TheRPGSite

The Lounge => Media and Inspiration => Topic started by: Apparition on January 03, 2018, 11:10:35 PM

Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Apparition on January 03, 2018, 11:10:35 PM


The singular good scene from the sequels.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: danbuter on January 04, 2018, 04:10:28 PM
I watched The Great Wall, with Matt Damon fighting alien dinosaurs with a bow and arrow. As silly as the premise is, it's a fun movie.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on January 04, 2018, 06:28:30 PM
While net was down sat down and watched some old BW SF movies.

Kronos: One of those "science hero" sorts of movies with a relatively slow start off but lots going on even so. Flying saucer is detected approaching earth. For some reason its decided to blow it up. Fails and the thing lands in the ocean off Mexico. Scientist team investigates. And finally Kronos makes its appearance. And I love the design of the thing. Its monolithic and lacking most of the standard robot features, or features at all. It proceeds to go on a rampage as its mission is to drain energy. Really neet way ov moving as it stomps along on four piston pillar legs that alternatingly lift and fall.

Monolith Monsters: Mentioned this before. Another "science hero" movie and one of my favourites for the totally original idea of a "monster" that isnt even alive. A meteor crashes outside a little desert town and soon thereafter people collect some of the fragments to study or by chance. Then one of found dead, petrified and then another and it becomes apparent the threat is the rock fragments that absorb water and silica and grow into huge crystal pillars that eventually topple and shatter. Also interesting in that the monster is secondary to the interplay of the people and how they react to the impending crisis.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Voros on January 04, 2018, 07:03:56 PM
Watched Office a Korean thriller/horror film. Pretty slow burn and subtle (with touches of Hitchcock) for a Korean genre film which these days tend towards a lot of violence and gore. Not that this one doesn't get plenty violent by the end but I'm grading on a curve here. Some nice but simple twists in this that could be used in any CoC or investigation game.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2086[/ATTACH]
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on January 04, 2018, 08:45:13 PM
We did a roundtable talk on House of Traps: https://www.podbean.com/media/share/pb-e5zv7-82211f

This is an early 80s Chang Cheh film starring the venom mob (no Lo Meng this time out though) and based on the Seven Heroes and Five Gallants. I think the story in this one is engaging and the fight scenes are all very tight. The centerpiece of the film is the House of Traps, which is a really cool concept and something that would work well in a campaign. It isn't a house filled with traps so much as a tower housing a single, but multi-level, trap structure (there are a sequence of traps that all play off each other once the thing is triggered). The world here is pretty morally gray, with a prince during the early Song Dynasty seeking revenge against Emperor Taizong for forcing his father to commit suicide. The protagonists of the film are trying to break into the prince's House of Traps to recover some stolen objects and to obtain a list of people involved in the revolt. Characters are colorful and memorable (even those with brief moments on screen). Pretty bloody as these films go as well.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on January 05, 2018, 02:30:27 AM
Saw what I think was House of Traps at a con. That the one with the floor of spikes and some sort of killer umbrella?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Voros on January 05, 2018, 02:32:40 AM
Is the Baulderstone on the podcast the same Baulderstone of the forum?

I'm digging the discussion approach to the podcasts, you know your Chinese history!
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Toadmaster on January 05, 2018, 03:18:18 AM
Quote from: Omega;1017754
Monolith Monsters: Mentioned this before. Another "science hero" movie and one of my favourites for the totally original idea of a "monster" that isnt even alive. A meteor crashes outside a little desert town and soon thereafter people collect some of the fragments to study or by chance. Then one of found dead, petrified and then another and it becomes apparent the threat is the rock fragments that absorb water and silica and grow into huge crystal pillars that eventually topple and shatter. Also interesting in that the monster is secondary to the interplay of the people and how they react to the impending crisis.


I saw this as a kid, keep meaning to track it down to watch again. If it is as I remember than more interesting than the description would make it sound.



Speaking of older movies, I recently watched the 1970s Invasion of the Body Snatchers again. I hadn't seen it in years and it was much better and scarier than I expected. Proof that re-makes don't always suck or just retread the same old story with different faces.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on January 05, 2018, 07:40:20 AM
Quote from: Voros;1017811
Is the Baulderstone on the podcast the same Baulderstone of the forum?

I'm digging the discussion approach to the podcasts, you know your Chinese history!

Thanks.

That is the same Baulderstone.

The discussion approach is a double edged sword but I feel more comfortable with that format. I just hit record and we don't edit the discussion (the only exception to the later is if something truly disruptive occurs and I have to stop recording---in which case I just splice together two separate recordings). I think you get more honest opinions about things that way and eventually you start getting a natural conversation.

Last week we reviewed a movie that uses the same source material so it was interesting contrasting them. Next week we are doing Reign of Assassins (normally we try to do 3 old school movies, followed by 1 newer film---newer can mean 90s or later).
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on January 05, 2018, 07:43:38 AM
Quote from: Omega;1017810
Saw what I think was House of Traps at a con. That the one with the floor of spikes and some sort of killer umbrella?

That sounds like the same movie.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on January 05, 2018, 03:31:54 PM
And as posted in the DL thread...

There is a Dragonlance Musical? In Russia? The Last Trial.
One of the songs from it. Takisis and Raistlin. Lord of Nothing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEXYeb4pSG8

Apparently started off as a fan made stage play in the 90s and then had a larger production around 2010 and one big final production in 2014.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Headless on January 05, 2018, 03:43:13 PM
Watched "The Last Dragon" an american kungfu movie from the 80s set in Harlem.  The main charcter is Bruce Leroy, a black dude who dresses and acts like he thinks Chinese do.  Its a fun and well done film.  

Then "Dragon: the Bruce Lee Story"  my wife liked that one better, its actully a love story with alot of Kungfu.  It wasn't as good as I remembered, but I was very tired and I'm not 14 any more.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on January 05, 2018, 04:09:41 PM
Saw the Last Dragon in theater. Reallly weird movie with alot of weird acting characters. But hey it was the 80s and movies were still able to be properly weird.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on January 05, 2018, 04:38:45 PM
So just watched Spiderman Homecoming and Justice League.

Spiderman was just as tween and annoying as I expected, but it's offset by strong performances from Michael Keaton and the kid playing Parker. Gwyneth Paltrow got billing in the credits for less than a minute of screen time. Guess someone was worried she might find a hashtag.

Justice League...was a mixed bag. Plot was surprisingly solid for a DC film, action scenes were easy to follow, but everyone that wasn't Wonder Woman or Flash looked plastic, like the editors went in during post and cgi'd the cast and failed to be subtle. I understand the Cavill had a moustache that needed to be removed, but the rest? No idea. And why in shit is Flash a barely functional autistic?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Voros on January 05, 2018, 11:29:21 PM
Quote from: Omega;1017885
And as posted in the DL thread...

There is a Dragonlance Musical? In Russia? The Last Trial.
One of the songs from it. Takisis and Raistlin. Lord of Nothing


Apparently started off as a fan made stage play in the 90s and then had a larger production around 2010 and one big final production in 2014.


That's the most Russian thing I've seen since Tarkovsky died.:D
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on January 06, 2018, 02:53:34 AM
Quote from: Voros;1017938
That's the most Russian thing I've seen since Tarkovsky died.:D

Apparently the person playing Dalamar in the last production was Raistlin in the previous, and his wife plays Tika. Music is pretty good too.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Elfdart on January 06, 2018, 11:05:50 PM
That is the most whack thing I've seen since Italian Spider-Man.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on January 07, 2018, 12:12:32 AM
Quote from: Elfdart;1018051
That is the most whack thing I've seen since Italian Spider-Man.

Come again?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: ArrozConLeche on January 10, 2018, 05:39:20 PM
Re: Last Dragon it's a fun movie; very obviously tongue-in-cheek movie. Bruce Leroy? Eating popcorn with chopsticks?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Voros on January 10, 2018, 10:08:21 PM
Honeymoon Killers. A classic grimy horror/thriller from 1970, Scorsese was originally to direct but was fired over creative differences. Kastle, an opera director, did a great job though and created a gritty, rough B&W sleaze classic. A favourite of not only Scorsese but Truffaut and John Waters.

Based on the true story of an overweight nurse and Lonelyhearts Lothario who fall in love and proceed to work together in ripping off lonely spinsters, eventually turning to murder. The late 60s/early 70s is an underused time period for CoC, I could see using this tale as inspiration for a different kind of CoC session.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2099[/ATTACH]
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Headless on January 10, 2018, 10:55:50 PM
Quote from: ArrozConLeche;1018734
Re: Last Dragon it's a fun movie; very obviously tongue-in-cheek movie. Bruce Leroy? Eating popcorn with chopsticks?

The pop corn with chopsticks actully looked like a good Idea.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Doom on January 14, 2018, 06:24:17 PM
I've been tearing through the Amazon horror movies selection; it's amazing just how many terrible movie-like things they have on there (a bunch of student films, perhaps?). About the only thing watchable is the Ash vs Evil Dead TV series, but it's good enough at least.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Voros on January 15, 2018, 09:29:17 PM
On Canada Netflix there are a few excellent horror films: Ben Wheatley's Kill List and Sightseers, Witch, Babadook, I Saw the Devil, We are What We Are and others.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: ArrozConLeche on January 16, 2018, 11:00:04 AM
For Amazon, you have to subscribe to their "channels". They have a couple of horror themed ones with curated stuff that looks decent. I tend to go for the pre-2000's horror and there's a good amount of that. I think another "channel' focuses on more modern horror movies, but don't quote me on that.

For Netflix, I think that their horror stuff is so-so. The Upflix app might be of limited help in finding something.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Toadmaster on January 17, 2018, 03:37:04 AM
Quote from: Doom;1019528
I've been tearing through the Amazon horror movies selection; it's amazing just how many terrible movie-like things they have on there (a bunch of student films, perhaps?). About the only thing watchable is the Ash vs Evil Dead TV series, but it's good enough at least.

My wife and I have been watching Ash vs the evil dead, just started season two. It's fun, nice to see they maintained the level of serious / camp from the original movies.


There is a lot of good stuff on Netflix, but yes there is a lot of chaff to sort through. Horror as a genre in particular has a high garbage to good ratio. On the plus side, it is so much easier to try another after 10 minutes compared to the old days of VHS where you felt an urge to watch the thing and hope it gets better since you already paid for it.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: danbuter on January 17, 2018, 04:59:44 PM
Just finished the new ScarJo version of Ghost in the Shell. I liked it, though it's certainly not as good as the anime movie. If you like cyberpunk, and have an aversion to anime, then you will likely love this movie.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on January 17, 2018, 11:02:18 PM
Quote from: danbuter;1020165
Just finished the new ScarJo version of Ghost in the Shell. I liked it, though it's certainly not as good as the anime movie. If you like cyberpunk, and have an aversion to anime, then you will likely love this movie.

I made it about half way. Any longer and I would have put my eyes out with a melon baller. The film managed to incorporate three different plots, shoe horn origin stories for at least two characters (maybe more didn't get that far) and Johansson has all the personality of a stroke patient overdosed on Botox.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Headless on January 18, 2018, 12:20:06 AM
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1020259
.....) and Johansson has all the personality of a stroke patient overdosed on Botox.

Thats accurate.  I think maybe thats what she was going for.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on January 18, 2018, 03:30:06 AM
Anyone remember a horror anthology series from possibly Mexico called something like Horro Horro Theater? I saw this back in the late 90s as at the time my cable subscription included a South american channel and it looked fairly interesting what little I saw. Had a sort of Dark Shadows feel.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on January 18, 2018, 05:45:03 PM
Quote from: Headless;1020270
Thats accurate.  I think maybe thats what she was going for.

Then this would be her most successful role. I'm honestly not a fan of hers, bjt this was atrocious.

And can someone please explain why they keep calling her Major? The character's name is Motoko Kuisinagi. Major is her RANK. But every time she's referred to its "Major got hurt" "Major did this".  Was the scriptwriters afraid to use the word "the"? Did they think Motoko was her middle name?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on January 23, 2018, 06:26:28 AM
Watched an ooold copy of a Filipino movie from 1987 called Tikbalang, Once Upon a Time in the US. First saw it at a convention back in the 90s. Think Duckcon? A really weird fantasy movie where a Tikbalang transports some kids from modern earth to a fantasy realm. Kind of like a live action D&D cartoon with an Asian theme. Some interesting effects here and there like the stop motion tikbalang at the beginning and various supernatural beings presented. Definitely does not take itself too seriously. Very reminiscent of Wizards of the Lost Kingdom which came out in 85.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: danbuter on January 23, 2018, 09:25:14 PM
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1020259
IJohansson has all the personality of a stroke patient overdosed on Botox.


So she was perfect as the character ;).
I also agree that the how people addressed her was really awkward.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on January 23, 2018, 09:44:56 PM
Quote from: danbuter;1021430
So she was perfect as the character ;).
I also agree that the how people addressed her was really awkward.

Everything was. Movie should have been titled Cring in the Shell.

It's really wierd. I couldn't make it through GitS, I was decidedly mixed on the Last Jedi and Thor Ragnarok gave me the dry heaves everytime someone tried to be funny.

Best movie I've seen recently? Fucking Justice League.

That's a painful realization.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: ArrozConLeche on January 24, 2018, 09:53:36 AM
Quote from: Headless;1020270
Thats accurate.  I think maybe thats what she was going for.


She's a cyborg after all.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 25, 2018, 12:34:45 PM
Quote from: Headless;1020270
Thats accurate.  I think maybe thats what she was going for.


If intentional, I think her performance was really good. I certainly was thinking it as I watched the film. I felt like she was a brain in a cyborg body, and not just when they were showing that she was a cyborg.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: kosmos1214 on January 25, 2018, 09:43:37 PM
Quote from: ArrozConLeche;1021521
She's a cyborg after all.

Cybog dos not mean brain dead nor dose it necessarily mean impossible to be "human".
This is particularly important given that in the source martial she has tons or personality.
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1021780
If intentional, I think her performance was really good. I certainly was thinking it as I watched the film. I felt like she was a brain in a cyborg body, and not just when they were showing that she was a cyborg.

You mean like in every ghost in the shell any thing ever ???? The simple fact is all of the gits stuff has done that.
But why should I spend my time damning A bad movie when some one much more skilled then me has all ready done it.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jeff37923 on January 27, 2018, 10:14:32 AM
I got tired of watching bad movies so I popped in a DVD of "The Sand Pebbles" starring Steve McQueen, Mako, and Candice Bergen. Good stuff, a classic, particularly good if you are looking for interesting events and background for your 1920's games.  On a different note, much of the feel in the movie can be used in the OTU for the worlds that are Amber Zone and Red Zone for where gunboat diplomacy has been used to maintain order among worlds by the Impereium.

Cleanse your palettes and give it a watch.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: kosmos1214 on January 27, 2018, 05:44:14 PM
I saw 2 really good movies recently.
Panic in the year zero about A family from LA that was going on A camping trip when the bombs fall. Part of why this is such an interesting picture is that rather then being about some one who dosen't pick up on whats going on or has no idea what to do or A survivalist type that's spend half there life waiting for something like this to happen. It's about A family headed up by A guy who never planed for this but imminently figures out whats going to happen and how to prepare for it before the last pieces of civilization collapse.

The other is The lady from shanghai it's A fun film noir movie and it frankly has some of the best dialogue I have ever seen in A movie.
Which rather makes sense given Orson Welles had A big hand in it.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 28, 2018, 02:16:04 AM
Just finished Blade Runner 2049. It didn't shit all over the first movie. Was a little too on the nose in spots for my taste, but altogether not bad.
It had this modern movie clean to it though. Even the dirt looked clean. Sharp and in focus, even when out of focus. That's not just Blade Runner though.
Story was fine. I mean, it's nothing new, and executed well. Not the kind of movie I'd want to watch over again, but fine for one viewing. I guess this my rambling way of saying it was ok.

