26 November 2019 17:59 (four years ago) link
It was bad not good
In Colour(1.851)Subtitles
DistributorCurzon Artificial Eye
9,151 ft +0frames
― Alba, Tuesday, 26 November 2019 20:34 (four years ago) link
Sight & Sound's best films of 2020 list. Perhaps especially useful in a year with so little fanfare and exhibition. Or rather, I've seen almost zero of these.
― tangenttangent, Friday, 11 December 2020 14:28 (three years ago) link
Thank you for that, I had no idea about most of these and have only seen two.
― Maresn3st, Friday, 11 December 2020 14:56 (three years ago) link
Seconded, except I've seen none of them. I'm sure I'll get to see the new Andersson at some point, just probably not in a cinema.
― sinewave boogie (Matt #2), Friday, 11 December 2020 16:15 (three years ago) link
They're all-in on the elevated horror this year. Seems like a weak year, understandably. Love their number 1 tho, will quite probably be mine too
― or something, Friday, 11 December 2020 17:10 (three years ago) link
Lester's was Lou's Loyal Opposition.
― Robert Gotopieces (James Redd and the Blecchs), Saturday, 12 December 2020 00:10 (three years ago) link
Lester
Ha, sorry, wrong thread.
― Robert Gotopieces (James Redd and the Blecchs), Saturday, 12 December 2020 00:18 (three years ago) link
I really liked Mank, but it's really funny that this $25 million prestige Fincher epic couldn't beat out the Zoom horror movie
― Whiney G. Weingarten, Saturday, 12 December 2020 00:26 (three years ago) link
The Zoom movie was absolutely unwatchable to me
― Whiney G. Weingarten, Saturday, 12 December 2020 00:27 (three years ago) link
I thought Rocks (on Netflix) was very good and I recommend it. Lover's Rock I had a lot of problems with but they basically boil down to the fact that I don't think Steve McQueen has any feel for actors, they are just accessories to him. It makes sense to me that the Silly Games acapella scene happened by accident and he just filmed it happening.
― 10percent Discocunt (jed_), Saturday, 12 December 2020 00:31 (three years ago) link
correction: I don't think he has any feel for performance in film.
― 10percent Discocunt (jed_), Saturday, 12 December 2020 00:37 (three years ago) link
McQueen's great escape from being a ropey Goldsmiths YBA chancer to a critically acclaimed movie director is not something I've ever had much enthusiasm about tbh. Although back in the day he was otm when he described most British artists as "happy amateurs" but to me he's more like a "competent mediocrity" as a director.
― calzino, Saturday, 12 December 2020 01:05 (three years ago) link
a competent mediocrity is exactly what he is.
― 10percent Discocunt (jed_), Saturday, 12 December 2020 02:06 (three years ago) link
Thanks for sharing this, TT - could it also be shared to the 2020 End of the Year in Cinema/Detrius thread?
Seen: Mank, The Personal History of David Copperfield, Little Women,, I'm Thinking of Ending Things
Added to various 'watchlists': The Vast of Night, The Forty-Year-Old Version, His House, Bacurau, Da 5 Bloods, Rocks, Dick Johnson is Dead, Time
Would also like to see one way or another: The Truth, About Endlessness, Tenet, She Dies Tomorrow, Relic, Limbo, Host, Martin Eden, Undine, Possessor, The Woman Who Ran, Saint Maud and, above all, Days - a national disgrace this hasn't yet got UK distribution!
Everybody seems to love Lovers Rock - and Mangrove - and I expect I will watch these two at least on the Iplayer. Perhaps the mediocrity of McQueen's style works better on smaller screens?
― Ward Fowler, Saturday, 12 December 2020 12:38 (three years ago) link
Surprised and pleased that WOLFWALKERS placed so high, even tho it's not quite as good as SECRET OF KELLS or SONG OF THE SEA imo.
― Piedie Gimbel, Saturday, 12 December 2020 12:46 (three years ago) link
Shame by Steve Mcqueen is a Christmas film— tim macgabhann (@el_fodongo) December 12, 2020
― xyzzzz__, Saturday, 12 December 2020 19:49 (three years ago) link
I wouldn't call myself a fan of Steve McQueen either and didn't expect much from Lovers Rock, in fact I only really watched it because it was on. I think the moment I really fell for it was when I realised that nothing was really actually going to happen, it was just this night, this party. There were hints at other narratives that might take off - somebody might pull, something might kick-off, but they don't, it's just a party
― or something, Saturday, 12 December 2020 20:55 (three years ago) link
Gonna hop in here and say, taken a whole, Small Axe is probably the best thing I watched all year
― Whiney G. Weingarten, Saturday, 12 December 2020 20:59 (three years ago) link