New one. Never seen the old one.
I was recommended to read the book many years ago and thought that it was pretty rubbish back then. Trying to be open minded I thought maybe I just didn't "get it" at the time. After this I'm convinced: Dune is crap.
The old film is wonderfully awful and stupid, featuring some of Sir Picard's finest bellowing and scenery chewing, I won't claim it's so bad its good as its not, but its an experience
I absolutely loved the new Dune. Watched it for a second time the other day on 4k disc and through a pretty good sound system and it knocked my socks off.
Brilliantly cast, excellent pacing, and it managed (I thought) to bring in that balance of appealing to both those who have never read the book and those that have. My partner went in completely blind and understood what was going on, I love the books and appreciated that they did as good a job as they could have - the story was concerned 'unfilmable' for many years, and with good reason.
As well as that thought the sets and production are absolutely a work of art. Villeuneuve is pretty good with it anyway, but I think this even surpassed the new Blade Runner in producing an environment that is completely tangible, utterly believable - you almost felt like you could reach out and touch the sets.
I'm just glad it performed well enough for the 2nd half to be green-lit, it would have been a tragedy if they had just stopped at that point.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: It seems baffling to me in the modern day a studio would make a film in two parts, but wait to see how the first was received before doing the second.
I’m sure there are good reasons. It just seems very unusual, especially Post MCU.
I think it's a combo of things, the blessings of Nurgle and the availability of the cast making a long shoot double film nigh impossible, general risk adverse nature of the film industry to back things without "brand" back up, and Space films not being popular, the last one is odd as divisive as nu-Wars was it still took money, just not all the moneys
Stil have yet to see the new Dune, but nobody ever said anything bad about it. Usually that's a sort of alarm sign for me, but in this case I think it actually is that nice.
Last night I decided to give the Netflix show Disenchanted another go (initially stopped after the secon season). It's alright-ish, but incredibly meandering and it feels rather shallow. There's way too many characters, too much pointless plot, too little point. Maybe I just wasn't in it enough, but it all felt very meh. I hope we're moving on from all that 'overarching storylines' and 20000 characters stuff again. It's funny, but that's exactly how soap operas (used to operate), right? Oh well. Films are more interesting. Trying to think what the last film was I saw. it's been a while, that's for certain.
Alfonso Cuarón does a great job keeping stuff moving along, great transitions and 'time passes' vignettes.
Yeah it has the issues the book does, we're still in school hijinks/boy's adventure mode and an incredibly powerful device is introduced and used to... take extra classes. Then never used again.
Kyoto Secunda is halfway through book 6, and they have some spring/Eid break coming up so we'll be seeing more I assume.
Just showed this film to my son. He thought it became boring when they first got on the boat. He was very angry at the mayor, and then wanted to know if the Indianapolis story really happened.
Last night I watched Robocop. What a tight, frantic, efficient film that is. Here's how Policewoman Lewis is introduced: She knocks out some culprit. She takes off the helmet, looks friendly.That, along with the next two minutes between Murphy and her, establishes the character perfectly AND Murphy's character to boot. That's it. We also get that very well made backflash-sequence of Robocop walking into his old flat and that's it. We're off and don't need any further exposition, any artificial conflict between Murphy and Lewis, none of that.
Is Robocop the perfect action film? Well, maybe it is. 90 minutes, actionactionaction, good depiction of a near future (don't say 'world building', it's icky) and corporate america in the 80s, good special effects, gory (funny, the thing that seemed the goriest to me was how the ED-209 killed that guy in the suit).
Sigur wrote: Last night I watched Robocop. What a tight, frantic, efficient film that is. Here's how Policewoman Lewis is introduced: She knocks out some culprit. She takes off the helmet, looks friendly.That, along with the next two minutes between Murphy and her, establishes the character perfectly AND Murphy's character to boot. That's it. We also get that very well made backflash-sequence of Robocop walking into his old flat and that's it. We're off and don't need any further exposition, any artificial conflict between Murphy and Lewis, none of that.
Is Robocop the perfect action film? Well, maybe it is. 90 minutes, actionactionaction, good depiction of a near future (don't say 'world building', it's icky) and corporate america in the 80s, good special effects, gory (funny, the thing that seemed the goriest to me was how the ED-209 killed that guy in the suit).
Yes. Yes it is.
Because it’s an excellent example of utterly brainless 8-‘s hyper violent action nonsense.
But, it’s also an excellent example of amazing film making. Lots and lots and of layers in play, should you care to dig. As a satire it’s sharp as a tack, but if you miss the satire it’s still a cohesive experience.
There’s just so, so much going on. But not having to look for it to enjoy it *cough cough Rick & Morty hack splutter retch Donnie Darko cough cough* at sheer face value is one hell of a film making achievement.
For more info, and the source of much of my deeper understanding, jump on YouTube and search Fact Fiend, Robocop. Because their vids are great and far more informed and eloquent than I!
Calling Robocop a brainless action flick is like calling Starship Troopers a brainless action flick; you might just be outing yourself as a subject of the satire.
But then, we live in an era where people spend hundreds of dollars on They Live merchandise, so satire may be dead.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: Calling Robocop a brainless action flick is like calling Starship Troopers a brainless action flick; you might just be outing yourself as a subject of the satire.
But then, we live in an era where people spend hundreds of dollars on They Live merchandise, so satire may be dead.
Read the rest of my post
Robocop and indeed Starship Troopers are highly competent Dumb Action Flicks. If that’s all the viewer is hoping for, they’ll be well satisfied. That there are then a great many layers beneath that superficial surface is brilliant film making.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: Calling Robocop a brainless action flick is like calling Starship Troopers a brainless action flick; you might just be outing yourself as a subject of the satire.
But then, we live in an era where people spend hundreds of dollars on They Live merchandise, so satire may be dead.
I was going to say the same but the rest of his post makes it clear there's a lot more if you look.
I've read the Robocop was originally going to be a Judge Dredd film which certainly would have been interesting. IMHO neither of the two films got the satire that should be build into every Dredd story.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: Calling Robocop a brainless action flick is like calling Starship Troopers a brainless action flick; you might just be outing yourself as a subject of the satire.
But then, we live in an era where people spend hundreds of dollars on They Live merchandise, so satire may be dead.
Read the rest of my post
Robocop and indeed Starship Troopers are highly competent Dumb Action Flicks. If that’s all the viewer is hoping for, they’ll be well satisfied. That there are then a great many layers beneath that superficial surface is brilliant film making.
Yeah, I read that. I was not necessarily responding just to you but to the criticism you briefly brought up. I know we’ve had posters here call Starship Troopers and Fury Road dumb movies, so the sentiment is common enough.
I still heavily advocate that there’s absolutely bugger all wrong with any given media being tropey, daft, low rent and silly though. Just as I cannot eat a perfectly marbled steak, cooked just to my liking every day, lest it lose my appreciation? So there is Bugger all wrong with ultimately crap but still enjoyable dumbass films.
Robocop and Starship Troopers though are a super rare breed that entirely deliver on the superficial, but have quite incredible depth to those of a mind to dig, or even merely scratch, beneath the surface.’
I still heavily advocate that there’s absolutely bugger all wrong with any given media being tropey, daft, low rent and silly though. Just as I cannot eat a perfectly marbled steak, cooked just to my liking every day, lest it lose my appreciation? So there is Bugger all wrong with ultimately crap but still enjoyable dumbass films.
Robocop and Starship Troopers though are a super rare breed that entirely deliver on the superficial, but have quite incredible depth to those of a mind to dig, or even merely scratch, beneath the surface.’
that's it. I'm not sure if there is all that much underneath the surface of Robocop or Starship Troopers, but there is something, and that something is woven into the films extremely well. But in the end we all agree that these films work on the level of spectacle and entertainment, but we can also feel somewhat smart for liking them because they got that one, two other levels to them. I only saw 3 minutes of the Robocop remake, but they also did try to have some subtext to the film. Unfortunately that one was made by hollywood hacks, so the 'message' was muddled, made no sense and ticked off some buzzwords (drones, big company bad-ish, middle east).
In newer blockbuster films, all that is replaced with 'characters' and their hokey motivations. Or maybe not. Who knows.
Last night I watched 15 minutes of a Finnish superhero action film Rendel from 2017. There was nothing but fighty scenes in dark warehouses, but oh well. Bless them for doing that film. I just didn't like the way the action scenes were cut. Maybe the idea was to present it like comicbook panels and that's why it was so choppy. The thing was rather brutal though. So if you wanna see some superhero film that isn't by the disney corporation, that's one option there.
Another installment in the Netflix "see what sticks" commission strategy. Choose or Die is a great example of what I feel really lies at the heart of the service's current struggles, a surfeit of perfectly reasonable quality, well funded but ultimately mediocre content that won't live long in the memory.
The plot centres on a mysterious video game, that once started gives the player a series of increasingly personally devastating choices with little information which is better or worse, and possess a supernatural ability to manifest those choices in the real world.
That's pretty much it, we follow a young woman as she tries to fight her way to the end of the game so she can escape. It's short at 85 minutes, and if you fancy watching something that feels like a riff on Jumanji with a dash of Ready Player One but a horror film, this is about your only option.
You won't hate it, but that's because you'll have forgotten it in a month.
It’s all very much enjoyable! Third one in particular surprised, as I’d somehow got it into my head I wouldn’t enjoy it.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Journey to the Centre of the Earth
The Brendan Fraser one, released as a 3D movie.
It’s a family aimed Brendan Fraser flick, so pretty decent value for money. By no means is it anything new, but it’s still pretty decent fun. Also manages to squeeze in some science stuff, so it has some educational value too.
House move complete, I’m now without Broadband Internet until 11 May. Which means I’ve 12 or so days to rediscover and devour (not literally, obvs) my DVD collection.
And so I’m kicking off this lesser known, but incredibly influential take on Robin Hood from the mid 80’s. Too fine a vintage for Ickle Me to have seen - and if I did, I’ve no memory of it.
It didn’t have an amazing budget so far as I’m aware, but you really can’t tell. Excellent use of Location Shooting, rather than wobbly sets.
The first one in particular is just a really solid kid’s ninja movie. Given their sheer popularity at the time, it could’ve been cheaply made guff, but they went a few steps beyond that.
The suits are incredibly impressive for their era, and the action is good fun.
Haven’t seen the second one in pretty much forever though!
The first one actually isn't bad. The second one... well. It features Kevin Nash IIRC.
oh, and the technology in the suits for these films gave us the Dinosaurs tv show, so that's good.
DS9 is really cool. I watched it twice over the past few years. Good stuff.
I just watched Fateful Findings (2013).
It's a paranormal sci-fi romance thriller drama, written, directed, composed and edited by the same guy. He also plays the main character.
It features heavy themes of love, loss, spiritualism, addiction, lust, violence, book-tossing, deadlines, The Truth, conspiracies, and the creative process. I's been compared to The Room, and I get the comparisons. But I feel like this one's got at least two more layers to it, but I'm not sure if they're there. There is a LOT going on.
Somehow I'd love to hear what the ideas bedhind the script were, because if I wrote a film, it would look pretty much exactly the same. Which is why I don't write film scripts. Watch It.
If, when I get proper internet back I can find it on a streaming service I will.
Having now watched the first two Turtles movies? I remain largely impressed.
They’re most definitely far, far better than they needed to be. Sure, the second one isn’t as great (where is Casey Jones????) as the first. But against all odds, being live action attempts at a stupendously successful marketing juggernaut of its day…neither are remotely phoned in.
I was part of Turlemania the first time round. For a brief period, I was the most popular kid at school because I owned a (plastic) throwing star…which was promptly lost in a sandpit (possibly nicked off me, to be fair). I’d have queued up just because it was a Turtles movie.
But the effort put in, on what was still a pretty limited budget deserves respect.
On a “me right now with all my life experiences added to idiot child wonder”? They still absolutely hold up. As kid focussed Kung Fu/Chop Socky, they’re at least Above Par. Yes on my now UHD screen and Ps5 upscaling a DVD I can see the mould seams and joints on the suits - but so what? I’m pretty sure any wee boy in the modern day would still be absolutely hooked for their run time.
And again…..they had no need whatsoever to be as competently made as they were. We’d have bought any old crap.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I think I might’ve? I’ve definitely seen Double Dragon which was surprisingly Not That Crap! By no means good. But better than I was expecting!
Double Dragon is great, but The Last Dragon is different. It was a Motown Kung Fu comedy, often titled “Barry Gordy’s The Last Dragon”. It’s funny, it has a lot of great action, and a lot of cultural cachet. It’s worth watching just for Sho’nuff, the Shogun of Harlem.
And if you don’t mind your martial arts comedies being full of dirty jokes, Orgazmo is a great time with a surprising amount of action. The pay off for this scene later on is worth the watch all by itself. (That, and Sancho.)
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and if you’re a fan of Double Dragon’s Mark Decascus, check out his action vehicle Drive, costarring Brittany Murphy. Not really a comedy, but good action.
That clip makes me wonder, because today we'd call a movie like that to be bad with bad acting.
Throw on 20 years though, and it becomes hilariously campy XD I wonder if some movies just need to age like wine before we can come back to them later and find them amusing.
Here's a nugget that's probably all too telling about me: Ninja Turtles were the first thing in my life I consciously rejected because it was 'the new cool thing'. I was perfectly okay with Ghostbusters (that cartoon show was also much better than it had any right to be IIRC. Maybe I'd redact that idea if I dared to watch it again, but I'm scared of the Boogeyman).
But I watched the first live action film back somwhat early on, and enjoyed it. And I assume that the practical effects help it holding up. I mean Howard the Duck isn't regaded as a bad film becaue of the effects (or early 90s Leah Thompson). It's because it's a pretty bad film.
Sigur wrote: Here's a nugget that's probably all too telling about me: Ninja Turtles were the first thing in my life I consciously rejected because it was 'the new cool thing'. I was perfectly okay with Ghostbusters (that cartoon show was also much better than it had any right to be IIRC. Maybe I'd redact that idea if I dared to watch it again, but I'm scared of the Boogeyman).
But I watched the first live action film back somwhat early on, and enjoyed it. And I assume that the practical effects help it holding up. I mean Howard the Duck isn't regaded as a bad film becaue of the effects (or early 90s Leah Thompson). It's because it's a pretty bad film.
TMNT Movie, as said, has absolutely no business being as good as it is.
I can confirm The Real Ghostbusters definitely holds up. Unlike M.A.S.K., which is cheesier than a [REDACTED]man’s Chopper coated in Gorgonzola then thrust into the cheesiest Mac & Cheese cooked and served by Daniel O’Donnell, whilst he wears a large hunk of Gouda as a hat. And has all drippy blue cheese in his ears.
Sigur wrote: Here's a nugget that's probably all too telling about me: Ninja Turtles were the first thing in my life I consciously rejected because it was 'the new cool thing'.
I'm the same, IIRC it replaced Transformers and/or GI Joe on TV and in toy stores, which I could not forgive.
Of course since then I've read the original comics and OMG talk about something that has no right to be that good...
Sigur wrote: Here's a nugget that's probably all too telling about me: Ninja Turtles were the first thing in my life I consciously rejected because it was 'the new cool thing'.
Interesting. I remember not wanting to see it for cashing in on a cult property that I was sure that the movie-makers didn't 'get' properly.
Which is weird in its own right, since I wandered into TMNT by way of the Palladium RPG books (Mutants Down Under was inexplicably my favorite, and had pretty much nothing to do with TMNT beyond 'mutant animals), and 'true fans' would have been sniggering up their shells.
But I watched the first live action film back somwhat early on, and enjoyed it. And I assume that the practical effects help it holding up. I mean Howard the Duck isn't regaded as a bad film becaue of the effects (or early 90s Leah Thompson). It's because it's a pretty bad film.
And the xenophilia. At least at the time.
I feel completely desensitized to that sort of thing now. Not sure if I blame Tank Girl or anime (yes, as a whole).