And on a techincal note, the Blu-Ray version hit a new first. I had to turn the volume, I swear I'm not even exaggerating, to the max, and I could only barely hear the dialogue. And then a loud part would come on, and blast the whole apartment, I had to ride the volume. I suspect it may be my jury-rigged PS3 HDMI to RCA TV. Dunno. Just very distracting.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on January 28, 2018, 04:28:14 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1022319
Just finished Blade Runner 2049. It didn't shit all over the first movie. Was a little too on the nose in spots for my taste, but altogether not bad.
It had this modern movie clean to it though. Even the dirt looked clean. Sharp and in focus, even when out of focus. That's not just Blade Runner though.
Story was fine. I mean, it's nothing new, and executed well. Not the kind of movie I'd want to watch over again, but fine for one viewing. I guess this my rambling way of saying it was ok.

And on a techincal note, the Blu-Ray version hit a new first. I had to turn the volume, I swear I'm not even exaggerating, to the max, and I could only barely hear the dialogue. And then a loud part would come on, and blast the whole apartment, I had to ride the volume. I suspect it may be my jury-rigged PS3 HDMI to RCA TV. Dunno. Just very distracting.

I've had that problem with dvds and blurays before. I think it's a layer imbalance when they format the media.  The first series run of Ghost in the Shell : SaC was notorious for it between the opening credits and the show proper.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jeff37923 on January 28, 2018, 05:52:31 AM
Quote from: kosmos1214;1021918
The simple fact is all of the gits stuff has done that.

My biggest problem with the movie was that while watching, I was mentally saying "I've already seen this, and it was done better then." They literally tried to cram three anime movies and four OVAs into a single film and it just ended up being 20 pounds of shit in a 10 pound bag.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Apparition on January 28, 2018, 05:47:31 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1022319
And on a techincal note, the Blu-Ray version hit a new first. I had to turn the volume, I swear I'm not even exaggerating, to the max, and I could only barely hear the dialogue. And then a loud part would come on, and blast the whole apartment, I had to ride the volume. I suspect it may be my jury-rigged PS3 HDMI to RCA TV. Dunno. Just very distracting.


I've found most movies have had that issue since the mid-'00s.  So much so that I keep closed captioning on 100% of the time these days.  I live in a condominium, and believe me loud noises will make the neighbors complain.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: kosmos1214 on January 28, 2018, 07:29:01 PM
Well moronwood is at it again they are now going to be making A movie out of one of the most impact full comics I have ever read.
that being battle angel Alita now this is going to hurt being as I can legitimately say I would not be the person I am had I not read this at 13/14ish.


Post script: Also the scrap yard is way to goddamn clean in that trailer.

Quote from: jeff37923;1022335
My biggest problem with the movie was that while watching, I was mentally saying "I've already seen this, and it was done better then." They literally tried to cram three anime movies and four OVAs into a single film and it just ended up being 20 pounds of shit in a 10 pound bag.
sounds like A good sum up of A good chunk of the problem.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Doom on January 28, 2018, 10:30:24 PM
Quote from: Omega;1020286
Anyone remember a horror anthology series from possibly Mexico called something like Horro Horro Theater? I saw this back in the late 90s as at the time my cable subscription included a South american channel and it looked fairly interesting what little I saw. Had a sort of Dark Shadows feel.


i remember the anthology...but can't remember the name. There are some pretty good Mexican horror movies, certainly as good as any B movie. Sorry I can't give a name, but be sure to watch Witching and Bitching if you can find it (used to be on NetF), it's *awesome*.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on January 29, 2018, 04:32:02 AM
The discussion on dumb monsters got me to dig out my old copy of the BW 1959 blob monster movie Caltiki, il mostro immortale. My copy was in Spanish so I thought it was produced down south. Turns out it is a movie from Italy. A pretty lurid and even at times grotesque movie I'd heard of but never seen as it got mention way back in those old monster movie magazines. Its a fairly plodding movie. But when things go bad they go really bad.

I've never seen the english dub or the original Italian version so cant say if anything was changed. Probably was in at least the english version.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: ArrozConLeche on January 30, 2018, 01:15:10 PM
wtf is wrong with her eyes. (battle angel alita picture)
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 30, 2018, 11:42:12 PM
Quote from: ArrozConLeche;1022756
wtf is wrong with her eyes. (battle angel alita picture)


Everyone's been wondering that since the trailer came out.

http://uproxx.com/hitfix/why-does-alita-battle-angel-have-anime-eyes/

Apparently they wanted to replicate the manga eyes in live action. I think the results speak for themselves.



She doesn't look like a cyborg. She looks like some kind of fish/human.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on January 31, 2018, 03:05:33 AM
Yeah it looks horrible.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: kosmos1214 on January 31, 2018, 08:34:31 PM
Quote from: ArrozConLeche;1022756
wtf is wrong with her eyes. (battle angel alita picture)

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1022821
Everyone's been wondering that since the trailer came out.

http://uproxx.com/hitfix/why-does-alita-battle-angel-have-anime-eyes/

Apparently they wanted to replicate the manga eyes in live action. I think the results speak for themselves.



She doesn't look like a cyborg. She looks like some kind of fish/human.

It's actually worse then that they are borrowing some notes from the manga's art style and not others leading to an aborted in between style that actually lacks some of the definition compared to the manga.  
Here are some pics for contrast.
[spoiler]
(https://s23.postimg.org/ya9xrp3sb/150a939fd799f55757512f1ea3236ecc.jpg)
(https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2F736x%2F63%2F22%2F78%2F6322785eb51be160b09e9b8f5d5b51c7--battle-angel-alita-direction.jpg&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pinterest.co.uk%2Fpin%2F228557749818143181%2F&docid=wg_ZBTaDtOSYbM&tbnid=KOM5nXLJxt6kaM%3A&vet=10ahUKEwiDwM_3wIPZAhWDq1kKHbFFBakQMwjFASghMCE..i&w=736&h=555&bih=943&biw=1920&q=battle%20angel%20alita&ved=0ahUKEwiDwM_3wIPZAhWDq1kKHbFFBakQMwjFASghMCE&iact=mrc&uact=8)
(https://i0.wp.com/www.completelyentertained.me/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/377_4_nzhyp_page1271.jpg)
(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/63/22/78/6322785eb51be160b09e9b8f5d5b51c7--battle-angel-alita-direction.jpg)
(https://d1nao0k9edgivc.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/battle-angel-alita-616x403.jpg)
[/spoiler]
Also sorry for not showing to much fight seance stuff that mangas pretty bloody and I don't want to break the rules.
Which actually leads me in to some thing but is it just me or from the trailer is the movies smelling pg-13?

Also heres A guide why the mangas worth reading http://www.ign.com/articles/2007/03/12/battle-angel-alita-new-readers-guide
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 31, 2018, 10:13:48 PM
Quote from: kosmos1214;1022943
It's actually worse then that they are borrowing some notes from the manga's art style and not others leading to an aborted in between style that actually lacks some of the definition compared to the manga.  

Also heres A guide why the mangas worth reading http://www.ign.com/articles/2007/03/12/battle-angel-alita-new-readers-guide

I've read Battle Angel Alita (The first run, and a little of the "reboot" series) and I agree. In general there's things in certain art styles that are done because it's not live action. This attempt to replicate it shows why. So I guess it will serve as a bad example? :/
And I agree, it's a great series. Made quite an impact on me when I first read it.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: kosmos1214 on January 31, 2018, 10:48:44 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1022953
I've read Battle Angel Alita (The first run, and a little of the "reboot" series) and I agree. In general there's things in certain art styles that are done because it's not live action. This attempt to replicate it shows why. So I guess it will serve as a bad example? :/
And I agree, it's a great series. Made quite an impact on me when I first read it.

Agreed I read up threw some point in the ZOTT arc then my library system ran out of the manga so I was stuck I'll be honest it's nice to know it's still going.
Also I must say It's nice to know I am not the only person this side of the sun thats read it.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: ArrozConLeche on February 05, 2018, 01:43:19 PM
The only person with huge eyes who still looks gorgeous to me is Kajal Jain. Maybe they should have cast her:

(http://www.punjabicelebs.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/10425494_782383471835712_7299730199791589824_n.jpg)
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: kosmos1214 on February 06, 2018, 05:20:27 PM
Quote from: ArrozConLeche;1023804
The only person with huge eyes who still looks gorgeous to me is Kajal Jain. Maybe they should have cast her:

(http://www.punjabicelebs.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/10425494_782383471835712_7299730199791589824_n.jpg)

Looking at her that very well may have been A better idea though it's worth remembering that the reason they ended up casting scar-jo as makoto was that none of the Asian actresses in Hollywood do action movies :/
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on February 07, 2018, 03:41:45 AM
Quote from: kosmos1214;1024054
Looking at her that very well may have been A better idea though it's worth remembering that the reason they ended up casting scar-jo as makoto was that none of the Asian actresses in Hollywood do action movies :/

This is sarcasm right?

Please tell it's sarcasm.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on February 07, 2018, 09:15:33 AM
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1024120
This is sarcasm right?

Please tell it's sarcasm.

It may be partially true. There may well be very few. Or those that were on hand either werent interested, or did not fit the look. And Hollywood may have wanted a big name to stick on the movie as usual.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on February 07, 2018, 10:54:49 AM
Finally got a copy of The Slime People from 1963. Saw this wayyyyyy back on Hoolihan & Big Chuck, but never saw it again till recent. Not a bad film really and its got surprisingly crisp filming for its budget. The suits arent bad either really. Its a rather plodding movie and some of the actings a little off though. But boy do they love their fog machines!
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ras Algethi on February 07, 2018, 11:08:05 AM
Quote from: Omega;1024151
It may be partially true. There may well be very few. Or those that were on hand either werent interested, or did not fit the look. And Hollywood may have wanted a big name to stick on the movie as usual.

So much more likely to be the latter, i.e. a big-budget movie and the studios wants a big name to prop it up.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: kosmos1214 on February 07, 2018, 04:46:04 PM
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1024120
This is sarcasm right?

Please tell it's sarcasm.

Quote from: Omega;1024151
It may be partially true. There may well be very few. Or those that were on hand either weren't interested, or did not fit the look. And Hollywood may have wanted a big name to stick on the movie as usual.

Sorry I should have been A touch more clear but it's pretty much what happened with gits LA. There weren't any major Asian actresses in Hollywood that where willing to do an action movie so we got scar-jo.
At the time there where more then A few videos on the subject by A bunch of different peeps at the time who do movie stuff .
There was one actress I remember hearing brought up as A potential I forget her name but she didn't have A huge name so the studios wouldn't even look at her.
Also what Ras said.

Post Script edit: Also rereading my previous post i miss typed rather badly sorry for any confusion. I didn't mean to say that there where no Asian actresses who do action movies at all.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: kosmos1214 on March 03, 2018, 11:33:51 PM
Saw an interesting movie the January man kind of A fun for A mystery / thriller feels A bit like it's A 600 or 800 page novel that got condensed down to 2 hours.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 10, 2018, 09:23:13 AM
Thor, Ragnarok

Let's start with the disclaimer that I'm way past burned out on the Marvel Cinematic Universe(tm) films. They were really good in the beginning, but they've beaten their tone and style into the ground. Having said that, I liked it ok.
The first 20 (ish) minutes almost lost me. Thor as a wisecracking hero rubbed me the wrong way. It was a huge tone shift for the character. He was too lighthearted, and the Surtur fight wasn't very interesting. Having Odin lost on earth and then die felt very limp to me. Like, Oh, they have to bump off Odin to get the plot moving, get on with it already! It's unfortunate that they couldn't find anything to do with the Jane Foster character and off-screened her. At least they tried in... man I can't even remember the title of the movie. Thor 2, the Dark Elf one.

But once they got to the junk planet, and the story started to get moving, I started paying attention and got into the film. The Hulk/Banner stuff was great.
Not bad, worth watching, but don't expect them to stray from the Marvel Formula.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on March 13, 2018, 10:07:12 AM
not a movie, yet, but coming in about 2 weeks I believe on Netflix is the new Reboot, which has ironically enough been so totally rebooted it shares about two points of interest with the original.

Now its a live action show about some teens who discover a digitizing machine to go into cyberspace to battle programs sent by a human hacker called the Sourcerer.

Fans are calling a Power Rangers wanna-be. But personally I think it shares more with Superhuman Samurai Cyber Squad. Minus the mecha and Ultra-Man type hero.

This is developing into some epic mishandling. "We tried to imagine that ReBoot had never been made"

https://www.rebootrevival.com/ (https://www.rebootrevival.com/)
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: kosmos1214 on March 13, 2018, 06:49:24 PM
Quote from: Omega;1029117
"We tried to imagine that ReBoot had never been made"

Well that sums up pretty well why I probably won't be watching it how about the rest of you?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on March 16, 2018, 04:26:50 PM
Quote from: kosmos1214;1029190
Well that sums up pretty well why I probably won't be watching it how about the rest of you?

Its about the same thing they said with the System Shock remake after they got the money. Eventually they realized their mistake and are going back to the original vision. Too bad Superhuman Guardian Reboot Squad wont.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 19, 2018, 11:14:06 PM
Justice League

More super hero movies. I've already said I'm well burned out on the genere by now, but there's a few things that made JL palatable. Mostly the end. Despite Steppentime being about the blandest super villian yet, I really liked how they eventually beat him. It was foreshadowed, and most importantly, they didn't murder him. He done himself in, which is a very superhero-story way for the villain to fail.
And I liked it way better than Batman versus Superman. Whatever the hell that movie was called.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on March 31, 2018, 01:29:51 AM
I just saw Ready Player One and I didn't like it. I'm not going to say it was bad--the rest of my family really liked it--but it just didn't appeal to me. There was just too much happening on the screen and I felt like I was distracted from what was going on by graphics overload at several points. I also went in knowing it was a kids/teen film at heart, but it's much more like the 80s versions of those where there really isn't any subtle humor or extra layers for adults. So again, not a bad movie, but it din't appeal to me.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Headless on April 02, 2018, 09:23:05 AM
I liked it.  The book was more enjoyable. (I won't comment on "better")  

It was a quick book but an even quicker movie.  Stuff the devoloped and built in the book didn't have time in the movie.  I was disappointed a couple parts I liked were missing.  Ain't that always the way.  

But worth watching.  Maybe more a rental than theater.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 08, 2018, 05:58:30 AM
Saw some of the Reboot series. Yeah, its got about nothing to do with the original.

But...

A few episodes in and they introduce Megabyte. Who seems to be the old Megabyte. That is till the human villain "upgrades" him. Cant say Im thrilled with the redesign. But whomever they got for the voice actor was spot on. So far seems really good at emulating Tony Jays voicing of Megabyte.

Later they actually visit Mainframe... which was part of this college secret lab all along??? And they meet Bob, Dot, and Enzo? Except they look kinda... off. And Mainframe is depopulated? Weird. Oh and we get to see the User from the original??? But whomever they got for the voices here too did it really well. and they did a good job of recreating Mainframe too. That doesnt save this series though.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on April 08, 2018, 01:28:37 PM
I saw Hurricane Heist yesterday. No money was spent to do so, yet I still feel cheated out of my time. It was fucking horrible. Not amusingly horrible, but more "I think I'd rather be mowing the yard in the hot Florida sun" horrible. If you have an opportunity to see this movie and are actually considering it, please call someone and ask for help.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: kosmos1214 on April 10, 2018, 06:20:11 PM
Regarding the reboot reboot I found this on A video  giving the history of reboot I am quoting this exactly as I found it.
Also It's supposedly something one of the guys who worked on the show posted on 4chan .

