I know it gets a lot of stick for the changes it makes to the source material and over-use of Synders patented slow-mo ultra violence, but I still think it's a pretty entertaining movie in its own way.
Sigur wrote: Yeah, I'm not keen on seeing it. Pretty sure there's no merit to it. Cannibal Holocaust - possibly, sure, why not. Cultural thing and stuff.
What I like about Cannibal Holocaust is that our victims absolutely deserve what they get.
They are not good people. They are not innocent. And by the time their fate unfolds? I had zero sympathy for them.
I'm currently watching the Fantastic Beasts movies. Two down, one to go. They're not really my thing, much like the 'Arry Po'er movies, but I found the latter engaging in spite of it. The Fantastic Beasts series doesn't have that effect. They're kind of meh, especially once the scrawny sticks come out and the magic starts flying. But yeah, not my thing, so I don't feel particularly compelled to trash the movies either.
Sigur wrote: Yeah, I'm not keen on seeing it. Pretty sure there's no merit to it. Cannibal Holocaust - possibly, sure, why not. Cultural thing and stuff.
II found Cannibal Holocaust to be pretty atmospheric when I watched it in the way back when. I'd recommend giving it a try if you aren't terribly sensitive. I'm not the best judge of these things, but I suspect that it doesn't have as much shock value to modern audiences as it did at the time of release. But it's one of those movies that started a craze because if was so good at what it did, and I find it worth watching for that alone if the subject, themes and genre are at all of interest to you.
Yeah, sure takes me a special mood to give those movies a go. It's election weekend here, so I'm in the mood for something completely silly to stay on theme. It's also why I play Goat Simulator 3 at the moment.
Well, we’re off to a bad start, aren’t we! The acting is laughable, and straight in with horrific stereotyping of mental health. Though someone has just been stabbed right in the giggle stick, so hopefully we’re on for some fun kills at least.
Oh, and seems it was released by Troma. Standard, cursory google shows the film was made in 1981, but prior to its 1984 release, 13 minutes of additional scene were filmed to pad the runtime. And…yeah. That opening scene is clearly one of them (students as actors, and bright red blood for gore, rather than the much darker red used in the main body).
Overall? Whilst not offensively bad, it’s distinctly below average. Also, that first scene, added to pad run time? Makes no sense once we know who the killer is. In fact, remove that and redo the very final scene (which kind of tie together) and you’d have a better film right there.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, and might as well cover off? I fully expect these movies, all of them, to be horribly misogynistic. They’re splatter/slashers from the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s. So it goes with the territory.
Thankfully the typically poor acting and script writing makes such things laughable.
Next!
Slaughterhouse
What a disconcerting opening! First couple of squishings, and this looks to be Texas Chainsaw but with a Great Big Cleaver And No Mask. Then the title sequence. A trip through a Pork Slaughterhouse, accompanied by music I’d more expect from a not-very-funny-but-gentle 70’s BBC Sitcom.
However, it immediately picks up with some motivation for our loonies - greedy property developers, and bizarrely, 30% Fat Pork Products, and concern for the health of the youth! That’s right, we’ve something actually resembling a plot!
Genuinely enjoyed that one. Quite the Texas Chainsaw knock-off, but entertaining all the same.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers
Written and directed by Fred Olen Rey, effects by Tom Savini. So I should be in for a good time with this one. Bonus points for featuring The Barman Most Likely To Look Like Moe Szyslak In Real Life as voted for by me in the category of The Barman Most Likely To Look Like Moe Szyslak In Real Life.
It’s trashy. It’s cheesy. It knows it. And it doesn’t care one jot. But, for Deliberate Low Rent B-Movie? It’s well made. The acting won’t bother any awards, but everyone is putting effort in and enjoying themselves.
Yep. That was a load of very silly fun. But the last one for tonight. For now, it’s time to retire to my boudoir, and make a start on my shiny new Discworld collection.
I know it gets a lot of stick for the changes it makes to the source material and over-use of Synders patented slow-mo ultra violence, but I still think it's a pretty entertaining movie in its own way.
It's honestly a great adaptation. Most of the changes work in the moment and only don't work if you really dissect them. The only one I absolutely cannot stand is moving the "nothing ever ends" line. It's such a powerful moment in the comics, showing us both a rare moment of remorse from our villain as well as a reminder of our general insignificance. In the movie it just reinforces the coward and cynic dynamic from a couple losers that completely misses the point.
And with work over in 18 minutes, it’s nearly time for me to once more descend the winding steps into the crypt of crap.
What is tonight’s offering, dear reader? Will it be a gross out cannibal flick? A by the numbers slasher? A lovely slice of body horror?
Noooooooo
It’s worse than that.
A tale so terrifying, few dare utter its name. A cinematic slice so vile, many have called for it to be wrapped in lead, sealed in concrete and dump into deepest crevice of the deepest ocean.
I was looking at some trailers on youtube recently, however, and it looks like the SAG strike effect is dropping off and there are unique and interesting looking films just on the cusp of release. Huzzah. I can ignore Madame Webb forevermore!
Pretty sure this is made for the Disney Channel or something. It stars a Disney-Kid who turns 16. She is given candles that make pre-written wishes come true.
I am not the target audience for this at all. It is for middle-school, pre-teens up to 17 year olds at best. That said the moral and story beats aren't bad in theory/ The first half is significantly worse than the back half. If you make it that far, the moral is by-the-number but good for the age demo.
A big part of it is Seeing For Myself, and my dissatisfaction with people confusing the merely mediocre with the genuinely bad.
For example? Some of the Phase 4 MCU offerings. Whilst a bunch weren’t up to the usual quality, none of them have been poorly made, written or acted drivel.
And for me, before I watch it (opening scenes playing now), my biggest quibble with Madame Webb is a big old “but how, and why, if Spidey isn’t going to show up”.
Released in 2000, G-Saviour tries to be a live-action celebration of the Mobile Suit Gundam universe—though it ends up feeling more like a derailment than a dazzling launch. The film’s ambitions are as colossal as its clunky CGI, which looks like it was done in somebody's dorm room on an Amiga they found in a dumpster.
The film has actors (I'm using that term loosely) and assuming memory serves, might include Ron Canada. His appearance is about as memorable as a cameo in a midnight infomercial.
I especially enjoyed the fact that a Gundam movie was released that doesn't have any mecha on.mecha action in it until the last 10 minutes or so... and when it does I had a flashback of Video Toaster renderings dancing through my brain.
In short, if you're in the mood for a train wreck with extra explosions and plenty of unintentional humor, and acting so wooden you'll be looking for marionette strings, G-Saviour is the quintessential live-action Gundam film.
Decent first half. Manifestation of powers, learning the powers.
Second half? Where we’re going, we don’t need rails! And it becomes rapidly fairly nonsensical.
Overall, I’d say it’s no worse or better than the first Daredevil movie. A lot of stuff happens simply because the plot needs it to happen, but the cast are enjoyable enough.
The effects are really disappointing though. I really don’t understand how you can be desperately pretending to be part of the main MCU, and get your Not-Spider-Man that wrong. For instance, where Spidey does his acrobatics and then lands on a surface, we see him absorb the impact. This guy just sort of…..stops dead. And looks oddly rubbery when in motion.
Do I regret paying £5 for this? Not really. Whilst clearly flawed it’s entertaining enough, if heavy on the genre and general cinema tropes.
The biggest flaw really is the villain and his motivations. So much of his plot is just so there’s a story.
What I did enjoy was our heroine learning her powers. That she can’t just see the future, but that it can be changed by her actions. That’s done really nicely and fairly subtlety.
Overall? A comfy 5.5/10. It ain’t great, but it’s far from an Abomination Unto Nuggan.
Funniest thing is how it avoids naming Peter and May Parker. As if the Directors lived in terror of Marvel doing a Will Smith on them.
Never overlook the chance for complications with big firms. Could be that the licence the studio paid for or negotiated didn't include Spidey; or someone higher up didn't want a "new risky venture" to "piggyback too much" or "harm their main spiderman brand".
There's often layers to these things which; from the outside seem like they should be simple choices - which behind the scenes are full of choices and decisions made by people who are often don't care about the lore or anything and are purely going on costs; complexity; marketing; surveys and stuff
What a great sendoff for the TOS crew. Everyone gets to do something important. The story is topical while also hitting a lot of the classic TOS tropes. The music is great. The acting is perfect for the film. The effects are the best they’ve ever been. George Takei never had to be on the same set as Shatner. Total success as a Star Trek film.
What a great sendoff for the TOS crew. Everyone gets to do something important. The story is topical while also hitting a lot of the classic TOS tropes. The music is great. The acting is perfect for the film. The effects are the best they’ve ever been. George Takei never had to be on the same set as Shatner. Total success as a Star Trek film.
Some of my favorite movie lines come from STVI.
"Captain's log, stardate 9529.1. This is the final cruise of the starship Enterprise under my command. This ship and her history will shortly become the care of another crew. To them and their posterity will we commit our future. They will continue the voyages we have begun and journey to all the undiscovered countries, boldly going where no man – where no one – has gone before."
I also love the Spock/McCoy Torpedo stuff...
"Doctor, would you care to assist me in performing surgery on a torpedo?"
"Fascinating!"
☆☆
"Where's that damn torpedo?"
"It's ready, Jim. Lock and load!"
Lathe Biosas wrote: Released in 2000, G-Saviour tries to be a live-action celebration of the Mobile Suit Gundam universe—though it ends up feeling more like a derailment than a dazzling launch. The film’s ambitions are as colossal as its clunky CGI, which looks like it was done in somebody's dorm room on an Amiga they found in a dumpster.
The film has actors (I'm using that term loosely) and assuming memory serves, might include Ron Canada. His appearance is about as memorable as a cameo in a midnight infomercial.
I especially enjoyed the fact that a Gundam movie was released that doesn't have any mecha on.mecha action in it until the last 10 minutes or so... and when it does I had a flashback of Video Toaster renderings dancing through my brain.
In short, if you're in the mood for a train wreck with extra explosions and plenty of unintentional humor, and acting so wooden you'll be looking for marionette strings, G-Saviour is the quintessential live-action Gundam film.
Interesting. I do love me some Gundam (well, UC, One Year War or shortly thereafter for now), but I'm not keen on live action versions of anime. I'll have to check it out though for curiosity's sake.
Tonight, I’m once again pet sitting. So I’m away from my slasher collection. And indeed my own streaming accounts.
So it’s The Conjuring
This of course proved to be the first in horror’s MCU equivalent. And it’s a superior example of its craft. There’s decent tension, clever scares and a solid pace.
Its main downside is sharing a main actor, and being released around the same time as, Insidious. Oh, and a Director. So I easily confuse the two franchises.
This speaks to the aging of the MIllenials, and their realization that they will not solve anything, and essentially forcing it onto Gen Z, because Millenials are now too busy with their own lives to save the world. Millenials have now fallen into the same trap as the Boomers.
I enjoyed that one well enough. I’m not sure I’d bring it into the Church of Latter Day Sequels. But I’d certainly not condemn it to the crypt of crap either.
Bill and Ted still feel and act like Bill and Ted, and I enjoyed their wonky selves - a nice build on Good and Bad Robot Bill and Ted.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: Do you count Everything Everywhere All At Once as Sci Fi? It definitely has oomph.
Never saw it. Worth watching?
It is a love it or hate it movie about an unhappy woman who gets drawn into a multiverse conflict against a multiversal threat with one of the best introduction kill scenes of any movie villain ever. However, it is one of those movies where the external conflict is a mirror of internal conflict, with a lot to say on failed romantic idealism, generational trauma and suicidal ideation, so it gets heavy at parts. It’s also a movie full of laugh out loud moments and two excellent combat scenes involving dildos. It’s a weird movie. It was also my favorite movie the year it came out.
The gimmick with the multiverse tech in the film is that one can meld their memories and skills (such as martial arts training) with an alternate version of themselves if they share a singular sensory experience at the same time and push a button. Here’s what it looks like in practice:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
LunarSol wrote: Its one of the best films I've seen full stop.
This is a film from 1940. However, seeing it had Tyrone Powers as Diego Vega/Zorro and Basil Rathbone as Capitan Esteban I knew I was in for at least one killer sword fight. It delivered when the two met.
There are some other fun set-pieces as well. If you want to put some swash in your buckle, you can do much worse than this film.
I'm looking for something with some oomph. Not just pretty images that are supposed to make up for a paper thin plot. (ie. The Creator and Avatar 2)
Uhm.... AllI can recall seeing is Life. Which was okay, and I thought pretty cool to look at. Just doesn't have lots of Oomph I'm afraid. As far as general conceptional Oomph goes, I liked Passengers alright. Oh, watch Moon, if you haven't already.
Rewatching Farscape again. That show is so lovely. My favourite sci-fi show.
Sigur wrote: Rewatching Farscape again. That show is so lovely. My favourite sci-fi show.
I was trying to decide what to watch next since I finished Andromeda. It was a toss up between Farscape, Babylon 5 or the RoboCop: Prime Directives miniseries. I'll take this as a sign and Farscape it is
Sigur wrote: Rewatching Farscape again. That show is so lovely. My favourite sci-fi show.
I was trying to decide what to watch next since I finished Andromeda. It was a toss up between Farscape, Babylon 5 or the RoboCop: Prime Directives miniseries. I'll take this as a sign and Farscape it is
A most wise choice. I watched it occasionally when it first aired and found it very endearing (puppets and it was different), but also quite silly. Now I watched it for the first time in full and earnest (and English!) last year, and it entertained me to no end. AND it's got the best puppets. And it's so different. And the best dialogue, the best sense of when to follow tropes and when to subvert them. And it does comedy well.
Spoiler:
And it's got the biggest and best love story in sci-fi
. And it can go from very silly to huge and dramatic very fast. And by season 3 at the latest it gets very leather-y. And characters are constantly on the verge of going insane, in between they want to have sex and/or something to eat. In general, everything is so organic in that show. The technology itself is proper alien, the aliens are mostly proper alien, it just rocks.
Sure, Babylon 5 is great and important and all, but I just enjoy Farscape so much. Can't say anything about RoboCop: Prime Directive (only watched what Spoony had to say about it back in the day), won't say anything about Andromeda.
You know, my wife and I had a rough day, let's watch some light-hearted fantasy flick. That will cheer us up.
Movie: "No."
I remember the backlash when they had that book on an elementary school summer reading list.
I picked it up from the library and asked the librarian what all the fuss was about, and he told me. Oh. Crap.
It wasn't until High School that depressing books were foisted upon us. Back to back to back we had Animal Farm, 1984, Alas Babylon, and On the Beach. (I was pretty sure a lot of the emo kids in Florida were created by our public school reading lists).
I picked up that book on my own in elementary school and would read it during breaks. Got completely blindsided in the middle of the day and had to try and explain to a teacher why I was so upset.
Super low budget slasher, in which a nutter clad in combat fatigues and a motorcycle helmet goes around offing folk with a Nailgun.
Written, Directed and Produced by Terry Lofton, who was apparently a stunt man on The Dukes of Hazzard.
I’m not gonna lie, the complete lack of budget ($50,000) shows. And whilst not disastrously so, you can tell it was made by people who were largely amateurs.
But I do want to commend it on at least one thing. The Nailgun killer has a compressed air tank on their back. So there’s at least some attention to detail. Also, it’s identified that victims are bleeding out, none of the individual injuries being fatal. Oh, and the wounds are well done from a VFX point of view, looking suitably convincing. Granted that’s not difficult when it’s a Nailgun, but again it is something to commend.
