Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I have said this other places, but it is amazing to me how taking From Duck til Dawn and moving the setting and tweaking the main characters can make this movie's subtext and themes so different.

I saw it several weeks ago, and I keep coming up with new takes on what it is saying to the audience. One of the first movies to make me feel something in a long time.

Yup. And whilst clearly Dusk til Dawn had an influence, this isn’t simply a remake or reimagining. It brings plenty of fresh to the table.

I wouldn’t say no to a follow up myself.

 Easy E wrote:
From Duck til Dawn

Now that's the remake I've been waiting for.

It would allow an epic crossover of duck tales, Howard the duck and Count Duckula!

You see Dawn is the name of the Duck's illegitimate daughter.....

10 to Midnight

Canon Film Studios! Charles Bronson! Wilford Brimley!

Someone going around doing murders to young women, and he’s basically an Incel. Charles Bronson is a the copper on his tail.

It’s….fine, I guess? Entirely watchable, but nothing new. Kinda feels like an extended SVU Episode.

Mr. K

A travelling magician checks into a large, rundown hotel that he can never leave.

I was looking forward to this one after seeing the trailer a little while ago, as it looked pretty weird. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a bit too weird, after about 30 minutes of random nonsense I gave up and watched some old Dr. Who instead (Tomb of the Cybermen).

 aku-chan wrote:
Mr. K

A travelling magician checks into a large, rundown hotel that he can never leave.

I was looking forward to this one after seeing the trailer a little while ago, as it looked pretty weird. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a bit too weird, after about 30 minutes of random nonsense I gave up and watched some old Dr. Who instead (Tomb of the Cybermen).

It's a pretty slow and focused movie. You want to be in the mood for watching the glacial change of mental states in the protagonist and the people he deals with. I figure the movie won't work for you otherwise.

Personally I didn't even find it particularly weird. That probably says more about me than the movie, though I'd argue if you accept from the beginning that you are watching a mental journey, the physical expression of it makes a good bit of sense and is even pretty predictable.

Not a movie I'd recommend or that I imagine I'll watch again in the foreseeable future, but not terrible for what it is.

Predator, Killer of Killers

Animated anthology movie from the excellent chap that brought us Prey.

The animation is really solid, and the stories good fun. It also canonises the species as Yautja.

If you enjoyed the Dark Horse comics, and Prey? This is absolutely for you.

THE RUNNING MAN, 1987.

I haven't seen The Running Man since I was about 14 years old when It was the big saturday night ITV movie, with the advert being paired up with Gladiators which would be showing earlier in the afternoon. My friend came over to watch it with us and it was a laugh, considering that Doom and Mortal Kombat was all the rage at the time and it was pretty much in that same dumb-but-fun tradition.

But for those who've not heard of it before, Ben Richards is framed for gunning down civilians in a protest and ends up on a cruel TV show called "The Running Man" , which involves running for one's dear life from psychopathic killers called "Stalkers" who use a charming selection of tools and methods to butcher the contestants.

If you like 80s sci-fi action movies like Predator and Robocop, then its not quite up to the standard of those classics but the action, music and supporting cast are rather impressive for a glorfied vehicle for Arnold. It's still worth adding to the slate!

 Geifer wrote:

 aku-chan wrote:
Mr. K

A travelling magician checks into a large, rundown hotel that he can never leave.

I was looking forward to this one after seeing the trailer a little while ago, as it looked pretty weird. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a bit too weird, after about 30 minutes of random nonsense I gave up and watched some old Dr. Who instead (Tomb of the Cybermen).

It's a pretty slow and focused movie. You want to be in the mood for watching the glacial change of mental states in the protagonist and the people he deals with. I figure the movie won't work for you otherwise.

Personally I didn't even find it particularly weird. That probably says more about me than the movie, though I'd argue if you accept from the beginning that you are watching a mental journey, the physical expression of it makes a good bit of sense and is even pretty predictable.

Not a movie I'd recommend or that I imagine I'll watch again in the foreseeable future, but not terrible for what it is.

Yeah, it's not a bad film, I just got totally the wrong impression from the trailer, I was expecting a quirky fantasy movie.
Had I known it was a somewhat arty exploration of the human mind, I wouldn't have even tried it, that's not my sort of thing at all.

Dr. Who and the Dareks

This is a Peter Cushing vehicle that I had never seen before. They have the Doctor, Barbara, Ian, and Susan. These are all characters from season 1 and the first Doctor Who when it was a bit more grounded in history before spinning out into sci-fi too.

This is like watching a Dr. Who episode made by people who had only had Dr. Who described to them and never watched any of the show. None of the characters are anything like the O.G.s, the theme music is super-swingin' 60's Exotica, Peter Cushing is nigh-on unrecognizable, and the Daleks are.... very colorful with the same favorite voices.

Not really worth it.

Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind

Had way less domjot than I expected.


A beautiful looking Ghibli film set in a post apocalyptic world filled with strange creatures and colorful plant life. And Metal Slug vehicles of all stripes.

Nausicaa is an aerobatic hero whose strength is her compassion and love of peace.

