Dark Soldier wrote:Him?
Ah fuck ruin the film why don't ya Spock. That's me hating it forever more.
It probably works much better if you aren't a cameraman by trade.cockbeard wrote:I've not seen it but surely as a shot for shot remake, it can't really be worse can it?
Gamermike wrote:Its pretty good but probably Eastwood's worst film. The kids acting in particular is awful.RasDam wrote:I'm about to watch Hereafter. I've not heard anything good about it, but Clint has racked up enough good will for me to sit through a couple of stinkers.
cockbeard wrote:What's happened recently, we had an Indian summer of great Euro Horror around 3 years ago with Martyrs, La Orfanato, Rec, Lat Den Rotta even Snow was pretty good, not heard of anything good recently except TrollHunter. I assume (hope) I'm just far from the loop
It's not really that they suck. It's just a ridiculous conceit to try and get passed if you're a camera dude.Tempy wrote:How about Chronicle, Cloverfield or any number of 'handycam' films G, do they all suck?
Cameras are big and fucking heavy. They also break easily, require constant battery and tape changes, and are highly complex and sensitive pieces of equipment.Dark Soldier wrote:How so, g? Purely wondering on a tech level as I know nuffink about such.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!