Just got a better look at the air tank, and it’s adapted from a fire extinguisher. And to be honest? That adds to it for me, making it seem like something cobbled together by our nutter, rather than something carefully crafted.
It’s otherwise all by the numbers, as we might expect. Which is almost a shame, as whilst there’s nowt wrong with that, this could’ve been a nice bit of Outsider Art.
Is that the movie where the smoking trailer park woman comments “It’s getting so you can hardly go out anymore for all the mosquitoes and serial killers.”?
Almost! That’s the general store owner. Terry Lofton’s Granny, in Terry Lofton’s Granny’s very own general store!
OK, that wasn’t as bad as reviews made it out to be. Cheap and amateurish, sure. But effort was put in. The acting is…fine, I guess?
Main thing I didn’t like was the nutter’s “spooooooooky” voice. Though it’s a fairly early example of a Scream style vocoder/voice changer. But it’s relied upon too much, and the “waaa, waaaaaaaaa, waaaaaaaaaaaaaa” as the killer walks away, it feels silly rather than scary.
As with a fair few of this genre, the meat of a much better film is there. But for a $50,000 micro-budget, I’m prepared to forgive a lot. It’s a decent, aha, stab, at a slasher flick, and not entirely devoid of merit. But, once again, it’s another example of a film originally intended to be straight up horror being adapted into a black comedy part way through, and it shows.
Massive props for keeping us guessing who the killer actually is though.
If you like mediocre TNG episodes but want to se what they look like filmed in theater aspect ratio, have I got the film for you. Look, we just need to clear the slate for the big refit ship next movie and we have a page of funny Data moments we weren’t able to slip in earlier. It’s fine.
What a terrible film. Just honestly, it missed the point of everything the original attempted to satarize.
I'm so glad they were able to save his hand. The rest of him they couldn't save, but he can touch things.... ooooo.
Then we get the redesign "tactical black" for the last bit.
Ugh. Samuel Jackson was the best part of this nightmare.
The best part of the movie was the first ten minutes or so, when it had a satirical edge (for then-current events) like the original. Then it became IP product and the director was kept from making any more decisions. Except for the body horror scene. That was neat.
If you like mediocre TNG episodes but want to se what they look like filmed in theater aspect ratio, have I got the film for you. Look, we just need to clear the slate for the big refit ship next movie and we have a page of funny Data moments we weren’t able to slip in earlier. It’s fine.
Ron Moore says why Generations wasn't as good as First Contact. They were so focused on getting Kirk and Picard together, everything else in the script was a footnote, and good storytelling was pushed aside to make the meeting a reality.
Demi Moore stars, and I believe has won awards for her role as an aging star that takes the mysterious, eponymous Substance.
Her performance is terrific here, being both captivating and convincing.
The film itself is heavy on symbolism, and there’s some excellent body horror to boot. However, it’s one you need to watch, rather than have on in the background.
You know, the Tom Cruise one. You know, the studio forced a lot of exposition into this one. For some reason, just showing us the backstory wasn't enough. We would be to dumb to understand it, so they needed to have Russel Crowe and the lead actress both explain it to us at different times.
However, I did enjoy seeing Tom Cruise get his ass absolutely handed to him by the titular beast. Like, painfully handed to him.
Yeah, this was not good. The connection with the Templars and the Egyptians was also..... Why? Honestly, the Brendan Frasier and Boris Karloff version are light years ahead of this thing.
Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey
Imagine if Winnie the Pooh and Piglet were mutant serial killers who went on a rampage after Christopher Robin left the 100 Acre Wood! That would be clever right..... RIGHT!
I just rewatched the extended editions of the Hobbit trilogy. Definitely much weaker than the Lord of the Rings movies, and part of that was some of the more zany action scenes that would fit better in a Pirates of the Caribbean movie. Also the extremely stilted elf-dwarf romance. Blech! Some of the CGI has held up okay over the last 12 or so years. Some of it definitely has not.
The biggest problem with the trilogy is how much extra stuff they added in just to pad it out to be a trilogy. It only needed to be two movies, really, and that includes showing how Gandalf investigated Dol Guldur and found out that the Necromancer who had taken up residence there was, in fact, the Dark Lord Sauron (I didn't mind this inclusion despite it not being in the actual book; Tolkien did write about it elsewhere, after all). They could have skipped the whole subplot of Azog chasing Thorin and company, and they drew out Thorin being obsessed with the treasure for far too long in the third movie. And the chase through the mountain with Smaug at the end of the second movie was probably the silliest scene in the whole movie.
Overall though, the movies are still reasonably fun. I enjoyed watching them once again, and I do recommend the extended editions despite the fact that there are some pacing issues (there are reasons why some of the extra stuff was left out of the theatrical release).
Kinda forgot I own all The Conjuring movies on Prime, so will be sprinkling them here and there in my viewing schedule. And tonight it’s the aforementioned Annabelle, second release in the movie universe.
I’ve definitely seen this before, but probably due to a propensity to binge the series alongside Insidious, I couldn’t tell you much about it right now.
Excellent design work on the doll though, making it look just creepy enough.
Overall, the film is kind of unremarkable. I will give it praise for avoiding lazy jump scares, but the atmosphere just doesn’t quite build. That being said, I am a heavily seasoned fan of the wider horror genre, so it may very well be this would be scarier to someone less experienced. I don’t regret buying it, and I don’t regret watching it. It’s just…..pretty average, almost frustratingly so.
This movie was from 2009 or so and made Zoey Deschanel (sp) a star! Also, was this the last big movie Joseph Gordon-Levitt made? What happened to that guy, he was everywhere for a while.
Anyway, this movie perfectly explained to me why dudes are shifting rightward. The whole movie is about a guy who feels entitled to a women's love, and completely falls apart when he doesn't get his infantile fantasy.
The most unrealistic part is that Tom actually learns his lesson and realizes that he isn't entitled to anyone's love at the end and actually takes ownership of being a better person. We all know this guy in real life, and he almost never does this.
This movie is still surprising relevant today. In a bad way.....
He did Batman, Inception and Looper after that film. Skimming his Wikipedia andnIMDB pages indicates he’s done a bunch of smaller parts and voice work since 2015 which coincides with the birth of his first child. I have no proof but it seems likely that he’s taken a decade or so off to have a family. I noticed him in a lead role again last year in a few things like Greedy People. Maybe he’s coming back?
Flinty wrote: He did Batman, Inception and Looper after that film. Skimming his Wikipedia andnIMDB pages indicates he’s done a bunch of smaller parts and voice work since 2015 which coincides with the birth of his first child. I have no proof but it seems likely that he’s taken a decade or so off to have a family. I noticed him in a lead role again last year in a few things like Greedy People. Maybe he’s coming back?
I was sad that he did not return in his masterclass performance of Cobra Commander in the second GI Joe film.
And it’s silly. Very silly indeed. How silly, dear reader? Set in 1977, we see a British hovel (and it is a hovel) where the teevee has a remote control. And a choice of more than three channels.
1977. When your teevee choices were BBC1, BBC2, ITV, or Sod All.
And now I just can’t take it seriously. Suspension of disbelief ruined.
Still. At least we get to see The Goodies being silly for a few seconds.
Kinda forgot I own all The Conjuring movies on Prime, so will be sprinkling them here and there in my viewing schedule. And tonight it’s the aforementioned Annabelle, second release in the movie universe.
I’ve definitely seen this before, but probably due to a propensity to binge the series alongside Insidious, I couldn’t tell you much about it right now.
Excellent design work on the doll though, making it look just creepy enough.
Overall, the film is kind of unremarkable. I will give it praise for avoiding lazy jump scares, but the atmosphere just doesn’t quite build. That being said, I am a heavily seasoned fan of the wider horror genre, so it may very well be this would be scarier to someone less experienced. I don’t regret buying it, and I don’t regret watching it. It’s just…..pretty average, almost frustratingly so.
A while back my employees and I were discussing the Conjuring universe and what movies were in it. None of us have really delved into it. Is "Oculus" part of it? I watched that movie, and it kinda feels like it should be in there somewhere.
The Conjuring
Annabelle
The Conjuring 2
Annabelle : Creation
The Nun
Annabelle Comes Home
The Conjuring; The Devil Made Me Do It
The Nun 2
Related, but not full parts? Mostly they just feature a single, supporting character from the main series.
Wolves At The Door
The Curse of La Llorona
Automatically Appended Next Post: Dead of Winter
The 8th film in 88 Films Slasher Collection.
And this is a proper thriller movie, starring most notably Roddy McDowall.
I shan’t say too much, as I’m going to flat out recommend this for fans of murder mystery.
It’s got tension, it’s got terrific acting, and it’s overall just really well made.
Automatically Appended Next Post: x-Ray aka Hospital Massacre aka Ward 13 aka Be My Valentine, Or Else!
In which our loony is offing people in….a Hospital! It’s pretty enjoyable. The murders are decently enough done, though the grisly bits aren’t in shot.
As a rule, any film known by multiple titles is going to be goofy fun. And this is no exception. It does do a genuinely good job of keeping us guessing as to who the loony is. We do see them as a murderous child in the beginning, but exactly which of the many grown ups they are is kept decently hidden.
Finally got around to seeing Puss in Boots: The Last Wish.
Definitely excellent, though I found Jack Horner kind of distracting and a lot of the journey kind of rote. Everything with Death is so incredibly well done. but every time Jack comes in, particularly at the end, I just wasn't feeling it. Goldie works great as the rival antagonist while Jack is just kind of an extra that distracts from the rest.
One of the best depictions of Death I've seen though. Every bit of him on the screen is a treat and the action is up there among the best fights I've seen, both it terms of animation and in emotional weight. Great film, highly recommended, but a little bit of fat in the middle.
For those that like Rowdy Roddy Piper in a scifi movie, this is the OTHER Scifi movie he was in.
Post-apocalyptic earth, where fertility is rare. Also, for some reason, amphibians have gotten intelligent, large, and anthropomorphic. Piper is a prisoner used as breeding stock, but must bust a bunch of fertile women out of the Amphibian City, all while winning the heart of the woman keeping him captive, who is still more than willing to let him sire children with the captive women.
If you're going to watch it, being sober does not help.
This is really rather good. Premise is that a mother’s abusive boyfriend is murdered by her children, as he made a habit of tying the kids to their bed.
Years later, the son is mute, and it seems the boyfriend’s spirit, trapped in a mirror, is causing killings.
Released in 1980, this could almost be an early prototype for modern supernatural tales of possession.
Now, some of the effects are cheap, but the plot and suspense are genuinely pretty good. Overall, there’s comfortably more good than bad here, and I’m thoroughly enjoying it, particularly given its vintage, it’s not relied on outright gore for the thrills.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Bloodsucking Pharoahs In Pittsburgh
1991 horror comedy, with a strong hint of Airplane! Effects by Tom Savini.
The opening scenes are good fun, including the Police Dectective having the background music, broadcast from a police car, turned off. And a ransom/police taunting note in hieroglyphics - but with them cut from a magazine like the old school ransom note.
It kind of feels like a sillier, slicker Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers. Also, an amazing side story of anti-smoking aversion therapy. Including gorillas and a high pressure hose, because why the hell not.
Scientist invents a machine that allows people to see into a dimension that is usually out of sync with our own. Said dimension is full of monsters though, so it ends badly for him.
And what do people do? They keep turning the machine back on!
A so-so gory body horror film with some good effects, let down by people acting dumb even by horror movie standards.
Scientist invents a machine that allows people to see into a dimension that is usually out of sync with our own. Said dimension is full of monsters though, so it ends badly for him.
And what do people do? They keep turning the machine back on!
A so-so gory body horror film with some good effects, let down by people acting dumb even by horror movie standards.
It stars Jeffrey Combs, so that's a plus straight away.
They keep turning it back on because they are addicted to the sensations from that other realm. The movie is pretty explicit about this. It is an allegory for addiction and particularly sexual addiction.
Not to be confused with Cat In The Brain which is a genuinely real and completely separate movie, and yes I’ve seen it.
Opening scene is proper gnarly. But overall the sound mix is a big poor. Until it’s not.
Also? Bizarrely visually explicit.
Whilst not entirely without merit (it’s a difficult watch for, I guess, the right reasons?), like The Night Train Murders, I’m not going to recommend this to any but the most seasoned, desensitised and mentally balance gore hound.
I mean, this is about as explicit as a 1981 slasher could get without everyone ending up in jail. And it’s absolutely a challenging watch. Probably because none of it’s played for laughs.
It’d definitely challenging slice of nasty. But I’m absolutely not gonna recommend it for that reason and that reason alone.
The 90's remake version.
An eccentric couple holds a party in an abandoned, supposedly haunted, asylum, will anyone survive the night?
An entertaining, but flawed, horror movie. It wants to do the whole "Is the place really haunted or is it all a scam?" thing the original had, but it also wants to jump straight to showing off the ghosties, so the whole scheme and counter-scheme plot between the Prices is pretty much totally pointless.
Also with all the bizarre and creepy imagery the rest of the film had, you would've thought they could've come up with a better climax than
I watched it a bunch of years ago, and these are my findings:
.) That Catherine Zeta-Jones. .) Not a bad cast really. The main lady, who I think also played the very tortured lady in a few episodes of the x-files, is good. .) There was some somewhat creepy stuff, despite the CGI.
Sigur wrote: I watched it a bunch of years ago, and these are my findings:
.) That Catherine Zeta-Jones.
.) Not a bad cast really. The main lady, who I think also played the very tortured lady in a few episodes of the x-files, is good.
.) There was some somewhat creepy stuff, despite the CGI.
I just watched the most horrific film ever to be deployed into theaters.
From the directors of the Matrix comes: Jupiter Ascending!
Even I am not so cruel to bring back the painful memories, the auditory and visual crime against humanity, that
Here's my review!
Spoiler:
In the vast cosmos of cinematic storytelling, few films have dared to reach the ambitious heights of Jupiter Ascending. Directed by the visionary Wachowski siblings, known for their groundbreaking work on The Matrix, this film is a dazzling spectacle that transcends the boundaries of traditional science fiction. With a star-studded cast featuring the incomparable Mila Kunis, the ever-charismatic Channing Tatum, the legendary Sean Bean, and the mesmerizing Eddie Redmayne, Jupiter Ascending is a masterclass in ensemble performance.
From the very first frame, the audience is thrust into a meticulously crafted universe that is as rich as it is expansive. The world-building is nothing short of extraordinary, with each planet and species intricately designed to evoke a sense of wonder and awe. The cinematography, helmed by the talented John Toll, captures the breathtaking beauty of this universe, with sweeping vistas and stunning visual effects that leave viewers spellbound. Every scene is a feast for the eyes, showcasing the Wachowskis' unparalleled ability to blend practical effects with cutting-edge CGI.
The score, composed by the brilliant Michael Giacchino, elevates the film to new emotional heights. Each note resonates with the audience, perfectly complementing the film's themes of love, destiny, and the struggle for identity. The music swells during pivotal moments, drawing viewers into the emotional core of the story and leaving them breathless. It is a score that lingers long after the credits roll, a testament to its power and beauty.
