Jump to content

Wolfie

Forum Legend
  • Posts

    7,000
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Wolfie

  1. 23 hours ago, BaaLocks said:

    See How They Run. Set up as a 1950s Agatha Christie (quite literally) murder mystery it is styled in a self-depracating and original way. It rolls along quite nicely and has a stonking cast (inc. Sam Rockwell and Saoirse Ronan - both of whom are great actors in pretty much anything they touch). But then it's as if they realise they're 85 minutes in and need to wrap everything up, one minute you're in the middle of the plot and the next it's the credits with everything inbetween just lying incomplete. It just ran out of every idea in less time than it takes to say "and I would have got away with it if it hadn't been for you meddling kids".

    Giles Barnes / 10 for me (started wonderfully, looked like it was going to grow into something special then fell away to nothing in next to a heartbeat)

    I watched this early Jan (and posted at the time) and it's a bit of damning indictment of the film that I read your comments and then couldn't remember enough about it, to be able to say I agree with you or not.

    I remember being disappointed with it because it should have been right up my street (comedy + mystery) but for me it all just fell a bit flat.

  2. 2 hours ago, Stive Pesley said:

    I, for one, am shocked. SHOCKED I tell you - by this revelation that our leaders abide by a different set of rules to us mere mortals

    I really can't stand Rees-Mogg but it's hardly breaking news that the cabinet (and opposition leaders) would be treated differently in a time of national crisis. Isn't that what things like the nuclear bunkers are for?

    Presumably some would be outraged to hear that Boris (who I also can't stand, BTW) probably didn't have to wait on an A&E trolley for 6 hours like a mere mortal, when he went into hospital with Covid.

  3. I've finally started watching the Star Wars films with Miss Wolfie, so kicked it off with A New Hope (obviously).

    Unfortunately I wish I'd gone with the original version, rather than the re-issue one - with pointless (and "weightless") CGI creatures added in, which just seems to interrupt the narrative and actually add nothing. Worst of all is the scene with the CGI Jabba the Hutt, who is far too small and where they just repeat the dialogue from the previous cantina scene.

    Normally 8/10. this version 6/10.

  4. 1 hour ago, Stive Pesley said:

    All such obvious and fundamental reasons why an asylum seeker might want to try and reach the UK. And totally reasonable.

    Yet still the mantra of "if they are genuine why don't they just stay in the first safe country" gets parroted. By intelligent people as well, so you can only assume that there is a subtext here that is going unspoken.

    "I care about asylum seekers but only as long as they are not in a specific geographic location of my choosing" 

     

    The only subtext here is that some of us know and care about the difference between people actually fleeing for their lives and those who just want a better standard of living and don't care about the rules.

    Been off topic for too long.

    Patronise away.......

  5. 45 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

    Exactly - it's tiring that you have to keep making these points, only for them to be ignored again and again

    Couldn't agree more

    45 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

    British exceptionalism fuelled by the gutter press who like to push these people's  buttons

     

     "If you don't agree with me then you must be a Sun reading xenophobic knuckle dragger". Nice.

    "These people" ?

  6. 17 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

    The vast majority of them do. More British exceptionalism. 

    I don't think it is. it's more the principle that to get to the channel, they've gone through any number of safe countries where they could and should have applied for asylum. By not doing this, then they become economic migrants (legal or otherwise) and should be treated as such.

  7. 2 hours ago, Stive Pesley said:

    And I think most would agree that would be a universal vote winner amongst the general public. It's  a simple common sense idea that benefits everyone

    Sadly what we see though is large corporate interests lobbying  politicians to oppose anything that might put a dent in their profits. And so the politicians end up having to pretend that these things aren't possible, much as they'd like to do them. 

    Who pays for all this private healthcare for employees?

    Companies will protect their profits by making either consumers pay or shareholders pay, which means that we all pay in the end via higher prices or lower pension returns. 

  8. 8 minutes ago, maxjam said:

    I'm pleased to see they referenced the 2012 Olympics opening ceremony, which IMO became utterly nauseating with the way it went on and on about the NHS.

×
×
  • Create New...