Quote

For years we have waited, well... ''don't bother'' posted from a employee from Rainmaker. He posted on 4chan anonymously and it has now since been deleted: (Note: the punctuation or lack-thereof is the same as in the post. I just typed it out.) ''I feel you guys deserve an explanation and since I can't talk publicly about this without putting my job in danger I'll post this here where everyone will think I'm larping. Everybody that was working on this show knew this backlash was coming but Hefferon has his head so far up his ass he wouldn't listen to anybody and nobody could tell him to smarten up since he owns the whole company any idea he came up with was put in no matter how stupid, hell sometimes he brought his kid into reviews and had the kid give notes, also fun fact the main character shares a name with his kid and the main character's father's name is the name of his assistant. The production itself was a massive disaster as well, Hefferon got sold on using the unreal engine for lighting and rendering the series despite rainmaker having a superb traditional CG pipeline because the first ReBoot was the first CG show on TV he wanted to make this show a first as well so the first unreal game engine show on TV. "To compound that problem those of us that came over from a traditional pipeline were given next to no training in unreal so we are figuring it out as we went along, the guy that was supposed to be the big know it all guy about unreal ended up being completely incompetent at his job but was great at kissing Michael's ass and creating conflicts by going behind the art and animation director's backs. Also wouldn't be surprised if a # MeToo story comes out about this guy as he was just creepy in general with the girls on the team. The project also went through a number of different art directors as they got fed up and quit due to the related issues this of course caused a lot of issues to the point where most environments in the show were just improvised off of single concept images. Also in the trailer you might notice some of the CG shots look extremely crappy and some look good, here's why that is. The creepy kiss up guy from earlier convinced Hefferon early on that reboot wouldn't need a team of lighters since ''The game engine will do that automatically for us'' So for the first few episodes there was no team dedicated to lighting the shots so it fell to the world builders to light those episodes and as no world building had any lighting experience you can see the results, after those episodes were complete they finally came to the realization that you actually need lighters to get good TV show level lighting so they hastily hired a team of lighters but because it was so late in the production schedule they had to hire basically anybody that applied so that means the majority of the lighters were straight out of school, and I don't think they finished up hiring that team till episode 11 or 12. Another reason for the crappy looking CG is because there was absolutely no training provided to the surfacing team on how shaders in unreal work, so you had them going in blind muddling their way through trying to figure out how to make ship work, hell the most any of us got to training in unreal for the whole project was about 2 weeks. I know to people outside the industry surfacing and lighting may not sound important but they are the subtle things that make something go from looking cheap and bad to looking good in CG. ''In summary the production was a complete cluster fuck with a CEO making all the decisions, refusing to listen to anybody just making his pet fantasy project about his self inserted son, but hey he got what he wanted, he can now say reboot the guardian code is the first ever show to be made with the unreal engine and rendered in 4k plus there is some VR stuff. Watch anytime he talks about the show he'll hit on those points, hell those are the points we've been told to hit on in the handout they gave us about how we're supposed to talk about the show in public.I'm very sorry about the product we put out there, I can't imagine how hard it is for long time fans of ReBoot to look at this abomination, if you're holding out any hope for this show don't, not only did the spit on the grave of ReBoot they did it in a badly written, badly acted show. If you're wondering if they tried to do anything to placate you guys, that'd be episode 10, they have all the old main characters in that episode but only that episode and it's just as badly written and acted as they other episodes. Do not watch this show, do not support this show or if you feel the need to satisfy your curiosity about it wait at least a month after release, netflix tends to make a decision on renewing for more seasons based on the numbers after about 2-4 weeks so the last thing this show needs is to do well out of morbid curiosity during those weeks and get another season.''


The video I found it on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVnzhISq0oY
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 12, 2018, 03:51:56 AM
You could tell that just by watching a few episodes and listening to the CEO talk.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: kosmos1214 on April 12, 2018, 05:09:04 PM
I'll buy that I my haven't heard any of the stuff the ceo has been spouting nor have I watched any guardian code so that was my 1st exposure.
Tbh if even A fraction of that post is true it explains A lot.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 13, 2018, 05:52:39 PM
Watching the first epsiode of Netflix's Lost in Space. So far, it's not grabbing me. I'll try to finish out the episode to give it a proper chance.

Episode 2 is much better. The characters are actually showing some character.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 15, 2018, 07:33:08 AM
Looks stupider than the failed pilot from the 90s or 00s. And oh hurray.. another dysfunctional family. Though will be interesting to see what the do, or dont do, with the dynamics between will and not-Dr Smith.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 15, 2018, 01:02:34 PM
Quote from: Omega;1034321
Looks stupider than the failed pilot from the 90s or 00s. And oh hurray.. another dysfunctional family. Though will be interesting to see what the do, or dont do, with the dynamics between will and not-Dr Smith.

I'm about 5 episodes in, and Smith is turning out to be a pretty interesting character. Or rather, her antics are interesting.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on April 15, 2018, 05:48:34 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1034360
I'm about 5 episodes in, and Smith is turning out to be a pretty interesting character. Or rather, her antics are interesting.

I like the actress, but the character is straight out of a soap opera. She exists, imo, to do one thing and one thing only. Make whichever situation they're in worse.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 16, 2018, 06:37:33 AM
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1034402
I like the actress, but the character is straight out of a soap opera. She exists, imo, to do one thing and one thing only. Make whichever situation they're in worse.

That was pretty much Smith in the original too.

Planets going to blow up? Smith sells all the Deuterium for an elixir. Trade off occasionally with Will's curiosity or trust getting them in a fix somehow.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Doom on April 19, 2018, 07:22:44 PM
I'm just amazed there's not more curiosity about the alien death-bot. They just sort of let it wander around, with no real interest in the first alien thing ever found, much less a robot with a wide array of powers.

And yeah, i'm liking the new Smith, too, even if she is a total maniac. I wonder just how long the writers can plausibly cover up the fact this character is pure psycho. The "old" Smith was a worm, but the new one is murderous and crassly manipulative to an extraordinary level
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on May 20, 2018, 11:45:32 AM
I really loved the after-credits scenes in Deadpool 2.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on May 29, 2018, 04:02:27 AM
Black Panther
This movie was extremely silly. I know it's a comic book story, but I couldn't take it seriously. I'll have to think about why it's tripping my silly-o-meter when something like Ant-Man didn't.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on May 30, 2018, 08:28:35 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1041069
Black Panther
This movie was extremely silly. I know it's a comic book story, but I couldn't take it seriously. I'll have to think about why it's tripping my silly-o-meter when something like Ant-Man didn't.

Could be the setting of Wakanda itself. Its allways been a little odd with its superscience theme.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on May 30, 2018, 08:32:43 AM
Not a movie, but theres a new Thundercats cartoon out. Its about as far removed from the original in art style as you can get.

And now theres a new Rocky and Bullwinkle show that just looks horrible.

Also really not liking the new Ducktakes art.

What with these massive downgrades in art?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on May 30, 2018, 11:29:49 AM
Quote from: Omega;1041266
What with these massive downgrades in art?

Laziness.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on June 05, 2018, 01:47:25 PM
Bumblebee trailer just dropped.

https://youtu.be/fAIX12F6958

As a big Transformers fan, who had hopes that the live action movies would be good, and was severely disappointed in the way Michael Bay treated the franchise, I'm hoping this movie will be decent.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: ArrozConLeche on June 18, 2018, 10:53:49 AM
Just caught Hell House LLC on Prime. Found footage horror movie, something I'm not usually a fan of. This one was genuinely creepy as fuck, though, even though they telegraph the final shock pretty badly towards the end.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: rgalex on June 18, 2018, 12:14:11 PM
Watched Savageland over the weekend on Amazon Prime.  Great low-budget fakeumentary about a town on the border of the US and Mexico that gets brutally massacred.  It's got an unnatural twist to it and the some of the "photos" of the event are downright frightening.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: ArrozConLeche on June 20, 2018, 01:57:26 PM
Quote from: rgalex;1044542
Watched Savageland over the weekend on Amazon Prime.  Great low-budget fakeumentary about a town on the border of the US and Mexico that gets brutally massacred.  It's got an unnatural twist to it and the some of the "photos" of the event are downright frightening.

I caught this yesterday, but I didn't like it nearly as much as Hell House LLC. It was plenty disturbing but not scary per se-- just sadder.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: danbuter on June 24, 2018, 09:14:20 PM
I watched Dunkirk. I don't know. Based on all the previews and reviews, I expected a really good movie. It was ok. Some scenes were well done, but overall, the movie just wasn't that interesting.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on June 25, 2018, 01:55:44 AM
Quote from: danbuter;1045665
I watched Dunkirk. I don't know. Based on all the previews and reviews, I expected a really good movie. It was ok. Some scenes were well done, but overall, the movie just wasn't that interesting.

Dunkirk felt really dull to me. I was hoping for something with a bit of excitement and a lot of tension (IOW, most of the old war movies I've liked) but this never delivered on either.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jeff37923 on July 08, 2018, 03:11:44 PM
I'm watching a very good German science fiction movie free on Amazon Prime called Cargo Space Is Cold. I'm about 20 minutes in on it and I am hooked. The only downside is that I can't seem to find this movie on DVD anywhere.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: The Exploited. on July 09, 2018, 12:29:08 PM
I'm dying to see Mandy... From the director of Beyond the Black Rainbow I believe.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on July 26, 2018, 11:34:44 PM
Watched all of No Game No Life. A fun little amime series about a pair of super gamers called to a world where everything is settled with games. And some of the games played get pretty wacky and some really clever twists and setups for each of the major challenges. Its up on Crunchyroll.

Currently re-working through Sword Art Online. First episode has a quick little homage to what I am pretty sure is Gary Gygax. Series about players trapped in a deadly fantasy VR MMO that goes in some interesting directions. Second arc features a sylvan themed MMO and the third shifts to a Sci-Fi/Post Apoc mmo. Also up on Crunchyroll except for the movie.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on August 12, 2018, 08:48:54 PM
And in WTF movie news. Micheal Bay will be producing a live action... Dora the Explorer. Except now shes in high school because nothing says Dora the Explorer like sticking her in school. Apparently eventually she will pick up the monkey and head off to the jungle to save her parents. Um Bay? You sure you didnt pick up the new Tomb Raider script by accident? :D
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on August 13, 2018, 12:57:56 AM
Quote from: Omega;1052697
And in WTF movie news. Micheal Bay will be producing a live action... Dora the Explorer. Except now shes in high school because nothing says Dora the Explorer like sticking her in school. Apparently eventually she will pick up the monkey and head off to the jungle to save her parents. Um Bay? You sure you didnt pick up the new Tomb Raider script by accident? :D

The explosions and gun fights are going to be epic.

On a related note...why in the fuck is there going to be a live action Dora film?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jeff37923 on August 13, 2018, 03:29:18 AM
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1052707
The explosions and gun fights are going to be epic.

On a related note...why in the fuck is there going to be a live action Dora film?

So Dora can explore the wonderful world of sex after she loses her virginity, obviously. It may even be a James Gunn vehicle movie....
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on August 13, 2018, 05:46:53 AM
Quote from: jeff37923;1052713
So Dora can explore the wonderful world of sex after she loses her virginity, obviously. It may even be a James Gunn vehicle movie....

I watch it with my daughter. Don't ruin it.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: ArrozConLeche on August 13, 2018, 07:20:45 AM
Quote from: jeff37923;1052713
So Dora can explore the wonderful world of sex after she loses her virginity, obviously. It may even be a James Gunn vehicle movie....

Cool. I've  been waiting  for a  reboot of the  Emmanuelle  series.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Doom on August 16, 2018, 05:02:26 PM
Hardcore Henry is pretty awesome, though the violence and pacing (if perpetual full speed can be referred to as "pacing") might be a bit much.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on August 17, 2018, 03:55:51 AM
Quote from: ArrozConLeche;1052725
Cool. I've  been waiting  for a  reboot of the  Emmanuelle  series.

I'm still trying to find a copy of the one with tge vr rigs.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on August 17, 2018, 05:56:05 PM
Quote from: Doom;1053166
Hardcore Henry is pretty awesome, though the violence and pacing (if perpetual full speed can be referred to as "pacing") might be a bit much.

For a Film Noir Detective version check out the 1947 movie "The Lady in the Lake" based on Raymond Chandler's book of the same name.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 22, 2018, 04:16:03 PM
I just watched A Quiet Place. Monsters invade (From space? Another dimension? The center of the earth?) not much details on the who, except they are blind monsters who hunt with sound. The story is about a family holed up on a farm, trying to survive.
I really liked the ending.

And I did find Michael Bay's involvement ironic.

"When the credits roll on "A Quiet Place," seeing Michael Bay's name is a jolt -- Krasinski's film feels far removed from Decepticons and Aerosmith ballads. "He never wants to squash the director's vision," said Fuller. "I think that Michael saw his responsibility as supporting [Krasinski].""

https://www.indiewire.com/2018/04/a-quiet-place-executive-producer-john-krasinski-emily-blunt-1201950769/

I think I like this Michael Bay. Help movies get made from the background. :D
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 23, 2018, 02:40:57 AM
Infinity War



My prediction:
[spoiler] I think this is gonna go similar to the comic, withe Captain Marvel taking the place of Adam Warlock. [strike]Gamora[/strike] Edit, derp, I meant Nebula. get the Infinity Gauntlet away from Thanos, and either she or Marvel use it to undo the events of the previous movie. Marvel splits up the Infinity Stones again, and we're back to status quo in the Marvel Movieverse. Several actors, including Robert Downey Junior, take this opportunity to retire their involvement.[/spoiler]
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on August 23, 2018, 09:24:51 PM
Am I the only one that felt Infinity War was a bit of a let down both as a film and as a MCU event?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on August 24, 2018, 01:18:34 AM
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1053850
Am I the only one that felt Infinity War was a bit of a let down both as a film and as a MCU event?

I thought it looked great, but it did feel like a letdown to me. Most likely that's because it's hard to fully meet the expectations of 10 years of build-up.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 24, 2018, 03:09:49 PM
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1053850
Am I the only one that felt Infinity War was a bit of a let down both as a film and as a MCU event?

Eh. I can't fault them. They have their formula, it works really well, and none of the Marvel Movies so far have been utter shite.
I aknowledgede that I was pretty burned out on the Marvel Movies a few years ago, so I went into Infinity War with a thorough "meh" attitude.
I think the big fight scenes dominated the movie, and dragged out way too long. I'd get distracted and putter around on the internet and listen out the side of my ear for something interesting to happen.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Doom on August 24, 2018, 07:42:50 PM
Quote from: Omega;1053262
For a Film Noir Detective version check out the 1947 movie "The Lady in the Lake" based on Raymond Chandler's book of the same name.


What's the relationship there? Hardcore Henry has many flashes of brilliance, but I would have never guessed it to be based on a Chandler book/movie, even if I concede many clear influences.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on August 25, 2018, 08:08:12 AM
I hated A Quiet Place. An idiotic premise, stupid situation, and characters who seem hellbent on getting themselves killed.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on August 25, 2018, 08:14:03 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1053942
Eh. I can't fault them. They have their formula, it works really well, and none of the Marvel Movies so far have been utter shite.

You missed the latest Fantastic 4 movie then. And the prior two Spider-man movies before the current re-reboot were pretty poor. I have not seen the newest one so can not say if it is good or bad. And aside from the airport battle Civil War felt so very very pointless.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on August 25, 2018, 08:15:54 AM
Quote from: Doom;1053976
What's the relationship there? Hardcore Henry has many flashes of brilliance, but I would have never guessed it to be based on a Chandler book/movie, even if I concede many clear influences.

What? No no. I meant that Lady in the Lake was an example of an early try at a fully POV movie. Far as I know there is no connection to HH.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on August 25, 2018, 01:45:27 PM
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1053850
Am I the only one that felt Infinity War was a bit of a let down both as a film and as a MCU event?


I thought it was a big let down.

The Marvel movies have had their ups and downs, but I thought the recent run of Doctor Strange, Spider-Man: Homecoming, Thor: Ragnarok, and Black Panther were excellent (and Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2 at least a solid sequel). All of them had a strong theme and visual style, plus interesting storyline and characters.

Infinity War was a jumbled, clunky mess by comparison. It had no style, and especially the formulaic plot and storyline was a major stumbling block.

(Spoilers)It was obvious from the premise that of course all six stones would fall into Thanos' hands leading to a final confrontation. So most of the plot was all playing out foregone conclusion, and even in a dull manner. What was worse was repeating the trope where Thanos threatens to kill someone, and the hero then dutifully hands over the stone - done by Loki over Thor at the start, followed by Gamora over Nebula, followed by Doctor Strange over Iron Man.(/Spoilers)
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 25, 2018, 02:12:10 PM
Quote from: Omega;1054011
You missed the latest Fantastic 4 movie then. And the prior two Spider-man movies before the current re-reboot were pretty poor. I have not seen the newest one so can not say if it is good or bad. And aside from the airport battle Civil War felt so very very pointless.