Character development in Jupiter Ascending is profound and nuanced. Mila Kunis delivers a stunning performance as Jupiter Jones, a young woman destined for greatness. Her journey from a humble life on Earth to becoming a key player in an intergalactic power struggle is both inspiring and relatable. Channing Tatum's portrayal of Caine Wise, a genetically engineered warrior, adds layers of complexity to the narrative. Their chemistry is palpable, creating moments that resonate deeply with audiences, often bringing them to tears.
Eddie Redmayne's performance as the villainous Balem Abrasax is nothing short of iconic. His portrayal is chilling and captivating, embodying the essence of a power-hungry monarch with a chillingly calm demeanor. The depth of his character adds a rich layer to the film, making the stakes feel incredibly high and the conflict all the more engaging.
The screenplay, a tapestry of intricate plotlines and emotional arcs, weaves together themes of love, sacrifice, and the quest for belonging. The dialogue sparkles with wit and poignancy, ensuring that every character feels fully realized and relatable. The Wachowskis have crafted a narrative that is both epic in scope and intimate in its exploration of the human experience.
In conclusion, Jupiter Ascending is a triumph of modern cinema, a film that dares to dream big and delivers on every front. It is a visual and auditory feast that will leave audiences breathless, with moments that will linger in their hearts long after the final credits. The performances, the score, the world-building, and the emotional depth all come together to create a cinematic experience that is nothing short of extraordinary.
But, I’m sorry, I can’t keep writing this. I don’t believe a word I’m saying.
“So, you’re all astronauts on some kind of star trek?”
First Contact is both the best TNG movie, and a movie I enjoy a little less every time I see it. It introduced to the franchise the dumb zombie Borg and their dumb embarrassing queen, as well unserious Action Picard. It would be a Voyager episode if the rest of it wasn’t so fun.
Sigur wrote: I watched it a bunch of years ago, and these are my findings:
.) That Catherine Zeta-Jones. .) Not a bad cast really. The main lady, who I think also played the very tortured lady in a few episodes of the x-files, is good. .) There was some somewhat creepy stuff, despite the CGI.
That’s The Haunting
So sorry, my bad. But that Catherine Zeta-Jones, eh?
Generations and First Contact were the only Star Trek films I watched at the cinema. The latter seemed better. I didn't quite like the edgier Picard then, but on later viewings it made more sense.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I particularly enjoy Picard demonstrating his PTSD. It was something we saw in the show, but here they could take it a little further.
And it's the first movie in the First Contact alternate Universe, which gave us Enterprise.
ZergSmasher wrote: First Contact is easily the best TNG movie; the others don't really even come close.
The problem as I see it is they never really seem to know what to DO with a TNG film after First Contact. The one that follows just feels like an over-long episode and honestly I never quite liked how the films started to really push Picard and Data as the core relationship focus of them. Esp since fans of the series had basically seen DATA do a lot of the character growth in the seasons already.
They were good films, but not outstanding and they didn't feel like they really pushed at the envelope of being a film. Nemesis tried but was very combat heavy. It setup a great stage though and its a shame that we never really saw it go further after in Startrek. Even when we revisit that timeline properly in Picard, we get a huge time-jump of decades which kind of means that we miss out on a huge chunk of development and change in things.
A Stephen King classic, and pretty creepy. Basically kids, at the behest of some ancient god that lives amongst the cornfields take over their town. And we get a lovely slice of Americana Horror.
And to follow, at some point, are two of its sequels.
This is the first Legendary film and.... it is really solid. I think some people bash it because of how Godzilla is basically a natural disaster going on in the background.... but it works really well. Plus, there are some amazing shots in this film, I mean really, really good looking and effective images. Plus, the "human" story is way more dramatic than I think people give it credit for.
This is the first Legendary film and.... it is really solid. I think some people bash it because of how Godzilla is basically a natural disaster going on in the background.... but it works really well. Plus, there are some amazing shots in this film, I mean really, really good looking and effective images. Plus, the "human" story is way more dramatic than I think people give it credit for.
Still has one of if not the greatest killing blow in the whole Godzilla franchise.
The main issue with it is just that Adrian Brody struggles to carry the film through the middle and his final power pill delivery feels cheesier than where they were going up to that point. The MUTOS also just don't have one of the stronger monster designs out there, lacking the kind of personality of the best films out there. The last fight suffers a bit from being too dark and up close to follow clearly.
This is absolutely one of those films where I can picture it being the best Godzilla film ever, but I'm overly critical where it falls short of that. They definitely build on what works from this film, though they also lose some of its best elements. Really enjoy the first three films out of the 4, though each of them feel just shy of knocking it out of the park for me in one aspect or another.
That kiss in this one though, is absolutely perfect.
ZergSmasher wrote: First Contact is easily the best TNG movie; the others don't really even come close.
The problem as I see it is they never really seem to know what to DO with a TNG film after First Contact. The one that follows just feels like an over-long episode and honestly I never quite liked how the films started to really push Picard and Data as the core relationship focus of them. Esp since fans of the series had basically seen DATA do a lot of the character growth in the seasons already.
They were good films, but not outstanding and they didn't feel like they really pushed at the envelope of being a film. Nemesis tried but was very combat heavy. It setup a great stage though and its a shame that we never really saw it go further after in Startrek. Even when we revisit that timeline properly in Picard, we get a huge time-jump of decades which kind of means that we miss out on a huge chunk of development and change in things.
The books gave a very nice continuation of the story after Nemesis. It's a pity they killed off that branch of Trek in favor of the Picard show. But I don't want to beat that dead horse any more.
Godzilla: while I did somewhat like the "not showing" the monsters early on in the movie in a very Jaws way, I would have preferred just a bit more illumination for the fight scenes. Just a tiny bit more fire/starlight/moon/ or something would have made things much better to watch, even if if was unrealistically bright for night time. Other than that the visuals were dang impressive.
I felt the human story needed a bit of work though. It suffered from how many times they changed the plan of attack mid-stream. One too many "Let's do this, no that".
Just got back from seeing Mickey 17. Best film I've seen in quite a while. Story was great, it looked fantastic and if Pattinson doesn't get a Best Actor nom next Oscars around, we have a hell of a year of acting performances ahead of us.
Overread wrote: Nemesis tried but was very combat heavy. It setup a great stage though and its a shame that we never really saw it go further after in Startrek. Even when we revisit that timeline properly in Picard, we get a huge time-jump of decades which kind of means that we miss out on a huge chunk of development and change in things.
I didn't have a problem with Nemesis being actiony, but with the fact that most of what was going on in between the action scenes was really boring. And the basic premise was all a bit silly, made moreso by the fact that the only visual clue we have to the origin of this guy who looks nothing whatsoever like Patrick Stewart is the rest of the crew seeing a bald man and immediately going 'By god, he must be a clone of Picard!'
It had some cool bits, though, and was largely quite pretty to look at.
Fear not! I have just watched Plankton! The Movie. Sadly it was not a monster of the week movie about vicious microscopic sea critters. This is the next shameless cash grab entry in the Spongebob franchise. My son wanted to watch it, as he dearly loves Spongebob.... but this thing is worse than Kamp Koral. What makes a good plankton movie? Gadgets, dastardly gizmos, and absurd plans?
Nope. Karen. Then more Karen. And finally, 4 Karens! Also they have a song, and a katamari damacy style robot without all the whimsy and silliness.
Oh, and psychoanalysis. By Spongebob, which is nowhere near as fun as it sounds.
If one of your little ones or cousins suggest it, do yourself a favor and push for whichever Sonic they're on these days.
There are so many reasons I dislike this movie. The conflict feels like a retread of an already mediocre episode. The dialogue and character moments are so low effort they feel cynical. The endangered Baku being punchably smug cottage-core new wave healthcare-hogging Mary sues feels like they’re on the wrong side of the conflict. Teasing bigger picture conflicts the movie could have been about instead of this backwater fratricide. The music is bland, and also somehow punchable. Action Picard is now also Mambo Picard. Worst of all, big chunks of the film are just boring.
There are so many reasons I dislike this movie. The conflict feels like a retread of an already mediocre episode. The dialogue and character moments are so low effort they feel cynical. The endangered Baku being punchably smug cottage-core new wave healthcare-hogging Mary sues feels like they’re on the wrong side of the conflict. Teasing bigger picture conflicts the movie could have been about instead of this backwater fratricide. The music is bland, and also somehow punchable. Action Picard is now also Mambo Picard. Worst of all, big chunks of the film are just boring.
At least Nemesis had that space battle.
Worse than Star Trek 1/3/5? That's a pretty tough sell.
And Nemesis has Tom Hardy (aka Venom) in a plot that fails if the Federation sent any other ship in the fleet.
And are you referencing the battle from Nemesis where Riker breaks our the joystick to manually fly the enterprise?
Insurrection to me felt like a nothing story in that it didn't really go anywhere new for the cast or the Federation. It really did feel like it was just a regular episode scaled up and filled out into a movie length adventure.
It just lacked that element of grandeur and scale and impact that makes a movie story stand out from the regular adventures.
ALSO Startrek 1 The Motion Picture is freaking awesome!
Riker’s joystick is in Insurrection, not Nemesis. (And I never really had much a problem with Riker flying the E like a fighter jet.)
Star Treks 1 and 5 are ambitious failures that make odd yet compelling choices. 5 is bad but never boring, and 1 has great special effects. They both have weird vibes that make them stand out from the other Trek movies.
3 is a good but not great Trek. Generations at least gets Picard and Kirk together and crashes the saucer. I’ll be rewatching Nemesis soon, but I remember that one feeling like a (dumb) movie, and having a decent space battle.
Heretic (2024) A man traps two two young female Mormon missionaries in his house and engages them a discussion on the nature of religion and faith. A very tense and engaging film with a great performance from Hugh Grant. The trailers kind of make it seem like it is more of a trapped house or Saw type of movie but really it is a dialogue heavy battle of wits. The kind of film where none of the characters are made stupid or do anything that would make you facepalm. It isn't really a "twist" film but definitely better knowing less about it going in makes for a more enjoyable experience. Definitely worth a watch if you like smart horror films.
A meditation on the nature of Totalitarian government, and how no one avoids being tainted by it. Whether you are the ruling elite enforcing the new order, the people fighting for freedom, or the citizens caught in the middle. At least, that is what this pretentious hat-wearing consumer saw.
Most people will probably see a slick visual action flick with good fight choreography and a wacky premise. I guess that is in there too.
This thing has not found an audience yet, but I think it will be a Cult film once people start catching it on streaming. Perhaps, it is a bit too glum for our modern times though?
Samurai Vendetta at Iga A brisk 45 minutes, it is basically 13 Assassins on a smaller scale, and is pretty much a perfect encapsulation of a Samurai drama with all the core elements. I can not shake the feeling what I saw was a cut-down version of the OG version.
Hellboy: The Crooked Man I didn't even finish it and I am not sure why. It is not inherently bad, but it just did not grab me. Felt like Content for the Content Gods and to keep the copyright.
I enjoyed Boy Kills World. I can see it also going cult status eventually.
I watched The Gorge this weekend. Genuinely enjoyed it. The plot is almost paper thin but the two leads make it very enjoyable throughout. It won't go on my watch yearly list but it'll likely go on the pop it on if I see it sometimes list.
Sequel to a notorious slasher, which involves a transgender killer. They’re not crazy because they’re trans. Rather, they’re crazy because they were forcibly raised female by their nutty Aunt, having lost the rest of their family in an accident.
So yeah, be forewarned if you’re wanting to watch this, as it’s not at all empathetic to the modern mindset. It is however camp, and rather silly. Top moment so far for me is the kids running around in Jason, Freddy and Michael costumes, and not surviving the experience.
Sleepaway Camp 3
In which Angela returns, again, and kills a bunch of people for ever more tenuous reasons. Really not much to see here.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Scalps
Fred Olen Ray again, this time an early, micro budget movie about six people, Native American Spirit Possession, and rather more ambition than ability.
Which isn’t a slight against it. Indeed, I love this sort of early effort movie, where the crew are still learning their craft, and trying their best.
The print quality here is awful, probably because it was shot so cheaply. But the tale is interesting enough, and as with many low budget offerings, there are the bones of a much better film here.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Drive-In Massacre
In which our loony keeps killing patrons of a Drive-In Movie Theatre. Which is on the site of a former brothel, and run by an ex-Carnie.
I don’t really know what’s going on here, but the kills (by sword) are entertainingly daft.
And when the film ends, we don’t know who the killer is, or why they were doing it. Which I’m afraid makes the entire affair really rather pointless - on home media.
See, the twist, such as it is, is a PSA type thing announcing such killings happen at Drive-Ins up and down the USA….and the killer is reported as being here, tonight - but don’t panic, the Police are on their way.
Yeah, that doesn’t work on the small screen, does it. But an interesting relic all the same.
Just wanted to make sure before I posted something that wasn't a horror movie or a bad film.
Title is in bold. Anything else?
The Longest Day(1962) is an epic war film that masterfully portrays the D-Day invasion of Normandy from multiple perspectives, covering the experiences of American, British, French, and German forces. What sets it apart from many other war films is its commitment to authenticity—not only in its large-scale battle sequences but also in its multilingual approach. The Germans speak German, the French speak French, and the English-speaking forces use their respective dialects, making it one of the most immersive depictions of the invasion ever put on film.
The film boasts an all-star international cast, including John Wayne, Robert Mitchum, Henry Fonda, Sean Connery, Richard Burton, Peter Lawford, Eddie Albert, Rod Steiger, George Segal, and Red Buttons, among many others. The European cast features notable names like Curd Jürgens, Gert Fröbe, and Wolfgang Preiss on the German side, while Jean-Louis Barrault and Arletty represent the French.
With its documentary-style storytelling, sprawling battle sequences, and attention to historical detail, The Longest Day remains one of the most comprehensive and gripping portrayals of D-Day ever made. It captures the invasion from the strategic planning stages to the chaos on the beaches, offering a rare, large-scale view of one of history’s most pivotal days.
This thread is for all films, but we do tend to focus on genre fare......
Anyone but You
A rom/com Sydney Sweeney/Glenn Powell vehicle that was released to the theatre. The Genre seems stuck to streaming only for the most part, with a few notable exceptions. Many people think that this genre is dead at the box office, and this was an attempt to bring it back. I am not sure how successful it was, as it is really just Much Ado About Nothing. Word on the street, is that Sydney Sweeney only made Madam Webb in order to get this film made and released.
I have seen a lot of Rom/Coms and this one makes use of a good Meet-Cute and has a good Enemies-to-Lovers basis. The characters are fun, and the core is; of course; miscommunication. There is more to like than dislike in this film, and the characters are all easy on the eyes.
Final point, this movie is a Sydney-ception as it takes place in Sydney, Australia.
But here viewed under an alternative, crude name which I don’t want to post on Dakka.
A thriller, about a young woman who, as a child, saw her prostitute mother killed on the job, and dumped in the Thames. And one could say she’s…..in two minds about the whole thing.
For a 1983 shlock, this is surprisingly subdued. It portrays Olivia, the central character, as someone rather wretched and unwell, rather than crazy ape bonkers. Background sound is rather good too.
Yup. A genuinely decent psychological thriller. Very uncomfortable viewing in parts due to SA, but it’s not shot or presented as titillating. Other opinions on that are available, and I’m not advocating for such scenes in movies where implication can serve much the same purpose. But gain, for a 1983 almost Giallo? This handles things pretty tastefully.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The First Power
Lou Diamond Phillips in a criticially panned but commercially successful supernatural “wait, isn’t this just Shocker but less good” avoidable waste of time.