Watch it.


Starship Troopers

Kills bugs good.


Even if satire is dead, the film has enough action and humor to entertain anyone.

Rico is a ground pounding protagonist whose strength is his lack of compassion and contempt for peace.

Watch it.

M:I 4 down. For the second time in a row, Ethan's love interest didn't show up for the next movie, but at least this time they worked it into the story.

This movie is ok, but strangely forgettable and never actually feels as high stakes as it is claiming to be, because we know by now that Ethan will just pull a win out of the bag regardless of what goes wrong...

Do 3 and 4 flirt with Egosploitation (Ethan is the best at absolutely everything, so why is anyone else bothering to show up?) as much as MI:2 did?

Trying to decide if I want to watch them.

No, #2 was Super Saiyan Ethan. 4 very much leans into the team all having their roles.

Just skip to Rogue Nation and Fallout. Fallout was my favorite, but there's a lot from Rogue Nation referenced.

Finished Lola Rennt (or 'Run, Lola Run!' in english). Really of it's time, but a pretty damn good movie. Basically, the main character, Lola gets a call from her boyfriend Manni. He's affiliated with some underground crime ring or something, and leaves 100,000 Marks on a train by accident. Lola has 20 minutes to somehow get enough money to him before he gets his ass capped by the mafia. It's a simple setup, but it REALLY does a lot with it. (I'll refrain from spoiling what happens) As a film it's dated, but that's by no means a bad thing. It's the kind of film you expect to enjoy ironically, before the sketchy animated segments and banging electro-music turns it into genuine enjoyment. It's so silly, but the acting is played so straight, and the overall convergence of all the themes, music, cinematography, and everything else really make it a unique, awesome film. A solid 8/10, completely recommend!

here's a link
It's only has german subtitles, but it's not that hard to understand if you know a bit of deutsch

 bullisariuscowl wrote:
Finished Lola Rennt (or 'Run, Lola Run!' in english). Really of it's time, but a pretty damn good movie. Basically, the main character, Lola gets a call from her boyfriend Manni. He's affiliated with some underground crime ring or something, and leaves 100,000 Marks on a train by accident. Lola has 20 minutes to somehow get enough money to him before he gets his ass capped by the mafia. It's a simple setup, but it REALLY does a lot with it. (I'll refrain from spoiling what happens) As a film it's dated, but that's by no means a bad thing. It's the kind of film you expect to enjoy ironically, before the sketchy animated segments and banging electro-music turns it into genuine enjoyment. It's so silly, but the acting is played so straight, and the overall convergence of all the themes, music, cinematography, and everything else really make it a unique, awesome film. A solid 8/10, completely recommend!

here's a link
It's only has german subtitles, but it's not that hard to understand if you know a bit of deutsch

This is one of my favorite films from one of my favorite film eras where a small team could make a really cool idea on a fairly limited budget. If you enjoyed this I highly recommend "Intacto".

 LunarSol wrote:

 bullisariuscowl wrote:
Finished Lola Rennt (or 'Run, Lola Run!' in english). Really of it's time, but a pretty damn good movie. Basically, the main character, Lola gets a call from her boyfriend Manni. He's affiliated with some underground crime ring or something, and leaves 100,000 Marks on a train by accident. Lola has 20 minutes to somehow get enough money to him before he gets his ass capped by the mafia. It's a simple setup, but it REALLY does a lot with it. (I'll refrain from spoiling what happens) As a film it's dated, but that's by no means a bad thing. It's the kind of film you expect to enjoy ironically, before the sketchy animated segments and banging electro-music turns it into genuine enjoyment. It's so silly, but the acting is played so straight, and the overall convergence of all the themes, music, cinematography, and everything else really make it a unique, awesome film. A solid 8/10, completely recommend!

here's a link
It's only has german subtitles, but it's not that hard to understand if you know a bit of deutsch

This is one of my favorite films from one of my favorite film eras where a small team could make a really cool idea on a fairly limited budget. If you enjoyed this I highly recommend "Intacto".

Wasn't even alive back then, but I still vastly prefer films like Lola Rennt to stuff that comes out today. Late 90's films like The Matrix, Johnny Mnemonic, etc. Were they that good? Certainly debatable, but they're so sincere and know what they want to be it's hard to not like them. I find them far more entertaining than a lot of blockbusters today, which seem to be allergic to sincerity. Seriously, take a shot everytime someone says 'erm, he's right behind me, isn't he?' or something of that caliber that completely ruins any buildup or tension (the fallout series is a prime example). You'd be six feet under in no time.

The late 90’s early 00’s movies, especially Sci-Fi, were exploring nascent and emerging technology though. Stuff so new, previous science-fiction hadn’t really predicted it.

Add in CGI making certain films possible where practical effects would’ve been at least ruinously expensive? And we again got Genuine Novelty.

Sure, bullet time and unnumbered once ground breaking effects are now old hat, and even wildly overused. But for those of us of sufficient vintage to have Seen It First? It’ll always have that special meaning.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
90’s in particular also benefitted from widespread and genuinely affordable home media. And so those who saw a film they enjoyed in the cinema could easily buy a copy a few months down the line to be watched and watched again.

