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.

The Seventh Voyage of Sinbad

Another Harryhausen classic. It’s a bright, colorful movie with a great soundtrack and some of the best monster scenes ever done. The actors are pretty great, too, in a manner very of their time. (If you don’t believe me, check out the Sinbad from And The Eye of the Tiger.)

Watch it for the cyclops on dragon action.

loved those movies when I was a kid and I'd catch them on cable

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
The A-Team

Hmm. How to critique this movie.

Our main cast are solid, as one might expect. And at least a first are good replacements for the originals.

But it’s just not The A-Team. The overall DNA is there, but they’re not the heroic four man ass kicking cavalry coming to assist the underdog. They’re…a black ops military team on a top secret mission type stuffs.

Now, take away the monicker and rename it, and you end up with a largely serviceable action movie which with just a bit more editing and tactical reshoots could’ve been a more solid offering.

If we get another attempt? Go the Ghostbusters Route. With the team exonerated, they remain a mercenary outfit, but with new recruits. Think an underground vigilante organisation, founded wrangled and trained by the original heroes. That gives us a solid reason to revisit, and could even spin-off to a new TV series. Like Expendables 3, but ideally Not Gak.

Heck, even draw from Supernatural. Face is the Bobby equivalent, their “man in the chair” BA as the specialist trainer. Murdoch as well I’ll think of something, because that’s a failure of my imagination right here.

Well, at least now I know who in the heck watches Supernatural. Just kiddin; by now I heard that it's got a pretty large and devout fan community. But up to pretty recently I was wondering who watched it.

Anyway, I agree with your assessment of the film. I was highly sceptical, but when I saw the film (well, the first hours or so), I found the casting to be pretty ingenious. The film itself is....yeah, and action film. Not bad, not really good.

 greenskin lynn wrote:
loved those movies when I was a kid and I'd catch them on cable

Me too. Now I get to share them with my son. We’ve still got the next two and Jason and the Argonauts to look forward to. And I have some of Harryhausen’s other films somewhere in storage if he’s still interested.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The only part of the A-Team I remember, besides the tank shooting down, is the Swahili joke.

Expend4bles…the fourth best film of the franchise by a very, very long way…🙁

Mrs Souleater and I love these movies, but this was very disappointing. Some poor SFX. Plot was very formulaic…okay…we weren’t expecting anything amazing in that regard. There’s nothing we didn’t see coming a mile off, coupled with a complete lack of anything remotely fresh.

It’s very much Statham’s movie. He’s good but his character gets such a big share of the action that the rest of the team feels under used.

Megan Fox just didn’t strike me as good casting for a veteran soldier. She doesn’t look the part, and her character just didn’t feel interesting.

On the other hand, on lean ring that 50 Cent was in this I was non-plussed as I didn’t even know he’d gone into acting. But he did a solid job- I would like to have seen more of his character.

Lastly, even though I went in with my brain set to Willing Disbelief mode, there are events that just…oh god.

 Souleater wrote:
On the other hand, on lean ring that 50 Cent was in this I was non-plussed as I didn’t even know he’d gone into acting.

If you want some more Fitty, he’s got a minor supporting role in Den of Thieves(2018) which is a decent film, but its really just tries to be Heat with less memorable dialogue. Decent gunfights throughout.

I wouldn’t say 50 Cent has gone into acting, so much as gone into appearing in movies.

No One Will Save You 2023

A fun PG-13 alien invasion/thriller. An isolated woman is beset by alien creatures in a town that seems that it would rather she didn't exist. A brisk ninety minutes with almost no dialogue and a great performance by the lead. I don't want to give away to much, not that it is honestly a big spoiler kind of film, but still best to go in fresh. If you like alien abduction type films, or want X-Files from a victims POV, then this is worth a look.

Sigur wrote: Anyway, I agree with your assessment of the film. I was highly sceptical, but when I saw the film (well, the first hours or so), I found the casting to be pretty ingenious. The film itself is....yeah, and action film. Not bad, not really good.