Basically satanic serial killer has been doing his thing so he can resurrect, by virtue of possession. And he can reveal himself to whom he likes, when he likes. And that can be different people at the same time.
The concept is fine, and clearly born out of the Satanic Panic. But the execution is sorely lacking. Once again, but on a higher budget making it all the more frustrating there are the bones of a decent movie here. But instead we get a nonsensical mess of quite staggeringly wasted opportunity.
Best moment is when the baddie, having first revealed his survival, leaps from a multi-storey building, to cat fall and scarper. That’s a genuinely well shot bit of action, despite the necessary jump cuts to different angles. But the last shot they’re falling a good few feet to land on their, erm, feet, then leg it.
Also, Mr Diamond Phillips spends quite a lot of time (literally) aimlessly discharging his pistol to absolute no avail. And we see someone run over by a Horse and Cart.
This past saturday, we went to the theater (a rare thing for me) to celebrate an old friend's birthday, and went to see "Mickey 17"
It was an enjoyable flick. And the one thing all 3 of us adults agreed on, is that the film "knows" what it is. It's never overly serious, overly funny, overly romantic, etc. It's just a ridiculous movie and was a fun bit of 2 hours
I went in with high hopes.... and it fell a little flat. Pattinson did a goodish job, with his part, so I'll give him that.
Mark Ruffalo though.... geesh. There's political satire, and then there's this. Ruffalo somehow goes overboard while also seeming like he phoned it in. I'm feeling like the script didn't give him any help here.
The movie also has plot holes large enough to fly their spaceship through, and a handful of side plots/sub plots that could have been cut and don't go anywhere.
Now, don't get me wrong I wasn't expecting a serious, hard-core, realistic sci fi here. I went in ready to switch on my suspension of disbelief. THe movie didn't quite work for me.
A down-on-his-luck man joins a mysterious company that guides humanity from the shadows, and is tasked with finding the macguffin of the title.
It's not a bad film, some of the writing and acting is a bit amateurish (I could never work out if magic was common knowledge or not, it doesn't get used often but no one seems surprised when it happens), but it's entertaining enough and has Sam Neill in it (Who always does a good turn in anything he's in).
And honestly, it's a made for TV movie based on a children's book, I didn't go into it expecting a masterpiece.
A Guy Ritchie movie starring Jason Statham, Cary Elwes, Audrey Plaza, Josh Hartnett, and Hugh Grant.
This is Ritchie's James Bond film. It is entertaining enough but ultimately not great. The stand-out is Hugh Grant. He is an amazingly slimy, somehow sympathetic arms dealer heel who reminds me a lot of Austin Powers. Josh Hartnett barely registers compared to everyone else.
Fun, but nothing special. An easy movie night film.
I went in with high hopes.... and it fell a little flat. Pattinson did a goodish job, with his part, so I'll give him that.
Mark Ruffalo though.... geesh. There's political satire, and then there's this. Ruffalo somehow goes overboard while also seeming like he phoned it in. I'm feeling like the script didn't give him any help here.
The movie also has plot holes large enough to fly their spaceship through, and a handful of side plots/sub plots that could have been cut and don't go anywhere.
Now, don't get me wrong I wasn't expecting a serious, hard-core, realistic sci fi here. I went in ready to switch on my suspension of disbelief. THe movie didn't quite work for me.
I would have forgiven it all, if the pacing was good. But it was jarringly all over the place.
A Guy Ritchie movie starring Jason Statham, Cary Elwes, Audrey Plaza, Josh Hartnett, and Hugh Grant.
This is Ritchie's James Bond film. It is entertaining enough but ultimately not great. The stand-out is Hugh Grant. He is an amazingly slimy, somehow sympathetic arms dealer heel who reminds me a lot of Austin Powers. Josh Hartnett barely registers compared to everyone else.
Fun, but nothing special. An easy movie night film.
Josh Hartnett has been added to the stable of Guy Ritchie actors like Carey Ewles and Jason Statham .
He was better in this than Wrath of Man.
Did enjoy the Aubrey Plaza verbal snipes towards Statham's less than astute character.
Just the one movie tonight, as I’m having a mare of a week at work, and want to go lose myself in a book.
Intruder
Bruce Campbell! Ted Raimi! Greg Nicotero! A slasher….set in a Grocery store?
Pretty sure I’ve seen this before, and with a cast like that and the setting? Confident I’m in for a good time.
I was right, this is terrific. Original setting for any horror movie, inventive and grisly deaths with Mr Nicotero’s signature solid effects. And it’s comfortably straddling the line between grotesque and silly.
A few months ago I rewatched Labyrinth for the first time in decades. It wasn't a film I liked as a kid, but, intrigued by its cult status, thought I'd give it another shot. Turned out adult me actually quite likes it.
The Princess Bride falls into the same category, unfortunately the rewatch didn't meet with the same success, I still think it's a pretty stupid movie.
The problem is, this one is more of a comedy movie than a fantasy one, and I still find comedies are very hit and miss with me (I think my main problem with Labyrinth all those years ago was the singing, which isn't such an issue now).
Still gotta rewatch The Dark Crystal at some point to complete my trio of beloved fantasy classics that kid me didn't like.
You know those times are night, when you can’t quite switch off? And your brain fills with random, almost childlike pondering?
Well, if one of said ponderings happened to be “what if The Running Man was crap”
Here’s your answer.
Nobody is giving their performance any effort. And the punch ups are spectacularly poorly thought out and the choreography is pathetic. The whole thing feels stitched together, and poorly so.
The only name involved is a clearly bored Michael Madsen, as one of the commentators. And it’s blatantly obvious he’s just there for a quick payday, and rather than reacting to footage of the action has been given an uninspired description of what’s meant to happen. Which only adds to the disjointed feeling between perspectives.
aku-chan wrote: The Princess Bride falls into the same category, unfortunately the rewatch didn't meet with the same success, I still think it's a pretty stupid movie.
You take that back right now! I will tolerate no slander about one of the greatest movies ever made! Apparently you need your bumps felt with one of Mad Dok Grotsnik's Bump Feelerers...
I am joking of course! But The Princess Bride is one of my favorite movies and I have fond memories of seeing it for the first time when I was maybe 8 years old (the movie itself is as old as me!). If it just didn't click for you, that's perfectly okay.
I love Metropolis. I forget which version I’ve seen, but it’s different from the one on YouTube. I’m not sure if it included all the rediscovered footage…. I’d better see it again, if I can find the most complete version available.
aku-chan wrote: The Princess Bride falls into the same category, unfortunately the rewatch didn't meet with the same success, I still think it's a pretty stupid movie.
You take that back right now! I will tolerate no slander about one of the greatest movies ever made! Apparently you need your bumps felt with one of Mad Dok Grotsnik's Bump Feelerers...
I am joking of course! But The Princess Bride is one of my favorite movies and I have fond memories of seeing it for the first time when I was maybe 8 years old (the movie itself is as old as me!). If it just didn't click for you, that's perfectly okay.
That's why I gave it a rewatch, it's remembered so fondly by so many people, that I obviously must've missed something the first time around, but no, it's simply not my cup of tea.
Captain America:- Brave New World
Can the new Captain America stop an insidious plot to bring down the president?
Not as bad as the Internet says it is (They rarely are, but I understand I'm also biased, just in the opposite direction).
While not as great as The Winter Soldier, which it is very definitely trying to imitate, I'd say it's a solid, above average entry in the Marvel catalogue with everyone settling into their new roles nicely (Though I did have a hard time wrapping my head around that teeny tiny lady being a badass Black Widow), and it's nice to see certain long standing plot points finally addressed.
But couldn't they have left the Serpent Society as people in wacky snake costumes instead of being a boring old group of mercenaries?
Just gotta see The Marvels and then I'm all caught up on the movie side (I wanna watch Ms. Marvel first, I just never get round to it!).
BobtheInquisitor wrote: I love Metropolis. I forget which version I’ve seen, but it’s different from the one on YouTube. I’m not sure if it included all the rediscovered footage…. I’d better see it again, if I can find the most complete version available.
In 2010 they came.out with a restored edition which included the 16mm Argentinian cuts. It's as close to the original theatrical release, but you can see the quality dip on these additions.
The version I just watched was from the 80s and had some additions, a few color tints, and a new score. I am floored by what they accomplished in 1927.
I still like the fact that the restored cut rocks a R rating.
A perfectly passable but fairly standard mystery slasher. The kills are well done, and fairly realistic. It does get a decently creepy atmosphere going.
Not an instant classic, but one worth watching if it pops up on streaming.
Return to Horror High
Look! It’s a 1987 Young George Clooney! And well before Pulp Fiction, it’s presented in a non-linear way, opening on the Police starting to investigate a massacre, and slowly revealing what happened. It’s also having a crack at the self-aware tone that Scream would make famous well over a decade later.
And so, this would’ve been something pretty fresh and interesting when released in 1987. Even today, it’s genuinely enjoyable.
Not a big fan of the Deadpool movies, they're very comedic and that's not always my thing, I did enjoy this one though.
It may not be a particularly good movie on its own, but as a big, crazy love letter to the Fox era of superhero movies there was a lot to like.
Not a big fan of the Deadpool movies, they're very comedic and that's not always my thing, I did enjoy this one though.
It may not be a particularly good movie on its own, but as a big, crazy love letter to the Fox era of superhero movies there was a lot to like.
I just hope they release an extended edition of the film, I'd love to see Fox Nick Fury: David Hasselhoff.
It’s Graduation! Yay! Let’s go hang out, overnight, in a, erm, Furniture Store. Sure. Why not, had to make your own fun in them days. Spesh when you’re too young to drink in pubs.
Only there is of course a loony offing our 20-something teens. A Cross Dressing Loony, because this is the 80’s.
Main issue with this film is 80’s Zak Morris Douche isn’t the first person offed. Otherwise, it’s genuinely pretty good. We get some Chekhov’s gun moments early on, such as a seemingly throw away comment about the Windows being shatterproof. Though not all follow through, such as the kids keeping the lights off so nobody realises they’re inside, but not attempt being made to turn them on when they now want to be noticed inside.
Watched two thirds of Irma La Douce today, was not disappointed. Last time I'd seen it must be decades ago. Looking forward to watching the rest. It's a long film, but rather lovely.
Night of the Living Dead, 1986 version, starting Tony Todd.
This is THE movie that made Tony Todd one of my favorite non A-Tier actors. For a horror movie remake, the man acted his butt off. You could feel the despair in his voice as he screams at God for what he's being forced to do.
The Princess Bride falls into the same category, unfortunately the rewatch didn't meet with the same success, I still think it's a pretty stupid movie.
I mean, it is a pretty silly movie, but that's what Mel Brooks does. I also didn't like it as a teenager (really disliked Spaceballs as well) but warmed to his style of humour more as an adult.
On the watching front - just rewatched the first Bay Transformers. Have to say, the problems with these movies become more apparent on each watch, and revisiting this one was a nice reminder of how much better Bumblebee was than the movies that came before it. So many questionable choices made in the making of this movie.
It's still a fun bit of action movie if you completely switch off your brain, but I find myself wondering if there's a director's cut somewhere that feels less like something cobbled together from the best bits without much regard for how cohesive it feels as a whole.
I’d imagine the Directors Cut would just be a blur of “so close up the audience can’t tell the combatants apart” fight scenes. And maybe inserted racist ice cream truck Autobots for good measure.
It's still a fun bit of action movie if you completely switch off your brain, but I find myself wondering if there's a director's cut somewhere that feels less like something cobbled together from the best bits without much regard for how cohesive it feels as a whole.
I feel like these days that's a huge problem with a large number of hollywood films. I really felt it in the first new Dune film. No scene itself was bad, but the connective parts scene to scene were just missing. It didn't feel like the story and film flowed from event to event and more just did a whistle stop past major events in the book and jumped between them.
Bay's films also have other issues, such as the utter daftness of the plot; insane plotholes; the fact that its not actually about the Transformers at all and the desire to make them as cute and charmingly stupid as possible for as much of the film. It also suffers from hero-worship where they don't show us Optimus being charismatic and cool and amazing as a leader; the film tells us all these things and then holds him up.
The Princess Bride falls into the same category, unfortunately the rewatch didn't meet with the same success, I still think it's a pretty stupid movie.
I mean, it is a pretty silly movie, but that's what Mel Brooks does. I also didn't like it as a teenager (really disliked Spaceballs as well) but warmed to his style of humour more as an adult.
Surely you aren't implying that The Princess Bride was a Mel Brooks film?
Really, really like the Princess Bride, because it's endlessly charming. Silly? Sure, but there isn't one annoying bit about it (MAYBE Billy Crystal. Also, incidently, possibly the most Mel-Brooks-seeming scene I think, even though he's got nothing to do with that film as far as I know). It is a comedy, but still very much a fairy tale, and I dig fairy tale films. Come to think of it, most of my favourites are basically fairytale films (or Rock&Roll Fables. ). Streets of Fire, Drive, The Apartment, Princess Bride, Night of the Hunter, etc.
Princess Bride also seems to very much keep its focus on the story rather than falling for the trappings of succumbing to contemporary popcultural references or ahistorical bits (like the Mel Brooks film Men in Tights does, much to its detriment. But that's a whole different kind of film. I'm quite suspicious of Mel Brooks comedies. Don't enjoy Spaceballs a lot either.). Not to say that there are no scenes which don't move the story along, but most of the serve a purpose, if only for a great swordfight scene.
@cuda1179: Ha, I think that was the first version of Night of the Living Dead I watched. It was on tv back then. Do they still show films on TV? ,
Automatically Appended Next Post: Irma La Douce (1963)
Billy Wilder film, starring Jack Lemmon and Shirley McLaine, among others. Based on a musical, I think. Last time I'd seen it was decades ago, and I kinda forgot about the second half of that film. It gets pretty wild. But stays fun throughout. I like The Apartment better, but I'll admit that Irma La Douce has a bit more of a bite to it, even though it also gets a bit broader.
Watch It. Classic, very un-annoying.
Asteroid City (2023)
Wes Anderson's film about Wes Anderson making films. To be honest, I haven't seen many of his films. Always found the very neatly organized, pastel pictures and quirky characters a bit too saccharine. And I was very close to turning it off because of all that "pretty picture wankery", combined with that particular brand of 'americana'. Stuck to it thought, because I'm just a weak human after all, and these pictures look cool. And it's got this just stupendous amount of famous hollywood faces. I'm not a huge Scarlet Johanson fan, but in this I liked her quite a lot. And all the others.
Despite all of this stuff, this film is un-annoying as well. It feels like somebody watched ALL the Tim Burton films a billion times and a David Lynch film and likes post cards and the america from before their own youth a lot and then made a film about they like making a film and then made a film about that and about how they like making a film about that film that was the result of the above and the way they made it. It is wankery of a pretty high order, but it's also a captivating film of a pretty high order.
I'm worried about how much all the hollywood stars are part of the formula though. Because I'm not sure if it would have been as sit-throughable if regular actors played the parts. It certainly would feel less home-y. Because that it does. And I think that this is what Wes Anderson does a lot. There's always this element of coziness to it, especially so with this film, especially due to the meta layers. But it never breaks that highly artificial look. It's always a stage (like in Irma La Douce, incidently. But Asteroid City has no pigs heads.).