I've got a soft spot for Tank Girl (the film). I'll defend some anime to the death (and everything from 1997 on can go to hell xD ). I guess we're all prisoners of our own time.
'97 sounds about right.
I got into anime in college partly because it was a different set of assumptions and tropes. It took a few years for the shine to wear off and I started to recognize their patterns and tropes. At that point, I started to get tired of it all.
And the creepy stuff that wanders in (the love of teacher/student relationships and that they're perfectly fine, for example)
Yup, exactly the different set of assumptions and tropes were refreshing, very well put. There just is a lot of trash out there, but sticking to the classics will do. About two years ago I gave Trigun a shot at a whim, and really enjoyed it. Recently we started watching Cowboy Bebop, and it's a hoot. Same with the old Gundam films and all of that. I adore the look of sci-fi anime from the 80s.
I tried watching One Punch Man, couldn't get into it, tried Jojo's Bizarre Adventures, was rather disgusted and did not have a good time. Here and there I'll watch a few minutes of what ever my brother's watching when I drop by (Attack on Titan, or that martial arts one that's drawn very weirdly), but I just don't enjoy it. Most new anime also looks very, very cheaply made. Maybe it's just me and my weird tastes.
One Punch Man wears outs its premise pretty quick.
And yeah. There's a lot of 'anime' factories out there with low budgets and fast turn around. There's only a handful of really good shows every year.
Try 86 if you haven't seen it yet. It might be a style of sci-fi/mecha action that's up your alley. Decent animation. Minimum anime weirdness interrupting a pretty straightforward war drama.
If you like retro animation, you could also try Megalobox. It's a newer anime but it purposefully invokes late 80s/early 90s animation. The show is a love letter to Ashita no Joe.
I've been rewatching Kingdom, which does not have great animation, though it gets more bearable after the first season. It's the only manga I'm really following weekly right now and I've been pretty hooked with it for years. I just got done watching season 3 and the ending animation is one of the most brilliant I've ever seen. What's the best ending you can make for a show about the unification of China by Qin Shi Huangdi? Depict all the series' principal characters as terracotta soldiers;
Inspired move. I'm shocked they needed over a hundred episodes to come up with it XD
Sigur wrote: Yup, exactly the different set of assumptions and tropes were refreshing, very well put. There just is a lot of trash out there, but sticking to the classics will do. About two years ago I gave Trigun a shot at a whim, and really enjoyed it. Recently we started watching Cowboy Bebop, and it's a hoot. Same with the old Gundam films and all of that. I adore the look of sci-fi anime from the 80s.
I tried watching One Punch Man, couldn't get into it, tried Jojo's Bizarre Adventures, was rather disgusted and did not have a good time. Here and there I'll watch a few minutes of what ever my brother's watching when I drop by (Attack on Titan, or that martial arts one that's drawn very weirdly), but I just don't enjoy it. Most new anime also looks very, very cheaply made. Maybe it's just me and my weird tastes.
I find my biggest obstacle these days is my distaste for dubs and not having the time to sit and focus on subtitles. Most of my video entertainment is background, not my focus. So committing to solely watching for 13 or 26 episodes is hard to fit in.
If you have time and want a classic space opera, I'll always suggest Legend of Galactic Heroes. But its a commitment.
Punisher:Warzone is back on Netflix! So I watched it of course. Still great Dad action film fun. One might say "the Daddest", up there with Taken. For some devious reason though Netflix put up a cut version!
What the actual fudge. Streaming services are gak. We all get it by now at the very latest.
So there's a new season of Law and Order and as a guy whose watched reruns of the original show constantly for most of my life, I figured I'd watch the new season and see how it is.
And it's okay so far.
Episode 1: The Right Thing
Spoiler:
The story for the episode is clearly inspired by the Harvey Weinstein scandal.
It's an odd thing. When I watch new Star Trek, I often feel like it's a souless exercise that is hitting all the right notes but just isn't making any music. It's more like someone telling me what they think I want Star Trek to say, rather than Star Trek telling me what Star Trek says. You know?
And I feel like that's this episode. Law and Order is no stranger to politics or current events and controversies. I'll leave them out and just focus on the way this show just feels like... a checklist. It has all those notes and the show's classic way of taking a hot topic and injecting a sense of balance into it that examines the topic from multiple angles. It's the exact kind of show I've been missing from modern TV even. A classical drama about 'people' rather than a banal drama about a person and their goofy personality.
But it feels a bit hollow. It lacks the sort of raw emotional edge that often came with classic L&O. I think the issue is the actors and the characters. They're a bit too on the nose sometimes. They lack the depth of the shows old casts. We've got Sam Waterson back as Jack McCoy and that's fething great, but the rest of the actors just aren't up to level. The dialogue is a little rough too. Looking back, I think the episode tries to be about one thing in its first half (police ethics) and then tries to be about something else in the second (sympathetic defendants and despicable victims) and the episode would have been better off focusing on just one of those themes.
I hope it's just a sort of rough thing that often comes with new shows.
On to episode 2: Impossible Dream
Spoiler:
Blarg. I think in episode 1 had a 'all the notes and no music' problem. This episode just has an off note problem. The new ADA character doing the legal side of the cases has gotten a lot of focus in these episodes and I find him rather bland. He's sort of a cardboard cut out who seems to lack character. One of the clever things Law and Order did that let it tell complex stories in little time was by giving two dimensional characters a core that could be built on. I don't really see Price's core beyond being the sounding board for the topic of the episode. It's just kind of lame to watch. Lacks the compelling and raw persona of force that made Jack McCoy such a great character. I think the episode also repeats the first episodes problem of trying to be about two things and not being very good at being about either.
Episode 8: Severance
Spoiler:
Wow. Most of the episodes after the second get better. The characters start feeling more consistent. The stories become more focused. Not always a hit, sometimes a bit eye rolling in some of the plots but wow. This one is like a who's who of headlines. Activision Blizzard's workplace scandal. Wokeism (those for and against). Corporate greed. Social media. Big-tech. Havana Syndrome. I lost track of what the plot even was cause the episode seemed to be racing to pack as many things from the news into this episode as humanly possible.
Hey, there are some films which technically aren't too bad, but you really dislike the idea of the fans of those films. Does that make sense?
To me that used to be Donnie Darko, but most of all to me the prime example is Unlimited. I'm aware that this film's got some sort of cult following, and I'm sure that most of them are harmless, but I'm also sure that there's people who take that seriously, and that will never let me enjoy the film (which in itself is alright, despite being slightly despicable. But Bradley Cooper is a good lead in films.).
Are you familiar with that sort of thing and do you have examples?
Zeon fans in the Gundam franchise are often disturbingly incapable of noticing the blatant and purposeful Nazi allegory. This includes some of the fans who went on to write for the franchise (looking at the original novels for Gundam Unicorn).
LordofHats wrote: Zeon fans in the Gundam franchise are often disturbingly incapable of noticing the blatant and purposeful Nazi allegory. This includes some of the fans who went on to write for the franchise (looking at the original novels for Gundam Unicorn).
Man, that really seems to be a problem with model-selling franchises these days.
It's especially bizarre when it involves Nazi saluts, the phrase 'seig zeon' and a a leader who is overtly compared to Hitler and a founder who is a literal expy for Nietzsche XD
Yes its clearly a kids/family film but there's some sneaky clever social commentary woven in, maybe Mr Cornish deserves a go at a few Who scripts, the young chap that played old Merlin was suitably bonkers and the nod to the greatest Arthur movie Excalibur whenever the Lady of the Lake was invoked was fun
8/10
Big Trouble in Little China
Its all in the reflexes, glorious then, glorious now
Saw the first half of Last Man Standing last night. I couldn't believe my luck to realize that it's actually the film rather than that abysmal sitcom.
It's fun. Walter Hill films always are, but this one certainly isn't his best. It has a peculiar atmosphere to it though, and it's silly and archaic and all women are damsels and whores and the Italians are very Italian and the Irish are very Irish and the Mexicans are all Mexican and Christopher Walken is Christopher Walken.
After the seemingly relentless barrage of remakes, reboots and mediocre superhero films, it was with trepidation that I approached this film. Yet fear is not needed - this is a very good film, go and watch it. The child actors are great and (nearly!) everyone is a character! You read that right, the writers actually managed to make individual characters that I cared about. See Hollywood, it can be done. I also especially liked the use of the proton pack streamers. I don't know much about the Ghostbusters extended universe but the interaction of the streamers with the ghosts was given a focus that expanded upon the story without contradicting anything previous. Very well done.
To be nit-picky, there were three things that stopped this from being a great film for me. And for once nostalgia-bait wasn't one of them!
1) Nearly everyone is a character. The adults were fine but the kids were great. Phoebe, Trevor and Podcast were all distinct without being annoying or overblown. Sadly Lucky didn't get the same treatment. She started off okay, pranking Trevor, but it wasn't seen through and she doesn't have any defining personality. I can't tell if that comes from bad writing or bad acting, but something was off.
2) There were no stand out lines. Off the top of my head I can't think of anything quotable and certainly nothing that was delivered in a memorable way. There was no moment that could compare with the likes of "We got one!" from the original.
3) There's a theme of action having no consequences running through the film. It happened a few times but the worst was when the kids watch someone die and carry on with the plan as though nothing happened. Even given that Phoebe says that stress makes her calm, it doesn't make any sense that the kids don't have any reaction to it at all. They could not have planned any better for the set up of Phoebe's character reacting to the incident, but instead she doesn't even acknowledge it. To prove it you could cut that very short death sequence out of the film and it wouldn't make any difference as it had zero effect on the kids.
Those nitpicks aside, it is a good film that is worth spending your time on.
Afterlife is up there amongst my favourite Latter Day Sequels.
I pretty much agree with everything you said, and will endorse everyone giving it a watch.
If I had to sum it up? It shows due reverence to its illustrious predecessors, but is not afraid to be It’s Own Thing. It’s not trying to reinvent anything. And I don’t think it’s trying to reinterpret either. But it does offer a different view on things.
Now to tick one off of Movies Everyone Seems To Love But I’ve Not Seen For No Particular Reason (which includes The God Father series)…
Lebowski is pretty good, but it's no Withnail and I, but then again that's just like my opinion man
Go
Teen movies of the 90's largely suffered from not being teen movies of the 80's, this one is mostly okay but not sure how much bias of that is down to the Katie (and that bloke from Grange Hill)
I couldn't tell you the plot of the film. But it is enjoyable. The funny thing about TBL is that it's one of the very few films I enjoy more the more often I watch them. It's not horribly impactful (that's reserved for The Man Who Wasn't There and - for me at least - An Honest Man, simply for the weird, foreboding atmosphere), but it's fun and a modern classic due to the casting and what these actors made of those crazy characters.
I'm sure it's WAY more impactful if you were there though. The early 90s must have been a magical time in the US. Well, in California and New York. If you're a white person with a certain amount of money, but that's a given.
The only comparable thing I can think of for the 2010s depicting life in California is the Netflix show Love. Which really kinda made me think less of Californians. Which I feel bad for, because I don't even know any personally. But these characters and their lives in that show are mostly annoying.
California is a huge state with a lot of people. Someone growing up in the Bay Area Will have a very different experience to someone growing up in OC, which is different from growing up in LA, which is different from growing up in San Diego, which is different from dying slowly in Rialto.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: California is a huge state with a lot of people. Someone growing up in the Bay Area Will have a very different experience to someone growing up in OC, which is different from growing up in LA, which is different from growing up in San Diego, which is different from dying slowly in Rialto.
Yes, as I was typing I thought I may have to clarify what I meant. Oh well
It was very good, don’t let the name put you off, it’s not a saccharine family film about Nancy Drew. It’s a darkly comic modern film noir. It’s similar to Brick by Rian Johnson.
Adam Brody plays Abe, a former child detective who now in his thirties is haunted by failing to solve a missing person case when he was 12 and is a washed up disappointment barely making ends meet as a Private Investigator taking cases like find the missing cat and if somebody is gay, when he gets asked to investigate a murder…
It’s very well done, Adam Brody is great and the supporting cast are spot on too. I’d highly recommend it, it’s a little slow at the start, but is one of the better detective films in a long time. Shame about the name though, I almost didn’t bother based on the title, expecting something quite different. I’ll re-iterate though it is pretty dark, definitely not suitable for children.
The first is one of the most iconic movies of the 1980s but an awful film in most respects. Saying that there was room for improvement is an understatement, and no amount of fancy F-14 footage nor catchy music videos are going to make up for it...
...although it did inspire Afterburner and Hot Shots!. So we shall let it off the hook...
Topgun: Maverick is basically this generation's top gun and thankfully its not only a far better film in every respect, but possibly the best film about planes ever. My only regret is not having watched it in 4DX or at least IMAX. I was so happy with Topgun: Maverick I played F-29 Retaliator for the rest of the day.
They’re B-Movies through and through, very much silly rather than scary. Probably worth a watch if that sounds your bag.
That is one weird and weirdly long film series, isn't it? With some very recent additions even. There's something about the guy who made the puppets having been killed by nazis during ww2, right?
Paul Blart breaks bad, and leads a gang of neo Nazis in what in many ways is a film that has strong echoes of Die Hard and Rambo, only with the least likely protagonist of all time in the shape of Becky, a 13 year old schoolgirl.
I'd been interested in seeing this for a while, if only to see if Kevin James, an actor I'd only ever seen do comedy, and light comedy at that, managed to make a successful transition into not only a dramatic role, but a role that leans really hard against type.
Does he pull it off? Mostly. I didn't find his tattooed, ultra violent gang leader all that intimidating if I'm honest, but I did at least find him credible and never felt like he was about to crack a joke to relieve moments of tension.
James' performance aside, the success of this movie all revolves around how willing the viewer is to entertain the plausibility of a young girl taking on an, admittedly small, armed group of adult men. Lulu Wilson as Becky does a respectable job of acting a role I'd find it highly unlikely she was able to bring any real life experience to, and mostly successfully conveys the fear and anger necessary to give the film even a chance of working.
This is a small scale film, with a cast and range of locations so sparse it could probably be easily adapted to the stage, and by keeping the running time short the pace is kept high. There's little exposition (they never waste time explaining why the maguffin the bad guys are after is important or what it does, for instance, they just let you know it's something they are prepared to kill for) and therefore little time to get bored.
Effects are mostly physical, and generally pretty well done, and in fact everything speaks to a film that has done much with a relatively small budget.
It's not an amazing movie, the basic premise just doesn't stand up to close scrutiny, but what it does with what it has is worthy of note. While "it could be worse" may sound like damning with faint praise, in this case, it means a perfectly watchable and entertaining movie had been crafted from something that by rights should have been a howling disaster.
Both enjoyable movies. Both pretty stand up in the modern day.
Now it’s time to lower my normally laughable standards with a bit of Jaws 3
This is the one I saw the most as a kid. I’m not sure why, maybe Ena had it on VHS? Though why she then showed it to 4 and 5 year olds I’ll never know!
Bothering Netflix for a bunch of Studio Ghibelline movies. As you may have read before in my posts, I’ve never really got on with anime in the past, but I do like sporadic attempts to challenge that status quo.
Kicking off with My Neighbour Totoro. So far, so good.
Good choice there Doc, I'd recommend Porco Russo, Spirited Away and Monoke rightly get hailed as the big hitters but there's something about Porco that wibbles me grey matter
It's not one of the better known ones, but I was always fond of The Cat Returns.
It's a simple, little adventure story, plus, if you watch it dubbed, you get Tim Curry as a sleazy Cat King.
aku-chan wrote: It's not one of the better known ones, but I was always fond of The Cat Returns.
It's a simple, little adventure story, plus, if you watch it dubbed, you get Tim Curry as a sleazy Cat King.
I think I spotted that on Netflix. Might be one I need to build up to over this experiment!
Just finishing off Jaws 3
You know…whilst the execution is poor (especially the shark and SFX), it’s a shame because there are the makings of a decent story here. The central premise is certainly interesting, and at least an attempt to change up the story. And I always award points for trying.