It is odd in that regard. The first hour? It is A-Team. Daring rescue, daring missions, build-a-fix and all.

Then? It seems to forget it’s source, and just becomes a not entirely bland action flick. The cast is game for a laugh, they’re just not given a whole lot to work with.

There is plenty mileage left in the tank of the concept, and I do hope we get another, more reverent attempt in the future.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 greenskin lynn wrote:
loved those movies when I was a kid and I'd catch them on cable

Me too. Now I get to share them with my son. We’ve still got the next two and Jason and the Argonauts to look forward to. And I have some of Harryhausen’s other films somewhere in storage if he’s still interested.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The only part of the A-Team I remember, besides the tank shooting down, is the Swahili joke.

Just bought three Sinbad films. Gonna have me a Sunday Matinee!

Blue Beetle

Or: the answer to what movie you get when you take a Spiderman movie, switch out the power set for something resembling Iron Man and give it a tone similar to Ant Man.

If more DC movies were like this I doubt that they'd have reached such a low ebb. Blue Beetle is a likeable film. It's mostly lightweight fun, but manages to incorporate enough likeability into its characters that you care when things get more serious. Susan Sarandon doesn't chew the scenery as the main villain, but definitely gives it a regular lick. The score is an intriguing choice for a movie of this sort, evoking the likes of Tron: Legacy or even Blade Runner, juxtaposed with a soundtrack that leans very heavily into 90s stadium rock, but somehow works.

It's not the prettiest movie you'll see, but it has it's moments. Most of the VFX are decent (and the Beetle flyer frequently surprised me at how such a ludicrous creation looked plausible on screen) although some of the practical costumes do have a whiff of "Power Ranger" from time to time.

Perhaps my biggest criticism is that it's a totally cookie cutter super hero origin film that doesn't even remotely try to do anything original relative to all the films that have gone before it. When it's done as well though, it's easy enough to forgive, and I hope Gunn sees the value in what is on offer here and takes some of it with him as the DCU undergoes it's restructuring.

How would you say it compares to The Suicide Squad (the second, not objectively awful one)?

Because I greatly enjoyed that, and Peacekeeper.

If TSS is The Boys then BB is an Arrowverse show. It doesn't mean either is bad, but they're so different that any comparison is going to be entirely subjective.

That’s fair.

Whilst I’ve never really stuck with any Arrowverse show, I’ve enjoyed what I’ve seen well enough. To the point I wonder why I’ve not stuck with them.

I stuck with Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. and that was dog muck.

I meant more in tone than overall quality. The Arrowverse skews much younger than The Boys and, especially if you fall outside of the demographic, that's going to skew your opinion of it in turn.

BB is aimed at that same YA market. I still found enough in it to find it entertaining, but trying to make a comparison to something aimed at an older audience is going to vary on the person.

Sinbad the Sailor, 1963

So, the three Harryhausen ones are truly wonderful. Those would be The 7th Voyage of Sinbad, The Golden Voyage of Sinbad, and Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger.

Bold storytelling, ambitious and occasionally impressive stop-motion.

But this? This is awful. The acting is dreadful. The creatures rubber crocodiles and that’s about it. Contemporaneous Doctor Who episodes had better effects and acting.

Clearly no research was done. Given our main cast would all be Muslim? There’s an awful lot of drinking, and the magician turns himself into a pig. Oh and we have random gladiatorial executions, which aren’t something associated with the Ottoman Empire. Like. At all.

Oh my god that is the worst Hydra I’ve ever seen. Behold how it…..just sort of flops about the place. And occasional shuffles a bit, in a completely unconvincing manner.

Avoid this one chaps. It’s too late for me, but you may yet be spared.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
How would you say it compares to The Suicide Squad (the second, not objectively awful one)?

But that is the awful one...?

I'll never understand the dislike for Ayers' Squad.

Because I greatly enjoyed that, and Peacekeeper.