I did skip them. I wasn't interested in them, as both were reboots and reboots of reboots. So I'll amend my post to say that the MCU movies I have seen haven't been utter shite. :D
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on August 25, 2018, 03:45:48 PM
Quote from: Omega;1054011
You missed the latest Fantastic 4 movie then. And the prior two Spider-man movies before the current re-reboot were pretty poor. I have not seen the newest one so can not say if it is good or bad. And aside from the airport battle Civil War felt so very very pointless.

The Fantastic Four movies and those Spider-Man films were not technically part of Disney's MCU (nor were the Blade series, Punisher movies, Elecktra, or Daredevil). Sure, they're Marvel movies, but bringing them into the discussion is a lot like bringing up D&D 4e into a discussion about any other type of D&D.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on August 25, 2018, 06:56:52 PM
I'd argue that the Garfield Spider-Man films, at least tge first one wasn't bad.  There has not been a goid FF movie though.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on August 28, 2018, 01:46:06 AM
I actually liked the middle two Fantastic Four movies even if they did totally botch Galactus in the second one and played up the Human Torch a bit too much.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on August 28, 2018, 02:35:56 AM
Quote from: Omega;1054240
I actually liked the middle two Fantastic Four movies even if they did totally botch Galactus in the second one and played up the Human Torch a bit too much.

Wait... If those were the middle two, what was the first one? I only remember three FF films: two with Captain America as Johnny Storm and one with Killmonger as Johnny Storm.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on August 29, 2018, 12:09:04 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1054244
Wait... If those were the middle two, what was the first one? I only remember three FF films: two with Captain America as Johnny Storm and one with Killmonger as Johnny Storm.
Treat yourself, here's the original Fantastic Four movie from 1994. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrbFLJHeX8w) With the Boy Who Could Fly as Johnny Storm.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 29, 2018, 01:36:31 AM
I liked the 05 Fantastic Four. The scene on the bridge specifically was a bit of super-heroism that hadn't been in "super hero" movies for a while. Just savin' people and whatnot. No big, endless brawl.
And the "family" part was played pretty well.

Doom was shit though.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on August 29, 2018, 11:17:49 PM
Quote from: Pat;1054318
Treat yourself, here's the original Fantastic Four movie from 1994. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrbFLJHeX8w) With the Boy Who Could Fly as Johnny Storm.

I... ah... um, yeah. I watched the first 2 minutes and that's shown me I shouldn't watch the next 90 minutes, but I've got a lot of time to kill, so...
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on August 30, 2018, 04:23:26 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1054466
I... ah... um, yeah. I watched the first 2 minutes and that's shown me I shouldn't watch the next 90 minutes, but I've got a lot of time to kill, so...
It's actually better than it should be. Yes, it's pure B-grade cinema, with crappy props and special effects, mediocre acting, a very goofy villain, some serious problems with the plot and character development, and the production quality is poor (the film only exists in the form of bootleg fan copies, after all). But it's entertaining as a trashy film, coherent enough that you can follow the plot, and there are a couple character moments that work. It might be better than the 2015 version.

And it's clearly got more spirit, because the actors were really into it. I can't recommend the documentary Doomed: The Untold Story of Roger Corman's The Fantastic Four (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3113456/) (2015) because it gets tedious, but the interviews with the cast make it clear that everyone involved sincerely believed this was a high profile film destined for success. In other words, they were all completed deluded.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 24, 2018, 11:32:32 AM
2nd trailer for Bumblebee.



I can't help but sperg out. This looks so much better than the Bayformers films.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: danbuter on September 24, 2018, 06:48:54 PM
I just watched The Mummy (with Tom Cruise). It was much better than I expected. I recommend it!
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Razor 007 on September 26, 2018, 01:10:38 AM
The 13th Warrior was an excellent inspiration for RPG gaming.

My 2 cents.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: The Exploited. on September 28, 2018, 08:41:56 PM
Quote from: Razor 007;1057860
The 13th Warrior was an excellent inspiration for RPG gaming.

My 2 cents.

While not the best movie ever made I think the concept is very cool. The enemies are class (and pretty freaky initially) as well as the whole set up of being trapped in a village that is very hard to defend.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on September 29, 2018, 12:37:59 AM
Got around to finally finishing watching all of Fire and Ice. This was a 1983 animated movie by Ralph Bakshi and Frank Frazetta no less. And pretty well done with none of Bakshi's cost cutting tricks used in some other movies. This is how you do rotoscoping right. It very much feels like a D&D adventure where "stuff happens!" between the villains initial bid for power and the final battle which unfortunately gets a little choppily edited near the end. Lots of interesting characters and I actually liked that the movie took its time getting from point to point.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on October 05, 2018, 11:35:38 PM
Quote from: Omega;1058282
Got around to finally finishing watching all of Fire and Ice. This was a 1983 animated movie by Ralph Bakshi and Frank Frazetta no less. And pretty well done with none of Bakshi's cost cutting tricks used in some other movies. This is how you do rotoscoping right. It very much feels like a D&D adventure where "stuff happens!" between the villains initial bid for power and the final battle which unfortunately gets a little choppily edited near the end. Lots of interesting characters and I actually liked that the movie took its time getting from point to point.

*Puts on grumpy pants*
A lot of modern movies seem to be afraid of boring the audience with pacing. Maybe they're right, but I find even movies I like don't give much time to absorb the story before rushing on to the next scene.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on October 09, 2018, 12:17:20 AM
Solo

I liked this a lot more than I thought I would. I knew they were going to explain the Kessel Run, which really, really didn't need explaining, but whatever.
A bit too on the nose at times, "Oh, that's where Han got his blaster, Oh, that's how he got the Falcon, Oh, that's how the Falcon got to look like it did in the OT" etc. That got tiresome.
But the story was coherent, always a nice difference from the sequels, I liked the characters and how they were acted, and the story took quite a few turns that I didn't expect.
It had some teeth as well.
I give it a solid C+.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on November 04, 2018, 04:51:40 AM
Watched my old copy of the 1953 movie Houdini starring Tony Curtis and Janet Leigh. Excellent movie even with all the liberties it takes with certain elements. For a George Pal movie it is rather subdued on the fantastical elements.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on November 07, 2018, 07:20:59 AM
I finally got around to watching muh DVD of The Kingsman: The Golden Circle.

Wow. So many Bad Ideas that were flawlessly executed and so many Good Ideas that were slapped together like a half-forgotten afterthought.

And MAN does it have the worst case of sequelitis you ever did see! Can't quite make up its mind if it wants to be a Serial or an Episode...



I almost feel like I should do one of my mega analysis posts on it... almost.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on November 09, 2018, 07:35:07 PM
Saw Bohemian Rhapsody last night. Enjoyed it. They take a lot of liberties, especially with chronology, but I expect that with biopics. The music, the performances and the story all worked.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on November 10, 2018, 04:56:53 PM
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1063981
Saw Bohemian Rhapsody last night. Enjoyed it. They take a lot of liberties, especially with chronology, but I expect that with biopics. The music, the performances and the story all worked.

I've heard that the surviving members of Queen sort of slanted the depiction of the band to come across as.. how to phrase it... The Good Guys, with the now dead Freddy taking the fall for shennanigans..

How obvious is it, if at all?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jeff37923 on November 11, 2018, 03:31:54 AM
Saw Prospect, I liked it but think it is better seen as a matinee or at the dollar theater because it isn't worth full price. The movie is more of a character study than anything else.

Picked up the DVD of Angel-A from the local McKay's. I recommend this film for anyone who has an ounce of romance in their soul. The acting, story, and camera work was absolutely riveting. Just about anytime you pressed pause, you were rewarded with an incredible visual.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on November 11, 2018, 07:32:51 AM
Quote from: Spike;1064076
I've heard that the surviving members of Queen sort of slanted the depiction of the band to come across as.. how to phrase it... The Good Guys, with the now dead Freddy taking the fall for shennanigans..

How obvious is it, if at all?


That didn't seem the case to me at all. I know why some people are saying that. But I really disagree. It depicted some of the conflicts in the band but it was a pretty respectful and humanizing depiction of Mercury. It did play very, very loose with things like chronology though. If you look at interviews of the band over the years, especially Brian May and Roger Taylor, they always been very protective of Mercury. There is one scene where they are having a stylistic clash over disco elements that I think people who have an axe to grind are reading into too much. And if you watch the actual scene, the end result is Another one Bites the Dust. There is a rift in the band in the film that over emphasizes Mercury's role. But I think that was done by the writer for dramatic purposes because Mercury is the person that the film is really about (and it isn't like the rest of the band comes out looking like they handled it all that well either). Again though, even though that portion of the movie plays lose with details and chronology, overall, it gets at some essential things that matted in Queen, particularly how close the band became once it was clear he was dying and they only had a limited time to make music (and just a spoiler they do place his AIDS diagnosis way earlier than it happened in real life for dramatic purposes).

My opinion is attacks on the band members somehow trying to make themselves look better, are unfair. First off, they've spent the last several decades protecting Mercury's legacy. Second, Queen isn't the kind of band where people were starved for adoration. Brian May is comfortably regarded as one of the top guitarists in the world, and both he and Roger Taylor had prominent singing and writing roles on their albums.

Some people have attacked the movie and the band for how it handles his sexuality. Again, I don't see it. The movie is basically about Mercury finding love and friendship. They didn't do that to say he was bad for being gay. They did that because in the wake of his death the press hounded Mercury's memory and attacked him for being overly promiscuous. The band has long tried to fight the image of Mercury as a promiscuous person who treated people like sex objects. And in the weeks after his death, you can find interviews of them doing just that. The film provides an explanation for how that image stuck, and it offers a more rounded view of his relationships with people. These are people who went to bat for the man pretty ferociously. So I just think folks are forgetting both the context of his death and the context of what it meant to be gay in Mercury's lifetime. People can debate the accuracy of the way they chose to represent his life. But I don't think the intention was what many of the harsher critics say it was. It just doesn't line up with the band's behavior and statements over the years (nor does it line up with the content of the movie).
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on November 11, 2018, 07:52:58 AM
Finally got to watch Guardians of the Galaxy 2. Overall a pretty fun movie. Went in some odd directions along the way but played out fairly well. And nice to see the original Guardians make a cameo. Well except for Vance Astro.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on November 11, 2018, 12:12:59 PM
Thanks, Bedrock...  I think I'll check it out when it comes out on DVD... hmm... odds of it playing locally??? Not good...

I wasn't sure earlier, I'm a fan of Queen after a fashion, but I've seen too many shit movies lately so I've started to look on anything made in the last twenty years (That long??!?!!) as automatically bad, so my evaluation is less about quality and more about if I can relax and enjoy the stupidity on display.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on November 11, 2018, 12:18:51 PM
Quote from: Spike;1064180
Thanks, Bedrock...  I think I'll check it out when it comes out on DVD... hmm... odds of it playing locally??? Not good...

I wasn't sure earlier, I'm a fan of Queen after a fashion, but I've seen too many shit movies lately so I've started to look on anything made in the last twenty years (That long??!?!!) as automatically bad, so my evaluation is less about quality and more about if I can relax and enjoy the stupidity on display.


I quite liked it. I will probably see it once more in the theater but I am a very big fan of the band. Once is probably plenty for most viewers. It is a movie for fans and audiences. Despite some really good editing and a few impactful choices, it is more meant to entertain than please critics. The critic score on rotten Tomatoes is about 60% while the audience score is 94% (last I checked). If you like queen, it is worth seeing. It is a biopic, so does all the usual biopic stuff if that is an issue for you. If you are like warm on Queen, then it probably isn't going to be as interesting to watch.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on November 12, 2018, 12:22:14 PM
Watched the 8 Harry Potter movies. I saw Sorcerer's Stone more than a decade ago, but beyond that it's my first real exposure to the franchise in either print or film. Two things really struck me, as I watched. The first is the major tone-switch. The first two movies were light kid's stuff, then they got really dark, both visually and thematically. This helped the series, though there was way too much focus on Harry Potter's innate specialness, and the villain Voldemort remained a one-dimensional caricature instead of turning into a fully developed character. The other aspect that really stood out is how the films celebrate the classism of the elite. It's not classism in the sense of money, but classism in the sense of talent and education. While it's true one of the major themes of the movie is a fight against discrimination, it's only against the prejudice facing the new elite (mudbloods). Those who have magic have it all, while muggles are treated as the butt of jokes and doing terrible things to them is fine because it's funny (pig's tail, being turned into a blimp, wiping their minds, etc.); at best, they're just shadowy figures you feel sad about (Hermione's parents), or people needing a rescue. Even blatantly slavery (house elves) is only considered bad when it's abusive.

Wasn't at all what I was expecting.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on November 14, 2018, 08:26:49 AM
I am one of those few who just rather dislikes the whole series, movies and books. The movies are relentlessly bleak and mean spirited with only a few rare bright points before something else rotten happens.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on November 14, 2018, 09:29:07 AM
Quote from: Omega;1064503
I am one of those few who just rather dislikes the whole series, movies and books. The movies are relentlessly bleak and mean spirited with only a few rare bright points before something else rotten happens.

I would definitely avoid Joe Abercrombie's stuff then....
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 18, 2018, 11:57:31 PM
Shit like this just makes me depressed. (https://youtu.be/WUxZmen6G2U)
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on November 26, 2018, 09:29:35 AM
On another western spree and this time came across an interesting one I'd seen partially before but never knew the name of.

Lucky Luke, 1991 Italian film based on the Belgium comic series. Made by and starring Terrence Hill from the Trinity movies. It plays much like a live action cartoon at times and certainly does not take itself very seriously. And Hill also played him in the Italian live action Lucky Luke TV series also in 91 and lasted 8 episodes. Ending apruptly after the death of Hill's adopted son it seems.

And apparently in 83 Hanna Barbera and Garmont co-produced a French/German/English Lucky Luke cartoon series of 26 episodes. And there may be a new series out.

And lastly there is another Lucky Luke live action movie from 2009. Still hunting that one down.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Thornhammer on December 04, 2018, 05:46:10 PM
Anyone else with a distinct apathy towards Captain Marvel?

There's no hate there, I just cannot find the slightest damn to give about the character.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on December 04, 2018, 08:27:41 PM
Quote from: Thornhammer;1067522
Anyone else with a distinct apathy towards Captain Marvel?

There's no hate there, I just cannot find the slightest damn to give about the character.

I am still interested. Though Larson shooting her mouth off in an interview lessened that interest.

I think alot of people are misreading the trailers and that alot of the backlash is fallout from the total agendaing of the character the SJW faction at Marvel turned the character into. Combined with really bad writing even when they werent SJWing. So people were primed to look on the character negatively and unfortunately Larson has not helped matters at all.

Id say the apathy is akin to what happened to the Han Solo movie. Apathy induced by Last Jedi and the whole SJW war against the fans.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Thornhammer on December 04, 2018, 11:24:21 PM
Quote from: Omega;1066091
On another western spree and this time came across an interesting one I'd seen partially before but never knew the name of.


Hey, speaking of westerns - did you check out The Ballad of Buster Scruggs?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on December 05, 2018, 12:09:07 AM
Quote from: Omega;1067542

Id say the apathy is akin to what happened to the Han Solo movie. Apathy induced by Last Jedi and the whole SJW war against the fans.

At this point I've been enjoying close to three years of I-told-you-so shadenfreud over the decline of Star Wars. I called it when I left the Farce Awakens and haven't seen any of the new Star Wars movies after that, though, honestly, with all the youtube videos about Star Wars, I almost haven't had too.

I can even point to the exact part of the the Farce Awakens that told me what a shit show we were in for, the de-protagonizing of Finn for Rey, starting the moment she kicked his ass.  Star Wars used to have room for more than one Hero at a time, you know?