It's entertaining though. And charming. Also extremely wankery, but - depending on how susceptible you are to film wankery - you don't mind from a certain point on and just shake your head and say "oh, you...".
Spoiler:
Loved the "you can't wake up if you don't fall asleep" scene. Because I'm a level7 susceptible to that sort of wankery
Take it or leave it. Probably an individual question.
Now, for me to calm down again, an all-time classic which I very much like - In the Heat of the Night (Watch It).
Surely you aren't implying that The Princess Bride was a Mel Brooks film? .
Apparently I am, for some reason. Put it down to encroaching senility, I guess...
Funny thing is that I looked it up just to be sure and one of the first hits was a Reddit thread about somebody imagining that the princess bride was a Mel Brooks film. So I assume it's not uncommon.
Quick, everyone back in the woods for this next entry on my Slasher journey.
Again, a superior example of a not exactly high art. Bonus points for an unpleasant scene setting early offing, and for the use of Blondie’s “Heart of Glass”. Also I really want our protagonists camper van. It looks ace. GMC Motorhome if anyone’s fussed.
WTF did I just watch? I have seen some odd stuff, and this is not the oddest; but it was odd.
Kevin Smith must have gotten this made after losing a bet. Can someone point me to the podcast where he explains how this happened in a funny and entertaining way?
Quixote wrote: I am taking a break from watching the animated scifi.... uhhh... film? Experience? Reason to not watch free movies anymore?
(The graphics remind me of an Xbox 360 cutscene.)
Trump vs the Illuminati (2020)
It's a future clone of Trump against Alastair Crowley and Satan.
Uhhh... I just checked and I've only watched 17 minutes of it... I thought it had been a lot longer than that.
Yeah, that ones pretty terrible.
Did you finish it?
Unfortunately.
Seriously though I only finished it because I was engrossed in painting some Deathguard & didn't want to interrupt my flow.
If you haven't finished it you're not missing anything but more crap.
In which a not very good, distinctly middle of the road and quite staggeringly overrated light rock band irritate everyone with bland, forgettable music and frankly staggering hypocrisy, and the lead singer refuses to sing on a new version of a scene setting charity single unless he can sing the same line he did first time around because some egos just don’t know control
OF COURSE NOT! The power, of suggestion!
This is a Dolph Lundgren flick. And unlike He-Man, and…erm…umm…Rocky IV, maybe?
Well it’s crap. Dolph is meant to be our unjustly imprisoned ne’er do well on a one man quest for justice against those wot done him dirty. But instead, he’s just a bit of a Richard, smashing up people’s property, forcibly kidnapping the dolly bird and generally not being at all sympathetic.
Granted this isn’t Steven Seagull crap. But crap it remains.
In a world where robots are outlawed, a young woman and a robot head off on a quest to find her brother.
I absolutely love the visual design of the weird mascot/animatronic robots in this, definitely a look that needs to show up more often.
The movie itself is pretty lousy though, it's basically a heavy-handed condemnation of social media and it's addicting properties tied to a plot that makes almost zero sense.
Remember how in Stargate they needed Daniel Jackson to figure out that whole seventh sign issue?
Remember, it was a major plot point... remember?
Good news, that was totally irrelevant because a Nazi already figured it out and Catherine (the older lady from the film and Season 1 of SG-1) had to use the gate to save her dad who was transported to Abydos by the Nazi and there is a demigod who is rebelling against Ra.
Does this make any sense to anyone? Does it matter?
Nope. It all fits in continuity. "How" you ask. Easy:
Spoiler:
They all do they one thing I wish I could have done after watching this: They forgot.
I just found out they were originally released as 10×10 minute episodes on Amazon. You get an extra 4 minutes with the movie edition.
Also Conner Traneer (Stargate Atlantis) returns, but in a different role.
My reaction to Section 31 was uncharacteristically visceral. My usual easygoing, “I’m sure I’ll find something to like” approach failed me.
It’s awful. It has no redeeming qualities.
Thanks for the save.
Any recommendations? Nothing sad. I can be sad for free. Why pay for a film to make me sad?
Because some films which make you sad are really good. By ourselves we can be sad and dull, with films that make us sad we got a reason and at least had some external impulse. Of course Section 31 is rubbish though. I have not seen it, but all signs point to it (and I draw some stinky, self-congratulatory satisfaction from that, I have to say.)
Haven't watched the Marine (well, not 1 and 2 at least ). I like The Wall with John Cena. That one was interesting. Or just go watch some Billy Wilder comedy. Can't go wrong with that.
If you're dead-set on watching John Cena for "lulz"-purposes I wouldn't suggest watching a comedy film that stars him. Watch the build-up to some big wrestling match. He's good at that.
Follow up to Class of 1984, which I think I’ve seen. That’s also on Prime so I’ll probably follow up with that.
This is a slightly odd film. Essentially, law and order has broken down in the USA. School kids are out of control. So a High School agrees to host three cyborg teachers. Who start to go ‘Nanners and kill students.
And it’s not as camp as it sounds, but somehow isn’t played entirely straight. And yes it’s sort of a Terminator knock-off.
Follow up to Class of 1984, which I think I’ve seen. That’s also on Prime so I’ll probably follow up with that.
This is a slightly odd film. Essentially, law and order has broken down in the USA. School kids are out of control. So a High School agrees to host three cyborg teachers. Who start to go ‘Nanners and kill students.
And it’s not as camp as it sounds, but somehow isn’t played entirely straight. And yes it’s sort of a Terminator knock-off.
I remember that one.
I loved the idea that all the kids were these violent, feral thugs but they still went to school every day.
Supernatural Slasher from 1991, a joint Canadian and Yugoslavian effort. Distractingly, a fair few voices seem to be dubbed over, but only in certain scenes.
Atmospherically it’s pretty much par for the course. But the plot is very silly indeed, involving a possibly possessed priest, and bits and pieces nicked from much better movies.
On the upside, a bunch of obnoxious Frat Boys have a really bad time.
Supernatural Slasher from 1991, a joint Canadian and Yugoslavian effort. Distractingly, a fair few voices seem to be dubbed over, but only in certain scenes.
Atmospherically it’s pretty much par for the course. But the plot is very silly indeed, involving a possibly possessed priest, and bits and pieces nicked from much better movies.
On the upside, a bunch of obnoxious Frat Boys have a really bad time.
Oh wait! It’s a young Jorja Fox out of office of CSI Something.
At least one person’s career escaped this intact.
This is an odd one. It’s not a badly made film, it’s just not particularly competent. The gore and kills are fun, and as I said the atmosphere is pretty much fine. But the editing is all over the shop, and there’s moments it feels like two, maybe three films stitched together.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Luther The Geek
In which a kid exposed to a Freakshow Geek at a young age, and lost his teeth as a result of an accident, goes ‘Nanners, replacing his lost gnashes with metal ones…and goes around biting people’s heads off once he’s grown up.
Goes to Pris, gets released 20 years ago, and then off to Head Biting.
Though even with steel falsies, surely it’s gonna take a long time for a human to bite another human’s head off, right?
For a while now, I’ve been desperately trying to find a film I saw once, and only had a dim memory of.
Something about a Freakshow, with a Hermapahrodite and a Three Armed Dwarf. I saw it during the age of Ceefax, whilst mindlessly channel hopping late one night. I figured it was some artsyfartsy thing on Channel 4. But last night, having watched Freakshow adjacent Luther The Geek, I suddenly remembered the Dwarf was played by Deep Roy.
To Google I flew! And bingo. I identified it.
Artsyfartsy my bottom. It’s not that at all. Ifs kinda the polar opposite, being Howling VI - The Freaks
Which is on Prime, and really not worth the bother.
Tom Hanks is a Destroyer captain hunting submarines. The film is laser focused on Tom Hanks giving orders and those orders being carried out, with very little in the way of sub plots or character development. Hanks does a decent enough job and oceans are still battlefields, but I doubt I'd rewatch this over any number of other, better naval warfare films.
7/10 Good
For a John Cena rec, I really liked Peacemaker. Lots of lowbrow humor, a decent amount of action and a great message. Robert Patrick is also a villain in this one.
My take-aways: John Cena as Peacemaker is very good. This is HIS role. The people around him are ....alright when interacting with Peacemaker, but I'm rather weary of character pointing out another characters' wrongdoings, as a sort of laugh track for people who can't tell right from wrong or something. The green dude from that show is everything that is wrong with film/tv comedy. I assume that's all based on a comicbook, and that's why they didn't go for depicting actual neonazis, but neonazis with slightly different logos and such?
One of the highlights for me was the police dude from Charmed playing the police dude and the eagle looked amazing. I also liked Robert Patrick's hairdo.
1979, previously banned in the UK as a video nasty. I’m quietly impressed. It starts off as a gory slasher with gratuitous nudity. Then takes a sharp turn into an oddly interesting psychological thriller.
Some of the scenes with the Loony and his Kidnapped victim are oddly touching, and pretty well acted. Just the right mix of tender and creepy. Overall a pretty decent horror flick.
The House on Sorority Row
Not quite what I was expecting! Prologue shows something odd going on with a birth. Fast forward to the film’s present, and during a prank gone wrong, the House Mother of our Sorority Girls is killed….or was she? Because someone is now bumping off our girls, one by one. Is it the House Mother? Is it one of the girls? Is it someone else?
And it spins out the murders and the mystery pretty nicely overall, if not exactly with anything original.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And now for something, completely different.
Shane Meadow’s Dead Man’s Shoes
Paddy Considine stars as a lad home from the army, and soon taking revenge upon the drug dealers that had taken advantage of his mentally disabled brother.
Those familiar with Meadow’s work will immediately recognise his overall style here. A certain juxtaposition of suburban decay and beauty. Delving into the lives of the economically disadvantaged, and the trials they face on a daily basis. Without glamourising or overly dramatising anything.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And even more differenter?
Transformers One
Right. I’ll be blunt.
Paramount has joined Warner Bros in needing to answer, and sharpish, why they’re so utterly inept at live action takes on their comic book/80’s kids stuff, yet can turn out such near impeccable animated fare.
Because this ace. It’s got pace. It’s got punch. There are some nice little call backs here and there, but nudge and wink, not DO Y’REMEMBER, D’YOU? REMEMBER, EH, EH, WE DIDN’T BOTHER WITH PLOT, JUST REMEMBER, EH? WHEN Y’WERE LIKKLE IN NINETEEN EIGHTIES AND IT MADE Y’FEEL BETTER ABOUT YER BRASS HAND
Heck, I’m just going off my knowledge and love for G1. And I’m fairly sure there’s stuff in there for Beastwars and other bits and bobs.\
Cracking voice cast too.
Get this through your eyeholes into your brain meat and makes yersel’ happy, yeah?
Went to the theater today to see Captain America: Brave New World, and enjoyed it for the most part.
Was a little upset that Ms. Haas got to be in the movie and they didn't mention her superhero character at all: Sabra. I was sure Disney was going to change her outfit (her comic book costume has a Star of David front and center).
There were a lot of set ups that just didn't seem to go anywhere. It was good to see Liv Tyler again.
I’d have dearly loved to have seen on the big screen for the first time, but sadly I’m just a bit too young for that.
But what a damned near perfect bit of kid friendly sci-fi. Well, maybe not with the head melting scene, but that was usually cut when televised in the UK.
It’s more than just a ‘me can do a Star Wars too’ knock-off, despite clear influences in its DNA. Its overall plot is solid, and novel. And given how drone warfare has evolved, and features controls familiar to any gamer, possibly kinda prophetic in its own way.
The CGI is of course early, but does the job well enough. Whilst I’d dearly love to see some crazy fan recreate them using modern technology, that feeling doesn’t extend to the film makers who should really just leave it be, as it’s of cinematic historical value. And for my money, did it better than Tron. Much better.
Just absolutely fabulous stuff, with a great cast to boot. Even the kid brother who is absolutely the right kind of slightly annoying.
If you’ve not seen it, or you’ve kids say, 8 and up*, now is the time to correct that oversight in your movie viewing habits.
Go on. GIT!
*head melting scene again. But you’ll of course know your kids best in that regard.
I’d have dearly loved to have seen on the big screen for the first time, but sadly I’m just a bit too young for that.
But what a damned near perfect bit of kid friendly sci-fi. Well, maybe not with the head melting scene, but that was usually cut when televised in the UK.
It’s more than just a ‘me can do a Star Wars too’ knock-off, despite clear influences in its DNA. Its overall plot is solid, and novel. And given how drone warfare has evolved, and features controls familiar to any gamer, possibly kinda prophetic in its own way.
The CGI is of course early, but does the job well enough. Whilst I’d dearly love to see some crazy fan recreate them using modern technology, that feeling doesn’t extend to the film makers who should really just leave it be, as it’s of cinematic historical value. And for my money, did it better than Tron. Much better.
Just absolutely fabulous stuff, with a great cast to boot. Even the kid brother who is absolutely the right kind of slightly annoying.
If you’ve not seen it, or you’ve kids say, 8 and up*, now is the time to correct that oversight in your movie viewing habits.
Go on. GIT!
*head melting scene again. But you’ll of course know your kids best in that regard.
This one is pretty special. It gets off to a bit of a slow start that feels a bit more like Ren & Stimpy than Loony Tunes, but once things really get rolling it doesn't let up until the end. Probably more of a homage to classic sci-fi shlock than Loony Tunes, it does a great job of capturing the vibe of when the 1950 reruns were on Nickelodeon.
The Tarantino/Rodriquez double feature of carefully and deliberately crafted trash. Comprised of Planet Terror (I’ve seen it once) and Deathproof (which I’ve seen enough times to remember the plot).
If these gent’s shtick is your thing? Still an awful lot to enjoy here, especially presented in its original double header format.
A bunch of the spoof trailers have also become movies in their own rights - Machete, Hobo with a Shotgun to name but two I’ve seen. And there are others which eventually became Real Movies, but I’ll need to finish watching to know which I’ve definitely seen.
Grindhouse was disappointing in the theaters, not because it was bad but because it started so strongly as a loving parody/homage and then followed that up with Death Proof. I can almost imagine the misunderstanding:
Rodrigues: “We’re making fun of those boring old schlocky trash movies?”
Tarantino: “Yes, we’re recreating boring old schlocky trash movies.”
The best description I’ve read of Death Proof was:
Four Tarantinos played by different women Tarantino in a bar for 40 minutes. Then Kurt Russel gets to act.
I haven't seen this one since it originally aired, and my opinion of it has improved a bit.
At the time I think it was just too different from the show I knew, but now it feels very much like your average Nu-Who Christmas special.
It's still not amazing by any means, but if you haven't seen it since the 90's, and you still like Dr. Who, it's worth a watch.
Alien:- Romulus
A plucky gang of 20-somethings attempt to escape their capitalist overlords by looting a derelict space station.
A real return to the franchise's roots and in doing so it's easily the best one since Aliens, the characters don't act like complete morons and there's no attempts to inject a lot of unnecessary lore into proceedings.
Rook does come off a bit overly CGI'ed at times, but that's probably my only real nitpick.
I’d agree on Rook. I think they’ve gone in an retweaked since the cinema release though.
Even so? He’s messed up already, so they could (should?) have used that to make the face more mucked up, giving the CGI an easier time of it.