But, when your great big killer shark looks naff and singularly unconvincing? You just can’t come back from that. Had they not insisted on 3D and it’s limitations, perhaps we’d have a more favourable outcome.
Also, maybe don’t have a Great White somehow battering a metal gate with its tail so hard it bends the metal (which I presume to be a steel bolt?). And especially don’t have it reverse out of its hidey hole.
Rarely has approximately an hour and a quarter felt as long as it did while watching Dashcam.
As a horror fan who has many personal favourites in the found footage sub-genre, it's really disappointing when something this low quality comes along, and actually diminishes those films by doing such a poor job of disguising the limitations of the format that it highlights flaws in better films.
Let's start with Annie, the main character. She's hideous. Clearly something is being said by putting a character with this many traits and beliefs that will rub many people up the wrong way, but for the life of me I can't say what. Ultimately all it does is make it hard to care about her, and therefore hard to care about the movie. There's an attempt to try and suggest she's ok underneath it all really and all the pro-crystals, anti-vax, MAGA, conspiracy nut stuff is just some sort of affectation. But then, on a couple of occasions when the chips are really down she's just obnoxious, so that idea is undermined.
Once the novelty of an unlikeable protagonist is removed from the equation though, much of what's left is a sub standard Blair Witch wannabe that seems to unerringly pursue the lowest common denominator in terms of any sort of scares, and it says a lot that the only moment of the whole film that startled me even slightly was the delayed and unexpected deployment of an airbag.
Ultimately, all other criticism aside, the film lacks the courage to hold anything back, and by simply showing the audience pretty much everything, commits the irredeemable sin of horror, it's boring and predictable. That it does so in a found footage format which is tailor made for keeping the audience in the dark, figuratively speaking, only exacerbates the issue.
Jaws 4 - This Time Michael Caine Needs A New House
Oh lawdy. Has to be seen to be believed. Lacking in tension, competence and plot.
About the only reason to watch it is to find out which of two endings your vision has. They’re both crap like.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Skinner
Horror movie starring Ted Raimi (always good value), Riki Lake (who I think is about it to snuff it?)
Apparently also starring Traci Lords, so all the parts in position for this to be utterly awful in a fun way.
First fun fact? The serial killer is called Dennis Skinner- who skins people. Not to be confused with veteran Member of Parliament Dennis Skinner, an older gent so know for not giving a fig he’s called The Beast of Bolsover.
Not as completely bloody awful as I expected….but a bit suspect.
Example? Dennis makes a skin suit from a black fellow. Which naturally leads to him living the character as a very racist caricature. Like, Black & White Minstrel, Al Jolson racist.
Granted the film is from 1993, but it made for awkward viewing. Within it is a pretty interesting movie, with glimmers of real promise. However, having been made by then well established director Ivan Nagy, I must judge it quite strongly as a poor effort because of those glimmers of promise.
Had this been an amateur made affair, or perhaps someone’s directorial debut I’d be more forgiving. Whilst the cast give it their all, it never rises above low tier B-Movie. Points most definitely deducted for the “blacked up” scenes, which for me tip over from poor taste for the sake poor taste to outright offensive.
One that in my now 42 years of life (get off my lawn, damn kids!) remains a relatively new discovery to me.
I’m not going to say much about this, other than it’s a film I greatly enjoy and have watched more than a few times.
It’s kind of Hammeresque, but isn’t a Hammer film so far as I know.
It’s well made, well acted and pretty bloody compelling. Pretty much everything about it demands your attention and appreciation.
It’s also free on Amazon Prime in the U.K.
Even if it’s not free in your area, it’s well worth paying for. Though when I said it demands your attention? I meant it. One for a settled evening indoors.
There's a lot of things I like about this movie and a few things I don't.
Personally, I dislike the way it makes out the Krays as noble entrepreneurs and romanticises them and all that cockney east end crap really grinds me up
It also doesn't really follow real life with a fair few things missing or made up.
It's still a good film and I like Tom Hardy in it and the way he plays both of the brothers. He does a pretty good job of playing a nutcase.
Fun fact: my granny was a jazz singer and met the Krays when they made a few attempts at muscling into Newcastle in the 60s.
One that in my now 42 years of life (get off my lawn, damn kids!) remains a relatively new discovery to me.
I’m not going to say much about this, other than it’s a film I greatly enjoy and have watched more than a few times.
It’s kind of Hammeresque, but isn’t a Hammer film so far as I know.
It’s well made, well acted and pretty bloody compelling. Pretty much everything about it demands your attention and appreciation.
It’s also free on Amazon Prime in the U.K.
Even if it’s not free in your area, it’s well worth paying for. Though when I said it demands your attention? I meant it. One for a settled evening indoors.
Trust me on this.
Is this one set in the "modern day" 1970s with Karen Black?
Watched The Crying Game for the first time last night, which was clearly inspired by a gag from The Pink Panther Strikes Again...
Bottom line it's a cracking thriller from Neil Jordan, with fantastic performances from all involved, but surprised that the "twist" was a shock to everyone. What is a shock to me is suddenly understanding all those comedy references that went right over my head over the years!
Shout out to Ace Ventura, Rush Hour 2, Naked Gun 33 1/3 and of course Return of The Jedi.
Half sequel, half remake. It was surprisingly good. Not a masterpiece, but I think the original is god awful. This one at least doesn't look like a tool to recruit people for the army/navy/air force. And actions scenes are decent, they aren't as confused as they were in the original, but I think that was Tony Scott's style. Which is basically the same style of Michael Bay and I personally don't like it.
Overall it's a typical classic modern Tom Cruise's movie and I love the guy. I don't think there's a single movie that was released in the last 30 years of his career that I didn't like, and I'm pretty sure I've watched them all, barring one or two (I haven't watched Barry Seal for sure).
First off and I forgot this put this in, bloody excellent soundtrack. As a big fan of Dave Rawlings, this was an instant hook with the intro cinematic.
I put off watching this movie for a long time, mainly because I was a bit sick of Guy Ritchie. All of his films are a bit blokey and a bit samey and a bit gak. I mean they are good films but they're a bit naff. I'm not sure if that makes sense but it does to me Worse than that, the people who stroke off to them all the time are the kind of people I really dislike. The same who obsess over Quentin Tarantino films. They just belong in a circle of tossers.
I like all the actors in the movie and after watching it I have to particularly enjoy Hugh Grant because he is great at making Fletcher into such a little weasel. He's definitely the driving force of the movie and he just oozes slime out of the screen. His rhythm and mannerisms in the monologuing come off extremely well and his back and forth with Charlie in the earlier scenes is really good. I also have to like Charlie Hunnam because he's a lercal lad like. I think the trouble is he's been so far away from the homeland for so long and his accent is well into decline bless him.
Jeremy Strong was enjoyable as well, certainly better than Matthew McConaughey who I rarely find doing an outstanding job. He's a good actor but I don't rate him that highly. I think maybe that is because the first movie I remember seeing him in was U-571 where they made it that the Americans cracked the Enigma code first and that has eternally soured it? I just think he's very samey. Not bad samey, just I want to see him do something a bit different.
I think my main dislike which is rather minimal is that it's so baited for an American / international audience. And you might say to that, well duh. Of course it is. But to me, this is how mythical Britain works. It's all posh pricks and then some cockneys randomly thrown in. They are the only two parts of Britain that exist. Like a shortbread tin with a red phonebox and when you open up the tin there's a weed farm. It's rare you get a good movie set in the UK and even rarer that it's outside of the bloody South. And a lot of Brits love that, they just scoop up that stereotype and think it's brilliant. I just hope to see some better stories from other areas. Like it would be nice if there was a movie shot in the North that wasn't centred on deprivation and misery.
One that in my now 42 years of life (get off my lawn, damn kids!) remains a relatively new discovery to me.
I’m not going to say much about this, other than it’s a film I greatly enjoy and have watched more than a few times.
It’s kind of Hammeresque, but isn’t a Hammer film so far as I know.
It’s well made, well acted and pretty bloody compelling. Pretty much everything about it demands your attention and appreciation.
It’s also free on Amazon Prime in the U.K.
Even if it’s not free in your area, it’s well worth paying for. Though when I said it demands your attention? I meant it. One for a settled evening indoors.
Trust me on this.
Is this one set in the "modern day" 1970s with Karen Black?
Nah. It was made in the 70’s, but set in Victorian/Edwardian turn of the century type.
After Ghostbusters was a hit I decided to have a go at another continuation/reboot, and over all it was much better than expected. The Matrix and Ghostbusters have a similar pedigree - a smashing first movie, both of which I will argue are still watchable today, followed by two further films of diminishing returns, with the third in each series being borderline unwatchable.
Resurrections is at heart a simple popcorn flick with nothing of great value to say. It shouldn't have any cultural impact as that isn't the movie it sets out to be. Where it succeeds is in exploiting the efforts of the previous films without getting bogged down in the lore of its own universe. Neo and Trinity are the core of the film as they were before. They aren't brought on show as a manipulative tool to hand over the story to new generation that we are being told we have to care about (a la Star Wars), or as one last hurrah for the fans (a la Ghostbusters). The film is unnecessary but it doesn't feel intrusive or diminishing of the universe.
Problems with the film? The action is not anything special. It isn't terrible but at times the wire work is obnoxiously poor and the choreography is simply dull. Reeves putting his hands in front of himself as the solution to every action scene is pretty lame. On the plus side at least they made the correct decision in not trying to force Neil Patrick Harris into a Kung-Fu situation. Speaking of which he does an excellent job as playing a new evolution of the machines. His character does have the rambling quasi-philosophical tones that marked those that cam before him but he delivers it in a manner that distinguishes him. The new Morpheus and Smith are also acceptably ok in their roles.
Reeves and Moss are both credible in picking up old characters and are at their strongest while in the simulation. But this leads to another problem as the parts where they are the best take up too much of the film. A tremendous amount of effort goes into building the simulation world so that when we finally leave it we are left having to pick up the pace somewhat to cram the rest of the film in.
But these are minor quibbles on a film that I'd rate as "not bad".
I’m yet to see Resurrections (wake me when I can legally stream it for free), so apologies if this is Really Flipping Obvious.
But what if the script for the AI’s philosophical ramblings is deliberately bad? As a way to show its nowhere near as smart or insightful as it likes to think it is?
You know. For a 90’s Kash In? It’s actually pretty fun. I’d argue superior to its Street Fighter Kontepery.
Goro in particular is rather well realised. Though I remain broadly unconvinced by Lambert’s Raiden.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Mortal Kombat Annihilation
And why not.
Because I’m only a few minutes in and oh my good gravy what a frankly staggering drop in kwalitee.
To this day Mortal Kombat most probably is the best video game adaptation I know of. Refused to watch the Street Fighter film. I'm rather sure I mentioned this on here before, but back then that may have been the first time I was actually angry at a film trailer/film. Because somehow I care(d) about Street Fighter.
Funnily enough, the Dead or Alive film wasn't all bad, because I felt like it captured the spirit of the games rather well (if not anything else ).
Today I idly watched most of Zärtliche Chaoten and Zärtliche Chaoten 2. A mere footnote in trashy German late 80s film comedy, but they had Michael Winslow as a leading man alongside a German radio host / tv presenter and a folk actor (not sure there's an actual English term for it. An actor who's known for connect very well with the people, usually comes with some local dialect, very down-to-earth and relateable. Stuff like that).
So these three are the leading men, and much of the supporting cast also are a mix of audience favourites from Southern Germany or Austria, mixed with US actors known at the time (people from Dallas, of course the had Hasselhoff in there for a small role, and so on). So there must have been a weird language mix going on, kinda like with the Italian productions in the 80s/90s. Very interesting, weird stuff. The humour is mostly horrible slap-stick with oddly sudden cuts, and there is no plot to speak of.
Anyway, Michael Winslow. That guy is good, isn't he. Few months ago I heard that he was somewhere on tv in the US and a whole generation who'd never heard of him were astounded by what this man can do. I'll not say that I'm a huge fan, but what have I been given to work with when I grew up? Zärtliche Chaoten 1&2 and Police Academy. That's not a great basis to build fandom for a comedian on, right? So if you're bored, look up Michael Winslow things on youtube. It's good for a while.
Yes, the movie in which Nicholas Cage portrays a fictionalised version of himself. I've always considered him a pretty mediocre actor but a real nice guy who had the luck to star in some great movies and made a career out of the success of such movies. Or maybe it wasn't really luck but the fact that he is the nephew of one of the greatest filmmakers in history.
I was also very intrigued since the movie stars Alessandra Mastronardi, as Pedro Pascal's love interest, who is a very famous actress here.
Well, the movie was surprisingly hilarious and it made me change my mind about Cage, he actually has a massive talent! Seriously, I laughed the entire movie. It's a great comedy.
Aye, I vaguely remember positive reviews Spy got back when it was released.
I like Melissa McCarthy. I don't like most of her films, but i think she's way better than most of her films allow her to be actually. I'd like to see her in more serious roles.
Sigur wrote:Aye, I vaguely remember positive reviews Spy got back when it was released.
I like Melissa McCarthy. I don't like most of her films, but i think she's way better than most of her films allow her to be actually. I'd like to see her in more serious roles.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:She’s definitely go solid movie acting chops.
I think I was put off her due to Mike & Molly seemingly sourcing all its humour from “oh look, we’re both overweight, chuckle chuckle chuckle.
You know. Like Rebel Wilson’s career was before she lost lots of weight.
If you’re interested in seeing Melissa McCarthy in a dramatic role, I’d recommend “Can you ever forgive me?”
She plays the lead in a biopic about Lee Israel who forged letters by notable historical figures. It co-stars Richard E Grant and is really quite good.
Can someone explain to me how so many of these older films still stand up to scrutiny? This film is a buddy cop / veteran schools rookie / the odd couple recycled mashup of cinema tropes. The jokes aren't particularly funny, producing more of a continuous smile than any laugh out loud moments. And one of the lead actors is one of those marmite characters whose self promotion is either endearing or a total turn off. Yet somehow it works.
The roles are perfect for the leads, one being boisterous who uses his cockyness to mask his nerves, the other being grumpy who uses his surliness to mask his emotions. The tells are there throughout the film without the director having to spoon feed the audience. And Vincent D'Onofrio (private Pyle!) is more than equal, playing the antagonist bug in a human suit with a praise worthy physical performance.
There's plenty to complement in this film but for me it all works due to the pacing and shot selection. The camera stays in the moment long enough for us to absorb the events then bounces to the next. It's quick enough to maintain momentum and slow enough to not cause headaches, and makes the best use of well framed action shots. And this constant beat plays into the schtick that, whether you like him or not, Smith excels at.
Now. I know I’ve watched Men In Black International
Couldn’t tell you a bloody thing about it.
As for Men in Black 2? Can anyone tell me what happened to Johnny Knoxville’s character, as he seems to just….exit scene right, and that’s it. Never seen nor referred to for the rest of the film?
I'm not planning on watching the follow on MIB like I've done with other movie series. I remember virtually nothing about MIB2, I think MIB3 is great and International is not awful (although I can't remember recall anything after she gets recruited).
It’s amazing. Quite possibly a film of its time, and indeed of my time (metal head, comedy fan). There’s definitely stuff here which would put folk off, but for me it’s a poo load of fun!
I think I was put off her due to Mike & Molly seemingly sourcing all its humour from “oh look, we’re both overweight, chuckle chuckle chuckle.
You know. Like Rebel Wilson’s career was before she lost lots of weight.
Yeah, she's charismatic and a capable actress. I think she could do way better. But indeed, she seems stuck in stuff that's all about "overweight, haha" or being coarse (because she's overweight!)
Rebel Wilson has WAY more potential to annoy I think. Seeing people in headlines also is annoying, and I just saw her in one the other day. I did enjoy that wedding bridesmaids film with her though and the evil bridesmaids. But that had Kirsten Dunst, so maybe it was just that.