You'll probably enjoy it then.

That's not meant to be a shot or anything. They share more of the goofball vibe than not.

 Kanluwen wrote:

But that is the awful one...?

I'll never understand the dislike for Ayers' Squad.

The first film you mean? It had several flaws, but the biggest was they forget the squad should virtually all die. Think dirty dozen, not a couple of random people get offed. Indeed you suspect it's a bonus for the government if they do die.

First one is just god awful.

Terrible cast, barring Boss Lady and Harley Quinn. Don’t even get me started on wotsherface just sort of….wriggling about in the background.

Yeah I'm really hoping Kan is only defending the film to be a troll. It's got some pretty obvious, glaring flaws.

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
Yeah I'm really hoping Kan is only defending the film to be a troll. It's got some pretty obvious, glaring flaws.

Nope. I genuinely enjoyed it more than I did the Gunn movie.

Gunn's Squad felt like "Guardians of the Galaxy rated R"/"We need something to introduce Peacekeeper for the series I want to do".
Ayers' Squad felt more like what the comics at the time were doing with them, without needing to be a 1:1 translation, and felt a bit more connected to the DCU at large.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

The_Real_Chris wrote:

The first film you mean? It had several flaws, but the biggest was they forget the squad should virtually all die. Think dirty dozen, not a couple of random people get offed. Indeed you suspect it's a bonus for the government if they do die.

It's worth noting that most of the deaths among the Gunn version are the "first wave" that we get virtually no connection to. There were a lot of big name actors in the first wave, but that's not really the same thing as ganking members of the Squad that we do get to know.

The real value for the government in Task Force X is that they can use them for whatever they want. They're expendable assets, but assets nonetheless.

The_Real_Chris wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

But that is the awful one...?

I'll never understand the dislike for Ayers' Squad.

The first film you mean? It had several flaws, but the biggest was they forget the squad should virtually all die. Think dirty dozen, not a couple of random people get offed. Indeed you suspect it's a bonus for the government if they do die.

Virtually all of them dying isn't actually comic accurate though. In any version of the series. Sure, a couple of super minor/maybe even newly minted characters might be killed over any particular run of the series, but the core members survive.
So there's nothing terribly wrong with the Ayers film concerning thier survival.

Knowing what went on behind the scenes and the sheer amount of studio meddling and reshaping the film I don't think calling it Ayer's Suicide Squad is a fair description. Ayer has talked quite a bit about how this isn't remotely the film he made.

Just googled David Ayer and whilst I recognise the names of his films, I’ve either not seen them, or seen them aaaaages ago. So I can’t and won’t comment on his merits as a Director.

But. I think it is clear Suicide Squad was studio meddling. A flailing attempt to Guardians of the Galaxy. The worst thing is the multiple introductions we get.

Well. After Leto’s woeful Joker.

Marcel the shell with shoes on

Ok, so I went into this completely blind (I had never heard of the movie and didn't realise until after that it was a "thing" on YouTube). My housemate wanted to pick a movie for a change but all she could remember was the film about the "eyeball" so after much random searching we eventually found that it wasn't about an eyeball, or at least not strictly speaking, lol.

So this is an odd one, I would probably not have picked this myself but when I saw it was A24 I thought I was in safe(ish) hands.

This is part animated, part live action and is a "documentary" about a 1 inch tall mollusc called Marcel, who lives in an airbnb......

Marcel and his large family had been living in the airbnb for a while but when the couple staying there had a huge argument the rest of family get accidentally moved from the apartment leaving Marcel and his Grandma, Nana Connie (voiced by Isabella Rossellini) behind. The next guest just so happens to be a documentary film maker who helps Marcel track down his long lost family.

So yes, this does sound absolutely bonkers but weirdly it wasn't. This is such a sweet, endearing film, suitable (pretty much) for all ages but does cover things like loss, death, grief, abandonment in a mature but accessible way.