What I do like is how thought out the overall plot and perils are. Our heroes do sensible things for sensible reasons throughout. Even the Pulse Rifle having auto-aim makes sense. After all, they’re there to be used by scientists, against potentially the nastiest killer the galaxy has ever seen.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: What I do like is how thought out the overall plot and perils are. Our heroes do sensible things for sensible reasons throughout. Even the Pulse Rifle having auto-aim makes sense. After all, they’re there to be used by scientists, against potentially the nastiest killer the galaxy has ever seen.
Yep, they even make
Spoiler:
the woman injecting herself with mystery goo
seem like a reasonable, if desperate, choice. It's a far cry from the absolute boneheads in Alien:- Covenant.
The Gorge
Two soldiers guard a mysterious gorge, will the isolation draw them closer together?
When the film actually gets around to exploring the gorge, it's quite entertaining, if a little silly. Sitting through an hour of two troubled souls striking up a long distance relationship is not.
A plucky gang of 20-somethings attempt to escape their capitalist overlords by looting a derelict space station.
A real return to the franchise's roots and in doing so it's easily the best one since Aliens, the characters don't act like complete morons and there's no attempts to inject a lot of unnecessary lore into proceedings.
Rook does come off a bit overly CGI'ed at times, but that's probably my only real nitpick.
What I really like is that we very much know that this is a group of young-adults who mostly just lost their parental figures in life and are doing things on their own. Even when they make bad choices they are very sensible choices for characters in their situation, age and experiences and so forth. It's really like those early films where you can see the bad choices ahead of time but also see that they seem very logical for the characters in the setting at the time.
Honestly I consider it the true 5th Alien film after the original 3 and the fanservice Alien 4 - which was a bit ropey on the science front but gave us some really awesome moments and very active aliens and such.
Ostensibly this film is about anxiety-wreck Beau’s Odyssey to his mother’s home, in which everything goes wrong and everyone is messed up. But really it’s a Frankenstein of vignettes about neuroses and paranoia that becomes less and less hinged as the film goes on.
First of all, this is not a film that “makes sense” or “has a coherent story”. Like Eraserhead, Beau is Afraid is less about the plot or characters than the feelings it evokes. And like Eraserhead, it has some spectacularly disturbing scenes. If you have a dark sense of humor and can see it with some likeminded friends, you’ll have a lot of fun. If you want something more grounded than bananas, move along.
Slasher. Not really worth the bother. Nothing especially interesting happens.
Blood Harvest
This took a wee bit of tracking down. And it’s, yes, a Slasher. But starring Tiny Tim, better known for falsetto nonsense songs. Will let you know how I got on, but there’s a promising early kill.
Yeah, it’s fine. Plot makes sense, but could’ve done without Tiny Tim. Glad I didn’t pay £50 for a copy though!
He was mostly gurning and acting really badly. Also he doesn’t know the words to Jack & Jill 🤣🤣
I mean, the whole thing is pretty much fine. But given it was a sod to track down, and some copies go for £50, I was really surprised at just how “meh” it was. Not good Meh. Not bad Meh. Just…..meh.
Ostensibly this film is about anxiety-wreck Beau’s Odyssey to his mother’s home, in which everything goes wrong and everyone is messed up. But really it’s a Frankenstein of vignettes about neuroses and paranoia that becomes less and less hinged as the film goes on.
First of all, this is not a film that “makes sense” or “has a coherent story”. Like Eraserhead, Beau is Afraid is less about the plot or characters than the feelings it evokes. And like Eraserhead, it has some spectacularly disturbing scenes. If you have a dark sense of humor and can see it with some likeminded friends, you’ll have a lot of fun. If you want something more grounded than bananas, move along.
I think I loved it.
I really would like to watch that film, but I'm worried it might scare me quite a lot.
.....so I'm sticking to watching very safe, brain-mushing things. Like Mobile Suit Gundam: Cucuruz Doan's Island (2022). Interesting bit of backstory: This film is a feature-length version of the 15th episode of the original 1979 anime tv show. Back then the show-runner was in hospital, the episode was out-sourced, nobody was happy with the quality, so 40 years later, they made it again and into a 90 minute film.
I'm slightly new to all of this, so this point in time is where I'm familiar with things. Original series, U.C.0079, One Year War, the White Base gang. Earth Federation is getting ready to invade Europe and push Zeon forces back, before that they're all busy mopping up everywhere else, because Zeon organized stay-behind units to do stay-behind units stuff. One such unit is suspected to sit on a tiny island (part of the Canary islands). White Base are sent to investigate.
Beautiful looking film, great-sounding film, very true to the original series (as far as I can tell; I only watched the films which summarize the show) in pretty much all aspects. It's nothing ground-breaking, nothing very clever (because it's based on a 1970s tv show for kids), but it's got its heart in the right place, there's good, very basic anti-war stuff (which early gundam is good at). I liked the dreadm sequence in which Amuro's backstory is told extremely efficiently (including his mother showing up, which I always found to be the strongest scenes in that show). It's not moving very quickly, and it's much more about people than big robots fighting (but when they do it's cool). It's not an action film. Is it a kids' film? Quite possibly. There are several violent scenes in there, but nothing graphic if I remember correctly, more an illustration about how war is bad.
It can be watched without knowing anything about the whole Gundam thing. It helps, but it's not necessary.
It's not a great film, but it's okay enough to give it a watch. I liked it a lot, but it's almost made to please me, and I draw a LOT of joy from the name Cucuruz Doan. It's such an anime name. And the dude is such an anime good guy dude. He's like Patrick Swayze in Road House.
Oh, I also watched Fargo (1996) for the first time in full. You've seen it. It's good. If not, Watch It, it's good.
A superior murder mystery slasher, and Brooke Shields’ movie debut.
It plays out at a decent pace, keeping the killer secret for a good slice, then the reveal. But keeping everyone else in the movie unknowing, which gives it a certain extra atmosphere.
A superior murder mystery slasher, and Brooke Shields’ movie debut.
It plays out at a decent pace, keeping the killer secret for a good slice, then the reveal. But keeping everyone else in the movie unknowing, which gives it a certain extra atmosphere.
I can see why it is a classic as it does some amazing things with lighting, scene setting, and shot comp.
The story is nothing great, but might have a bit more relevance today than one would expect.
The shadiest parts are the exposition dumps.
We enjoyed Citizen Kane a lot more than we expected to. With all of the hype around it, I expected something pretentious and inaccessible. Instead we got a movie that found some new way to entertain every few scenes. Of course, it helped a lot that we went into the movie with all the backstory on William Randolph Hearst after visiting Hearst Castle (the real life “Xanadu”), and knowing the whole movie was essentially one big dis track.
The surprise bird screech still makes my son laugh when he remembers it.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @Sigur
You’re probably same from being terrified by Beau is Afraid. Being anxious, tense or stressed out is more likely. Especially if the particular kinds of manipulation and abuse in the film resonate with you.
A superior murder mystery slasher, and Brooke Shields’ movie debut.
It plays out at a decent pace, keeping the killer secret for a good slice, then the reveal. But keeping everyone else in the movie unknowing, which gives it a certain extra atmosphere.
Lovely.
Oh, that sounds pretty watchable!
Be aware that while it is her debut it is not her movie and is barely in it.
So, there I was, minding my own business in the discount DVD section of Wal-Mart, sifting through a mountain of forgotten films that looked like they’d been there since the dawn of time. You know, the kind of movies that make you question if they were ever actually released or if they just spontaneously appeared one day. And then, like a beacon of light shining through the dust, I stumbled upon this little gem called Star Wars: A New Hope.
Now, I’ll be honest—I had never heard of this film before. It’s not like it’s a cultural phenomenon or anything. But the cover art was intriguing! A guy in a shiny white suit, a princess with a hairdo that could double as a satellite dish, and a giant furry creature that looked like it had just rolled out of bed. I thought, “This has to be good!”
The movie kicks off with a space battle that’s more intense than my last family reunion. I was immediately hooked! There are spaceships zooming around, laser beams flying everywhere, and a villain in a black cape who seems to have taken “dressing for success” a bit too seriously. I mean, who knew that the key to being a successful intergalactic tyrant was a dramatic wardrobe?
Then we meet Luke Skywalker, a young man who seems to have a serious case of wanderlust. He’s living on a desert planet (which, by the way, looks like the world’s largest sandcastle) and dreaming of adventure. I can relate! I once dreamed of leaving my cave, too, but then I remembered I have a Netflix subscription.
As the plot unfolds, we’re introduced to a motley crew of characters, including Princess Leia, who is basically the ultimate multitasker—she’s a leader, a diplomat, and she can rock a blaster like nobody’s business. And let’s not forget Han Solo, who is basically the charming rogue we all wish we could be. He’s got a spaceship, a sarcastic attitude, and a furry co-pilot named Chewbacca who looks like he could use a good grooming.
The special effects? Let’s just say they’re “vintage.” I mean, who doesn’t love a good model spaceship flying across a backdrop that looks like it was painted by a toddler? It adds to the charm! And the lightsaber battles? Pure gold! I found myself wondering if I could get one for my next family gathering.
Now, here’s the kicker: I couldn’t help but wonder if there are any plans for a sequel to this film. I mean, it ends on such a cliffhanger! Will Luke ever find his long-lost relatives? Will Han and Leia finally go on that date? And what about Chewbacca’s grooming situation? The world needs answers!
In conclusion, if you ever find yourself in the discount DVD section of Wal-Mart, do yourself a favor and pick up Star Wars: A New Hope. It’s a delightful ride through space that’s somehow both epic and endearingly quirky. Who knows? You might just discover your new favorite film—just like I did! And if you hear any whispers about a sequel, let me know. I’m dying to find out what happens next!
A superior murder mystery slasher, and Brooke Shields’ movie debut.
It plays out at a decent pace, keeping the killer secret for a good slice, then the reveal. But keeping everyone else in the movie unknowing, which gives it a certain extra atmosphere.
Lovely.
Oh, that sounds pretty watchable!
Be aware that while it is her debut it is not her movie and is barely in it.
That's perfectly okay; my comment wasn't hinging on the Brooke shields thing (that film is earlier than I thought. I assume Shields still was the tallest on set. The most vivid memories of her work I have from Suddenly Susan, and I remember that she's a tall lady.), but the plot sounds kinda interesting for that sort of film. It is a funny bit of trivia though. It was right before the slasher craze, I assume, so it might look it up. Btw, apparently it had three titles: Communion, then the Alice one, and then another one for the cut US TV version called Holy Terror. Also, I haven't watched a horror film in a while.
It's funny though; if anybody asked me what my top 3 Brooke Shields films were I probably couldn't name a single one. Was she in Blue Lagoon? Never seen it, but I vaguely remember that she was the girl in that one. The other two I'd cite probably would be me mistaking her for Cathy Ireland. (top 3 Cathy Ireland films: Loaded Weapon 1, Alien from L.A., the David Hasselhoff Die Hard clone in which she plays his wife).
Sigur wrote: That's perfectly okay; my comment wasn't hinging on the Brooke shields thing
I didn't say or imply you were I was just letting you know. When the film came out she wasn't known but after she became famous the producers changed the poster/cover of VHS to prominently feature her to increase sales even though she is barely in it. It is an interesting film in that is like a bridge between giallo films and the upcoming slasher genre. The director being an excommunicated Catholic and the film being full of Catholicism is an interesting bit of backstory as well.
Really? Wow. What does one have to do to get excommunicated? I mean even in the 70s.
Yeah, it's funny what these salespeople do with VHS/DVD covers (I think in DVD times the false advertising with people who got famous later on got even more rampant).
The surprise bird screech still makes my son laugh when he remembers it.
Yeah, I had heard it was a Hearst dis-track and I think it delivers on that front.
It was also so refreshing to see that a politician could lose an election and have their political career ruined for such a simple reason. How refreshing compared to modern times.
Also, the "real" Rosebud is even funnier than the one in the movie. <Wink>
After further consideration, “Rosebud” was the “and it’s probably a minorrrrrrrrrr” of classic cinema. Truly, Citizen Kane is the Citizen Kane Of Dis Tracks.
Sigur wrote: Really? Wow. What does one have to do to get excommunicated? I mean even in the 70s.
.
His first film was a porno, included a scene filmed without permission on the local archbishop's property, and wound up in court on charges of obscenity.
Sigur wrote: Really? Wow. What does one have to do to get excommunicated? I mean even in the 70s.
.
His first film was a porno, included a scene filmed without permission on the local archbishop's property, and wound up in court on charges of obscenity.
Sigur wrote: Really? Wow. What does one have to do to get excommunicated? I mean even in the 70s.
.
His first film was a porno, included a scene filmed without permission on the local archbishop's property, and wound up in court on charges of obscenity.
“There’s a new god in town. And his name is Psycho Goreman.”
What if the ultimate space villain fell under the dominion of a budding child sociopath? Psycho Goreman!
The movie feels like a twisted take on an Amblin movie, a Saturday morning cartoon and the Power Rangers…blended into an R-rated 80’s gore fest. All of the effects are practical, and the costume design is worth the price alone. It’s not a joke a minute, and not every joke lands, but most of those that do land hard.
Worth considering:
-Yes there is a montage where the kids take PG clothes shopping so he can pass as human.
-All the space stuff feels like it’s based on heavy metal album covers and SatAm cartoons.
-Internet darling Rich Evans has a voiceover cameo.
It’s an experience. Not necessarily a good experience, but not an entirely negative one.
Mostly, it’s just really effing weird and unsettling.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Offerings
1989. I am Michael Myers! I AM HIM!
Less than average Halloween knock-off/cash-in. And it really feels like it was made in the mid 70’s. I mean, there’s really nothing on screen to particularly date it, other than cars.
Bit of a weird one this, it's entertaining enough, but I don't get why it was made or why they waited so long to make it, it definitely wasn't because they had come up with anything new to add to the story.
It's an okay way to fill a couple of hours, but you're not missing anything if you haven't seen it.
Bit of a weird one this, it's entertaining enough, but I don't get why it was made or why they waited so long to make it, it definitely wasn't because they had come up with anything new to add to the story.
It's an okay way to fill a couple of hours, but you're not missing anything if you haven't seen it.
Very much a disappointment. Not even die hard fans had anything positive to say about it. The true definition of 'Meh.'
I kept waiting for something really fun or unique to grab me like the original did.
My biggest issue is that Monica Belluci just….doesnt really serve a purpose. Like someone had been carrying two versions of the script, dropped them, and managed to recollate pages into the shooting version.
It is fairly good fun, but not a classic like its predecessor.
Quixote wrote: Ever seen a DVD for sale that you know in your heart of hearts, that you will never watch?
One of my friends has a copy of the Garbage Pail Kids movie still in the shrink wrap on his shelf.
I asked him if it was a collector's item, but he said, "nope, it's just been collecting dust for 11 years, since I bought it at a comic convention."
Is that movie so terrible, people who own it won't watch it?
I don’t know how I would feel about it today, but as a kid I found it too off-putting to sit through, and I had watched Howard the Duck multiple times.
Ahtman wrote: Heretic (2024) A man traps two two young female Mormon missionaries in his house and engages them a discussion on the nature of religion and faith. A very tense and engaging film with a great performance from Hugh Grant. The trailers kind of make it seem like it is more of a trapped house or Saw type of movie but really it is a dialogue heavy battle of wits. The kind of film where none of the characters are made stupid or do anything that would make you facepalm. It isn't really a "twist" film but definitely better knowing less about it going in makes for a more enjoyable experience. Definitely worth a watch if you like smart horror films.