@Aash: Cheers, yeah, I head of the film back then of course. Haven't had a chance to see it yet.
It’s amazing. Quite possibly a film of its time, and indeed of my time (metal head, comedy fan). There’s definitely stuff here which would put folk off, but for me it’s a poo load of fun!
I consider it one of the best movies that have been released in the last 20 years, I've watched it like 10 times. Some of the songs are actually great to listen even as regular standalone songs.
Not much to say but one of the most beloved sci-fi movies of the 1990s. Acting is a bit flat in some places but otherwise the film that Dune wishes it could be.
That's the one where Steven Segal paid 50 million dollars to make an enviromentally conscious action film of varying grandness. It stars the trio of Dr.Cox, a Marketing Lady and Sir Michael Caine as the bad guys (later supported by Gunnery Sergeant Hartman) trying to do dastardly oil things and Steven Segal's ego, Steven Segal (bearing the very good name Forrest Taft) and Joan Chen have to stop them. It also features Billy Bob Thornton in an early role and Bart the Bear in one of his later roles.
It marks the end of the good Steven Segal films and the begining of the much less good ones (with the exception of Under Siege 2 and Glimmer Man which followed immediately and to an extent Fire Down Below, which feels like a slightly more cheery version of On Deadly Ground). From 2000 on we got the really bad ones.
Forrest Taft is a specialist firefighter who wears a jacket which has his name and logo on the back. His speciality seems to be to make fires go out be exploding them. He's got some undefined super secret military background too. He works for Michael Caine's oil company who wanna get more oil of the ground in Alaska. To do that they built a mega refinery on the lands which decades ago they basically stole from the natives, but the refinery is made of crap parts, they just do it to keep the rights to the land or something. Taft gets wind of the plan, Dr.Cox explodes him, natives find him (after a bear maybe or maybe not dragged him to them), nurse him back to health and think he's the crowbearsomething warrior that's going to help them.
This film boasts a pretty fun cast. Dr.Cox's strength in all these films around the time is that he immediately draws the viewer's attention, no matter the scene he pops up in. Michael Caine and his marketing/PR lady must walk about 200 miles over the course of the film. Each time they're on scene they're walking either through offices or the refinery. As far as silly action films go, this one's pretty sombre in tone. I mean you feel that Segal's heart (and his twisted, twisted mind too) were in the making of this film, and he didn't hold back either. There's a lot of explosions and they make very good use of that helicopter they got.
Don't Watch, unless you're a Segal completionist or you've seen all the good ones and want to have a look at the slightly bittersweet milestone in his filmography.
Started watching a pretty insane sci-fi film in which people travel through time to hunt animals for their DNA because in the future all the animals died out. I kinda like it so far, although it features CGI from hell. It also inexplicably features Heike Makatsch!
In other news, NYPD Blue is as good as I remembered it. Can you believe that just the first two seasons were ever released on DVD in Germany? Even Disney+ just streams 8 seasons. What's going on with that? The few full series DVD boxes available are incredibly expensive.
On Deadly Ground changed the way I view movie making.
That is, ODG is the film where Steven Segal put a floppy disk into a computer upside down. And they left it in the movie.
I was watching with my Dad, and we had to pause to hash it his out. No one on set corrected him. No editor cut the scene or scheduled a reshoot of a hand properly inserting a floppy disk. Not only was the Star of the film so out of touch as to insert the floppy upside down, but he was so hated that the rest of the production was united in their determination to let him look bad even if it affected the quality of their movie.
It opened a doorway to a shadowy world of ego, discord and petty revenge that I had never imagined existed, and the world of film has been a more colorful place for me ever since.
That is, ODG is the film where Steven Segal put a floppy disk into a computer upside down. And they left it in the movie.
I was watching with my Dad, and we had to pause to hash it his out. No one on set corrected him. No editor cut the scene or scheduled a reshoot of a hand properly inserting a floppy disk. Not only was the Star of the film so out of touch as to insert the floppy upside down, but he was so hated that the rest of the production was united in their determination to let him look bad even if it affected the quality of their movie.
It opened a doorway to a shadowy world of ego, discord and petty revenge that I had never imagined existed, and the world of film has been a more colorful place for me ever since.
That is an amazing story. I didn't even notice the floppy upside down thing!
The Devil's General (1955)
Classic film starring Curt Jürgens. It set in 1941 in Germany. Jürgens plays a Luftwaffe general (based on Ernst Udet) who made his name as a fighter pilot in WW1 and later helps re-armament efforts as Luftwaffe research and development overseer. He doesn't identify with the new regime, but has a nice job developing and testing new military airplanes.
Himmler's SS, always keen on gaining more influence within the state, try to get close to the general, but he mocks them. Shortly thereafter he is set up and taken away to a Gestapo prison where the SS run a ploy to break him mentally and have him be 'saved' by a friendly SS officer. The general sees through the ploy.
It's a classic based on a stage play by Carl Zuckmayr and showcases the acting chops Jürgens possessed, as he carries the film rather effortlessly. Which in some way sometimes was turned against the film by some critics as they cited that it's all too easy to symathize with the leading character even though he's all about him being am ambivalent figure.
Anyway, Watch It. It should be watched, because it's good.
That is, ODG is the film where Steven Segal put a floppy disk into a computer upside down. And they left it in the movie.
I was watching with my Dad, and we had to pause to hash it his out. No one on set corrected him. No editor cut the scene or scheduled a reshoot of a hand properly inserting a floppy disk. Not only was the Star of the film so out of touch as to insert the floppy upside down, but he was so hated that the rest of the production was united in their determination to let him look bad even if it affected the quality of their movie.
It opened a doorway to a shadowy world of ego, discord and petty revenge that I had never imagined existed, and the world of film has been a more colorful place for me ever since.
It bothers me that I want to know if it was a real floppy disc or just a 3.5" hard plastic.
It bothers me as to what kind of horrendous half-assed computer did the props department build that LETS you put a floppy disc in the wrong way around.
Flinty wrote: It bothers me as to what kind of horrendous half-assed computer did the props department build that LETS you put a floppy disc in the wrong way around.
This was a big part of why we had to pause it and double check. We didn’t even think it was possible.
The first anime/manga I ever saw (well, first one not made for western audiences). But I’ve not seen it for at least 30 years.
There was a new translation around 2000 or so (and who knows maybe more since then) so it's no longer 2 hours of people shouting TETSUO! and KANEDA!
And the soundtrack is awesome, I still listen to it, even chased down some more Baliense (from Bali, not sure I'm spelling it right) music.
Automatically Appended Next Post: "The Bubble" Netflix
A bunch of dysfunctional movie stars are locked up together to make Cliff Beasts 6 during the pandemic.
I saw it only for Karen Gilam because honestly I would pay to watch her read the phone book. I just wish she'd use her Scottish accent instead of her American. Ah well.
All star cast, predictable pandemic and movie making humor, amusing at times. A great film to paint Mordians by.
@Voss: Yeah IIRC it was a 3,5" disc, but who doesn't call those floppy anyway? (well, we actually call them Disketten of course, but that's beside the point ).
@Kid_Kyoto: Oh yeah, that post-2000 version is the one I got then. I vividly remember these hours of them shouting their names.
"Terrahawks, stay on this channel! This is an emergency!"
Some of the first memories I can recall are of Terrahawks, back in 1983. Zelda was pure nightmare fuel for a three year old child, but Sergeant Major and his Zeroids would always keep us safe from the monsters...
...just finished season 2 and now moving on to season 3. So far its not quite as polished as Thunderbirds nor Captain Scarlet, but it does have a secret weapon in Windsor Davis who frequently steals the show as Sergeant Major Zero. The best bit of the series so far was in "To catch a Tiger" where the gang save a pair of hostages who are "shown" to their quarters by Zero. Davis at his best!
Apparently a new show is in the works under the name "Kate Kestrel & The Terrahawks", and looking forward to it.
It opened a doorway to a shadowy world of ego, discord and petty revenge that I had never imagined existed, and the world of film has been a more colorful place for me ever since.
Ohh boy, if that interests you, then you should look into the Disney animation studios protests. So, so many of our movies have things animated into them for petty (and, honestly not so petty) reasons.
Sigur wrote: @Voss: Yeah IIRC it was a 3,5" disc, but who doesn't call those floppy anyway? (well, we actually call them Disketten of course, but that's beside the point ).
Truthfully it was just the mental image of Segal trying to insert the larger, floppier disc.
I could see that going on for a while, and it seems more amusing.
For the 3.5," I would just assume he broke the drive trying to force it during the first couple takes of the scene.
SamusDrake wrote: "Terrahawks, stay on this channel! This is an emergency!"
Some of the first memories I can recall are of Terrahawks, back in 1983. Zelda was pure nightmare fuel for a three year old child, but Sergeant Major and his Zeroids would always keep us safe from the monsters...
...just finished season 2 and now moving on to season 3. So far its not quite as polished as Thunderbirds nor Captain Scarlet, but it does have a secret weapon in Windsor Davis who frequently steals the show as Sergeant Major Zero. The best bit of the series so far was in "To catch a Tiger" where the gang save a pair of hostages who are "shown" to their quarters by Zero. Davis at his best!
Apparently a new show is in the works under the name "Kate Kestrel & The Terrahawks", and looking forward to it.
Tiger Ninestein is a melt!
Relies utterly on the Zeroids, still thinks they’re worthless.
It's on terrestrial right now, I'm not going to pass it up. I can't explain how much I love it or even why. In my opinion it stands with Logan at the pinnacle of superhero films, although clearly for very different reasons.
I feel thick for confessing this but I had never before made the connection with how British influenced the film is - production company, director, lead bad guy, half the cast of Lock Stock, the music play list. Maybe that's why I like it so much. It's Guy Richie doing a tights and capes film.
I watched Carriers (2009) yesterday - starring Chris Pine and friends trying to escape a viral pandemic.
I must admit, I assumed this had been filmed more recently and was one of the expected "COVID apocalypse" wave of movies I am sure will follow.
However, it was filmed in 2006, so pre-Star Trek and long before the dreaded "C" word.
This doesn't take away from the fact that it is a dull, depressing little movie that seems to take all the worst parts from things like The Walking Dead etc but doesn't inject anything new or revolutionary to the genre.
It was disappointing at best and not one I would recommend.
Another movie I probably, by all rights, should’ve seen aaaages ago.
It’s really rather good. Certainly a superior teen horror movie, spesh given its more creepy than gory, nearly veering into outright psychological horror.
Douchebags are well written and delivered douchebags. Not so much malevolent, more just unthinking arseholes.
The four centre characters are all completely solid.
I like Honest Trailers’ new trend of calling these kind of light adventure movies that try to be everything to everyone “Red Notices”. I feel like Jungle Cruise is the ur-Red Notice.
Oh dont worry seems panto dame Sparrow will be back on the menu soon (and even putting aside Mr D's recent troubles the Pirate films being diminishing returns money wise time after time)
I watched the first two episodes of Peacemaker (John Cena plays a superhero), and I think I dislike every single thing about blockbuster tv shows these days. That I thought after the first episode. After the second I kinda just got lulled in and gave up resisting. John Cena making an ass out of himself is amusing to an extent because he's really good at it, and he's fun to look at. It's all so calculated though, isn't it? The other characters are insufferable in the first episode. At that point in time I decided that I hate characters and exposition dialogue in tv shows. Especially with characters like these.
A few weeks ago I watched the first few episodes of NYPD Blue. The show opens with things happening and characters are introduced via what happens and how they act in the face of these things happening. Peacemaker opens with an impossible-to-decypher summary of what happened in the Suicide Squad film followed by dialoge whilst people sit. Every now and then John Cena falls over or grimaces, between that it's people sitting, explaining what they are 'about'. Emotion is generated by Cena's father being an ass and inexplicably being amused by some abuse story. He's also very overtly racist, watches one of these right-wing/libertarian/whatever of the above sells better atm TV hosts and so on. Later we learn that he's got white supremacy superpowers. And the show is really overt about that, displaying the nazi salute, but the bloody show is too afraid to show that, so they use their left arms? wtf is this? Here we seem to learn about how tv shows prioritize what can be shown and what can't: Graphic violence incl. blood - okay (albeit absurdly badly cut). Women's (not actual character though, just extras) breasts - okay, but keep it to once per episode. Nazi salute - Noooo, even though the actors do it like 20 times and chant "hail white dragon" or something. But maybe there's some comicbook reasoning for the left instead of the right there, I don't know.
The intro. I just can't deal with 'irony' any more, certainly not in a Marvel superhero thing. I don't like people dancing to impress to begin with. Ironic dancing doesn't work. It does probably set the tone for the show and tells us "don't take this seriously, this is just some James Gunn Mavel junk food thing", and I'm probably just old and boring. The eagle looks great though and it did some funny things. Well, "it" probably doesn't exist, so, it doesn't do anything, but the computer program was told to do a funny thing or two.
I also watched Kim's Convenience (episodes 1 and 2), and it looks ....alright? I guess?
They probably use the left arm so that they can even show the episodes in Germany.
I also watched a 2011 anime about sci-fi racing called Redline. At least that is ostensibly what it is about. However, it tries really hard to shove in all the tropes with mecha, kaiju, pompadours, and tropes I am not familiar with enough to name but I know when I see them.
Despite the mess, making no sense, and using a strange out-of-date animation style, it is hard to look away. The frenetic energy of it all is something to behold. In some ways if reminded me of a older anime like Robot Carnival or Galaxy Express: 999 as there is some main characters that drive the story, but they are surrounded by a lot of vignette's of other things.
Easy E wrote: They probably use the left arm so that they can even show the episodes in Germany. ...
Aye, that's a good point. Yeah, germans are weird about the Verbotsgesetz (or what ever they call it there). Not that I'm against it; we have pretty much the same law here. Shouldn't be a problem since it's an artistic thingy without propagating national socialism, but oh well.
Oh, it was evident that Cena was great at being a goofy dude. And cursing can be done by anybody with half a braincell. But cool thing you're enjoying it, maybe I'll get there too. Who else did Gunn make into a comedic actor? Dave Bautista?
Just looked through James Gunn's work. Seems like he wrote the script for the excellent Dawn of the Dead remake, but otherwise I can't get on board with his oevre.
I found Peacemaker enjoyable in the main. Sure there are low points, but they never seem to last long enough to break the flow.
Two other things I've watched recently: City On A Hill - Kevin Bacon playing a corrupt cop in early 90s Boston. Good enough for me to keep watching after the first few episodes.
The Sopranos - never seen before so I tried a well loved series. I persisted eight episodes until I gave up. I love James Gandolfini but I cared nothing for his character, his character's family or any of the events. The show is clearly of his time, from before live recording was ubiquitous and box set bingeing was a thing. As a result when you watch one episode after another there's a general feeling that nothing happens to move the series forward. The gimmick with the psychologist gets boring quick and there's simply nothing there to grab hold of. One for the history books I think as modern TV production has moved on to a much better place.
It's a Guy Richie film about gangstery types in the United Kingdom, and it's pretty much what you'd expect. To be honest I didn't know it was a Guy Richie film at first and thought "they're trying really hard to be a Guy Richie film there". It's almost a parody of a Guy Richie gangster film, but with an impressive cast. Matthew McConaughey is the big gangster boss, Hugh Grant is a shady journalist type, Colin Ferrell is a ...coach and so on. Everybody is very rich, there aren't any sympathetic guys really.
It's no Lock, Stock & Two Smoking Barrels and it certainly is no Snatch, but it's serviceable. It's not interesting by any means, the story just goes on and we're along for the ride to see what little thing happens next, there are some twists, but they're kinda silly.
Watch It if you're into that sort of stuff (which I am in general). It's alright and got some interesting performances. It does lack any sort of grime though, cameraderie or that little twinkle in its eye the prior films got. One might say that it goes on for a little too long. No need for a film like this to go 2 hours.
If you haven't seen it, watch Snatch, because it's really entertaining. I really like that film.