I have to say I really, really enjoyed this one, despite the premise which had I known beforehand might have put me off. But certainly a good watch if you are into that sort of thing.

And yes, Marcel really does have shoes on......

Die Hard and Die Hard 2

Not so much a review, as a commentary on viewing habits.

These two are of course very well regarded action flicks. Ask pretty much anyone, and they’ll be able to tell you that, even if the movies aren’t their personal cup of tea.

Sitting down to watch them with a critical eye and understanding why they’re good is well worth it.

First, you can’t appreciate them as well in isolation, the way you can with a viewing history of their contemporary genre mates.

Yes they do veer into the unlikely, sometimes into the daft. But unlike the Arnie type films? They stop comfortably short of outright ridiculous. Like a man with seemingly infinite ammo standing in the open whilst the baddies form an orderly bullet catching queue.

Our main character is similarly fairly normal as action heroes go. Tough as old boots and ridiculously persistent, yes. But again unlike the Arnie Archetype, he’s not a warrior god, bullet proof and infallible.

So as well as being really well crafted movies, they were a breath of fresh air in a tired and hackneyed genre. You can absolutely pop your action movie cherry on them, but I feel true appreciation requires that historical context.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Die Hard With A Vegeance

You’re probably almost certainly not wondering why I didn’t include this in the first bit. Well, that’s because simply put, I’m just not as familiar with this one. But it’s on my tellybox right now.

And it’s really rather good! It’s increased the scope of the action, but for the most part not the scale, as it takes places across New York City, rather than the single location the first two dealt with.

To help with the plot, we get Samuel L Jackson as an equally reluctant hero who never asked for any of this.

And….it works! There are riddles, chases, treasure hunts, explosions, the odd shoot out, and once again an audacious heist.

In terms of its place in the movie timeline (1995) this was probably the last such heist movie to be made before mobile phones became common place. The baddies have them, but our heroes don’t. Which helps retain the “one against many, no guarantee of backup” feel which the series normally depends on.

You know? I’d say for trying something different, and so successfully? This is the second best one. My current ranking being 1, 3, 2, 4, every other film ever made including cack handed Die Hard clones, your boring relative’s dull holiday movies, Neil Breen movies, then Die Hard 5.

StraightSilver wrote:
Marcel the shell with shoes on

Ok, so I went into this completely blind (I had never heard of the movie and didn't realise until after that it was a "thing" on YouTube). My housemate wanted to pick a movie for a change but all she could remember was the film about the "eyeball" so after much random searching we eventually found that it wasn't about an eyeball, or at least not strictly speaking, lol.

So this is an odd one, I would probably not have picked this myself but when I saw it was A24 I thought I was in safe(ish) hands.

This is part animated, part live action and is a "documentary" about a 1 inch tall mollusc called Marcel, who lives in an airbnb......

Marcel and his large family had been living in the airbnb for a while but when the couple staying there had a huge argument the rest of family get accidentally moved from the apartment leaving Marcel and his Grandma, Nana Connie (voiced by Isabella Rossellini) behind. The next guest just so happens to be a documentary film maker who helps Marcel track down his long lost family.

So yes, this does sound absolutely bonkers but weirdly it wasn't. This is such a sweet, endearing film, suitable (pretty much) for all ages but does cover things like loss, death, grief, abandonment in a mature but accessible way.

I have to say I really, really enjoyed this one, despite the premise which had I known beforehand might have put me off. But certainly a good watch if you are into that sort of thing.

And yes, Marcel really does have shoes on......

I also recommend this movie. It’s charming and funny and hits the feels.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Die Hard is the Godfather of action movies. Not just because it’s a masterpiece, but because it also demonstrates the art of adaptation at its zenith. Die Hard is also based on a somewhat trashy thriller, one even more disposable than The Godfather, but darn if the film makers didn’t figure out exactly what worked, what needed to change, and then mercilessly cut the rest. The only adaptation I can think of that did an even more exemplary job of transforming chaff into diamonds was The Princess Bride.


