Lots of 4k Blu-ray rips out there these days, but I don't think the ATV can play back the Atmos tracks.
I have a Nvidia Shield for those.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Spoilers What Movie Are You Watching?
- Thread starter Huntn
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have a Nvidia Shield for those.
The Pelican Brief (1993)- watched on Netflix. John Grisham was a hot writer of legal, political thrillers in the 90s. This is an outstanding thriller that explodes quickly, full of intrigue right up to POTUS.. Excellent performances. The novel is excellent too if you like legal, political thrillers
Last edited:
Admittedly this was not an action thriller by today's shallow "action" standards if you require constant gun fights, explosions, and violence, (although there are gun shots, explosions, and violence but at a slower pace) but it's still a hard core thriller in my book. No problem if you disagree.
One of my favorites. Most Grisham adaptations turn out great.
Haven’t watched one in awhile but the app iWebTV is awesome. Can get just about any movie free.
Just watched Star Wars: A New Hope.
one of my all time favorites.
one of my all time favorites.
Netflix: Oxygène (2021), directed by Alexandre Aja, starring Mélanie Laurent
I like these kinds of movies. Movies set in confined spaces with the minimal amount of actors. There were a couple of them about ten years ago, one with Stephen Dorff, and the probably more famous one with Ryan Reynolds, and I liked both of those so I thought I'd give Oxygène a go. It was good.
Basically a woman wakes up in a sort of a sealed medical pod with no recollection as to how she got there or even who she is, and soon finds out she has a finite amount of time left to figure it all out until she runs out of oxygène.
Laurent is great as the lead, insofar that that descriptor can be used here. There's really only so much one can physically do in the circumstances her character finds herself in, so the actress has to find other ways to emote and portray the predicament she's in. The film also features the Bond villain Mathieu Amalric, but in a different kind of role. All in all a good movie, looked really good in Dolby Vision.
I like these kinds of movies. Movies set in confined spaces with the minimal amount of actors. There were a couple of them about ten years ago, one with Stephen Dorff, and the probably more famous one with Ryan Reynolds, and I liked both of those so I thought I'd give Oxygène a go. It was good.
Basically a woman wakes up in a sort of a sealed medical pod with no recollection as to how she got there or even who she is, and soon finds out she has a finite amount of time left to figure it all out until she runs out of oxygène.
Laurent is great as the lead, insofar that that descriptor can be used here. There's really only so much one can physically do in the circumstances her character finds herself in, so the actress has to find other ways to emote and portray the predicament she's in. The film also features the Bond villain Mathieu Amalric, but in a different kind of role. All in all a good movie, looked really good in Dolby Vision.
X+Y. Film about kids who are mathematicians and mostly on the autistic spectrum. Competing in maths competitions. Reminds me of my daughter. Not that she was into maths. But the awkwardness of the social skills reminds me of her.
Don’t care about the business model. All I know is I seek out content and it’s there to watch.
Containment (2006)
Recommended by a friend when released. Never got round to watching, being long forgotten in a box for best part of 15 years. Very much a budget film that I'm certain that most are unlikely to come across.
Not going to say anything negative as you can see a lot of heart & soul went into the production on a budget of a well used car LOL. I'm just going to leave you with the directors (Chris Schwartz) own comments on IMDB from 2007;
"Actually, your perceptions are correct. About half of the cast/crew was composed of high-school students. We're a huge supporter of new talents, and though this reflects poorly on us at times, we believe that we'll find that undiscovered talent someday. Unfortunately, our budget was "high-school" level as well. And I don't like to film with a tripod, because I like the organic feel of a free cam. It more closely resembles life, which isn't mounted on 3 steel legs, and is barely ever stable (how's that for symbolism?). Yet, I understand that it looks unprofessional...hell it is unprofessional, but I like it. Oh, and we did use a consumer cam for the picture. We all agreed that the grainy, horrible quality fits this kind of production..guess we were wrong on that too. Good to know though.
In any case, I recommend watching this movie for the plot, story, and gore, not acting and technical aspects that unfortunately require more funding than we had. We were contracted to do a graphically situated B-movie with an interesting plot twist. I think we hit it. Follow the plot and gore..It throws in some twists that you never saw coming, I'm sure of that.