It's a Guy Richie film about gangstery types in the United Kingdom, and it's pretty much what you'd expect. To be honest I didn't know it was a Guy Richie film at first and thought "they're trying really hard to be a Guy Richie film there". It's almost a parody of a Guy Richie gangster film, but with an impressive cast. Matthew McConaughey is the big gangster boss, Hugh Grant is a shady journalist type, Colin Ferrell is a ...coach and so on. Everybody is very rich, there aren't any sympathetic guys really.
It's no Lock, Stock & Two Smoking Barrels and it certainly is no Snatch, but it's serviceable. It's not interesting by any means, the story just goes on and we're along for the ride to see what little thing happens next, there are some twists, but they're kinda silly.
Watch It if you're into that sort of stuff (which I am in general). It's alright and got some interesting performances. It does lack any sort of grime though, cameraderie or that little twinkle in its eye the prior films got. One might say that it goes on for a little too long. No need for a film like this to go 2 hours.
If you haven't seen it, watch Snatch, because it's really entertaining. I really like that film.
Same feeling, the movie is ok but I am a fan of that kind of style too.
Went to see this last night. It’s not a direct adaptation of the film, but it is good fun all the same. Set and cast are genuinely impressive, as are the songs and choreography and that. But, I think the overall thing will be marmite.
Me? I loved it, even if I did receive an emotional kick in the jewels from Lydia’s songs.
Sadly they don’t do DVD versions, so I can only hope it goes on tour, or at least comes to the West End.
While Coronavirus and the impact of lockdowns will almost certainly echo through horror films for years to come, I suspect few will ever be as closely tied to those events as Host.
Depicted exclusively through the viewpoint of a Zoom conference call, a collection of bored friends conduct a remote seance. Sadly, in an effort to spice things up, one girl manufactures a story, only for the medium conducting the session to inform them that such a "false spirit" can provide a conduit for anything to manifest itself.
Needless to say, worst case scenario ensues.
It's difficult to be too critical of this film. Firstly, at 56 minutes, it doesn't demand enough of your time to really be upsetting about it being wasted even were it awful. It's really not awful though. The achievement of conceiving and making a film while the UK was in the deepest lockdown should be applauded, that they've made something that's at least entertaining and occasionally a little unsettling borders on remarkable.
Sure, it doesn't really do much new aside from the conceit of using Zoom as a justification for allowing the viewer to watch the events unfold. Several shots feel entirely lifted from other movies (one shot of a woman being dragged through a door by an unseen entity, only for the door to slam shut is pure Paranormal Activity) but fundamentally this movie is a perfect example of how horror is a genre that does so well when severe restrictions are placed upon it.
I haven't watched this stuff since the 90s and it's shockingly good. I was expecting the flimsy staging and awkward costumes would expose this as outdated twaddle, yet I'm surprised to find that the budget limitations only add to the charm and creativity.
Also, male extras walking around in mini dresses. Damn, they were ahead of their time.
If I'm to be critical then there are a few things they got wrong. Wesley Crusher and over sexualisation are both annoyingly rampant. There's an undercurrent of fanfic writing that permeates everything, but it's not so bad that it brings the whole edifice down. And it's clear they didn't have a clue what they were doing with Troy to begin with. Sigourney Weaver's parody of both Troy and Uhuru in Galaxy Quest was spot on.
But the characters develop quickly. Frake's "Tom Sawyer" leadership contrasts well with Stewart playing the man who has become accustomed to being obeyed. Early on the doctor is unafraid to let it be known that she rules her domain and there's nothing the captain can do about it, while doing it different from the original series. And Burton has already got the swagger and ability to reveal the "but wait.." macguffin that he will come to rely on when promoted.
The characters of Troy, Worf and Data are in need of development, but we got plenty of seasons to come for them to move up. Really, surprisingly good.
Riker and Picard really pays off, when Picard reveals he chose Riker precisely because he’d stand up to him.
I couldn’t tell you the season let alone episode that’s revealed, but it absolutely makes sense. Both are very competent, very confident Ranking Officers. But Picard choosing Riker so he would be challenged if making the wrong call is proper Chef’s Kiss Trek. And it speaks a lot of Picard’s wisdom.
Just got Paramount+ which has all the Trek stuff. I nearly skipped straight to DS9, which was my Trek when growing up. But if you bypass TNG then you miss out on half of the best personal story line in the saga - the ongoing misery of why the universe hates Chief O'Brien.
(He's not only an engineer but also the only consistent NCO in all series. I can personally relate with that fella)
The Picard bit with Riker was from the very first episode. Picard challenged him before he had greeted him onto the crew. I'm just watching episode 12 and the cast are clearly having a blast. McFadden and Spinner are chewing the scenery with gusto.
One of my favourite stories of the time was Stewart (a great theatrical actor) being asked if he didn't think taking a cheesy sci-fi role was a step down. He responded that all the roles of kings he'd played was training for taking the chair of a starship.
It's difficult for that man to be any more gorgeous.
Finished Terrahawks and moved onto a binge of Stingray.
It follows the adventures of Troy and "Phones" as pilots of the titular Submarine that battles an underwater race that sees Man as invaders of their incredible aquatic kingdom. Character of note is Marina who is silent but can breath underwater, and even has her own song in the closing credits.
Henry wrote: Just got Paramount+ which has all the Trek stuff. I nearly skipped straight to DS9, which was my Trek when growing up. But if you bypass TNG then you miss out on half of the best personal story line in the saga - the ongoing misery of why the universe hates Chief O'Brien.
(He's not only an engineer but also the only consistent NCO in all series. I can personally relate with that fella)
The Picard bit with Riker was from the very first episode. Picard challenged him before he had greeted him onto the crew. I'm just watching episode 12 and the cast are clearly having a blast. McFadden and Spinner are chewing the scenery with gusto.
One of my favourite stories of the time was Stewart (a great theatrical actor) being asked if he didn't think taking a cheesy sci-fi role was a step down. He responded that all the roles of kings he'd played was training for taking the chair of a starship.
It's difficult for that man to be any more gorgeous.
TNG is definitely solid. In retrospect, it definitely gets better as it goes on, and many (possibly all?) the cast credit Sir Patrick for that. He was certainly the most widely experienced actor for sure. It is kind of cool to hear largely positive tales from those involved.
Skipping forward significantly, Chain of Command had absolute highlight scenes, scenes which I cannot imagine any other actors carrying off in the circumstances. It could almost be Star Trek, A Two Man Play.
This one especially…..whilst I dearly hope I’ll never be in a position to find out? In also hope that should it happen, I demonstrate testicular fortitude of Jean Luc Picard.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: The sole problem with that film is that Colin “awaiting a rational explanation” Farrell is in it.
Or indeed anything, given he’s demonstrably useless.
Need an Irish actor? Colm Meaney is right there, man. RIGHT THERE
I love Colm Meaney as much as the next guy, but I don't have a single problem with Colin Farrell either to be honest. Especially if he's dressed up like a clown anyway.
Last night I watched Lock, Stock & Two Smoking Barrels (1998) again.
I watched it on Netflix, and boy did they do a weird job in digitizing it or codecing it or whatever. The film's grainy, that is true, but not THAT grainy, is it?
Lock, Stock is enjoyable, but to me Snatch will always be the way superior film. I do like the reduced scope Lock, Stock though and how claustrophobic the whole world is.
Watch it.
Now to something even more interesting though. I just watched a film on TV: Piercing (2018).
Film adaptation of a book. Family man (Christopher Abbott) has the urge to murder somebody with an ice pick, so he goes on a 'business trip' to hire a prostitute (Mia Wasikowska) to stab her. He's planning it all meticulously, he's got a little diary in which he wrote down all his thoughts on the matter, and so on, and then things go a bit different than planned.
What a stylish, stylish film. It must make reference to 70s/80s cinema, but I don't think I've ever seen a single Giallo film, so I wouldn't know. The whole world is pretty irreal, city skylines quite clearly are models (which I love), the rooms are either dark or in a twilight, dominated by black or bordeaux red walls, silk or velvet. Lynchian looking, but not quite Lynchian feeling, but I'm sure you get the idea.
Not sure I've seen Abbott in anything before, and Mia Wasikowska looked vaguely familiar to me. I'd seen her in Only Lovers Left Alive! (not in any of the Alice films, because I'm a git and only watch GOOD films. ) Funny.
Speaking of which, this film's quite the ride. First off, it's just over 80 minutes in length, which is lovely. But it takes us for a ride. There are some twists and turns, there's some stuff that's quite open for interpretation, there's a bit of graphic violence, many humorous bits, some romance, some body horror, and son on.
Spoiler:
The back and forth between the two before he lays the cards on the table is hilarious.
I guess in the end it's about what we want, what we want in another person, how to express that. Stuff like that. And loads of SM vibes.
Watch It. It's an interesting film that sticks with ye.
Fancied some nostalgia, as I’ve not seen this since I was a kid, and Season 1 was a piffling £5 on Prime.
You cannot whack a bit of 80’s action nonsense. And this is every bit of it. Plus Terry “I invented Daleks and Davros, I did” Nation contributed to it. So it’s bound to be good!
The film adaption of that famous play with James Corden in the lead! <Que booing and hissing from MDG>
For those not familiar, this is the text book example of "subverting expectations" if not one of the successful originals. The first half is all fairy tale goodness, while the second half is all post-apoc fantasy nightmare. Subtext galore in this film.
Despite that.... well.... I have always found Into the Woods a little dull. No idea why as it normally would be the kind of thing I would dip my beak in and chew on like a bird with a juicy set of eyes!
For a start it’s far too violent to be a kids’ film,
It's rated 16+ on D+, I don't think there's any intent for it to be for kids.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Jeruzalem
Not a typo, that's the name of the film, although surprisingly it's not about zombies.
I was drawn to this movie for two reasons, firstly that it's a found footage horror and that's a sub genre I enjoy, but more specifically I saw it talked about on a documentary, where they mentioned that due to the difficulty of getting permits to film in Jerusalem, they'd done a lot of the location work in a guerilla style, actually filming in the way that the film was presenting itself as being filmed. I figured that it would be an interesting view of the holy city, and it might somehow add some authenticity.
While I was largely right about the former, it has to be said that it doesn't really add much in terms of the latter.
Jeruzalem in a nutshell is a low budget version of Cloverfield with an end of days twist. It's an intriguing setup, but sadly it's let down by some fairly fatal flaws.
Chief amongst which is that we have 2 female protagonists in a film written, directed and produced by 2 brothers who apparently don't know how to write women. Neither seems to have any sort of proactivity and they rely on (largely male) characters to tell them what to do and where to go most of the time. The lead's grief at the loss of her brother seems to manifest itself by turns as sleeping with the any male she's currently interacting with for no apparent good reason and self pitying whining, whereas her best friend couldn't be more cookie cutter "popular high school girl" if they'd dressed her in a cheerleader's outfit.
It's a shame, also, that the VFX fall just short of being convincing enough to be let off the hook, as witnessing the night that the gates of hell opened is still a compelling idea for this format, just sadly this film doesn't do it justice.
Terminator was great, in that it largely followed a well trodden formula. The set pieces were good, and there was a good amount of property destruction. My brain was firmly switched off, so not really looking for negatives. It was ‘splodey enough to keep such thoughts at bay.
Logan was impressive, but pretty grim. I liked how they just let the film set the background rather than having some kind of horrible text crawl or voice over explaining how the world had changed.
That was similar for Terminator as well actually. I guess most people watching it will already understand the whole premise enough that the studio managed to avoid beating it into everyone’s faces.
From the trailer, you'd be forgiven for expecting a movie the borrows heavily from the likes of The Wicker Man, Midsommar or the esoteric Jude Law TV series The Third Day.
In many ways, you'd be right, if any of those had been written by H P Lovecraft.
Marie receives a letter informing her that her mother's grave has been desecrated, and she should return to the island (I assume in the Florida Keys, but it's never explicitly stated) where she's buried to authorise the restoration as a matter of urgency.
Forgiving this rather thin pretext, what then ensues is a film that was hugely evocative to me of many late night films watched during my teenage years. Films that you've probably never heard of, but still end up staying up late to see the end of.
The director uses a variety of methods to deprive the viewer of information, chiefly amongst them the copious amounts of mist, the existence of which in such quantity defies any rational explanation but adds to the slightly dreamlike quality that the movie inhabits. There's more subtle mechanisms at work too, such as leaving the camera static when many films would cut to show you what's happening out of frame.
There's very little to be had in terms of gore or scares, Off Season instead opts for a more cerebral approach, with a slow burn (despite a short run-time) that leans heavily on the viewer's interpretation of events to instill dread. Bonus points are awarded for the lead taking time to figure out a complex bridge mechanism rather than automatically knowing what buttons to press in which order.
Consequently, Off Season won't be for everyone, but if you feel like you're in its target audience, it's one to seek out.
I genuinely swear blind I’ve read the preceding posts before.
Maybe I’ve glitched?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Flinty wrote: On holiday and catching up with some films.
Watched Terminator Dark Fate and Logan yesterday.
Terminator was great, in that it largely followed a well trodden formula. The set pieces were good, and there was a good amount of property destruction. My brain was firmly switched off, so not really looking for negatives. It was ‘splodey enough to keep such thoughts at bay.
Logan was impressive, but pretty grim. I liked how they just let the film set the background rather than having some kind of horrible text crawl or voice over explaining how the world had changed.
That was similar for Terminator as well actually. I guess most people watching it will already understand the whole premise enough that the studio managed to avoid beating it into everyone’s faces.
I like how Dark Fate neatly did away with the other sequels, or at least firmly shoved them into another reality.
I do get that Carl’s scenes are quite cringey, but I feel they overall work. Sarah in particular his amazing. Everything she learned in the originals comes to the fore. The loss of John bringing a bitter sweetness to her and the world’s survival (as if fate meant the survival of John or A Better Future, never both).
The whole of the thing really works.
Automatically Appended Next Post: 9-1-1
First came across this on my holiday, and it’s really rather good. Just found the first four seasons on Disney+ (suspect it’ll be Hulu in the USA, as in the U.K. that’s rolled into D+ as Star).
It’s kind of lo-fi police procedural. Each episode has a number of short stories, and the focus is largely on the Emergency Service folks, more than the situation.
I also got the impression that maybe some posts got a tiny bit jumbled up? I thought I'd read some, but above them were a few I'd never seen before. May be wrong though.
Anyway, last night I watched the beginning of For Your Eyes Only. Perfectly fine stuff (possibly one of the best James Bond theme songs?). So while James Bond and Carole Bouquet (there's a photo of her on wikipedia from 2013. She hadn't aged. It's crazy) were running from the baddies after he'd gotten himself captured and she'd crossbowed the baddie into the pool I looked up some stuff about the film, had a look at what else the director had directified.
Ran into a curious British-made 1994/95 tv show based on a sci-fi film that was shot 10 years prior, but never was aired. The show is called SPACE PRECINCT and is up on youtube, as I realized much to my delight. It's utterly incomprehensible to me how this isn't one of the go-to "cult tv shows" or a thing people spoofed 15 years ago or 'youtube reviewers' called attention to equally long ago. I like me some NYPD Blue, I very much enjoy the Alien Nation tv show and the thing's from 1994/95, so I had to give it a go.
And so should you. It's got to be seen to be believed. It's about a NY policeman who is restationed to a police precinct on a far away planet, where he does policework with lots of alien policepeople and his youthful parner. I jsut watched the first episode so far, and it's not good, but highly interesting. Especially considering what else was on tv at the time.
Unrelated: I watched a few episodes of the Buck Rogers TV show. Excellent theme music, otherwise it's solid space fun.
I feel that the poor dancers and in particular the choreographer was somewhat restricted by the towel sized dance floor. However it is entirely possible that the scene could never be truly salvaged.
I used to catch Space Precinct late, late at night back in middle/high school. I got the DVDs as a gift a couple years ago. Saving them for a good time.