Does it have anything inappropriate for a young teenager?
1988 horror thriller starring Richard Lynch as a possibly-back-from-the-dead cult leader tormenting the sole survivor of his madness.
It’s pretty good! Also, credits role to Sweet Child O’Mine, which is pretty rad.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Frightmare
A Troma Studios release, but not a Troma Movie. And it’s only Jeffrey Combs’ horror movie debut!
Bunch of film students decide it would be a great wheeze to steal the body of a legendary Horror Actor from his tomb. They set off a black magic curse, and nonsense ensues.
If you’re a horror fan, the presence of Jeffrey Combs and being a Troma release should tell you all you need to know. Like you’re in a for a great, if silly, time.
I do hope this is the last of them as they seem to have gone a bit off the rails.
Carriers
A Chris Pine work about some kids trying to stay ahead of the plague. It is fine for what it is. Seeing how they decorated their face masks was a highlight, as my family did that during COVID as well. However, it also gave me some PTSD to those days that, we as a society; like to pretend never happened and have stricken from our collective memories.
Continuing my rewatch of the Transformers movies.. Just worked through from Revenge of the Fallen through to The Last Knight.
The pros - as the series went on, Bay took on the feedback from people complaining about not being able to see what was going on, slowing down transformations and adding more slowmo sequences in fights.
The cons - complete disregard for any sort of continuity, nonsensical plot, oh look - Cybertron's coming again!, it's almost impossible to tell any of the Decepticons apart, they introduced fighter craft for Transformers to drive in robot form instead of taking the opportunity to add in the rest of the Seekers, and by the end they've largely dumped G1 characters in favour of new bots made up for the movies.
I also realised on this rewatch that a large part of what feels 'off' with these movies is that the transformer voices largely feel dubbed over the top. I mean, they obviously are, but there is no effort made to integrate the voice into the action.... It doesn't feel like the robots are actually talking, it feels like a voiceover, and that's continually jarring.
On the plus side, after Last Knight comes Bumblebee, which I'm looking forward to rewatching.
Easy E wrote: One other quick point about John Wick 4. They shamelessly rip-off The Warriors in the second half.
Huh. I thought you were going to bring up the 3 Stooges - because the endless rolling down the stairs felt like it would be perfect in one of their pictures.
A slasher movie, number 39 in this collection, and one I’ve wanted to see ever since I was proper ickle, as its poster and cover art left an impression in the Video Rental Store*
I mean, look at this poster!
And it’s a horror movie about a possessed movie! Starring someone who very much looks like Lydia Deetz.
Happy to say whilst nothing groundbreaking, my patience has paid off, as it’s thoroughly enjoyable.
*Eh, eh, d’you remember Video Rental Stores? D’you? You’d spend ages picking out the tapes you wanted, buy some over priced invariably stale popcorn, and by the time you got home, the electromagnetics of yer Brass Hand had wiped the tapes? D’you remember? Eh?
Ahtman wrote: There are a lot of VHS covers, almost entirely horror, burned into my mind from around that time period when rental stores reigned supreme.
Same here! They used to be rather inventive about those too, but standing in front of a whole wall of the things made them also look kinda samey again. But then you'd pick one and it's a big demon over an old house with a skeletal hand coming out of it or something. Then when you'd watch the film it's some dude in a bad 'creepy grandma' mask, chasing the director's friends around in an abandoned building.
Just watching 21 Jump Street season 5 for completeness sake. S05E17, Under the Influence ("Die Hexe". No, no, it's German, it means The Witch! Somebody who speaks German can't be a bad person). The titular witch has her satanist underlings stand in a circle around her. One by one, they each tell a bad fact about the state of the world or bad news which happened to others to her, which in turns makes the witch happy or something. It's a great scene (also a bit icky, but mostly funny). She basically invented doomscrolling.
George Baker stars as a heroic cavelry horseman who beats off the roundheads...while smuggling the country's aristocracy to France. Patrick Troughton and Sylvia Sims also stars.
George Baker stars as a heroic cavelry horseman who beats off the roundheads...while smuggling the country's aristocracy to France. Patrick Troughton and Sylvia Sims also stars.
SamusDrake wrote: Bond in Space needs to happen more often. As kids we always went bananas if Moonraker was on telly.
Space marines, space station and Bond. And "Jaws". Both with hot girlfriends in tow. Greatest innuendo line ever delivered on screen. Best movie ever!
I remember watching that movie so often I killed our VHS tape... that and kid-me being terribly disappointed at NASA for failing to deliver on anything in that film...
George Baker stars as a heroic cavelry horseman who beats off the roundheads...while smuggling the country's aristocracy to France. Patrick Troughton and Sylvia Sims also stars.
Hmmm, that doesn't sound too bad. Bit of swashbuckling in buff coats...
Managed about 15 minutes of (Extremely) shaky cam footage of a bunch of Dude Bros being obnoxious scumbags, before deciding to see if there was something better to watch. Probably should've waited until the film actually reached the haunted video tape/horror anthology main bit, but I just couldn't be bothered.
Considering how many movies are in this franchise it must be fairly popular, it just wasn't for me.
I've never managed to get into the whole "shaky video camera recording" style films. I can tolerate it in small, short films that are almost more arty/you know they are tiny budgets. But anything long it just becomes insanely annoying.
It's like how video game designers like to shove things like lensflare into your view in video games. Unless I'm looking through a camera at the time as the character I should not be seeing lens-flare! I should only get one or two if I'm in a cabin or looking through a single panel of glass, I can tolerate that for realism. But if it looks like I'm looking through a high end lens with multiple optical elements all flaring badly - just URG!
Significantly worse than the Legendary (Company Name, not a value judegement) movie that kicked off the new cinema-verse.
The best was Kong absolutely Mike Tyson punching Big G while standing on an Aircraft carrier deck. However, since that was in the trailer, I guess there was no real reason to see this?
The amount of people killed and high-end, high budget equipment killed/destroyed in this world is eye-watering. I would love to understand how the economy in this world of Titans' can even keep going, much less be more advanced technologically than our own. However, I am over-thinking a movie about giant creatures punching each other repeatedly.
Currently watching Season of the Witch with Ron Perlman and Nic Cage... and Claire Foy.
It's actually better than I thought it would be. I'll let you know how it turns out.
EDIT: Ok. It didn't go the way I thought it would... I kinda wish the production had a little more money to spend on the 3rd act.
Much like a lot of promising films (like Solomon Kane and Wonder Woman <-That's the only time those two films will be mentioned in the same sentence.) The end features a chunk of unconvincing CGI, that doesn't fit the rest of the film.
Finally rewatching Babylon 5 on Amazon after all these years.
I saw most of it in its original run in the 90s. Then about 2005 or so I started re-watching it on DVD
But the dvds weren't mine, so part way through I lost access to them.
So far, 6 episodes in, it's still as entertaining as it was back then....
Quixote wrote: Currently watching Season of the Witch with Ron Perlman and Nic Cage... and Claire Foy.
It's actually better than I thought it would be. I'll let you know how it turns out.
EDIT: Ok. It didn't go the way I thought it would... I kinda wish the production had a little more money to spend on the 3rd act.
Much like a lot of promising films (like Solomon Kane and Wonder Woman <-That's the only time those two films will be mentioned in the same sentence.) The end features a chunk of unconvincing CGI, that doesn't fit the rest of the film.
Oh yes, I watched that one in the cinema Yeah, IIRC my impressions were similar. It's not a horrible film; once they're on their way with the witch it felt like somehting that would work nicely as a D&D adventure. Which usually means that the film is very simplistic. Which is okay. But the CGI in the end really kinda let it down. Still, I bear no grudge against that film. It's pretty ok.
ccs wrote: Finally rewatching Babylon 5 on Amazon after all these years.
I saw most of it in its original run in the 90s. Then about 2005 or so I started re-watching it on DVD
But the dvds weren't mine, so part way through I lost access to them.
So far, 6 episodes in, it's still as entertaining as it was back then....
AKA The William Poulter Movie, Also Featuring Unicorns.
It was pretty good. I’m glad I saw it in the theater because there were some strong audience reactions to scares, jokes, and satisfying kills. It’s a good film for character actors, but maybe not scary or intense enough for horror fans, despite some good gore. If you liked the trailer you’ll probably like the film.
Lathe Biosas wrote: I'm going to ye olde cinema this week, as my folks like to take me for my birthday. A tradition in our family, like watching Die Hard at Christmas.
Anything decent out?
What kind of movie are you looking for?
Novocain is a bloody action comedy that got good reviews. The Looney Tunes movie The Day The Earth Blew Up also got good reviews. The Minecraft Movie seems to be …not the worst thing ever?
My review for Death of a Unicorn is above. “Decent” is a good description.
Just enjoyed Buddy goes west (1981) on Youtube yesterday.
Bud Spencer being the stereotype Bud Spencer character is always a good time for me.
It starts with him freeing a friend of his Girolamo (an Indian) who thinks they are blood brothers because of a blood transfusion. And that' guy is a clown/plot device type character. Not unlikeable either.
They part ways briefly in the first act only to be stuck together again but now with a case of doctors tool and books. Our Indian friend thought it was full of gold due to overhearing an off hand remark.
No Buddy, if that's even his name, is masquerading as a doctor and good news! He can read ! Meaning he can use the books which are more or less an index of problems and remedies.
It's a fun story with a full 5 minutes of "Buddy" stuffing his face in a sudden eating competition between him and the town Sheriff. More like eating to assert dominance really followed by a few crazy fit fights which is exactly what one would expect from either Bud Spencer or Terrance Hill in a movie. They like less gunplay in their movies. I think they said it was because kids watched their movies.
The town plot is also quite good. Not terribly deep and even predictable but it rides in the background while Buddy plays Doctor and we get to see the colorful town.
One side note as well, a lot of this movie made me thing of art by Moebius the framing and the color pallet and the dreamlike ending to the town plot. I found that incredibly engaging.
I should also say that this movie is clearly a product of it's time as far as casting. Amidou playing Girolamo.
Lathe Biosas wrote: I'm going to ye olde cinema this week, as my folks like to take me for my birthday. A tradition in our family, like watching Die Hard at Christmas.
Anything decent out?
I thought you were going to see that Jason Statham movie?
An Andy Sandburg (sp.... the guy from Brooklyn 99?) film that is a interesting update to Groundhog's Day. I.e. He is stuck in a time loop, but accidentally pulls a woman into the time loop with him after he has been there for...... a very long time.
I enjoyed it. I normally am not a fan of these Time Loop movies, but this one took it in a slightly different and interesting direction as we join one of the main characters after they have been stuck in it for a very long time.
Plus, a goat plays a big role in the film and I like to see goats on screen.
Mad Doc Grotsnik in Watched A Film Other People Have Probably Seen Shocker!
Terror Train
David Copperfield! Bunch of Nobodies! Jamie Lee Curtis!
Bunch of douchebags celebrate the end of school or something by hiring a train, aboard e terrible human beings, but thankfully someone is hard at work putting them out of our misery.
Bit of a Slasher Classic this one, and decently made.
Modern horror comedy about a Cursed Item. Sadly, not starring Johnny Vegas, a Nice Cup of Tea* nor ITV Digital.
This is quite dark, but treads the line between horror and laughs really nicely.
The setting overall is kinda of timeless, though ostensibly we start in 1999.
*This is the one and only time I’ll ever refer to PG Tips in that way. Because I normally describe it as the sweaty straining of a fisherman’s jersey. It’s that awful. Yorkshire Tea is the best, but Tetley is acceptable.
warhead01 wrote: Just enjoyed Buddy goes west (1981) on Youtube yesterday.
Bud Spencer being the stereotype Bud Spencer character is always a good time for me. .....
Bud Spencer is the GOAT. Yes, together with Terence Hill the magic is complete (and some Bud Spencer solo films are rather bad), but in my mind Bud Spencer is 60% of what makes these films great and Hill is 40%. That ratio may change though based on the day of the week, I have to add.
Either way - there is nothing like a Bud Spencer film. It's basically Laurel and Hardy. With punching. But the punching always happens upwards. Speaking of Spencer/Hill films specifically, they always want to get rich or are offered an opportunity to get rich. In the end they always are on the side of the bullied, the poor and the powerless. Because they're basically two of them.
Bud Spencer was the man.
@MDG: From the ads and so on I thought that The Monkey was more like a "young people's first horror film", but the other day I heard it's actually pretty violent and pretty good. Sounds interesting.
Well, I never was a huge fan of Scott Adkins. He's a very vanilla man in everything I saw him in. Earlier I was idly looking for an interview with Daniel Bernhardt, specifically him talking about Bloodsport II (and possibly the Mortal Kombat tv show. And possibly FUTURE WAR.), ran across Scott Adkins' youtube channel, The Art of Action, in which he does long interviews with action dudes. And it's really nice to listen to. So do, if you're so inclined: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_jEf4zv-RE Fun thing is that Adkins also looks exactly like Bernhardt, with a dash of Rob Brydon thrown in.
Oh there’s plenty splats to enjoy, but they are also kind of restrained.
In comparison to say, Saw? They’re pleasingly graphic, but nobody actually suffers as such. Parental Advisory of course, but if you’ve a young teenager looking to progress from “horrible but just off screen”, this might work for them.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Oh there’s plenty splats to enjoy, but they are also kind of restrained.
In comparison to say, Saw? They’re pleasingly graphic, but nobody actually suffers as such. Parental Advisory of course, but if you’ve a young teenager looking to progress from “horrible but just off screen”, this might work for them.
Cheers, thanks for the info! I was talking to a friend whose son is showing an interest in scary films. I guess The Monkey is out of the question for now.
Holy crap, I just learned that Richard Norton has passed away recently! Just watched Scott Adkins' interview with him earlier today. :O
Honestly? Let the Dad watch it first, and call it from there. The underlying “we know this is silly. We intended it to be” humour does balance nicely.
But then? I’ve been watching all sorts of horror since I was 10. I’m absolutely not desensitised to real world violence, but it’s been a while since I found a horror upsetting.
Night Train Murders was the one. Don’t watch that movie. It’s vile.
The Minecraft Movie. A random selection of set pieces and explosions that fills 2 hours of your time tolerably entertainingly.
Best enjoyed with kids who are into the game. Not for those subject to epilepsy or who have difficulty in changing perspective and attention on about a 6 second cycle.
There is no discernible plot or character development. At no time do you believe that any of the main characters are at any level of risk. They actually kill quite a lot of stuff for a PG film. But they are bad guys or villagers, so they kinda don’t count.
A criminal waste of the acting talent available in the cast. I really hope Emma Myers’ career survives contact with this thing In particular
They missed a massive opportunity to bring in Element Animations’ transcendentally wonderful villagers. Just get in the bag (but I don’t want to)
My young adult room mate said that the audience interaction and participation with what was on screen made their screening of the movie super fun and high-energy, but yeah.... the film itself was not great.
Easy E wrote: My young adult room mate said that the audience interaction and participation with what was on screen made their screening of the movie super fun and high-energy, but yeah.... the film itself was not great.
So just like The Rocky Horror Picture Show, except of course that the staff during a showing of RHPS were/are expecting a mess.
Once I discovered it was the same director as Napoleon Dynamite, Nacho Libre, and Gentleman Broncos I wasn't sure how Minecraft fans were going to react but was certain it was going be considered a cult classic in five to ten years.