I've missed... four?... of the MCU movies, and with all the crap going on with Ms Marvel I'm tempted to sit out the second half of Infinity Wars.  I've liked Brie Larson in the past, but she seems to have forgotten that fans are the reason she has a career, as with all entertainers.   I wish I'd kept a link to an editorial piece I saw that contrasted Tom Hanks (who gracefully allows fans to take selfies with him) and Jennifer Lawrence, which made this point very well.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on December 06, 2018, 05:21:14 PM
Quote from: Spike;1067571
At this point I've been enjoying close to three years of I-told-you-so shadenfreud over the decline of Star Wars. I called it when I left the Farce Awakens and haven't seen any of the new Star Wars movies after that, though, honestly, with all the youtube videos about Star Wars, I almost haven't had too.

Rogue One is excellent.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 06, 2018, 06:55:34 PM
Quote from: Thornhammer;1067522
Anyone else with a distinct apathy towards Captain Marvel?

There's no hate there, I just cannot find the slightest damn to give about the character.


Yep. I burned out on Marvel just before Infinity War. The Captain Marvel trailers are like a couple of minutes watching someone do the dishes.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jeff37923 on December 07, 2018, 07:30:56 PM
Quote from: Pat;1067780
Rogue One is excellent.

Rogue One is the best out of all the movies IMHO. Solo wasn't that shabby, either (best on DVD).
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on December 08, 2018, 07:28:29 PM
Quote from: Pat;1067780
Rogue One is excellent.

It's good but I wouldn't go that far. It had some serious pacing issues and a bunch of switch off your brain moments.

That fact that it's still good in spite of that is amazing.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 09, 2018, 05:05:16 PM
Quote from: jeff37923;1067920
Rogue One is the best out of all the movies IMHO. Solo wasn't that shabby, either (best on DVD).

I really liked Solo, despite my criticims eariler in the thread. I'm a bit dissapointed that it didn't do well at the box office, and Disney/Lucasfilm may take the wrong lessons from that.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on December 11, 2018, 07:35:35 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1068055
I really liked Solo, despite my criticims eariler in the thread. I'm a bit dissapointed that it didn't do well at the box office, and Disney/Lucasfilm may take the wrong lessons from that.

I believe Solo did not do well because Disney screwed royal Last Jedi and alienated fans to the point they just up and refused to watch Solo out of protest. That and solo came out too soon after Last Jedi. Not helped either by some of the SJWing going on in the background from the producers that sabotaged the movie too. There are times where it feels allmost like they wanted the movies to fail.

Unfortunately Disney likely learned not a damn thing other than maybe not try to put out the movies so close together that fallout from one diminishes the next.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on December 11, 2018, 07:37:06 AM
Just watched Antman & Wasp and enjoyed it quite a bit. There were some slow moments here and there. But overall it was pretty good and had some crazy action scenes too.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on December 11, 2018, 08:07:17 AM
Also. Finally got to see a pair of anime that were suggested viewing in an old issue of Polyhedron. Which also gave a good overview of why some names are spelled differently.

First up is "Tenku Senki Shurato" (Shurato of the Heaven Wars) aka "Legend of the Heavenly Sphere Shurato": This is one of those "abducted to a fantasy world to champion a cause." sort of series from 1989-1990. Two friends are whisked away to a fantasy world. One being the reincarnation of a legendary hero, and the other inexplicably becoming evil. Interesting in that unlike most such shows the hero in this one has about zero support and things go downhill for a while. Good art and apparently was fairly popular in Japan. Not quite my thing but I got a few episodes at GenCon and finally gave it a look after decades.

The other is a weird one called Project Zeorymer, aka Hades Project Zeorymer: This was a 4 part OAV loosely based on a manga series. Frankly it didn't make alot of sense, but my copy was untranslated which made it a little harder to parse a few particulars. But the gist of it was fairly easy to figure out. A young man is abducted to pilot a super mecha stolen from some sort of organization that has taken over with these mecha what are incredibly destructive. It is also interesting that the villain actually sends an escalating number of units to take on the Zeorymer instead of just one at a time. Also good art, if occasionally choppy.

Third up was Bubblegum Crisis. One of my players has the set on DVD and plan to have a look at it soon. I have only seen parts of it over the years.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: ArrozConLeche on December 11, 2018, 10:07:06 AM
Quote from: Omega;1068208
Third up was Bubblegum Crisis. One of my players has the set on DVD and plan to have a look at it soon. I have only seen parts of it over the years.

The original one or the remake? I hated the remake.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on December 11, 2018, 09:35:40 PM
Quote from: ArrozConLeche;1068217
The original one or the remake? I hated the remake.

He has both and was not very impressed with Bubblegum Crash either so it is low on my priority list.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: ArrozConLeche on December 17, 2018, 09:49:00 AM
Ah, Bubblegum Crash wasn't nearly as good either, but I was talking about the reboot. I tried to watch with an open mind, but it just wasn't my thing.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on December 17, 2018, 05:47:47 PM
So there is a 3rd version? Never heard of it. Probably why.

Much like the 3rd or 4th remake of Gatchaman which retained the title and that was about it.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: danbuter on February 25, 2019, 05:16:17 PM
I watched Battle Angel Alita. It was pretty good. Fantastic combat scenes, and the actors were great. They did westernize it a bit, adding in a little extra romance than was in the source material, but I guess that's unavoidable nowadays.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 26, 2019, 07:01:20 PM
Quote from: danbuter;1076532
I watched Battle Angel Alita. It was pretty good. Fantastic combat scenes, and the actors were great. They did westernize it a bit, adding in a little extra romance than was in the source material, but I guess that's unavoidable nowadays.


Eh. I liked Battle Angel Alita for it's really strange aspects. Chips for brains, split personality cyborgs, uncomfortable questions about human nature and how it could swing hard from a romantic view of humanity, to a horrible dystopian view of humanity.

I'm expecting the film to have scrubbed about 99% of that, and left the cyborg fights and replaced all the dialogue with Hollywood cliches.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: ArrozConLeche on February 27, 2019, 09:13:37 AM
It's stupid of me, but I can't get past the anime eye thing. I think a review on Forbes was mixed about the movie too. They also felt the eye thing was weird.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on February 28, 2019, 05:58:54 PM
Quote from: ArrozConLeche;1076846
It's stupid of me, but I can't get past the anime eye thing. I think a review on Forbes was mixed about the movie too. They also felt the eye thing was weird.

Battle Eyeball Alita.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Thornhammer on March 04, 2019, 07:37:37 PM
Anyone else just flat-out not give a fuck about Captain Marvel?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Snowman0147 on March 04, 2019, 11:19:43 PM
Quote from: Thornhammer;1077624
Anyone else just flat-out not give a fuck about Captain Marvel?

I am skipping that movie.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 05, 2019, 02:23:04 PM
Quote from: Thornhammer;1077624
Anyone else just flat-out not give a fuck about Captain Marvel?


I'm looking forward to Shazam!

Marvel Studios could make a talking raccoon work, but I think even they can't save Captain Marvel.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on March 06, 2019, 12:49:15 AM
I've got tickets for the family to see Captain Marvel this weekend. I don't imagine it will be all that different from the rest of the Marvel movies, and they've all been fairly entertaining even if they're starting to feel like "too much of the same" to me.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: ArrozConLeche on March 06, 2019, 09:54:02 AM
Quote from: Thornhammer;1077624
Anyone else just flat-out not give a fuck about Captain Marvel?


I personally don't care much for superhero movies, except Batman and maybe Superman.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on March 06, 2019, 03:22:01 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1077811
I've got tickets for the family to see Captain Marvel this weekend. I don't imagine it will be all that different from the rest of the Marvel movies, and they've all been fairly entertaining even if they're starting to feel like "too much of the same" to me.
I thought the most recent spate of Marvel movies had nicely distinct style from each other - like Doctor Strange with its world-folding psychedelics, Guardians of the Galaxy with its 1970s music theme and humor, Thor: Apocalypse with its heavy metal quirkiness, Black Panther with its afro-futurism, along with Spider-Man: Homecoming and its high school drama.

The exception was Infinity War, which I thought was an awful formulaic mess with no style at all.

I'm cautiously optimistic that Captain Marvel will be more like the other Phase 3 movies - which is to say, not like them, but having a style of its own.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: danbuter on March 06, 2019, 05:10:04 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1076764
Eh. I liked Battle Angel Alita for it's really strange aspects. Chips for brains, split personality cyborgs, uncomfortable questions about human nature and how it could swing hard from a romantic view of humanity, to a horrible dystopian view of humanity.

I'm expecting the film to have scrubbed about 99% of that, and left the cyborg fights and replaced all the dialogue with Hollywood cliches.

A lot of that is still there. I recommend you see it.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on March 06, 2019, 09:05:33 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf
Eh. I liked Battle Angel Alita for it's really strange aspects. Chips for brains, split personality cyborgs, uncomfortable questions about human nature and how it could swing hard from a romantic view of humanity, to a horrible dystopian view of humanity.

I'm expecting the film to have scrubbed about 99% of that, and left the cyborg fights and replaced all the dialogue with Hollywood cliches.
Quote from: danbuter;1077891
A lot of that is still there. I recommend you see it.
I haven't read the original manga, but I was pleasantly surprised by Alita Battle Angel.

Admittedly I had low expectations, but it avoided many of the bad anime and bad Hollywood trends that I thought would be there.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spinachcat on March 06, 2019, 09:42:10 PM
Quote from: Thornhammer;1077624
Anyone else just flat-out not give a fuck about Captain Marvel?

Brie Larson was a terrible choice and the trailers don't give us any sense of drama or story, just disconnected quick cuts that smell like political propaganda instead of a coherent story. But who knows? Maybe it will be an okay action flick.

Shazam - in huge contrast - shows perhaps too much in its trailers, but it certainly makes its tone/story very clear. Same with the Hellboy reboot.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on March 07, 2019, 12:30:19 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1077950
Brie Larson was a terrible choice and the trailers don't give us any sense of drama or story, just disconnected quick cuts that smell like political propaganda instead of a coherent story. But who knows? Maybe it will be an okay action flick.

Shazam - in huge contrast - shows perhaps too much in its trailers, but it certainly makes its tone/story very clear. Same with the Hellboy reboot.

Why do you consider her (Larson) a terrible choice for Captain Marvel? Is is because of her acting ability or her politics? If it's the former, can you give examples? If it's the latter, I really don't care about the politics of the actors (or writers or directors or whatever) in the things I watch.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spinachcat on March 07, 2019, 12:56:58 AM
Brie has been boring and perfunctory in everything she's done, but she's Hollywood's darling of the moment. Her performance in Kong: Skull Island was surprisingly dull considering the hype around her, but most of that cast was a mess, and that film only held together because of Kong and the editing pace.

Maybe she's be amazing in the Marvel role, but nothing in trailers shows a hint of that - especially compared to the initial trailers for Wonder Woman (Gail Gadot), or compared to other female supers from older movies, look at the trailers for Underworld and Resident Evil which had a fraction of Captain Marvel's budget.  

As for her politics, she's standard Hollywood garbage.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on March 07, 2019, 03:18:50 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1077975
Brie has been boring and perfunctory in everything she's done, but she's Hollywood's darling of the moment. Her performance in Kong: Skull Island was surprisingly dull considering the hype around her, but most of that cast was a mess, and that film only held together because of Kong and the editing pace.

Maybe she's be amazing in the Marvel role, but nothing in trailers shows a hint of that - especially compared to the initial trailers for Wonder Woman (Gail Gadot), or compared to other female supers from older movies, look at the trailers for Underworld and Resident Evil which had a fraction of Captain Marvel's budget.  

As for her politics, she's standard Hollywood garbage.

Are you suggesting that Underworld(s) and Resident Evil(s) had good acting/performances from their female leads? If so, I don't think we're likely to agree on much because I thought those movies were trash (enjoyable popcorn-munching trash, but trash). I don't doubt that Larsen can pull off a performance on par with Selene or Alice--but that's setting the bar very low IMO. I'm more interested to see how her performance compares with that of ScarJo's Black Widow.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spinachcat on March 07, 2019, 03:58:07 AM
The entire MCU is popcorn trash! And that's 100% okay because it's comic books, not the Iliad. The DC movies get themselves in trouble because they're overly enamored with "comics as American mythos" instead of "disposable monthly fantasy cartoon books".  

Very few action movies are more than popcorn flicks, regardless of the gender of the lead. What Underworld and Resident Evil have is compelling performances of the character from their leads (much moreso in the first films in the series before sequels take the character concepts off the rails) and that comes across in the trailers. And I'm not a Kate Beckinsale fan, but her Selene jumped off the screen as a unique character. There is no sense of the who/what/why of Captain Marvel from the trailer and that's due to Brie's vacant performance. The same vacancy she had in Kong, except now we get "angry vacant" instead of "scared vacant".  

I suspect Brie will be on the same level as ScarJo or JLaw's Mystique, but that's not a compliment.

But I could be wrong. I thought Halle Berry as Storm was a mess in the original X-men trailers, but she was great in the actual film and has since really commanded that character.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 07, 2019, 09:58:32 AM
Quote from: danbuter;1077891
A lot of that is still there. I recommend you see it.


Quote from: jhkim;1077942
I haven't read the original manga, but I was pleasantly surprised by Alita Battle Angel.

Admittedly I had low expectations, but it avoided many of the bad anime and bad Hollywood trends that I thought would be there.


Hrm. Hrmmm. Hrmm. Maybe. I hate how hollywood takes a piece of fiction and turns it into a cookie cutter action movie, so your posts make me at least closer to the fence. I'll probably check it out on disk when it comes out.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 07, 2019, 10:07:24 AM
Quote from: danbuter;1077891

But I could be wrong. I thought Halle Berry as Storm was a mess in the original X-men trailers, but she was great in the actual film and has since really commanded that character.


Huh, I thought Storm (And Cyclops) were horribly under-used in the films. I didn't expect them to write whole sagas about their characters, but we hardly got anything. As for performances, like I said, they were hardly there in the first place, and I found both characters to be underhwhelming.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Godfather Punk on March 08, 2019, 05:22:43 PM
Just saw Captain Marvel. I was entertained and sometimes pleasantly surprised, but then again I know nothing of Captain Marvel and I managed to avoid all spoilers beyond the first trailer.  Mostly I saw it in theater because I learned she would be someone important in [strike]Protectors[/strike]Avengers : Endgame and I'm gonna see that one opening weekend.
The humor was different enough from GotG or Ragnarok. I liked Brie, disliked the CGI job (or make-up effects) they did on Fury and Coulson. And I kinda guessed what the 2 post-credits scenes would be.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: deadDMwalking on March 08, 2019, 06:18:25 PM
I really enjoyed Captain Marvel.  I'd put it in the top-tier of Marvel movies with Captain America, first Iron Man, and Guardians of the Galaxy.  Tone was a little more GotG - it was funny but didn't seem forced.  I felt compelled to register with Netflix and add my review; it was at 43% audience before I saw it and 34% after I saw it, but I can tell that the theater crowd really enjoyed the movie.  No spoilers, but I think people particularly enjoyed the cat (Goose).  I think you can discount the audience rating - it appears to have been manipulated by people that are not interested in a female super-hero lead.

There is a second post-credits scene at the very end of the credits; people who left after the first post-credits scene didn't miss anything particularly important, but I felt (and think the others in the theater) felt that it was worth watching the second one, too.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Godfather Punk on March 08, 2019, 07:09:36 PM
And the Stan Lee tribute at the beginning. :thumbsup:
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on March 08, 2019, 11:44:55 PM
Captain Marvel wasn't bad, but it wasn't great either. It really suffers for not having a memorable villain much as Doctor Strange did. Overall, the whole thing felt like it was just crammed in backstory to get Captain Marvel into Avengers: Endgame. On its own, the film didn't really do much of anything or go anywhere. Larson did fine; in my eyes it was the story that dropped the ball, not the actress.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 09, 2019, 12:51:25 PM
Quote from: deadDMwalking;1078259
I really enjoyed Captain Marvel.  I'd put it in the top-tier of Marvel movies with Captain America, first Iron Man, and Guardians of the Galaxy.  Tone was a little more GotG - it was funny but didn't seem forced.  I felt compelled to register with Netflix and add my review;


Is it on Netflix already?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on March 09, 2019, 04:42:44 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1078297
Captain Marvel wasn't bad, but it wasn't great either. It really suffers for not having a memorable villain much as Doctor Strange did. Overall, the whole thing felt like it was just crammed in backstory to get Captain Marvel into Avengers: Endgame. On its own, the film didn't really do much of anything or go anywhere. Larson did fine; in my eyes it was the story that dropped the ball, not the actress.