Flinty wrote: I feel that the poor dancers and in particular the choreographer was somewhat restricted by the towel sized dance floor. However it is entirely possible that the scene could never be truly salvaged.
You don’t make friends with salad. And if you subject someone to Roller Disco, they’re gonna kick your head in
Just an awful, awful scene. And remember, this is post-Star Wars. The Cantina scene was by then seared into public consciousness.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: I used to catch Space Precinct late, late at night back in middle/high school. I got the DVDs as a gift a couple years ago. Saving them for a good time.
It seems like it's the sort of show you'd see late at night in middle/high school, isn't it. I gotta watch beyond episode 1 now. The first one was quite the classic detective tale with surprising amounts of gore (ish) and a rather obvious twist on who the baddie is. But nevertheless. I like the effects and the designs of the exterior and so on. The aliens are rather cheap, but look good (at least on the 720p youtube on my phone screen).
You’re wrong. And you’re exiled. Begone with your vileness!
But not as vile as….
Resident Evil on Netflix.
Oh god this is crap. Zombies waaay over choreographed. Slow pace. Generic moustache twirling generic villains. Aaaaaaand here comes the generic Dishy Love Interest.
Links to Resident Evil in name only.
I mean….the original movies are bobbins, but have a fun charm to them. The latest movie is Just Plain Bloody Awful. There there’s this…..turd.
I’m on the second episode, and I just don’t care about anyone or anything about it,
Typical assassin redemption tale. Nicely shot with decent action sequences. I think it has a nice mix of generic dark grittiness with a slash of Japanese neon. One nice twist, one incredibly obvious twist.
I did not will care for his one, even Lizzie O's yummyness couldnt counter balance the sheer twaddle
So I saw it today and it turns out Multiverse of Madness is the $200 million remake of Army of Darkness we never knew we wanted but clearly we deserved.
Now I want the Disney+ show - Pizza Poppa Always Gets Paid.
Kid_Kyoto wrote: So I saw it today and it turns out Multiverse of Madness is the $200 million remake of Army of Darkness we never knew we wanted but clearly we deserved.
I am yet to see this movie but by this one statement I feel as though I already have.
I did not will care for his one, even Lizzie O's yummyness couldnt counter balance the sheer twaddle
So I saw it today and it turns out Multiverse of Madness is the $200 million remake of Army of Darkness we never knew we wanted but clearly we deserved.
The Sea Beast
Pretty fun sweet movie, was looking for background noise while i painted.
IT was pretty much HTTYD with a different coat of paint. Very pretty movie and something i wouldnt mind putting on for futre imaginary kids .
What really got me though was a message of the film wasnt that there was a misunderstanding like HTTYD but
Spoiler:
It turns out all the hunting was orchestrated by royalty to expand their empire, so they started a century long smear campaign sending poor people to their death for their monetary gain.
and when someone say "But Hunter are heros" the reply back "You can still be a Hero, and be wrong"
Something about that just got me thinking, about people sent to war for reasons that are not their own for others benifits,
The Sea Beast
Pretty fun sweet movie, was looking for background noise while i painted.
Kid_Kyoto wrote: To be clear I mean that as a compliment! Benedict Cumbersome as Bad Ash alone is worth the price of admission!
I may watch it again
Oh, I got that that was a compliment, but something deep within me refuses to recognize a Marvel film even put close to AoD in terms of 'a good time' or good looks. That's just me. Haven't seen any of the Dr. Strange films.
Right, I went to the cinema today! Yes indeed. 35mm film version of The Warriors (1979).
Including several trailers from the time as well. Great stuff. That trailer for ALIEN rocked my socks actually.
Oh, and Warriors is really good. What a dynamic film that holds up SO well, because I think it very much fits viewing tastes of today. Sure, there's lots of 70s stuff and hokeyness and people should keep in mind when that was made and what sort of people are the protagonists. But looking beyond that (which any human being should be capable of if they ever expect to enjoy a film or anything), it's a cool film.
Truly a multiverse of madness. This film makes a lot of weird decisions, and then leans hard into each of them, to brilliant effect. The first half had us laughing hard enough that my wife needed her inhaler. The second half is still funny, but more moving from cascading emotional payoffs. If the weirdness doesn’t lose you, you’ll experience a hell of a film.
Edit: Although we saw it with our son, I would urge caution to other parents. There is a disturbing amount of dildo-related martial arts violence.
We play lucky dip with Sky Cinema once again and come up with...
Prisoner
A 2013 thriller with High Jackman and Jake Gyllenhaal pushing the boundaries of what you would be prepared to do in the search for your missing daughter. With no knowledge of what it was going to be like I wasn't expecting much. Close to the end I'm bug eyed, gripping the sofa and anxious for our protagonists.
Thoroughly engrossing and I'd absolutely recommend it.
During EEAAO, my wife informed us that she had never seen Ratatouille. So we had to watch it. A film about rat and a man, a multi-species team who become a family, culinarily, by cooking while nobody’s looking…it’s a charmer.
Cruella Which takes place in swingin' London of the 70s! Not a hint of roller-disco in sight!
This movie is better than it has any right to be. It looks great. The story is like a Greek Tragedy. Emma Stone and Emma Thompson absolutely murder their roles.
This would be a an interesting companion piece to watch with Phoenix's The Joker.
This is one long action set-piece more than a movie. That said, it was entertaining enough and reminded me of a far less-serious Dredd or The Raid only put in a fantasy setting and led by a female lead.
Fun for what it is, but won't last in the memory that long.
It's about being an adult, it's about abandoned dreams, it's about divorce, a failing business, a daughter who may as well be an alien, oh and a multiverse-shattering kung fu battle across an IRS office.
Not, quite sure it's great, but it's pretty darn good.
It was great seeing John Stewart back as a Green Lantern, but you would've thought, after all these years, they would've learnt to work with the short runtimes these DC animated movies have. There's just not enough space to set up both Johns origin story and do a version of the
Spoiler:
Parallax
storyline.
Worth a watch if you're a fan of these films, but it's a below average entry in the franchise.
Caught the first episode on the Youtube, oooh f-bombs and gore, how now...(kind of liked Ivy, rather Daria like)
Mary Poppins 2 - CGI over-doo
About a B-, everyone is trying their best but it felt very by committee and metrics. Ms Blunt wisely went the "English" clipped RP accent rather than try a Julie Andrews, although I'll admit Mr Dawes (Jnr) left me giggley
The Buzz Lightyear you know from Toy Story isn't the real Buzz Lightyear. That Buzz Lightyear is an action figure, and like many action figures, has been produced to tie in with a movie or TV show. This is the movie that the Buzz from Toy Story was manufactured to cash in on.
Clear?
Well, never mind, it won't impinge on your enjoyment of the movie, as long as you don't wonder why Buzz's voice is different or where Woody is.
I fear the blend of talent that made Pixar great may never be repeated, but while Lightyear seldom reaches the heady heights of some of their early work, all the ingredients are here, just perhaps not in the same potency.
As you'd expect from the studio that pioneered this style of movie making, the film looks great, especially in the IMAX enhanced version. One liners and casual throw away visual jokes are here, but constantly simmer at mild amusement without boiling over into laughter all that often. The pathos and heart that is so key to Pixar films is here, but again, never really grab you by the feels (although one moment does, for a second, approach Up!'s gut punch moment, but it's too fleeting to land with the same impact.)
While it opens strongly, it does lose its way a little in the middle before rallying with a better final act. Lightyear is unlikely to trouble the places the likes of Wall-E, Toy Story or Up! have in people's hearts, but it's hard not to recommend it, especially now it's available with the convenience of streaming and/or to those with younger family members.
Well, never mind, it won't impinge on your enjoyment of the movie, as long as you don't wonder why Buzz's voice is different or where Woody is.
Or why the backstory and setting is different and completely unrelated to toy Buzz (whereas the cartoon series was actually tied to the Toy Story toy).
Lightyear has the same problem as modern Trek: the writers are unfamiliar with and indifferent to the source material, and its just an unrelated brand to stamp on the title.
Hot diggety darsh. Unlike the previous words? Grange Hill pulled no punches. Kids die. Kids deal with heroin addiction. No, not “caffeine pills”, ‘Murica. Actually Smack. The apparently Good Stuff. Something even I’m not daft enough to try. Probably because of Grange Hill.
In its heyday it was truly magnificent. It pulled no punches. It looked Contemporary Issues in the face and didn’t blink.
Granted I now watch it with my own rose tinted? But it still holds up.
I watched the end of the Peacemaker tv show now. Phew. I'm sure it will be liked by people who like all the superhero films, because it very much follows that formula. The end feels weirdly rushed. I suppose not everythig has to deal with saving the world (it's never about saving people with those superheroes, is it. It's always about 'humanity' and 'the world'. Which not only will work under ANY form of government, but also affirms everything we got in place right now. Even though there's a funky little eco-twist in there in the end, but I'll give it a pass, because it comes across as unfocused as a 90s eco twist rather than an annoying 'twitter call to action' eco twist of the 2020s).
Spoiler:
.) What's the point of the little green martial arts dude?
.) Why is every man an idiot or a non-character? (The women characters are fine)
.) Vigilante is everything that's wrong with hollywood comedy
.) The eagle looks really good. Why didn't the rest of the cgi?
.) John Cena is really good.
.) I hate the whole childhood-brother-angle, especially the constant flashbacks. I think that the whole "this person is like this, because in their childhood XY happened...". It's cheap and it's such a weirdly deterministic world view. The character would have worked without it, the Evil Dad character would have worked without it.
.) the slo-mo-purposeful-walk is gak, and attempting or pretending to use it ironically is hack-y. And there's a ton of it in the last two or three episodes.
.) the scene after which Peacemaker shot his Evil Dad was textbook Marvel: emotional thing happens. Instead of letting it play out properly some character cracks a joke. Then - as a heightening of the typical Marvel thing - some other character has to point out "dude, this character here is mourning for his father whom he just killed". It's a sort of double-sabotage of the scene. Incredible.
I guess it's kinda alright. The scenes in which John Cena makes an ass out of himself are fun. I hope this doesn't go on for much longer; I fear that 80s pop-rock/metal music may get ruined. The whole ending felt kinda rushed.
In other TV show news - did you know that they made FIVE season of Sliders? Baffling.
Lightyear has the same problem as modern Trek: the writers are unfamiliar with and indifferent to the source material, and its just an unrelated brand to stamp on the title.
It's more the studios have found that existing properties outsell new ones. And producers/directors/writers know this.
So my pitch for Johnny Spaceman the Movie will go nowhere, but change the name to Buzz Lightyear and people will at least give it a look.
A lot of tie in films probably started as original projects but were bent, folded and mutilated to fit an existing property. Lightyear probably could have just as easily become Starbuck or Dr. Smith.
Lightyear has the same problem as modern Trek: the writers are unfamiliar with and indifferent to the source material, and its just an unrelated brand to stamp on the title.
It's more the studios have found that existing properties outsell new ones. And producers/directors/writers know this.
So my pitch for Johnny Spaceman the Movie will go nowhere, but change the name to Buzz Lightyear and people will at least give it a look.
A lot of tie in films probably started as original projects but were bent, folded and mutilated to fit an existing property. Lightyear probably could have just as easily become Starbuck or Dr. Smith.
This is demonstrated nicely by the Die Hard series. The second, third and fourth film didn't start out as Die Hard sequels but were rewritten to take advantage of the brand recognition of Die Hard.
Also the later Hellraiser films, which were adapted from tales involving demons and stuff, replacing them with Cenobites and applying the Established Rules Of Hell.
Granted there are mixed results (Hellworld is the worst, if you ask me) but it does at least end up with some interesting results.
Spiderman Home Coming and Far From Home, on BBC iPlayer.
While Tom is a good Peter Parker, and Michael and Jake are good villians, the films are sadly a step down from previous efforts to bring our favourite webslinging hero to the big screen. If its not having kept up with other films in the MCU( I think there are now more films than Star Wars, Harry Potter and LOTR combined ), then the supporting cast of annoying witty-go-sarcastic class mates wore me down.
Its a shame because the Vulture has some really mean moments that stand out, while "Mysterio" provides some incredible saturday morning cartoon action we've been sorely missing without knowing it.
I really enjoyed it as a weird and interesting inter-dimensional kung-fu movie with a serious point about depression.
Mrs Souleater was not so impressed.
"Unless you can explain what we just watched in a way I can understand, you are not picking the next movie."
Were you able to?
My wife had a similar problem. She checked out at the first hot dog fingers scene, and we had to pause and talk about it before she was convinced to continue. She was tearing up just like everyone else by the last hot dog fingers scene, though.
I think the movie has a lot more impact with the children of immigrants or people who experience suicidal ideation, generational trauma and depression. Even the Red Letter Media guys missed the point of the ending.
Escape from LA Not bad, but it's basically little more than a bigger budget remake of Escape from New York, so much so that I spent the whole film waiting for a twist that never came.
(My initial guess was it was going to turn out the President had somehow engineered LA's current situation, but nope, he really was just a religious nutbar who got lucky.)
Escape from LA Not bad, but it's basically little more than a bigger budget remake of Escape from New York, so much so that I spent the whole film waiting for a twist that never came.
(My initial guess was it was going to turn out the President had somehow engineered LA's current situation, but nope, he really was just a religious nutbar who got lucky.)
I watched this the other day, its no New York but fun enough and still not sure how my aging grey matter didn't link the end with the first Deus Ex game..
It's both better and worse than I had remembered but it is still good fun. And more humorous when viewed with some modern day attitude's in mind. Good or bad its funny either way imop.
Brigitte Nielsen's acting is a bit wooden in the beginning but once the cast of characters are all in the mix I feel everything improves. Arnold looks like he's having a wonderful vacation where he gets to play with a sword.
To me one of the best parts is that the Evil Queen has an advisor who is actually trying to give her sound advice which is a little refreshing. And her wizard is...defiantly a wizard. You can tell because he seems to have left her viewing crystal on Skin-o-max.
And Brytag... Such a ham, too much fun. I feel like he stole the show, such a fun bad guy for as long as that lasted.
I think he says something like, " I have fought 400 men and only one is alive and he has no legs!" So you know he's legit.
I'd watcha a reboot or a remake or just another red Sonja movie if there ever is one. If the tone is close to this it could be a lot of fun.
The original live action Cruella! Great shoes in the opening montage, and the rest is fairly mundane. Stanley Tucci is great as always.... I think I could watch him in local used car ads and love it!
The rest.... meh.....
Dredd The third or so time I have seen it. Yup, still entertaining.
Clash of the Titans The new one. Second time I have seen it.
I had it on as background when I was painting, and it was much more enjoyable that way than actually sitting down and watching it for real.
Dredd is a stone cold classic. I’ve been a Dreddhead since I was absolutely tiny and almost certainly shouldn’t have been reading them, but Mum would take me to Chainsaw Harry’s for haircuts and there were the 2000AD issues…
It just….gets the characters. All of them. Spot on. Luvverly.
I particularly enjoy the negative reviews citing Dredd’s heavy handed approach, shoot first, somewhat fascistic behaviour etc.
Imagine the hand wringing these days if a teen lad tumbled dead out of a car after being driven to suicide by Admiral Ozzel, at tea time no less
Ahhh…but Danny Kendall wasn’t a suicide. It was his brain tumour that got him. He did nick Admiral Ozzel’s car, that’s true. But as that’s Series 12, and BritBox only goes up to 11, I can’t really remember why. He very much clashed with Bronson early on, but Series 10 & 11 they mostly sort of ignore each other.
I bloody love Grange Hill, me!
Automatically Appended Next Post: For those too young or old enough but not British? This is the scene we’re talking about.