Also, Die Hard with a Vengeance works so well because it wasn’t written to be a Die Hard.

Rob Zombie's 31

WTF was this. Someone needed to reign this guy in a bit, this was just a huge music video and Id writ large all over the screen. Terrible, choppy editing, and shaky-cam nonsense. This looked super amateur hour, so I have no idea where this fits in the timeline of "his work".

Not good dude. We all know you can do better, now get some people on your team to say, "No, that's stupid!".

 Easy E wrote:
Rob Zombie's 31

WTF was this. Someone needed to reign this guy in a bit, this was just a huge music video and Id writ large all over the screen. Terrible, choppy editing, and shaky-cam nonsense. This looked super amateur hour, so I have no idea where this fits in the timeline of "his work".

Not good dude. We all know you can do better, now get some people on your team to say, "No, that's stupid!".

Never understood the hype around any of Rob Zombie's movies, myself.

I love horror flicks, and I used to love queuing up "Dragula" twelve times in the juke box at the local bar before paying the bill and leaving, but none of his movies ever hit for me. It was different, for sure, but nothing really ground breaking imo.

They’re more celebrations of the genres.

31 is definitely an acquired taste, but it’s a taste I’ve acquired.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dune

The new one. It’s up on Prime for free, and this is my second watch.

Overall, it is probably superior to the first movie version. But, not universally so.

Now as ever, and for clarity, I’ve never read the books, and don’t particularly intend to. So what follows may seem ignorant to some. And that is a fair cop. But it’s genuine and admitted ignorance for whatever that’s worth.

Where the original did it better?

1. Soundtrack. New Dune’s soundtrack is fine, but it’s really quite standard Hollywood.

2. Created a much stronger visual language between Atreides, Harkonnen and Sardukar forces. This was evident in the trailer, where I don’t think anyone knew who was who in the snippets we got. And for me, it’s not much better in the whole of the thing.

3. I know this is a huge departure from the books, but with the Wyrding Module, the original at least gave a pretty convincing reason why The Emperor setup House Atreides. I know enough about the books that it was Leto’s rising popularity that did for him. But this movie just….doesn’t really get that across as well.

4. The Sandworms looked better for me.

5. Dr Yueh’s betrayal is better explained. At least in my opinion.

But the new one is objectively the better film. There can be no honest denial of that. At first I missed the inner monologue whispered stuff, but this instead takes the time to have that sort of stuff spoken out loud. But hey, that’s what happens when you have twenty minutes longer to tell half the story.

Hmm. That sounded like a back handed compliment, which isn’t my intent. Indeed, for a two and half hour movie, it’s not dragging its heels at all. It’s all put to decent use and it moves along at pace, with no particular scene outstaying it’s welcome.

It definitely deals with the mysticism and prophetic visions much better.

In terms of Part Two? I have some concerns that our lead is just a bit too drippy to convince as the leader of a rebellion. But, and yes insert convoluted Sir Mixalot ref sized but, that’s only because I’ve not seen him in such a role.

His name irrationally irritates me, but there’s no denying he’s a talented lad. So I’m perfectly open to him absolutely nailing it.

 nels1031 wrote:
...

Never understood the hype around any of Rob Zombie's movies, myself.

I love horror flicks, and I used to love queuing up "Dragula" twelve times in the juke box at the local bar before paying the bill and leaving, but none of his movies ever hit for me. It was different, for sure, but nothing really ground breaking imo.

Well, House of 1000 Corpses was .....entertaining enough and Devil's Rejects was pretty good (mostly due to the characters, which I assume aren't Zombie's strong suit to begin with. Just luck with the cast and keeping the characters around).

These are the two i watched, the rest have a pretty bad reputation I hear.


Now, as for Die Hard. The first one is great and infinitely re-watchable. The second one has Andy Sipovicz, and I'll watch things with angry policeman Andy Sipovicz in them.