It was better than Thor 2 or IM3. So definitely middle of the road.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on March 09, 2019, 06:37:57 PM
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1078396
It was better than Thor 2 or IM3. So definitely middle of the road.

I agree that it was better than those two, but it also wasn't as good as roughly four times that many titles. So, I put it on the not-so-good side of the road, but not all the way into the ditch alongside it.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on March 09, 2019, 06:47:37 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1078401
I agree that it was better than those two, but it also wasn't as good as roughly four times that many titles. So, I put it on the not-so-good side of the road, but not all the way into the ditch alongside it.

I didn't want to type out all the MCU movies that are forgettable.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on March 09, 2019, 07:53:43 PM
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1078403
I didn't want to type out all the MCU movies that are forgettable.

Fair enough. I've enjoyed most of them, but I agree that they are all largely forgettable. I also tend to prefer the group movies (Avengers and Guardians of the Galaxy along with with CA: Civil War) and "buddy movies" (CA: Winter Soldier, Ant Man and the Wasp, and Thor: Ragnarok) over most of the solo hero movies. I also strongly prefer well-developed villains, which helped me to like Black Panther over Doctor Strange (even though, in the comics, I vastly preferred the latter) and was the thing I most enjoyed about the most recent Spider-Man.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spinachcat on March 10, 2019, 04:55:25 AM
I've been surprised at how few memorable villains there have been in the MCU movies. Most have been sadly one dimensional, which is weird considering how many awesome intricate villains exist in the Marvel comics.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on March 10, 2019, 01:20:21 PM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1078441
I've been surprised at how few memorable villains there have been in the MCU movies. Most have been sadly one dimensional, which is weird considering how many awesome intricate villains exist in the Marvel comics.

All one needs to do is look up Ronan the Accuser on Wikipedia. He was the blue guy in the first Guardians of the Galaxy.  He's got a history on par with Magneto for ups and downs, villianny and anti-heroism.

So its not that the MCU is lacking for interesting villains, its that they aren't making full use of them.  Part of this has to do with Time. I noted this twenty god damn years ago with the first X-Men movie, which had... 9 major characters, and 87 minutes in which to use/develop all of them. And it fails on that level, despite being an enjoyable movie... though contrasting it with the current crop of Comic Movies shows just how weak it was in retrospect.

So when making a movie under a tight deadline, you give an emphasis to the Heroes and reduce the Villains to MacGuffins, who don't need a lot of development. It can work (honestly: How much development did Darth Vader actually receive in A New Hope?)

Another element, perhaps more subjective, is that modern directors and writers are simply weak storytellers, focusing on formulaic Rotes, and allowing visuals to carry them.  Just last night I watched a comparison of the Korean Old Boy with the Spike Lee remake, and the contrast was appalling, but it shows how much can be done in small, even short, scenes if you pay attention to details... and just how much those details can matter!  Again: Darth Vader is Illustrative. He had roughly the same amount of screen time as Ronan the Accuser, yet we got so much more out of that time, thanks in part to two excellent actors, and the simple fact that DV actually had a comprehensible purpose, while RA was... some sort of randomly genocidal maniac/generic goon with power.  

Its no shock to me that one of the most compelling villains came from Thor, as whatever other flaws Kenneth Branagh may have, he was telling a story about people. Loki is interesting because he is human, its his human flaws that make him interesting, and allow him to keep dancing across the lines between hero and villain while staying true to the character, and from what I can tell Killmonger from Black Panther carries a lot of that 'humanity' with him... we can sympathize and even admire what he does even when we are appalled by his methods and choices.  

I'm increasingly of the opinion that any would be author starting out should focus their energies on making the antagonist and his/her goals before they put any thought at all into the Hero, who is actually best served as a semi-anonymous proxy for the reader/viewer... but that's a minority opinion at best.

But its damn good GM advice, I'd say...
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on March 10, 2019, 10:12:50 PM
Quote from: Spike;1078468
I'm increasingly of the opinion that any would be author starting out should focus their energies on making the antagonist and his/her goals before they put any thought at all into the Hero, who is actually best served as a semi-anonymous proxy for the reader/viewer... but that's a minority opinion at best.

The protagonist as proxy for the viewer isn't a minority view, it's straight out of the Hollywood blockbuster handbook. Critics and genre fans may dislike it, but it appeals to audiences. The usual poor development of villains is more Sturgeon's Law than anything.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on March 11, 2019, 08:02:48 AM
Quote from: Pat;1078529
The protagonist as proxy for the viewer isn't a minority view, it's straight out of the Hollywood blockbuster handbook. Critics and genre fans may dislike it, but it appeals to audiences. The usual poor development of villains is more Sturgeon's Law than anything.

How embarrassingly unclear of me. I was referring to the idea of writing the villain first as the minority opinion, not the idea of the hero as a semi-anonymous proxy.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on March 11, 2019, 02:14:57 PM
I saw Captain Marvel this weekend. I'd put it a little above average among the MCU films, and I agree with others that weak villains was its weakness - which to be fair is shared by most of the MCU films, even the good ones.

Quote from: Spike;1078468
Darth Vader is Illustrative. He had roughly the same amount of screen time as Ronan the Accuser, yet we got so much more out of that time, thanks in part to two excellent actors, and the simple fact that DV actually had a comprehensible purpose, while RA was... some sort of randomly genocidal maniac/generic goon with power.  

Its no shock to me that one of the most compelling villains came from Thor, as whatever other flaws Kenneth Branagh may have, he was telling a story about people. Loki is interesting because he is human, its his human flaws that make him interesting, and allow him to keep dancing across the lines between hero and villain while staying true to the character, and from what I can tell Killmonger from Black Panther carries a lot of that 'humanity' with him... we can sympathize and even admire what he does even when we are appalled by his methods and choices.

I agree that the MCU movies have been weak on villains - but to be fair, you're comparing to one of the most memorable cinema villains from forty years ago. Within the MCU movies, I think the best villains have been Loki (from Avengers), Vulture (from Spider-Man: Homecoming), and Killmonger (from Black Panther); plus sort-of the Winter Soldier (who was not technically the main villain, but was the opponent with the most screen time).
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 11, 2019, 03:09:43 PM
I noticed that Ant Man and the Wasp didn't even have a villain, so much as a set of antagonists. I know the ghost-woman would probably qualify as a villain technically, but really, her sympathetic situation pushed her pretty far out of villain territory, IMO.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on March 11, 2019, 03:16:53 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1078595
I agree that the MCU movies have been weak on villains - but to be fair, you're comparing to one of the most memorable cinema villains from forty years ago. Within the MCU movies, I think the best villains have been Loki (from Avengers), Vulture (from Spider-Man: Homecoming), and Killmonger (from Black Panther); plus sort-of the Winter Soldier (who was not technically the main villain, but was the opponent with the most screen time).


I think its less that Darth Vader was THAT memorable, but rather that the film(s) as a whole were that memorable.  Go back to A New Hope and tell me exactly what Darth Vader does that brings him to the level of complexity of Killmonger or The Vulture?   The only fair comparison winds up being Loki, as DV got three movies to build up his character arc.

Thank you for bringing up The Vulture, btw.  It makes an interesting example of my 'start with the Villain' theory of writing, as Spiderman:Homecoming literally starts with The Vulture!
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on March 11, 2019, 04:42:47 PM
Quote from: jhkim
I agree that the MCU movies have been weak on villains - but to be fair, you're comparing to one of the most memorable cinema villains from forty years ago. Within the MCU movies, I think the best villains have been Loki (from Avengers), Vulture (from Spider-Man: Homecoming), and Killmonger (from Black Panther); plus sort-of the Winter Soldier (who was not technically the main villain, but was the opponent with the most screen time).
Quote from: Spike;1078611
I think its less that Darth Vader was THAT memorable, but rather that the film(s) as a whole were that memorable.  Go back to A New Hope and tell me exactly what Darth Vader does that brings him to the level of complexity of Killmonger or The Vulture?   The only fair comparison winds up being Loki, as DV got three movies to build up his character arc.

Thank you for bringing up The Vulture, btw.  It makes an interesting example of my 'start with the Villain' theory of writing, as Spiderman:Homecoming literally starts with The Vulture!
I wouldn't say that Darth Vader has that much complexity - but I also don't think that strong characters are the same as complexity. With Killmonger and Vulture, we're treated to their origin backstory at the beginning of the film - but I think that's a crutch rather than being necessary. Backstory isn't the same thing as character. Good acting, writing, and directing can bring a lot to characters without any need for backstory or complexity - and I think Vader has that.

Regarding backstory, I really liked that the Tom Holland Spider-Man hasn't had an origin story. It's a tired formula, and over-rated in importance.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on March 11, 2019, 07:06:28 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1078621
I wouldn't say that Darth Vader has that much complexity - but I also don't think that strong characters are the same as complexity. With Killmonger and Vulture, we're treated to their origin backstory at the beginning of the film - but I think that's a crutch rather than being necessary. Backstory isn't the same thing as character. Good acting, writing, and directing can bring a lot to characters without any need for backstory or complexity - and I think Vader has that.

Regarding backstory, I really liked that the Tom Holland Spider-Man hasn't had an origin story. It's a tired formula, and over-rated in importance.


Yer drifting, jhkim. This isn't really a discussion of backstory at all.  This is what I said just a few posts upthread:

Quote from: Me
Its no shock to me that one of the most compelling villains came from Thor, as whatever other flaws Kenneth Branagh may have, he was telling a story about people. Loki is interesting because he is human, its his human flaws that make him interesting, and allow him to keep dancing across the lines between hero and villain while staying true to the character, and from what I can tell Killmonger from Black Panther carries a lot of that 'humanity' with him... we can sympathize and even admire what he does even when we are appalled by his methods and choices.

Neither the word, nor the concept, of Backstory comes up.  I talk about being able to relate to, to understand, the villain and why they are doing what they are doing.

Loki doesn't start out evil, he starts out at the less favored son trying to win the approval of his father, competing with a beloved older brother, but his choices are bad, and as things spiral out of control, they get worse until he loses everything he wanted.  (Yes, that's a very facile treatment, but I'm keeping this modest and short).

Killmonger disagrees with the isolationist policies of Wakanda and wants to use their advanced technology to help outsiders. But to do that he has to kill everyone who opposes him and destroy a peaceful, stable (possibly stagnant) culture.  Backstory helps us know why, but it isn't necessary.

I think the Vulture largely gets carried on the strength of Michael Keaton's acting, as there is a strange gap between the 'fuck the system that screwed us, we'll get ours' we see at the beginning and the murderous sociopath we see for the rest of the film, but even then his motivations are human motivations.

Ronan the Accuser: Random genocidal monster with vague murmurings of 'because reasons'. How can you understand or sympathize with that? He's evil for the sake of evil, basically, and really we get sort of the same thing from Ego in the second film. We can understand (if not sympathize) with his bloody quest for offspring, but then he goes off the rails with some plot to absorb all life in the galaxy that just goes into cartoon villainy.


To bring this full circle, what about Darth Vader? Well, when we meet him he's trying to secure military secrets that have been captured by the 'other side'. We don't need to know who DV is under the mask, or what sort of childhood he had to understand his motivations, and his ruthless determination would almost be admirable. We can understand him and his actions because they are relatable. The entire conflict makes sense to us: Darth Vader is searching for the droids because they hold secrets dangerous to him/his side. Every step of the plot follows from that starting point like a well constructed set of dominoes.  Going back around to Spiderman, the conflict between the Vulture and Spidey is just as organic, if not as direct (and nothing at all wrong with that!) Spiderman is trying to be a Superhero and doing Hero stuff, and the Vulture is selling alien guns to criminals to make money because the Government screwed him out of a contract. Their rational, relatable goals put them into conflict, and the movie is stronger for it than say, the Captain America, or worse, Winter Soldier (which I enjoyed, but seriously: Hydra's motivation inside SHIELD is what, exactly?)
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spinachcat on March 11, 2019, 07:24:23 PM
100% agree with Spike. The quality of a fiction highly depends on the antagonist.

Its extremely important for GMs because your players need to strive against something they respect / fear / hate and that requires time and crafting to make the villains worthy of the players' actions and their character's sacrifices.

As for Hollywood, 90% is gonna be crap so I'm happy when even 10% is worth my time.

And I am with jhkim on Origin Stories. I'm bored to tears with them. Noticed the trailers for the Hellboy reboot are downplaying that aspect, but I wonder how the actual film will deal with that. I understand their need as a setup, but you got 30 minutes max. Makes me concerned about Shazam as it looks like all Origin.

Finally saw GLASS last night. I'm a happy camper. The Unbreakable / Split / Glass trilogy worked for me and nailed the "street level" / low power superhero concept while still feeling they were "super" in aspect. I enjoy M. Night's work even when his films don't work because I always find something creative and out of the ordinary, even when the overall film is a mess (The Happening).

Also saw BUMBLEBEE (Woot! $4 Double Feature!) and I'm good. I'm an unabashed Michael Bay fan and the Transformers reboot is totally an amalgam of Bay's Transformers & Speilberg's ET. Fun PG kid's movie, not an adult fan flick.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: deadDMwalking on March 13, 2019, 02:47:30 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1078376
Is it on Netflix already?

Flixster (which uses Rotten Tomatoes).
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on March 13, 2019, 08:44:13 PM
Quote from: deadDMwalking;1078886
Flixster (which uses Rotten Tomatoes).

Flixster hasn't existed for a couple years. Captain Marvel is on a number of the streaming sites that replaced it, like Fandango Now and Vudu, but only as a preorder.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: deadDMwalking on March 14, 2019, 10:36:14 AM
Quote from: Pat;1078937
Flixster hasn't existed for a couple years. Captain Marvel is on a number of the streaming sites that replaced it, like Fandango Now and Vudu, but only as a preorder.

I'm sorry that I was unclear.  I did not watch Captain Marvel on Flixster.  I use Flixster to find movie times and I used the app to review the movie.  Flixster uses Rotten Tomatoes for critic and audience reviews to determine if a movie is 'Fresh'.  Currently, Captain Marvel is 'certified Fresh' with a 62% audience score and a 79% critic score. I saw the audience score as low as 34% on opening day, driven by people who had not seen the movie.  After seeing the movie the first time on Friday, in a theater, with an audience that clearly broadly enjoyed the movie, I registered in order to post my own review (my first ever). The movie was quite enjoyable and I went to see it again the next day, this time with my wife and three children (age 11, 7, and 3).  My wife and the two older kids quite enjoyed the movie; the three year old enjoyed being AT the movies, but probably didn't care much, but she was well-behaved and I'm glad we included her.  

As far as a movie 'villain', I don't think this movie suffers for not having a clearly defined bad guy that can be punched in the face.  I think it's easy to believe that bad things happen because a bad person does bad things and punching that bad guy in the face will solve that problem.  The truth is that a lot of bad things happen because well meaning people take actions that they believe are good and either have unintended consequences or they have convinced themselves that they're supporting the 'greater good'.  Civil War dealt with similar themes regarding personal responsibility versus societal oversight.  In the movie there were a series of objectives and a series of obstacles; the fact that it wasn't a single bad-actor pulling the strings didn't bother me at all.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on March 14, 2019, 11:55:42 AM
Quote from: deadDMwalking;1078992
I'm sorry that I was unclear.  I did not watch Captain Marvel on Flixster.  I use Flixster to find movie times and I used the app to review the movie.  Flixster uses Rotten Tomatoes for critic and audience reviews to determine if a movie is 'Fresh'.
Ah, my bad. I didn't realize a Flixster app was still around. They no longer exist as a company, and my experience with them (online movie locker) is they shut their doors and closed. Always odd how different exposure combined the complexity of mergers and acquisitions can lead to very different perspectives on things as fundamental as whether a company is still around. I suppose as long as it's bought and turned into a brand, nothing ever really dies.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on March 16, 2019, 10:58:44 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1078647
100% agree with Spike. The quality of a fiction highly depends on the antagonist.