@ Doc, well its been a while so mostly forgot the exact story so just assumed he'd done for himself, although for a show that had folks drowning and fatal falls you can see how I jumped to the worse case, UK 80s kids telly was brutal at times (usually tea time)
The Sandman
Did Episodes 5 and 6 today, 5 is most likely the most jiggled from the book, but not being to able to really go with internal monologs is a tricky thing with medium shifts, I think that's why Matthew is more included in the show more as can play exposition Raven, bit the episode was just as un-nerving as the book with David Thewlis playing a blinder
Spoiler:
and more how I missed the waitress totally call the books finale with what happens if storys go on long enough
And 6 was awesome, Ms Howell-Baptiste totally nailed it, was a bit worried, not the silly hater reasons, but id only seen her in The Good Place, where her acting was a tad Sir Picard school of mostly shouting most of the time, and more Jenna is always watchable. and given how the Hob story rolled out Lady Joanna will get at least another half episode in due time
I just finished Sandman and thought it was absolutely brilliant. I haven’t read the comics for ages, but it hit all the main points I remembered. The whole cast did marvellously and the visuals were great on my big screen.
I guess they could ‘t have done anything differently, without massive fan uproar, but I had half hoped they might pull a hitchhikers and have the tv series follow a subtly different line to the book (and the radio, and the record, and the film). A very faithful retelling, with episode 5 Definately being a bit different, but the comic version of the story was probably a bit too extreme even for modern things tastes.
I just hope they do a second series if only for the midsummer nights dream story
Christ, I remember Danny's death like it were only yesterday. Grange Hill...urgh. Always switched it over if it came on because just going to school was bad enough. We'd catch the end of an episode because something else was usually on afterwards.
I watched 13 Lives - the Ron Howard movie about the Thai kids football team trapped in a cave.
It's a shame I knew what the eventual outcome would be (from watching the news) because if I had gone in without knowing anything about the real events this would have been a truly nail biting movie.
But it is very good, and there was a lot of stuff included that wasn't on the news.
The performances, from everybody, were top notch, especially Viggo Mortensen and Colin Farrell.
Worth a watch. I wouldn't say it's Ron Howard's best movie (felt like too much crammed in with too many story points on the go) and probably would have been better as a limited TV series (maybe 6 episodes) but it is definitely worth watching even if you already know how it ends.
SamusDrake wrote: Christ, I remember Danny's death like it were only yesterday. Grange Hill...urgh. Always switched it over if it came on because just going to school was bad enough. We'd catch the end of an episode because something else was usually on afterwards.
I was still in Primary School during Grange Hill’s heyday, so my school experience was sufficiently different for it to capture my attention.
Given I can’t have been more than 7 or 8 when Danny Kendall snuffed it, I remember a surprising amount of very specific lines and sequences from that series. Stuff like Mauler McCaul being rubbish at Transformers, the school radio’s horoscope jingle etc.
I don't check in for a while and all of a sudden everybody starts watching interesting things! (Escape from L.A.: lovely. Red Sonya: Perfectly fine.)
Me, I watched A Sound of Thunder (2004).
Based on the Ray Bradbury short story (and basically the Treehouse of Horror episode in which Homer travels back into dinosaur times and changes a little thing). This film kinda got me from the start. It looks cheap as all hell, but it's got a very interesting world design, the acting is decent all around, and it deals with time travel, which is the equivalent of putting your shoes on the wrong way and pulling your pants down before doing a race.
It's bascially about a company in the future offering rich people to lead them back into prehistoric times so they can hunt an Allosaurus. Since you may change NOTHING about the past they use a fixed anti-gravity path, always travel to the same Allosauraus right before it falls victim to an accident, so nothing is changed. Things get complicated as something does get changed one time. So far, so good. That's the short story. What happens then is the film showing us HOW things change and it does so in waves. Which leads to new creatures, and the creature design in this film is something to be seen. Certainly memorable.
But I was on board with the bad CGI, I gave an approving nod when it looked less bad, I like all the world design, the actors were pretty and mostly fine. It's got Sir Ben Kingsley as the head of the time travel company, and he's having the time of his life. Not sure I've ever seen Kingsley (who I'm not a huge fan of due to the film he did mostly since the mid-90s) have so much fun. And it almost shows that there's a good actor in there. Later that night I read up on the film a little and was most surprised to see that it cost EIGHTY MILLION DOLLARS. This film looks like a made-for-tv Asylum film which somehow got lucky and isn't boring as hell. But still, it looks majorly cheap. The backstory about the making of this film is either very interesting or pretty boring and sad and possibly would end up being a financial true crime documentary (and true crime documentaries are crap. Financial ones less so.).
Don't Watch. I would have given a Watch It for the attraction of an ambitioned cheapo film, but not at that budget.
Steve Reeves plays ..... not Hercules!..... but some Greek guy!
The Tubi version looks really good! That is not always the case with many Peplum films from the era, having been destroyed by time. Yes I am looking at you Seven from Thebes!
That said, this is more historically accurate than 300 but still has some laughable parts.... historically speaking.
That said, it you like movies where sweaty, Italian men wrestle, while big-eyed ladies swoon in half-dresses, and have an obligatory dancing girl scene, and casts of dozens of extras lazily hit each other with prop weapons.... this movie is for you!
You know me. I have a worrying tolerance for movies other say are bad.
I’ve watched Children Shouldn’t Play With Dead Things, and found it at least amusingly bad. I’ve seen Manos, The Hand of Fate. That at least had kind of an interesting premise, sort of.
But this? This……..dreck? It’s just….bad. Not amusingly bad. It’s far too Poe faced to be amusing,
The acting is crap. The pacing is crap. The accents are crap. The effects are cheap and crap. There’s no real tension to it. The plot could’ve made sense? But they blew it.
I mean….I’m going straight into Spoiler Territory because I don’t want anyone else to suffer as I’m suffering.
You’re running a facility to find out the potential of emergent Mutants. OK. That makes sense. But….why just a single staff member? Where’s your security? By definition and purpose of your facility, you don’t know their potential - so surely you’d assume the worst and take sufficient steps. Especially for Mr “you’d think he knows what he’s doing” Sinister (who doesn’t feature, isn’t personally mentioned or named, so why bother as it’ll only confuse people with only a passing knowledge of X-Men) But no.
Five mutants got loose? Things going a bit tits up? Just tell them to go back to their rooms, because that works on every moody teenager, and especially super powered ones.
And don’t forget to film the whole shebang in Gloom-o-vision. Nobody goes to the movies to see what’s going on after all. That’s just crazy talk.
Seems making yourself be on fire also gives you sudden super strength too, which wasn’t mentioned before the big fight against the Nightbear.
Maisie. Oh poor sweet Maisie. I like you, I think you’re a fine actress. But what is that accent my precious? Is it Irish, English or Scottish? Because it seems to vary scene to scene.
What a dull, boring, irritating poo storm of a bad movie this is.
Avoid it. Avoid it like the plague. Wait. The last two years suggest we as a species aren’t all that good at avoiding the plague (little bit of Politics, ladies and gentlemen, I’ve been Ben Elton). Avoid it like….well let’s just avoid it like something that should be avoided at all costs.
OH GOD IT KEEPS GETTING WORSE.
Remember that sole member of staff I mentioned? Her ability is force domes. Which she uses to prevent the kids leaving the facility. And does five smaller ones to cage them after it turned out telling moody super powered teenagers to go back to their rooms doesn’t work. She then gets ate off the Nightbear, and we of course see the force domes dissipate when she snuffs it…..and the kids are surprised when the bigger force dome is also gone….
A cinematic turd of such grand proportion, if it was a real turd even David Attenborough would be convinced it was from King Kong himself crimping off a length of dirty spine.
I was dumb to watch this. And I’m even dumber for having watched it.
You know, I was going to sit down to watch it and make a start on my new cross stitch kit.
I’m glad I didn’t get the kit out, as I’m far from convinced I would’ve resisted ramming the needle into my eyes over and over and over and over and over and over.
A low key, low budget but not low effort horror thriller from 2016. Notable cast include Lance Henrikson and Dina Meyer.
It’s…almost brilliant. Whilst nothing about is original, it’s well put together, and toward the end has the feel of The Evil Dead. It just doesn’t quite go the distance or stick the landing.
It feels like someone’s first post-film school effort. Made with care and enthusiasm, but just missing what it takes to break out. Looked at separately, it’s constituent parts all work well enough, but it just doesn’t come together right.
It’s definitely worth a watch though if you’re looking for something a bit spooky.
Teenage Me used to love Jackie Chan films (And martial arts films in general) but Old Man Me just can't get into them anymore and it's time I stopped trying.
.) Dang, that Bobby Simone story. That was a punch to the gut. Maybe drawn out a tiny little bit too long, but that's nitpicking. That was some powerful TV. Other than John Kelly, Bobby Simone will be missed.
AKA, and probably better known as Dawn of the Dead, the Argento cut.
Now I’ve seen the original theatrical cut dozens of times. And I’ve recently had the pleasure of the extended Romero Director’s cut.
So far the differences are largely superficial. Less time spent getting our group together, as they entirely forgo the meeting the other group of cops.
The soundtrack is also different from memory too.
Ideally I’d watch the original, then watch this straight after, but to be honest I’m not entirely sure my appetite is quite that strong.
For my boys, it was their first time seeing it, and my oldest just kept saying 'how have I never watched this before?'.
It is the rare film adaptation of a book that changes what needs to be changed, and integrates it while keeping the tone. A faithful adaptation would have lacked action. This one added the action, while keeping the fairy tale and fairy tale universe intact. So many story threads are woven together so well.
You constantly feel as if you understand a few of the rules of this universe, but keep being made very aware you do not know them all. It is fun and exciting fantasy. Fantastic performances, with Charlie Cox being understated and reserved, and Michelle Pfeiffer chewing scenery like Bruce Campbell (that is very high praise indeed). Everyone involved is having a fantastic time, and it shows. If only more adventure stories could be this entertaining and well constructed!
Ooh, good choice. Not seen stardust for ages. Have you watched mirrormask? I recall it being a similar experience. Not quite as polished (hah) as Stardust though.
I'll second the thumbs up for both Stardust (nearest anyone has got to The Princess Bride) and Mirrormask, which like Flinty says not as slick but worth it for the visuals (with the bonus game of "isn't that him/her from wotsit")
No, not that one! The one from the 50's with Richard Burton! This one spends a lot of time on Alexander, Olympius, and Phillip. This Olympius is no Angelina Jolie.
Of course, there is a cast of thousands thanks to the help of the Spanish military. Some of the outfits are ridiculous, while others are pretty good.
The details of the story seem pretty solid too, but the movie ends short after the death of Black Cleitus, and somewhat suddenly.
Solomon and Sheba So, hungry for more "historical epics" my Tubi just rolled into Solomon and Sheba starring Yule Brenner! My knowledge of this tale is not as solid as that of Alexander.
That said, it was great to see another "epic"! We got to see some chariot action and guys who had no chance of being Egyptian playing Egyptians! Fun stuff.
We really need more "modern" historical epics that aren't trying to be Lord of the Rings.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: We also need modern adventure films ala The Mummy, Indiana Jones et al.
Hey, we just got an immensely memorable Mummy film featuring Tom Cruise and we're about to get a new Indiana Jones nobody will wanna ever remember (Disney figured out that formuly for making any 2hours big franchise film feel 'alright' whilst in the cinema and then it's quickly forgotten, but the lingering guilt remains. It's the Big Mac formula. Most of all, it works in any part of the world, it works under any regime. That'll be one of those. )
Adventure films would be nice. Closest we got recently I'd say is that film in which Sandra Bullock is a novels writer and kinda goes through Romancing the Stone, but as a lady? Of course that's no Firewalker or King Solomon's Mine.
Hey, maybe Warner would like to do a series of Jules Vernes films. But they'd probably get cancelled for some reason.
I’ll reserve judgment on Indy until we’ve actually seen it. Parts will filmed just up the road from Daddykins, so it’s a shoe-in for me.
The Tom Cruise Mummy (in which Tom Cruise plays Tom Cruise, learns nothing and continues being Tom Cruise, like an adult Zack Morris, who is trash) doesn’t exist. You hallucinated it.
I'm a New Yorker and a Broadway fan but even I was ambivalent about whether the world needed a WSS remake. But this is good, real, real good.
Spielberg adds layers to the script that were there, but not as clear. For example the overture and Jets song make it clear the West Side is about to be bulldozed to build condos for rich folks. The Jets and Sharks are fighting to see who'll be the king of the last pile of bricks. There's also a great speech about the Jets, the Puerto Ricans are moving in because all the white people with any money or upward mobility have moved out. The Jets are the ones who are left, the bastard sons, the junkies, the losers, the white trash. It adds a lot of futility to them as they try to be kings of a neighborhood no one wants and which is about to be torn down.
My dad grew up in Brooklyn watching other families move out and immigrants move in. He lost his dad in the war and his family wasn't going anywhere, so I felt a very unexpected connection.
My family wanted to watch some movies, so that put an end to my Historical Epics and Peplum binge watching..... for now!
Logan Surprisingly poignant, even if the end set-piece feels a bit contrived.
The chemistry between Stewart and Jackman sells the movie alone.
Lightyear So, what was all the fuss about? Oh, there is a gay relationship that is portrayed in a positive light? I see.
This movie is really, really beautiful to look at. Just thinking about how far they have come since 1995's Toy Story 1 to today with the technology is unreal.
Sadly, the innovations ended at the technology, because the script is..... something.... it hits the right beats, but at the same time feels by the numbers, and the plot is..... a thing.
Big Bang was like Friends to me: I understood why it was supposed to be funny, and occasionally it could make me smile, but I didn't actually find it consistently funny.
I've only seen one episode of Young Sheldon (the plot involved a new games console) and from what I saw I agree with you. It was a warm hearted show very different from Big Bang (the lack of a laugh track really helps).
Yeah. Rather than the joke being “Sheldon is socially inept”, it’s a gentler “Sheldon is socially awkward and inept, but loved by his family all the same, who try to accommodate his eccentricities”.
I think it works because his family are kind of odd balls themselves, just in very different ways.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Taggart
Chewing through my boxed set, and on disc 36, so approx half way.
Was trying to place the new Pathologist, and realised it’s only Boaby from the Clansman.
I love me some Friends. Still watch it. Maybe I even like it more than before.
I detest Big Bang Theory. It's calculated, cheap, not even made for the target audience it kinda pretends to be for. At least it very much cemented the fact - even for the last person on earth - that the 'nerd' thing is meaningless. The sitcom Mom is by the same guy, right? That's much better than Big Bang Theory.
Competently shot, nice over the top action sequences, Chris Evans chewing all the scenery. It would have been wonderful, except that our man Mr Gosling cannot do stoic. All he could manage on this occasion is vacant...
Also watched Kiki's Delivery Service again with my daughter after many years. Its still as lovely as I recall. Just a lovely slice of life for a young witch finding her feet in a big city. Another generation enjoyed it greatly
It's Resident Evil all over again, Milla Jovovich being badass in something that bares little more than a passing resemblance to the source material.
Fortunately, I love the Resident Evil movies so I found this entertaining even though it wasn't that great of a film.
Did they ever give a reason for throwing a modern military unit and dimensional travel into the film rather than just going with... actual monster hunters doing monster hunter things? That actually seems far more relatable and understandable.
Ahhhh, a great slice from 1995 to 2000 or so. A snapshot in time when "Syndication" was a thing. Basically, local, independent channels would buy pre-made shows to fill time slots based on their schedule needs. These shows were made and optioned by independent production companies and bought in seasonal block. Star Trek: The Next Generation is a pretty famous syndicated television shows.
So, this follows the life of Duncan McLeod who is a kinsman of Connor McLeod from the Highlander movie. Christopher Lambert is in the first episode or so, and then he wanders off after transitioning to Duncan.
Season 1 is trying to find its footing and focuses a lot on Immortal of the week type stuff. Season 2-5 are pretty solid, with a few ups and downs; and moves a bit away from immortal of the week and allows for some arcing themes; but they are all mostly stand alone. Season 6 was mostly a focus on other immortals rather than Duncan, and it feels like they were trying to develop some sort of spin-off that could stick; but mostly failed.