Bear with us through the technical limits if you can. The acting gets better, if you get a headache, then take a break or take a Tylenol and come back. If you make it the whole way through, we'll give you a cookie, just for being a good sport....seriously
But I feel the real treat is in the story alone. Though that doesn't make a great film, at least you can follow the plot. Look at some of the other indy films out there...I suggest watching the movie the whole way through first, before condemning it. We had less than 1/3rd of the funding that the Blair Witch Project rode on. Please watch the 2 and compare. Then come back, if you made it through the BWP without tearing your eyes out. So try not to compare us with the million dollar or even $100k+ films. We're just another small company making a jump from commercials to film. And Steven Spielberg was out of the office during production
If this is the worst movie you've ever seen, I invite you to send me an e-mail, and I'll get back to you with a list of productions that fall way behind ours. If this is the worst movie you've ever seen, go rent 100 indy HORROR flicks with budgets under 100K and come back. Then when you whine about how bad it is, I'll listen. And hey, it's not the worst movie in the world...but it is funny how every "attempt" suddenly becomes the "worst movie ever" go look at the reviews on here. Just about every film is "the worst movie ever" in someone's opinion.
But thanks for the comments. We'll keep working on making better films. That's all I can offer until someone coughs up 1/2 a mil to fund us. Then I'll give you $50 to refund you if you still hate it and feel like it was a waste of your time."
TBH I don't feel that Chris Schwartz was too far off the mark...
Q-6
Recommended by a friend when released. Never got round to watching, being long forgotten in a box for best part of 15 years. Very much a budget film that I'm certain that most are unlikely to come across.
Not going to say anything negative as you can see a lot of heart & soul went into the production on a budget of a well used car LOL. I'm just going to leave you with the directors (Chris Schwartz) own comments on IMDB from 2007;
"Actually, your perceptions are correct. About half of the cast/crew was composed of high-school students. We're a huge supporter of new talents, and though this reflects poorly on us at times, we believe that we'll find that undiscovered talent someday. Unfortunately, our budget was "high-school" level as well. And I don't like to film with a tripod, because I like the organic feel of a free cam. It more closely resembles life, which isn't mounted on 3 steel legs, and is barely ever stable (how's that for symbolism?). Yet, I understand that it looks unprofessional...hell it is unprofessional, but I like it. Oh, and we did use a consumer cam for the picture. We all agreed that the grainy, horrible quality fits this kind of production..guess we were wrong on that too. Good to know though.
In any case, I recommend watching this movie for the plot, story, and gore, not acting and technical aspects that unfortunately require more funding than we had. We were contracted to do a graphically situated B-movie with an interesting plot twist. I think we hit it. Follow the plot and gore..It throws in some twists that you never saw coming, I'm sure of that.
Bear with us through the technical limits if you can. The acting gets better, if you get a headache, then take a break or take a Tylenol and come back. If you make it the whole way through, we'll give you a cookie, just for being a good sport....seriously
But I feel the real treat is in the story alone. Though that doesn't make a great film, at least you can follow the plot. Look at some of the other indy films out there...I suggest watching the movie the whole way through first, before condemning it. We had less than 1/3rd of the funding that the Blair Witch Project rode on. Please watch the 2 and compare. Then come back, if you made it through the BWP without tearing your eyes out. So try not to compare us with the million dollar or even $100k+ films. We're just another small company making a jump from commercials to film. And Steven Spielberg was out of the office during production
If this is the worst movie you've ever seen, I invite you to send me an e-mail, and I'll get back to you with a list of productions that fall way behind ours. If this is the worst movie you've ever seen, go rent 100 indy HORROR flicks with budgets under 100K and come back. Then when you whine about how bad it is, I'll listen. And hey, it's not the worst movie in the world...but it is funny how every "attempt" suddenly becomes the "worst movie ever" go look at the reviews on here. Just about every film is "the worst movie ever" in someone's opinion.
But thanks for the comments. We'll keep working on making better films. That's all I can offer until someone coughs up 1/2 a mil to fund us. Then I'll give you $50 to refund you if you still hate it and feel like it was a waste of your time."