Its extremely important for GMs because your players need to strive against something they respect / fear / hate and that requires time and crafting to make the villains worthy of the players' actions and their character's sacrifices.


To be fair, as I understand it the Antagonist in Captain Marvel is 'The Patriarchy', and leaving aside external concerns that is a perfectly valid choice of antagonists. I understand Absalom, Absalom* is a classic example of a story with no true antagonist, with the family struggling against nature.

Conflict is what is important, so what I said about starting with the villain is actually of limited use if viewed as literal.

The problem with CM's use of the Patriarchy is not that The Patriarchy is boring or that it doesn't exist, its that Marvel doesn't struggle against it. Its a one sided fight of a hypercompetent Ur-woman against a weak and feckless concept trying to surpress her inner awesome, or so it seems to me**.   Conceptually it isn't a problem with the antagonist, its a problem with the hero (ie: She never struggles, never grows, never has that moment of darkness, blah blah...), but bringing it full circle, if the role of The Patriarchy was more fully fleshed out, then CM would have potentially had these issues to solve.












* Haven't seen/read it.  I'm totally burnishing my intellectual cred with some name drops that mean nothing.  Pimpin'!

**I haven't seen it, so I'm speculating based on second hand reports.  Look man, its a 100 mile drive for a character I never cared for in a film I didn't expect and the main actress doesn't even want me to see it, so... yeah.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: JRT on March 16, 2019, 11:10:11 AM
Quote from: Spike;1079345
To be fair, as I understand it the Antagonist in Captain Marvel is 'The Patriarchy'...


Not sure why you think that, since as presented it's really about an alien race that basically kidnapped her, and had used propaganda against another alien race to make them look like the bad guy.  

I saw nothing in this movie that really emphasized anything resembling "patriarchy".  I think you might be listening too much to the people critiquing the movie without seeing it, or those praising it and reading into things that aren't there.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on March 16, 2019, 11:26:27 AM
Quote from: JRT;1079347
Not sure why you think that, since as presented it's really about an alien race that basically kidnapped her, and had used propaganda against another alien race to make them look like the bad guy.  

I saw nothing in this movie that really emphasized anything resembling "patriarchy".  I think you might be listening too much to the people critiquing the movie without seeing it, or those praising it and reading into things that aren't there.


I'm not sure why you are invested so much in making this point, as I clearly stated that there is nothing wrong with a conceptual antagonist even 'The Patriarchy'.  

As to your inability to see past superficial conflict to the thematic conflict at the heart of the film, that I can't help you with. Perhaps you have a vested reason to not see it in this case?  Perhaps you need some giant conan looking motherfucker with "The Patriarchy" emblazoned across his chest in order to visualize conceptual enemies?    

Perhaps you'd care to disagree that 'The Weather' could be an antagonist in Absalom, Absalom? No? Then I assume your disagreement is emotional and not rational.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: JRT on March 16, 2019, 12:26:41 PM
Quote from: Spike;1079351
I'm not sure why you are invested so much in making this point, as I clearly stated that there is nothing wrong with a conceptual antagonist even 'The Patriarchy'.

Hah, "invested"?  I simply wrote two sentences in response.  Hardly what I'd call an investment.

You said "To be fair, as I understand it the Antagonist in Captain Marvel is 'The Patriarchy'"  First of all, you said as you understood it.  But you didn't see the movie.

My comment corresponded to whether or not you've seen the movie at all, or if you're just listening to the critics and second hand reports who think it is some sort of SJW fantasy, and basing your critique of the movie on that aspect rather than the actual viewing--in which case I simply provided what I consider a correction, as well as  a question as what caused you to think that was the theme.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on March 16, 2019, 02:57:58 PM
The enemy in CM is Imperialism.

More specifically, western imperialism, with the Kree leadership all being white and the Skrulls being broken into native tribes that refused to being conquered.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: JRT on March 16, 2019, 08:01:13 PM
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1079366
The enemy in CM is Imperialism.

More specifically, western imperialism, with the Kree leadership all being white and the Skrulls being broken into native tribes that refused to being conquered.

I agree with imperialism, maybe not necessarily Western though--probably more based on the Roman Empire style.  The Upper Class Kree are blue, not the white skinned ones (or black ones)--they are kind of the minority.  Though that's not obvious in the movie--it's more the MCU in general.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on March 17, 2019, 01:36:45 PM
(Minor spoilers - nothing significant)

Quote from: JRT;1079408
I agree with imperialism, maybe not necessarily Western though--probably more based on the Roman Empire style.  The Upper Class Kree are blue, not the white skinned ones (or black ones)--they are kind of the minority.  Though that's not obvious in the movie--it's more the MCU in general.
In terms of narrative, I'd agree that the enemy is collectivist militarism and imperialism. Inherently, I don't see that the Kree are any more symbolic of the U.S. than of, say, China or Japan. I think it plays fine in China, picturing the Kree as the imperialist Japanese. Tibetans could easily see China in the Kree. etc.

Calling it the Patriarchy is interesting - because I think many people would see that - which I'm sure the film-makers are aware of. The Kree are not in the slightest portrayed as sexist. Their military are integrated, and no mention is made of Captain Vers being a woman as unusual. Her superior officer / mentor is male, but the Supreme Intelligence is portrayed as sexless - and appears to Vers as a woman. Meanwhile, her allies on Earth are mostly men.

A key point of the film is when Carol, in montage, remembers a series of points in her childhood of being knocked down and getting up again. I think this is taken by audiences as a scene of female empowerment. In the montage, young Carol is seen as all girls. But there's nothing inherently gendered in it, other than Carol being female.

By contrast, Wonder Woman is a much more gendered movie - inherent from its source material. It's very much about matriarchy vs patriarchy - given the all-female Paradise Island contrasted with the sexist WWI era setting.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: deadDMwalking on March 18, 2019, 11:42:25 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1079494
In the montage, young Carol is seen as all girls.

I'm sure all girls (and probably all boys) can relate to trying to move past failure, but I don't think they were trying to imply that all girls are like Carol - she very clearly pushes the envelope in terms of achievement, which is part of what makes her worthy to be a hero.  

Captain America did more with this - obviously the heroes have super powers, the question that leads to is whether they're worthy of them.  Thor also directly confronts that.  I think Captain Marvel realizing that 'getting up again' is what makes you a hero is important to her arc, but it is not specifically a commentary on girls versus boys - it just happens that a lot of people telling her that she couldn't 'play with the boys' were for obviously sexist reasons, and Thor or Captain America didn't deal with those specific problems.  But Captain American certainly had a similar experience with more physically powerful 'bullies'.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on March 27, 2019, 09:41:56 AM
While I am not interested in Alita: Battle Angel. It is at least a chucklefest to watch the SJWs attack it now since it seems to be outperforming their chosen savior Captain Marvel.

One recent accusation on a newsfeed was that Alita was doing so well because "Men are sexist and Alita has a totally sexualized body!" which anyone with even one brain cell to rub together can tell isnt true. She has a fairly normal figure and doesnt even have any genitalia! Really. WFT SJWs? And yet Captain Marvel gets a pass...
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on March 27, 2019, 02:45:18 PM
Quote from: Omega;1081081
While I am not interested in Alita: Battle Angel. It is at least a chucklefest to watch the SJWs attack it now since it seems to be outperforming their chosen savior Captain Marvel.

One recent accusation on a newsfeed was that Alita was doing so well because "Men are sexist and Alita has a totally sexualized body!" which anyone with even one brain cell to rub together can tell isnt true. She has a fairly normal figure and doesnt even have any genitalia! Really. WFT SJWs? And yet Captain Marvel gets a pass...
The point about outperforming seems off base. Here's the numbers from BoxOfficeMojo -

Captain Marvel (BoxOfficeMojo (https://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=main&id=marvel2018a.htm))
Budget: approx. $152M
Domestic: opening weekend $153M, second weekend $68M (-55% drop), third weekend $34M (-49% drop)
Foreign: opening weekend $303M, total to date $590M


Alita: Battle Angel (BoxOfficeMojo (https://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=main&id=alita.htm))
Budget: approx. $170 million
Domestic: opening weekend $33M, second weekend $12M (-57% drop), third weekend $7M (-41% drop)
Foreign: opening weekend $31M, total to date $316M


Totals aren't quite comparable since Captain Marvel came out a month later and is still playing, but Alita has made $400M worldwide, while Captain Marvel has already made $914M worldwide and seems likely to pass a billion. Alita has performed well in Asia and came close to Captain Marvel there, but Captain Marvel has performed roughly five times better in the U.S. and made more than twice as much overall. I think the Asia vs U.S. split seems obvious given the material for each, and Captain Marvel has clearly done much better overall.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 27, 2019, 03:43:40 PM
I haven't seen either! Do I win anything?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on March 27, 2019, 05:44:36 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1081127
I haven't seen either! Do I win anything?

Extra money in your pocket right now and the opportunity to watch them as "new releases" when they show up on On Demand in a couple of months.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: deadDMwalking on March 27, 2019, 06:44:28 PM
I took my 11 year old to Alita.  The movie was okay.  I don't think Alita was sexualized - there were questions about whether a human could love someone with a mechanical body.  Ultimately the movie fails to resolve its central premise; it essentially establishes that a sequel is required.  

Having seen both, I think Captain Marvel was the better movie and had much broader appeal.  

$900 Million+ compared to $400 Million would make a premise of 'Alita outperforms Captain Marvel' difficult to fathom.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on March 29, 2019, 01:08:28 PM
Quote from: deadDMwalking;1081158
it essentially establishes that a sequel is required.  

Having seen both, I think Captain Marvel was the better movie and had much broader appeal.  

$900 Million+ compared to $400 Million would make a premise of 'Alita outperforms Captain Marvel' difficult to fathom.

1: Sounds like it ends at about the same point the anime way back ended on. There never was a sequel far as I know.

2: Alita just doesnt appeal to me. Im more curious to see Captain Marvel. But I am going to wait and get it second hand off E-bay rather than put money in Disney or Marvel's pocket at this point.

3: Apparently Alita had a bigger budget than CM. But from all accounts CM had a substantially bigger marketing budget. Also apparently someone has been tinkering with the numbers for CM as well. Disney? Someone else? But there has definitely been some underhanded goings on with CM so all bets are off on their claimed numbers. I am also dubious of the claims it is the sixth highest grossing film since 2002 as wikipedia claims. But who knows at this point?

x: I did like Antman & Wasp. Aside from a few slow points it was an overall fairly good movie that suffered a little from trying to shoehorn in five or so different stories from the comics into one movie and using hardly any of some of them.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on March 29, 2019, 04:08:19 PM
Quote from: Omega;1081421
3: Apparently Alita had a bigger budget than CM. But from all accounts CM had a substantially bigger marketing budget. Also apparently someone has been tinkering with the numbers for CM as well. Disney? Someone else? But there has definitely been some underhanded goings on with CM so all bets are off on their claimed numbers. I am also dubious of the claims it is the sixth highest grossing film since 2002 as wikipedia claims. But who knows at this point?
You describe "claimed numbers" here. But box office results aren't internal numbers from Disney claimed without verification. They're from exactly the same source as all the other box office results - collected from theaters. Disney could hide some production or marketing costs internally, but I don't see how to question the box office gross except by conspiracy theory that box office results for all movies everywhere are rigged. Particularly given the variety of international distributors, it seems highly implausible that a conspiracy to massively manipulate numbers could get through without notice.

Still, if you have a source for that, I'd be interested to hear it.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on March 29, 2019, 08:14:28 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1081462
You describe "claimed numbers" here.

Numbers can be manipulated, and apparently Disney bought up a bunch of tickets for the movie. How much? No clue. At first I thought that was just for the boxtop discount tickets they were doing. But seems after that so who knows what the hell is up. But seems people are noticing something. They sure as hell noticed Rotten Tomatoes manipulating the numbers. Weird stuff that is honestly perplexing.

The movie does seem to be picking up at the box office again. Probably because most of the viewers are unaware of Larson's bad attitude and self proclaimed "agenda" she pushed into the movie.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: deadDMwalking on April 01, 2019, 10:38:24 AM
I think people are watching the movie because it is fun.  

I saw the movie twice on opening weekend and I saw a different movie a couple of weeks later and the number of people per showing appeared to me to be relatively consistent with a popular movie.  The box office receipts from movies this decade tend to be higher because of IMAX/RPS/3D which include a higher ticket.  I don't know that more people saw Captain Marvel than saw Iron Man in theaters, but it certainly wouldn't surprise me; a lot of people know what they're getting with Marvel movies and a lot of people who aren't into comics have been enjoying them.  

I think that if you feel that the numbers are lying, it means that the movie doesn't fit in with a narrative you want to be true; I think that's a far bigger problem.  Johnny Cash described the problem in Man in Black:

Quote from: Johnny Cash

And, I wear it for the thousands who have died,
Believen' that the Lord was on their side,
I wear it for another hundred thousand who have died,
Believen' that we all were on their side.


It's easy to believe that you're 'standing up' for others who agree with you when you're just...not.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 01, 2019, 11:52:21 PM
I think its more a matter of various companies, including Disney, caught pulling various tricks and it means you really can not trust them after that. Are the numbers as good as they appear? Who knows? But with all the other trickery going on it is best to not just believe at face value. Movie companies have been turning more and more to manipulation. A few years back it was just shill reviews to generate fake good news. But over the last few years its getting worse.

As said. I was hoping the movie would do well and advocated that people were reading the wrong things into the trailers. Then Larson herself proved me so very wrong. And things went downhill from there.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on April 02, 2019, 04:30:47 PM
Quote from: Omega;1081826
I think its more a matter of various companies, including Disney, caught pulling various tricks and it means you really can not trust them after that. Are the numbers as good as they appear? Who knows? But with all the other trickery going on it is best to not just believe at face value.
You are still speaking as if the box office numbers are a just some numbers made up by Disney, and we have to trust in Disney to believe those numbers.

Box office totals come from groups of theaters, where each theater chain publishes their ticket sales. Box Office Mojo is just one front end for showing that - you can compare the numbers with many others. I believe Entertainment Data, Inc. (EDI) is the most common central source - but they are transparent about the numbers they get so they can be spot checked. Particularly in the international market, theaters are under different management - and different people working there can see the data that is attributed to their theaters.

cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box_office#Box_office_reporting

So it's a highly distributed system subject to a lot of little uncertainties, but I find it hard to credit the idea that box office receipts could be off by hundreds of millions of dollars.

Quote from: Omega;1081826
Movie companies have been turning more and more to manipulation. A few years back it was just shill reviews to generate fake good news. But over the last few years its getting worse.
Of course companies try to use manipulation to get people into buying their product. To my mind, that's basically the definition of marketing. Do you feel that there was a good old days when companies were just honest and didn't try to manipulate people into buying?

Quote from: Omega;1081826
As said. I was hoping the movie would do well and advocated that people were reading the wrong things into the trailers. Then Larson herself proved me so very wrong. And things went downhill from there.
I dunno. I don't follow entertainment news and haven't seen anything from Larson (or pretty much any other celebrity). I don't know what you got from that. I watched the movie and I liked it - as did my friends and family. That's how I base things.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 03, 2019, 12:19:16 AM
Bumblebee

During the first third, I wasn't very enthusiastic. It has it's moments, but nothing really stood out as great. towards the transition from the middle to the climax, the characters got got quite a bit better. They started to make the cookie cutter characters a bit more relatable. Last third was good. I could follow the action, unlike all the other movies in the franchise, which were a godawful CGI mess.

Serviceable story, nothing earth shaking there. The Transformers characters were actually characters, for a nice change.