Older stuff, particularly for my niche Horror, from the 60’s and 70’s less so. Some of it hasn’t seen a home media release until relatively recently. Some of it remains largely lost media.

Which means, again particularly for horror, the literal watershed movies, which didn’t necessarily do a thing first, but were the first to get past censors and find a wide market? Are seen After The Shock, and so lose a lot of cultural context.

 Quixote wrote:
Just skip to Rogue Nation and Fallout. Fallout was my favorite, but there's a lot from Rogue Nation referenced.

I have seen 1, 2, 3 (can't remember a bit of it though) and Fallout. Fallout is really good.

Never seen Lola Rennt, funnily enough. It was everywhere back then. Should catch up on that.

I saw Lola Rennt the first or second time it aired on TV. I can't say I remember anything about it other that I didn't like it.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
The late 90’s early 00’s movies, especially Sci-Fi, were exploring nascent and emerging technology though. Stuff so new, previous science-fiction hadn’t really predicted it.

Add in CGI making certain films possible where practical effects would’ve been at least ruinously expensive? And we again got Genuine Novelty.

Sure, bullet time and unnumbered once ground breaking effects are now old hat, and even wildly overused. But for those of us of sufficient vintage to have Seen It First? It’ll always have that special meaning.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
90’s in particular also benefitted from widespread and genuinely affordable home media. And so those who saw a film they enjoyed in the cinema could easily buy a copy a few months down the line to be watched and watched again.

Older stuff, particularly for my niche Horror, from the 60’s and 70’s less so. Some of it hasn’t seen a home media release until relatively recently. Some of it remains largely lost media.

Which means, again particularly for horror, the literal watershed movies, which didn’t necessarily do a thing first, but were the first to get past censors and find a wide market? Are seen After The Shock, and so lose a lot of cultural context.

I see what you mean, but personally I think a lot of horror movies have aged pretty well. Romero's Dead trilogy is a great example. Are the special effects somewhat cheesy nowadays? Yes (in the first two films, Day of the Dead doesn't look real but it is still pretty gruesome). Are extras in grey bodypaint pretending to be fentanyl addicts, occasionally chowing down on a person still scary? Not really, but the themes and setpieces, as well as the plots manage to still be pretty grisly and scary, even in the era of VFX and green-screen. Sure, the blood does look fake, but when someone is torn apart it's still shocking. The zombies by themselves are not too scary, but it's the idea of being in that situation and what they represent that makes it damn-near terrifying. I think horror films with good writing and situations can age well

Definitely.

But stuff which, at the time, really pushed what you could get in cinemas, can lose its cultural context all too easily.

In the UK, we had the Video Nasties List. I’ve seen many of those, and by today’s standards they’re really pretty tame. And so the key is try to watch them in context. So, buying other preceding horrors, and seeing what they didn’t even try.

This even goes for Hammer, once notorious for Blood ‘n’ Boobies, despite really not showing a huge amount of both. But they did show more than before.

The Exorcist has probably suffered the most. I’ve seen it, and it’s certainly got atmosphere. But it’s not actually scary to me. At all.

And I do mean scary, not uncomfortable. Hostel I would say is more uncomfortable. But not actually scary. For gruesome, I’d NOT recommend The Night Train Murders. I’ve seen it, and it’s a well made film, to the point of being genuinely difficult to watch.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Definitely.

But stuff which, at the time, really pushed what you could get in cinemas, can lose its cultural context all too easily.

In the UK, we had the Video Nasties List. I’ve seen many of those, and by today’s standards they’re really pretty tame. And so the key is try to watch them in context. So, buying other preceding horrors, and seeing what they didn’t even try.

This even goes for Hammer, once notorious for Blood ‘n’ Boobies, despite really not showing a huge amount of both. But they did show more than before.

The Exorcist has probably suffered the most. I’ve seen it, and it’s certainly got atmosphere. But it’s not actually scary to me. At all.

And I do mean scary, not uncomfortable. Hostel I would say is more uncomfortable. But not actually scary. For gruesome, I’d NOT recommend The Night Train Murders. I’ve seen it, and it’s a well made film, to the point of being genuinely difficult to watch.

The Exorcist is certainly a little scary, but I do think a lot of the horror came from seeing something so new and disturbing at the time, now it's not that scary, but it can be really shocking. The cross scene is a prime example.

I maintain the real scares in The Exorcist are not from Reagan or the demon, but the sheer helplessness that Reagan's mother feels and evokes.

There is something wrong with her little girl and nobody can tell her what it is, let alone help her. Going to Father Karras wasn't an act of religious belief, but of pure desperation for anything.

Sinners

As discussed by others, a good flick. Probably not my favorite Coogler flick, but its probably the best film of the year.

I mainly had some quibbles on the vampire rules/mechanics:

Tales from the Hood 2

I love horror. I love horror portmanteaus. And this is a decent horror portmanteau. Little bit scary, little bit silly, little bit satirical.