Rocky Horror has musical numbers of actual worth. I strongly doubt that Minecraft can achi3ve anything close to a cult following. It's a big budget cash in, simple as.
Easy E wrote: My young adult room mate said that the audience interaction and participation with what was on screen made their screening of the movie super fun and high-energy, but yeah.... the film itself was not great.
If it's anything like what's going on over here, fxxxwits shouting at the screen because of some other fxxxwit on TikTok is not audience participation - it's just bloody rude
The movie Valerian and the actress Cara Delevinge are a perfect match. Both are really nice to look at.
And that's about it.
The movie was 137 minutes-but felt a lot longer... and not in an exciting, "I hope this never ends kind of way
... more of a, "wow, this movie just won't end," kind of way.
1. 2001: A Space Odyssey
2. Batman & Robin
3. Brother Bear
4. Catwoman
5. House of Flying Daggers
6. Mission Impossible 2
7. Mission Impossible 3
8. Twister
9. Valerian
I love the opening montage to Valerian, pity the rest of the film ranges from meh to terrible.
I'd go for either of the Mission Impossible films, as long as you're not after something deep and meaningful (And don't mind Tom Cruise) they're all pretty good.
This movie was a lot of cheesy fun. It has both Studio Gibli and Scooby-Doo DNA, such fun.
Terence Hill, Bud Spencer play body doubles for two very rich cousins for 7 days. People are trying to kill the cousins. And they are told to just be themselves. What could possibly go wrong. It is also funny that both of the cousins have opposite personalities to their doubles. Bud's cousin character is seeing a therapist and has never been in a fight, basically a huge weak-body very pampered and soft. Hill's "cousin" is a platonic friend to a knock out blond character who clearly has feelings for him. It's more funny because it's opposite of the character traits to their usual characters and these as well. A really clever layer I quite enjoyed. Mayhem insures which culminates in yet another huge fist fight and a several million dollar payday for the boys. I think this will easily be one of my favorites.
I also watch "All the way boys" which wasn't bad but wasn't as good. Sadly they leave that movie as poor as they started. Not a bad movie but the cut was a little off but the opening sequence was good for a laugh.
Bud Spencer was younger and not as "heavy" as he is when he's older. He definitely looks more like a jock in this one. My introduction to these guys was They call me Trinity. I was hooked. It's also very much a Studio Gibli type movie. My reference would more or less be Porco Rosso.
I actually like Sharon Stone's performance in Catwoman.
It was a hoot when I saw it at the cinema, but you have to go into it with the right mindset to get the most out of it, I think you have what it takes Lathe Blosas!
Catwoman is fun if you enjoy camp. If you enjoy Adam West’s Batman, you’d probably enjoy Catwoman. Unfortunately for the movie, Batman fans of the time were the most humorless of comic book fans.
And that movie had a Jesse Ventura cameo in it (He was an Arkham Guard).
On a creepy side note, was I the only person who thought Alfred was a little off, for not only having his niece's measurements, but making her a skintight rubber batsuit... just in case.
Lathe Biosas wrote: On a creepy side note, was I the only person who thought Alfred was a little off, for not only having his niece's measurements, but making her a skintight rubber batsuit... just in case.
For the former, you have to remember that a quartermaster to a superhero (or super spy if you extend it to Bond) needs to know all about the gadgets before the man himself even knows he needs them. You might think of it as super-butler powers.
For the latter, eh. Kids these days wear the most ridiculous things. You got to go with the times if you want them to wear your custom outfits.
SamusDrake wrote: Alicia Silverstone and Uma Thurman were both smoking hot in Batman & Robin.
Batman went down to dullsville after that.
Hey, now. There were plenty of attractive women in....
Uh...Batman Begins? Er... The Dark Knight... Umm... The Dark Knight Rises... ehh...Batman v. Superman: Dawn of MARTHA!!! had Gal Godot in it... See! They weren't all bad.
I really don’t see what all the fuss is about. She’s certainly far from ugly. But there’s just nowt special about her. And she’s a terrible, awful, rubbish actress.
Altogether now, once more with absolutely no feeling….
Kal-El.
No.
No no no. Do it properly. Absolutely no emotion whatsoever or you’ll be disqualified.
I think her crowning achievement is in the dire Wonder Woman 1984, just after she’s been beaten up, and she’s lying knacked up against a wall in like, a bank or something. Because her supine, can’t be bothered to get up pose exactly matches the complete lack of effort she’s put into her portrayal.
I really don’t see what all the fuss is about. She’s certainly far from ugly. But there’s just nowt special about her. And she’s a terrible, awful, rubbish actress.
Altogether now, once more with absolutely no feeling….
Kal-El.
No.
No no no. Do it properly. Absolutely no emotion whatsoever or you’ll be disqualified.
I think her crowning achievement is in the dire Wonder Woman 1984, just after she’s been beaten up, and she’s lying knacked up against a wall in like, a bank or something. Because her supine, can’t be bothered to get up pose exactly matches the complete lack of effort she’s put into her portrayal.
Gal Gadot.
I just don’t see what all the fuss is about.
Just because she graduated from the Kristen Stewart School of Apathetic Acting...
You have to admit she was amazing in the Fast and Furious franchise as... uh... what was her character's name again?
On a positive note how can you not have loved her Highlander-level sword hiding skills in Wonder Woman.
Can't every woman hide a large steel sword down the back of their dress?
I must know, who is your "I'll watch this movie only because she's in it" actress?
I'll give you mine: Rebecca Ferguson. I would go watch a movie of her sitting alone on the beach and dry reading all of Vin Diesel's lines from the film 2 Fast 2 Furious, and enjoy the experience.
Is there anyone who you will rush out and see, just because it's one of their movies, not because the plot sounds interesting...
My Mom loves Jason Statham. We will see all of his movies. What's the plot to his newest? Who knows and who cares! I bet he's gonna kill the feth outta a bunch of people.
And yes, The Beekeeper and The Working Man were both really good.
I started in on the Resident Evil series, as I think I've only seen the first one before.
Halfway through #1 so far, and it's so much worse than I remembered.
The interesting thing is that the design work for it is fantastic. The sets look excellent. But it's like someone dropped a B-grade schlock horror movie into a sound stage set up for a much more expensive movie...
Shout out for the zombie dogs. Definitely the best boys in the movie.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I’m more worried about why someone who’s bullet proof bothered to deflect a load of bullets with her also bullet proof bracers.
The answer is that she has the bracers because she's not bullet proof. She's supposed to be super-strong, but not invulnerable.
The comics have been wildly inconsistent about that over the years, though.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lathe Biosas wrote: My Mom loves Jason Statham. We will see all of his movies. What's the plot to his newest? Who knows and who cares! I bet he's gonna kill the feth outta a bunch of people. .
I worked through the Transporter series a few weeks back. It's impressive how much sillier they get as they go along.
Female actors are harder. They just don't give them the chance to carry a movie the same way and/or when they do they tend to swing wider across genres. So like any action or comedy Charleze Theron/Natalie Portman/Kate Winslett. I love Anne Hathaway and Jamie Lee Curtis but only in certain roles. I'd watch Alexandra Daddario breathe for 2 hours. But there isn't a single one I'd just put anything they're in on (but they all definitely give a movie on the fence a bump).
warhead01 wrote: Double Trouble 1984 | Terence Hill, Bud Spencer
This movie was a lot of cheesy fun. It has both Studio Gibli and Scooby-Doo DNA, such fun.
Terence Hill, Bud Spencer play body doubles for two very rich cousins for 7 days. People are trying to kill the cousins. And they are told to just be themselves.
What could possibly go wrong.
It is also funny that both of the cousins have opposite personalities to their doubles. Bud's cousin character is seeing a therapist and has never been in a fight, basically a huge weak-body very pampered and soft. Hill's "cousin" is a platonic friend to a knock out blond character who clearly has feelings for him. It's more funny because it's opposite of the character traits to their usual characters and these as well. A really clever layer I quite enjoyed.
Mayhem insures which culminates in yet another huge fist fight and a several million dollar payday for the boys.
I think this will easily be one of my favorites.
I also watch "All the way boys" which wasn't bad but wasn't as good. Sadly they leave that movie as poor as they started.
Not a bad movie but the cut was a little off but the opening sequence was good for a laugh.
Bud Spencer was younger and not as "heavy" as he is when he's older. He definitely looks more like a jock in this one. My introduction to these guys was They call me Trinity. I was hooked.
It's also very much a Studio Gibli type movie. My reference would more or less be Porco Rosso.
Oh, Double Trouble is tauted by many as one of their best. Interesting, I never realized it was made that late. Anyway, very fun film. What's basically the first thing they do once they took on the rich lifestyle? Go to the cheeriest, ruddiest strip club and have a BIG plate of spaghetti.
"All the way boys" has a pretty sweet ending. The title song was and is quite a radio hit around here and very much helped that band (who made songs for many of their films and others) gain some sort of cult status. Wasn't that one also one of the few films in which they fight each other at one point? That to me always felt very special and a bit weird. All wholesome films, them.
insaniak wrote: I started in on the Resident Evil series, as I think I've only seen the first one before.
Halfway through #1 so far, and it's so much worse than I remembered.
The interesting thing is that the design work for it is fantastic. The sets look excellent. But it's like someone dropped a B-grade schlock horror movie into a sound stage set up for a much more expensive movie...
Shout out for the zombie dogs. Definitely the best boys in the movie.
I watched those movies again a few months ago. I like the first one except for the stupid jump scares. It's a perfectly good B-movie in my opinion.
I unabashedly love the Resident Evil series. They daft, silly, and utterly nonsense. But not without the charm of daft, silly, utter nonsense that knows exactly what it is.
And they’re still miles ahead of Welcome to Raccoon City. Which is Bloody Awful.
“Oh, Hi Albert Wesker!”
“Hi yourself, Claire Redfield! Hey, any of you swinging cats seen Jill Valentine?”
“Shucks Albert Wesker, I think I saw Jill Valentine behind the bike sheds with Claire Refield’s brother, Chris Redfield”
“Gosh Leon Kennedy! Are Claire Redfield’s brother Chris Redfield and Jill Valentine going steady”
“Hot diggety, they sure are, Albert Wesker! Hey, I wonder if Ada Wong might be at The Hop tonight!”
“Gee Wilickers Leon Kennedy, I sure hope so. She’s lush!”
Is there anyone who you will rush out and see, just because it's one of their movies, not because the plot sounds interesting...
My Mom loves Jason Statham. We will see all of his movies. What's the plot to his newest? Who knows and who cares! I bet he's gonna kill the feth outta a bunch of people.
But Strathram, Nic Cage, et al are essentially genres at this point. You know what you will be getting, and typically not getting enough of it determines whether the film is good or bad.
warhead01 wrote: Double Trouble 1984 | Terence Hill, Bud Spencer
This movie was a lot of cheesy fun. It has both Studio Gibli and Scooby-Doo DNA, such fun.
Terence Hill, Bud Spencer play body doubles for two very rich cousins for 7 days. People are trying to kill the cousins. And they are told to just be themselves.
What could possibly go wrong.
It is also funny that both of the cousins have opposite personalities to their doubles. Bud's cousin character is seeing a therapist and has never been in a fight, basically a huge weak-body very pampered and soft. Hill's "cousin" is a platonic friend to a knock out blond character who clearly has feelings for him. It's more funny because it's opposite of the character traits to their usual characters and these as well. A really clever layer I quite enjoyed.
Mayhem insures which culminates in yet another huge fist fight and a several million dollar payday for the boys.
I think this will easily be one of my favorites.
I also watch "All the way boys" which wasn't bad but wasn't as good. Sadly they leave that movie as poor as they started.
Not a bad movie but the cut was a little off but the opening sequence was good for a laugh.
Bud Spencer was younger and not as "heavy" as he is when he's older. He definitely looks more like a jock in this one. My introduction to these guys was They call me Trinity. I was hooked.
It's also very much a Studio Gibli type movie. My reference would more or less be Porco Rosso.
Oh, Double Trouble is tauted by many as one of their best. Interesting, I never realized it was made that late. Anyway, very fun film. What's basically the first thing they do once they took on the rich lifestyle? Go to the cheeriest, ruddiest strip club and have a BIG plate of spaghetti.
"All the way boys" has a pretty sweet ending. The title song was and is quite a radio hit around here and very much helped that band (who made songs for many of their films and others) gain some sort of cult status. Wasn't that one also one of the few films in which they fight each other at one point? That to me always felt very special and a bit weird. All wholesome films, them.
Yep. They fight each other for what looks like it could be a full day. It's funny because Bud's flying a plane at night during a storm, drinking and shouting he's immortal ! while trying to get a kid to a doctor. It feels like a funny 4th wall brake in a way. I'm not sure hole long of a run they'd had I'm movies at that point so maybe it was just a bit.
Those two more or less play are like Demigods in almost* every movie now that I've thought about it.
My brother thinks there's a case to be made that Hill is playing an angel in My name is nobody but if Nobody is also Joe Thanks then I think he's more of an embodiment of a Coyote spirit. ( I really like where this is going. ) *They aren't really playing action heroes as an archetype once we get out of the God forgives I don't, Boot hill and Ace High trilogy.
Ace High was super solid with Eli Wallach playing Mr. Cacopoulos. I feel like he really made that movie less dark than the other two were.
I'll be looking for more of their movies that I haven't seen and see how they shake out.
Oh yes, Hill being an angel is heavily implied in that film, with his shadow in the end and all. Also a great film.
I recently watched Crime Busters (1977) again. Have you seen that one yet? Really good fun (might have the strongest opening, along with the two meeting), and it also stars David Huddleston (of many, many things) and Laura Gemser (of Black Emanuelle fame).
Spoiler:
The very funny scene in which they storm into the building to rob a money transport and realize it's a police station always gets me. Hill switching from robbery mode to 'yes, we wanted to ask how to sign up with your club' is the smoothest and quickest move every caught on film.
.
As for films I'd watch because of a starring actor/actress despire the inherent badness ....not sure I'd do that. I mean there are certain genre actors who I know improve films. I'll watch a Steven Seagal film (pre-2003 or so), a van Damme film, a Cynthia Rothrock film, a Sho Kosugi film, a Jackie Chan film (unless it's a big Chinese fantasy film from 2010 on, because that's painful), etc. but also with the RE-films discussion above I realized that I'll watch a Milla Jovovich film (not the three Musketeers film though). I'll watch a film starring Kirsten Dunst, I'll watch a Cannon action film in general, etc. but usually these are factors which could lead to me watching a film.
In the sense of the above action/martial arts films, I can absolutely see what Lathe Biosas wrote about Jason Statham. That guy is a phenomenon. Possibly the last pure action guys, and most so dedicated to that role than even most guys in the 80s/early 90s. You know what you get with Statham, he does a great job at it and refuses to age. That guy is an institution.
For female thespians I will watch just about anything with:
(SP on all)
1. Julianne Moore
2. Tilda Swinton
3. Helen MIrrem
4. And for my meme pick.... Aubrey Plaza
For actors (who may or may not have been mentioned), I will watch just about anything with:
1. Clive Owen (Even if he has burned me several times)
2. Kyle Lachlan (Also burned me many times)
3. Michael Jai White (Why do I do this to myself?)
Which was okay, and I thought pretty cool to look at. Just doesn't have lots of Oomph I'm afraid. As far as general conceptional Oomph goes, I liked Passengers alright. Oh, watch Moon, if you haven't already.