Of course, one of the highlights is all the famous and well-known character actors that show up as one-off immortals. There are a lot of people passing through this show that go on to other things. I recall watching an episode where person X showed up, and then watching a movie the next night that had that exact same actor in it, only 10 years later or so.
The show of course has good and bad episodes, but overall it is a very solid experience for a syndicated show; one of the good ones for sure. Duncan is an interesting "heroic" character, his supporting characters are all solid, and they really do a good job exploring what it means to be an immortal. The weakest episodes are typically the big "season end" or "Season opening" set pieces.
Anywho, it was good enough to inspire to me to create and run a "Highlander" themed RPG for my group. I would recommend watching it if you liked the movie.
Chewing my way (heh) through The Walking Dead on Star, and up to season 8.
And they’re playing some episode out of aired order. Not in a “you’ve buggered it up” way, but in a “look this is fairly old now, so sod spoilers and tension” way. So where we find Rick dumbstruck at the Saviours escaping, they showed how they escaped (Daryl’s possibly idiot plan) being put into action, then Rick finding out.
Voss wrote: Did they ever give a reason for throwing a modern military unit and dimensional travel into the film rather than just going with... actual monster hunters doing monster hunter things? That actually seems far more relatable and understandable.
Nope.
Towards the end there's a bit of talk about an ancient civilisation of dimension jumpers whose portal tech has reactivated for some reason, but nothing comes of it (The film ends surprisingly abruptly).
Honestly, I think they had the idea that people wouldn't understand how super tough the monsters were unless people shot at them with big guns to no effect, or they just really wanted to do the whole
I know, and don’t care, that they’re not to everyone’s taste. They’re my favourite idiots. Well stoked to have yet another series of gross negligence and abject stupidity to entertain me.
Absolutely ideal for decompressing the brain after a day of being clever.
Basically "the thing" on a larger budget and scale with some religious tones that are explained in the movie. I liked it overall, Peter O'Tool was wonderful.
Admittedly the military rushing in with dozens of pieces of monsterbait.....er, soldiers and multi-million dollar vehicles on some small town sheriff's word was a little implausible, unless they knew about the bigbad.
Visually stunning, even watching it streaming but like many blockbusters ultimately gutless.
Spoilers, seriously, like the whole movie spoiled, I'm not kidding.
Spoiler:
So there's a blight killing the crops and destroying civilization, and billions died, but we're not going to show you that. I like how they subtly referred to it thought so I give that a pass.
So they eventually escape Earth, which makes no sense, it would always be easier to make sealed green houses than move everyone to space stations, but I'll give that a pass. And presumably billions were left behind while the space station had room for a baseball field, but I'll give that a pass too.
No, what got me is Cooper had a perfect story arc, figuring out the timey-whimey way to save the Earth. Great! Done! Heroic sacrifice! Cooper we shall never forget you... oh wait. He also gets home. Oh and his estranged daughter is still alive so they can reconcile. Oh and he just stole a ship to go back into space.
Hollywood has decided that audiences can't handle sad endings or indeed anything sad at all. I had the same complaint about Top Gun 2: Topper Gun. If that guy who sat in the 3rd row is totally safe, then why should I think there are any stakes for the main characters? Or how Star Wars 9 teased all these sacrifices but nope, Chewy's fine, C3P0 is fine, everyone's fine. It's like you couldn't even get away with killing Wedge these days.
I still think us Star Wars fans got off light, the animated Transformers film was brutal and borderline evil, kill kids toy heroes to sell them new ones
I still think us Star Wars fans got off light, the animated Transformers film was brutal and borderline evil, kill kids toy heroes to sell them new ones
RIP Prowl and Ironsides, I never forgave Kup for taking over Ironsides role as the old vet dude who's seen everything.
Why have I never watched this before? It’s just wonderful, in every sense of the word. Great cast, solid performances, tight direction.
Baffles me how It somehow flew under the radar, despite having some names attached, maybe wrong time and/or weak publicity, but you've put it right now so good job
Love, Death + Robots
The third season is again a mixed bag, but that's to be expected with anthology shows, and the return of the robots from S1 was fun, 7/10
Predator
After the mild surprise of the well doneness of Prey I thought I'd give Arnuld's a nostalgia watch, yes its dipped in pure 80's cheese but still a lot of fun and reminds you of how off the boil the franchise went after the second film
Flinty wrote: I think Iron Chef might make up the perfect trifecta of batgak crazy kung-fu films
Good sir, have you heard of the glory of Kung Pow : Enter the Fist?
I know of no kung fu movie as crazy as it.
So Steve Odekerk (I'm sure I misspelled his remarkable last name) got the rights to a few kung fu movies from the 60s. He edited them together with himself as the hero, and did most of the dubbed voices.
I've never met anyone who liked it, only those who love it, and those who hate it.
There's never likely to be a perfect movie, but it is distinctly possible that Maverick is the perfect sequel.
It retains the military accuracy (very little,) and slightly homoerotic bonhomie (quite a lot,) of the original and sets it in an even more bonkers set of circumstances.
You see Russia ,Chinathe enemy have built a secret underground bunker, and it needs destroying before it gets stocked and becomes a giant nuclear volcano or something.
The difficulty of the approach is such that only one man in the Navy has the experience of all the required mission elements, but he's old now, so he needs to teach a bunch of young up'n'comers to do what previously only he could do.
Lord help me Maverick, you're going to Top Gun.
What follows, if you've any affection for the original, a couple of hours of pure joy. The script is laden with call backs and nostalgia, sometimes with a surprising amount of nuance for an 80s kid out for its last hurrah before going back to sensible shoes and economical family cars. What's not in the least nostalgic are the action sequences however, much has been said about the lengths the cast and crew went to to retain authenticity and it's all up there in screen.
They even manage to squeeze in a topless sports sequence on the beach!
I can't see how this will garner any new fans, although in isolation the cheesy feel good elements and actions sequence may still be enough for some. Some parts are laughable, not least of which is the painfully generic terminology used to avoid pinpointing the nature of the enemy or their "fifth generation fighters." Doubly so when a Hind Gunship, a helicopter as iconically Russian as the Apache is American, pops up in the final act.
But for an 80s kid that loved the original (and had a crush on Kelly McGillis all the way until he saw Witness*) it's difficult to imagine how it could be better.
*Talking of love interests, has Jennifer Connolly just stopped aging?
Around half way through and I’m pretty sure the twist is about as twisty as something not at all twisty, and indeed telegraphed more than The Daily Telegraph.
But. All things considered? It seems to be far better than it has any right to be. Not in the same “why is this film which should be crap so good” sense as say, A Knight’s Tale. But still a pretty solid effort.
Bad guy is cheesier than a Brie sandwich, but kind of fittingly so.
Nearing the end. Definitely give this a watch, as it’s good fun. Stallone isn’t phoning it in, and seems to be having a great time.
.) Shaolin Soccer is better than Kung Fu Hustle, even though Kung Fu Hustle is pretty good. .) Kung Pow is good when it does what's at the core of it (ie being MST3k taken one step further, and standing on the shoulders of such giants will work. It's also done very well at that.). There's some stuff which isn't as good like the whole cow thing, which is dreadful and reeks of marketing.
There, now that that's settled...
@Maverick: Haven't seen it, but I hear mostly good things, and I'll probably enjoy it once I see it some time down the line. The thing about the 'baddies' is funny, isn't it. For almost a quarter of a century we can't have national baddies any more. Even Terrists don't quite work any more. The most obvious baddies for Hollywood films would be China, but then of course there's tons of Chinese money involved in making Hollywood films and China's still viewed as an important market. That must suck. Maybe Hollywood should just agree that it's all Thanos' fault. He wants to .... destroy our planet. That's good. That's what everybody can get behind, no matter the regime or vision of society one has (as long as they got money to pay for streaming services and cinema tickets.).
Still on NYPD Blue, still enjoying it, Sheeri Rappaport is quintessentially late 90s pretty AND a bit insane as well! Oh well. I read that some people didn't enjoy Kim Delaney's character and acting. These people don't know things. She's almost at sipowiczian levels of being the heart and soul of that show. In fact, they're awfully similar characters.
Kid_Kyoto wrote: Good point about villains. Can't even use Neo Nazis lest half the country assume you're talking about them
Yeah, you can't even villainize fans of authoritarian totalitarism out of fear they may feel insulted. Also of course - you never know what markets to serve in the future. Nothing more annoying than offering your streaming service to a country with an extreme right-wing regime and having to cut bits which disparage such regimes.
Few days ago I had a little chat on Facebook about people not sweating or not being very human in general any more in hollywood blockbuster films. Reminded me of an article from last year and I even dug it up: https://bloodknife.com/everyone-beautiful-no-one-horny/
Rather interesting (even though some stuff goes a bit far. I won't dispute that if people feel afraid somehow they develop some sort of cult of the body, but to connect that to the fall of the British empire soundsa bit weird). In that way all these films nowadays are weirdly remniscent of 50s/60s films. Doris Day and Rock Hudson were also impeccably dressed and combed, but as chaste as Captain America and Black Widow. And somehow I feel that all the superficial diversity works in the very same direction. That merely covers target audiences and happens for the sake of marketing and PR. There's nothing progressive in there.
The Eternals was the horniest Marvel movie. And while most of the characters were pretty and dry, Druig seemed ugly and metaphorically sweaty enough to make up for three or four heroes.
And Marvel learned its lesson: never do that again.
I think about that "And no one is horny" article a lot. I think it speaks to the creeping sexless kiddy friendly Disney-fication of pop culture generally, yes, but much more alarmingly to me, of the internet itself as it becomes increasingly corporatised. I grew up in the 1990s/early 2000s, when the internet was an exciting, user defined open range, and it's so disappointing to see what it's being corralled into now. We somehow have the worst of all worlds, where very literal neo nazis can use huge platforms to preach stuff that used to get them banned back to Stormfront with their tail between their legs, and that's fine so long as they don't erroneously use a predefined slur, but a photo of somebody's own boob will get them sent into exile forever.
Movies are just a symptom of this wider and imho dangerous push coming from a mixture of weird puritans and corporations/brands who need to terraform the medium before they can take it over entirely. You can't advertise lootbox games to pre teens on the same platform they might scroll past a wang, and you can't spent 150 million dollars on a movie that can't have a lootbox game, or might not be screened in X, or whatever. It is wild how rare and tame sex scenes are now vs what regularly cropped up in any random action movie in the 1980s.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: The Eternals was the horniest Marvel movie. And while most of the characters were pretty and dry, Druig seemed ugly and metaphorically sweaty enough to make up for three or four heroes.
And Marvel learned its lesson: never do that again.
Yeah. Oddly enough the horniest-feeling MCU property I can think of before that might have been Winter Soldier? Steve and Nat had legit chemistry Marvel's never mustered up again. Probably because of, rather than in spite of, the fact they weren't actually meant to be love interests.
I want to see more of what you folks are watching, because I'm tired of sexualized crap being squeezed in sideways, and could use a break from it. Or at least a break from scrolling past it.
Azreal13 wrote: *Talking of love interests, has Jennifer Connolly just stopped aging?
You didn't really think she made it out of the Labyrinth without making a deal with the goblin king, did you?
I want to see more of what you folks are watching, because I'm tired of sexualized crap being squeezed in sideways, and could use a break from it. Or at least a break from scrolling past it.
Azreal13 wrote: *Talking of love interests, has Jennifer Connolly just stopped aging?
You didn't really think she made it out of the Labyrinth without making a deal with the goblin king, did you?
Best not to over think that one as both Top Gun and Labyrinth came out in the same year which makes Mav;s "high speed pass" a little suspect...
If we’re getting into the internet in regards to that article, I found something funny a while ago when I was searching to see if the actress from Jurassic World was the same actress from an episode of Black Mirror: the internet loves her when she’s thick. The horny internet is all about her bass, which I find hilarious since the studio apparently forced her to lose all the weight in order to increase her sex(?) appeal. Even more ironic is that she was cast as the co-lead apparently for her looks while (Archer’s fetish fuel) Judy Greer brings more energy, charisma and somehow sex appeal to her role as the divorced mom, in the same movie. It’s just bizarre to me how detached the studios are from the audiences.
Casualty wrote: I think about that "And no one is horny" article a lot. I think it speaks to the creeping sexless kiddy friendly Disney-fication of pop culture generally, yes, but much more alarmingly to me, of the internet itself as it becomes increasingly corporatised. I grew up in the 1990s/early 2000s, when the internet was an exciting, user defined open range, and it's so disappointing to see what it's being corralled into now. We somehow have the worst of all worlds, where very literal neo nazis can use huge platforms to preach stuff that used to get them banned back to Stormfront with their tail between their legs, and that's fine so long as they don't erroneously use a predefined slur, but a photo of somebody's own boob will get them sent into exile forever.
Movies are just a symptom of this wider and imho dangerous push coming from a mixture of weird puritans and corporations/brands who need to terraform the medium before they can take it over entirely. You can't advertise lootbox games to pre teens on the same platform they might scroll past a wang, and you can't spent 150 million dollars on a movie that can't have a lootbox game, or might not be screened in X, or whatever. It is wild how rare and tame sex scenes are now vs what regularly cropped up in any random action movie in the 1980s.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: The Eternals was the horniest Marvel movie. And while most of the characters were pretty and dry, Druig seemed ugly and metaphorically sweaty enough to make up for three or four heroes.
And Marvel learned its lesson: never do that again.
Yeah. Oddly enough the horniest-feeling MCU property I can think of before that might have been Winter Soldier? Steve and Nat had legit chemistry Marvel's never mustered up again. Probably because of, rather than in spite of, the fact they weren't actually meant to be love interests.
Oh, don't get me started on how much I used to love the internet and how much I came to hate it. It became the worst anybody could fear. From a parallel world of freedom (for better or worse) to an all-encompassing entity owned by five or six companies which seem to keep a strangehold on the real world.
Harry Potter 7.0 Harry Potter and The Lethal Stuff
This is a dark film. No not the plot (3 or 4 minor characters die, but not even my daughters cared) but literally dark. Like Zack Snyder on a cloudy day wearing sunglasses dark. Did no one tell them there are colors beyond blue and grey and sometimes beige.
Gotta say if Britain really looks like that (there's a lot of moors, like a lot, like half the movie is moping around moors) I can kind of get why all y'all were so eager to get out and invade the rest of the world.
Like the other Potter films perfectly serviceable adaptation (except for one plot point that gets cut so Harry basically pulls a rescue out of his butt). And honestly if you've seen Harry Potter 1-6 like you're going to skip 7.0?
Or "What If Old Rocky Had Superpowers?" or, or "We bought this when we bought MGM, what do we do with it?"
It would be easy to rag on this movie, and I was tempted to, but the reality is it's harmless enough action movie by numbers for the main part, and has one or two redeeming features, so I'll be a little kinder.
First, the bad: it's predictable, oh boy is it predictable. It's also clearly a cynical attempt to cash in on the popularity of other franchises. There's an attempt at digital de-aging that's painful to watch.
The good: The cinematography is great. It's isn't in your face, but shots are often framed in a similar manner to comic panels. I really liked the production design as well, from the cars that look like they were snatched of the backlot from the original Verhoven RoboCop to the back streets, alleyways and appartment buildings that evoke the sorts of movies that Stallone made at his height. The broken, ageing hero is Stallone's wheelhouse these days, and he's perfectly solid, the antagonist is the guy who played Yuron Greyjoy in Thrones and is every bit as watchable, even the kid who provides the eyes of the audience is likeable enough, not an easy thing with child stars.
A much longer list of good than bad, but please don't think this film is anything special. The tragedy is that the more interesting story, about two superhuman brothers who react so differently to their upbringing that they end up diametrically opposed for the control of their city, happens well before the film and is only explained in voice over while the opening credits run, but maybe the film will do amazingly and we'll get a prequel.
If I'd paid to see this in a cinema I'd be less sanguine about the whole thing, but for an evenings' mostly mindless entertainment, there is worse.
).