TBH I don't feel that Chris Schwartz was too far off the mark...
Q-6
Last edited:
Was that the home movie camera effect (sometimes called documentary I think) for this movie? if so I mostly hate that.Containment (2006)
View attachment 1775631
Recommended by a friend when released. Never got round to watching, being long forgotten in a box for best part of 15 years. Very much a budget film that I'm certain that most are unlikely to come across.
Not going to say anything negative as you can see a lot of heart & soul went into the production on a budget of a well used car LOL. I'm just going to leave you with the directors own comments on IMDB from 2007;
"Actually, your perceptions are correct. About half of the cast/crew was composed of high-school students. We're a huge supporter of new talents, and though this reflects poorly on us at times, we believe that we'll find that undiscovered talent someday. Unfortunately, our budget was "high-school" level as well. And I don't like to film with a tripod, because I like the organic feel of a free cam. It more closely resembles life, which isn't mounted on 3 steel legs, and is barely ever stable (how's that for symbolism?). Yet, I understand that it looks unprofessional...hell it is unprofessional, but I like it. Oh, and we did use a consumer cam for the picture. We all agreed that the grainy, horrible quality fits this kind of production..guess we were wrong on that too. Good to know though.
In any case, I recommend watching this movie for the plot, story, and gore, not acting and technical aspects that unfortunately require more funding than we had. We were contracted to do a graphically situated B-movie with an interesting plot twist. I think we hit it. Follow the plot and gore..It throws in some twists that you never saw coming, I'm sure of that.
Bear with us through the technical limits if you can. The acting gets better, if you get a headache, then take a break or take a Tylenol and come back. If you make it the whole way through, we'll give you a cookie, just for being a good sport....seriously
But I feel the real treat is in the story alone. Though that doesn't make a great film, at least you can follow the plot. Look at some of the other indy films out there...I suggest watching the movie the whole way through first, before condemning it. We had less than 1/3rd of the funding that the Blair Witch Project rode on. Please watch the 2 and compare. Then come back, if you made it through the BWP without tearing your eyes out. So try not to compare us with the million dollar or even $100k+ films. We're just another small company making a jump from commercials to film. And Steven Spielberg was out of the office during production
If this is the worst movie you've ever seen, I invite you to send me an e-mail, and I'll get back to you with a list of productions that fall way behind ours. If this is the worst movie you've ever seen, go rent 100 indy HORROR flicks with budgets under 100K and come back. Then when you whine about how bad it is, I'll listen. And hey, it's not the worst movie in the world...but it is funny how every "attempt" suddenly becomes the "worst movie ever" go look at the reviews on here. Just about every film is "the worst movie ever" in someone's opinion.
But thanks for the comments. We'll keep working on making better films. That's all I can offer until someone coughs up 1/2 a mil to fund us. Then I'll give you $50 to refund you if you still hate it and feel like it was a waste of your time."
TBH I don't feel that Chris Schwartz was too far off the mark...
Q-6
Yes & No as this is not in the documentary style of filming. Just a quick & dirty B movie, that said I can see if they had a much larger budget the film could have been far more. In parts the story is genuinely unnerving, if not disturbing on the phycological level.Was that the home movie camera effect (sometimes called documentary I think) for this movie? if so I mostly hate that.
Was just a fluke, I was digging into things to find an old (ironically 2008) MBP charger and came across the DVD still boxed & unwatched, so why not give it a shot. All in all on a budget of less than $20K there's little to complain about
To some respects I rather watch a film where all did there level best, not just another big studio, big budget (CGI), "phone it home" rinse, wash & repeat, lesser reboot to solely fill the coffers...Either ways I'm going to rip the disk and preserve Containment (2006) for posterity LOL.
Q-6
Last edited:
As a fan of both Laurel and Hardy and Coogan and Reilly, I was looking forward to this. Although it ends pretty happily, it is sad for much of the film.
I agree. Throughly enjoyed it though. Very good performances.
I often hear this movie mentioned with the greats, but I didn't really enjoy it. I found the plot plodding along, and the characters uninspiring.
There are some excellent action scenes, especially the train chase, but ultimately it didn't hook me.