I don't expect anyone will understand, but

[spoiler]The scene at the end where Bumblebee meets up with Optimus Prime, in his G1 Freightliner truck mode got me all emotional. Up until now, I'd been resigned to the live action Transformers movies being garbage, but for a moment there the G1 cartoon I loved as a kid was on the big screen. The whole movie was worth it just for that scene, to me. [/spoiler]
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on April 03, 2019, 01:30:59 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1081987
Bumblebee

During the first third, I wasn't very enthusiastic. It has it's moments, but nothing really stood out as great. towards the transition from the middle to the climax, the characters got got quite a bit better. They started to make the cookie cutter characters a bit more relatable. Last third was good.
I hadn't seen any of the other movies in the franchise, and barely remember the cartoon. But I agree with this. It definitely got better.

It straddled a fine line between shallowly repeating 80s tropes and really engaging with them, but yeah, I think it got better. And it did make the transformers into characters - even the bad guys.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 03, 2019, 03:07:11 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1081993
I hadn't seen any of the other movies in the franchise, and barely remember the cartoon. But I agree with this. It definitely got better.

It straddled a fine line between shallowly repeating 80s tropes and really engaging with them, but yeah, I think it got better. And it did make the transformers into characters - even the bad guys.

As a Transformers fan, (That's the TF, in Ratman_tf) I've had some time to brew up some specific opinions, and read a few reviews.

Bumblebee was better than the previous films in the franchise, but Bay has set the bar very low.
The film still suffers from the casual violence and over the top action of the Bayhem precedent. For example, the Decepticons casually killing humans and Autobots. Now, I don't mind that the bad guys do bad things, but it's treated very casually. Like, oh well, Cliffjumper just got cut in half. On with the film! Bumblebee casually kicks a Decepticon's severed head in the first battle sequence. The good guys seem just as shitty as the bad guys, and there's very little reflection on the extreme violence. Even the cartoons were more thoughtful than that!
The whole movie suffers from moving far too fast and not building tension. A problem I have with a lot of modern movies. Action-Drama-Humor, repeat in quick succession until the credits roll. It makes for a very unsatisfying story.
Charlie starts out walking a very thin line between being understandably upset over her father's recent (ish?) death, and being shitty towards her family over it. I think this actually pays off when the film starts building towards the climax, and the family has to come together. Though it has the same pacing problem where it's all thrown together at the last moment.
The semi-love interest is at least not a complete goofball, but really doesn't add a whole lot to the movie besides being the person who stumbles into the situation while pursuing Charlie, and being a foil for the whole "Girl and her robot" situation. But it does give some cool scenes where Charlie gets to show off her cool alien car robot to him. So eh.
I think the movie needed to prune some scenes, and focus on the remaining elements to make them more resonant and impactful. Pacing and building up the story.

Nitpicks-
1. I believe Charlie was trying to fix her father's Corvette engine with parts from boat motors? I don't think car engines work that way. I'll have to re-watch to make sure that's what she was doing.
2. Sector-7 guy racking the slide on his pistol in his office. Such an eye-rollingly bad movie cliche.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: deadDMwalking on April 03, 2019, 04:40:35 PM
@Omega

You're in tinfoil hat territory.

Disney is a publicly traded company.  They have to report to their stockholders about their financial performance.  

I don't know what you think they're getting by inflating the numbers - the more they do that, the more it costs them.  If Disney were going to try to make movies look successful, surely they would have done the same with John Carter of Mars?  

From all appearances, this was a decent Marvel movie and performed like a decent Marvel movie.  Other than 'I don't like SJWs and I want this movie to fail', on what basis do you suspect that they didn't just cross the $1 Billion world-wide this week?  

It boggles my mind to think of how many people would have to be in on this conspiracy.  If theater owners were showing the film to empty auditoriums, surely we'd have heard reports of that?  I saw the movie twice and the theater I go to has assigned seats; it appeared that all the seats that were assigned before I bought my tickets were filled.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: rgalex on April 04, 2019, 08:48:42 AM
Trailer for the Joker movie dropped. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t433PEQGErc)  Lots of people seem to be really excited but I'm just not feeling it.  I just... I don't know.  To me the Joker is just one of those villains I feel is better w/o an official origin.  Also, I kinda think he, of all the villains out there, should never come off as a sympathetic character.  Maybe it's just me though.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 05, 2019, 01:52:32 AM
Quote from: deadDMwalking;1082086
@Omega

You're in tinfoil hat territory.


Or are you blindly naive or been living under a rock all this time?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 05, 2019, 02:17:50 AM
Quote from: rgalex;1082185
Trailer for the Joker movie dropped. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t433PEQGErc)  Lots of people seem to be really excited but I'm just not feeling it.  I just... I don't know.  To me the Joker is just one of those villains I feel is better w/o an official origin.  Also, I kinda think he, of all the villains out there, should never come off as a sympathetic character.  Maybe it's just me though.

I am not liking the look of this Joker. Another "Nut in makeup" take rather than the chemically deformed loon?

Depends on which joker they are using. Assuming its not another one totally unrelated to anything in the comics.

Depictions of the Joker, like about every comic character, have changed depending on the writer. But one older backstory is sympathetic. That being the one where the person that would become the Joker was a comedian who agreed to help a gang with a heist in order to help his ill and pregnant wife. Falling into the chemicals while trying to escape Batman. His wife and child die and all this drives him insane.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: deadDMwalking on April 05, 2019, 11:40:43 AM
Quote from: Omega;1082313
Or are you blindly naive or been living under a rock all this time?

I don't think so.  

Quote from: cinemablend
Here, in release order, are Marvel's members of the billion dollar club.
Marvel's The Avengers. Global Box Office: $1.518 Billion.
Iron Man 3. Global Box Office: $1.214 Billion.
Avengers: Age Of Ultron. Global Box Office: $1.405 Billion.
Captain America: Civil War: $1.153 Billion.
Black Panther: $1.346 Billion
Avengers: Infinity War: $2.048 Billion
Captain Marvel: $1.003 Billion (and growing)

Clearly there are successful movies that aren't in the $1B+ club, even ones I quite enjoyed.  From this list, the films most closely associated with the Avengers have done the best; Captain Marvel was teased at the end of Infinity War and included a teaser for the next Avengers movie.  It's hardly surprising that Captain Marvel would correlate.  Further, it appears that GENERALLY, newer movies are grossing more than older movies.  I'd attribute that at least in part to more IMAX/3D screenings that include higher ticket prices.  That is, it's possible to gross MORE while fewer people watch the movie if those people are opting in for the premium experience.  

While I've never seen a movie in China, I'm not particularly skeptical of Transformers: Age of Extinction making nearly $300 million in China, so I'm not any more skeptical of Captain Marvel's gross.  This file appears to be in line with other films.  The audience in the theater appeared to be in line with other movies that have crossed the $1B mark.  I have not seen or heard any credible evidence that the numbers have been doctored.  It appears that the only people trying to cast doubt on the numbers don't want to believe that a super-hero movie starring a woman with 'outspoken views on gender equality' could perform well.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: JRT on April 06, 2019, 06:44:28 AM
Quote from: Omega;1082313
Or are you blindly naive or been living under a rock all this time?


I think the issue is that, while we can argue there's no such thing as "objective news", usually statistics are the ones hardest to spin unless the stats reporting has errors on that level.

I try to use Occam's razor when thinking about this type of thing.  Marvel Movies have done pretty darn well since they established the MCU, especially with The Avengers Movie tying them together.  Captain Marvel is consistent with the same box office performance, so I don't see any manipulation of the figures.  Seeing the movie myself, there was nothing in this movie to come off as heavy handed preaching, etc.  And I don't think anything Bree Larson said would have a significant backlash--there's been very little talk of that.  (For those that didn't know, she said something about wanting movie critics to not be dominated by "White Men" last year).

Also, most movie reporting on Box Office really loves to emphasize failures as well as successes.  Let's put it this way--if a Marvel Movie was not doing well, the press would be all over that.  People are actually waiting for "super-hero fatigue" to set in, and nobody's going to be on top forever, so I do expect at some point we will have a Marvel Movie that is considered a failure.  It hasn't happened yet.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: rgalex on April 08, 2019, 07:18:36 AM
Went and saw Shazam! over the weekend with some friends.  It was good.  The story was an origin story, but I don't really mind those so long as we haven't seen them a dozen times before (Batman, Superman, Spider-man, etc).  One of the best surprises was that they didn't show all the funny parts in the trailer.

Overall I'd give it a B+.  Good story, children actors that didn't suck, nice message about family, fun action.  On the downside it was obvious in a few places that the budget didn't allow for the CGI to be as polished as it could have been.  Also, the villain was a little dull but the actor did a good job with what he was given.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on April 08, 2019, 04:25:54 PM
Quote from: rgalex;1082663
Went and saw Shazam! over the weekend with some friends.  It was good.  The story was an origin story, but I don't really mind those so long as we haven't seen them a dozen times before (Batman, Superman, Spider-man, etc).  One of the best surprises was that they didn't show all the funny parts in the trailer.

Overall I'd give it a B+.  Good story, children actors that didn't suck, nice message about family, fun action.  On the downside it was obvious in a few places that the budget didn't allow for the CGI to be as polished as it could have been.  Also, the villain was a little dull but the actor did a good job with what he was given.

I enjoyed the movie, but Shazam! had some really conflicting tones. It's 70% lighthearted and fun with 30% holy shit that's violent thrown in. You know there's going to be some fighting in a superhero movie, but some of the violence was a bit surprising to me.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 09, 2019, 01:20:57 AM
In a way it is Shazam/Captain Marvel in name only as they really do disservice to both the characters. Not as badly as in New 52. But ugh. Someone missed the memo on who Captain Marvel and Bully Batson are. The TV series, cartoon and even the serial got it down better. Though the TV series deviated massively in other respects.

Shazam feels more like a retooled Prime script for Ultraverse. Looks good though. But like other DC movies, seems to miss the points of the characters, Even Wonder Woman has that problem.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: deadDMwalking on April 09, 2019, 10:39:57 AM
Quote from: Omega;1082748
Shazam feels more like a retooled Prime script for Ultraverse. Looks good though. But like other DC movies, seems to miss the points of the characters, Even Wonder Woman has that problem.

I thought WonderWoman was the best DC movie by a wide margin.  What do you think the point of the character is and how do you think they missed it?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on April 09, 2019, 07:42:44 PM
Quote from: Omega;1082748
In a way it is Shazam/Captain Marvel in name only as they really do disservice to both the characters. Not as badly as in New 52. But ugh. Someone missed the memo on who Captain Marvel and Bully Batson are. The TV series, cartoon and even the serial got it down better. Though the TV series deviated massively in other respects.

Shazam feels more like a retooled Prime script for Ultraverse. Looks good though. But like other DC movies, seems to miss the points of the characters, Even Wonder Woman has that problem.

There's that pesky Wisdom of Solomon that the current comic run pretends isn't a thing, and the movie follows suit.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on April 09, 2019, 09:01:35 PM
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1082833
There's that pesky Wisdom of Solomon that the current comic run pretends isn't a thing, and the movie follows suit.
To be fair, it's not just the current comic run. The same was true in other adaptations like the Young Justice cartoon. A number of writers have been intriguing by the idea of a kid in an adult body. I agree that it isn't the original Captain Marvel of the comics. But a lot of adaptations change things from the original comics considerably. I mostly care about whether it's a good movie first.

With Shazam, I was mixed. I was annoyed by much of the first half of the Shazam movie, but I have to admit, the ending really hooked me.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: danbuter on April 09, 2019, 09:35:13 PM
Quote from: rgalex;1082185
Trailer for the Joker movie dropped. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t433PEQGErc)  Lots of people seem to be really excited but I'm just not feeling it.  I just... I don't know.  To me the Joker is just one of those villains I feel is better w/o an official origin.  Also, I kinda think he, of all the villains out there, should never come off as a sympathetic character.  Maybe it's just me though.

I think he's going to start out weird but basically nice, and then end up madly sociopathic and killing people for fun. He actually seems insane, just with his little posture changes and facial expressions.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 10, 2019, 01:10:15 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1082842
To be fair, it's not just the current comic run. The same was true in other adaptations like the Young Justice cartoon. A number of writers have been intriguing by the idea of a kid in an adult body. I agree that it isn't the original Captain Marvel of the comics. But a lot of adaptations change things from the original comics considerably. I mostly care about whether it's a good movie first.

With Shazam, I was mixed. I was annoyed by much of the first half of the Shazam movie, but I have to admit, the ending really hooked me.

I liked the Justice League version where as Captain Marvel he was more mature and confident. But there was still a kids wonder and hope too.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on April 11, 2019, 10:50:42 PM
I just saw the new Hellboy, and it's really, really bad. I thought about leaving after less than an hour of the film, but I din't really have anything better to do, so I sat through the second half texting with a friend that had the good sense not to join me for the film. The action scenes felt like a video game, and so did the dialogue. But the story...how the hell could they cut & paste it so sloppily that it made almost no sense at all. More than a few times there was the "tell them, show them, then make it totally irrelevant by the next scene" bullshit. This Hellboy wasn't just brooding and sarcastic, he was a whining bitch. The squeaky babydoll voice of the female BPRD agent/medium was grating too.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Godfather Punk on April 12, 2019, 07:59:53 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1083045
But the story...how the hell could they cut & paste it so sloppily that it made almost no sense at all. More than a few times there was the "tell them, show them, then make it totally irrelevant by the next scene".
It's a railroad scenario, where the PCs have to go from scene to scene to fight, and get the next clue for the next encounter.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 12, 2019, 02:19:32 PM
Dare I even mention that the teaser trailer for the new Star Wars film dropped?
I mean, at this point I'm only interested in watching this flaming train finally go sailing off the tracks and crash into the gorge.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on April 12, 2019, 03:54:13 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1083114
Dare I even mention that the teaser trailer for the new Star Wars film dropped?
I mean, at this point I'm only interested in watching this flaming train finally go sailing off the tracks and crash into the gorge.

My day was better not knowing that it was out.  

That said, looks like more of the same shit I didn't like in TLJ.

Wonder if they've got the stones to withstand the cries of racism if they off Lando like they have every other OG character.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Thornhammer on April 12, 2019, 04:05:16 PM
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1083124
Wonder if they've got the stones to withstand the cries of racism if they off Lando like they have every other OG character.

Nope.  So they won't kill Lando.

He might have been on the chopping block earlier, but not with Carrie Fisher passing away.

The Last Jedi badly, badly damaged my interest in new movies.

I'll admit, though - I was watching the Celebration feed when they showed the trailer.  When Ian McDiarmid walked out, I lost it.  Marked right the fuck out and am not ashamed of that in the slightest.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 12, 2019, 04:18:21 PM
I sat through the trailer. I suspect it's a huge troll. Are they bringing back the Emperor? Who is the Last Skywalker? If only they built up an actually interesting story and characters to care about, I might be equally interested in those questions.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 12, 2019, 11:04:21 PM
Dark side Ghost? Or possibly he he uncovered the secret of immortality and reformed. Or its a clone. Or like Darth Maul, he survived somehow. I mean really. If Maul can survive being cut in half then all bets are off.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on April 12, 2019, 11:12:48 PM
Quote from: Omega;1083156
Dark side Ghost? Or possibly he he uncovered the secret of immortality and reformed. Or its a clone. Or like Darth Maul, he survived somehow. I mean really. If Maul can survive being cut in half then all bets are off.

It's J.J. Abrams. Guy is an imitator. He knows what works without knowing why it works. Look at Into Darkness for a great example.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Armchair Gamer on April 13, 2019, 11:23:36 AM
Quote from: Omega;1083156
Dark side Ghost? Or possibly he he uncovered the secret of immortality and reformed. Or its a clone. Or like Darth Maul, he survived somehow. I mean really. If Maul can survive being cut in half then all bets are off.

   If some of the rumors I heard a few months ago are true, it's going to be flashbacks and Palpatine's last secret/master plan, although the possibility of them bringing him back a la Dark Empire is also there. Any of those do seem to be ways to get things out of the plot cul-de-sac TLJ left things in. A straight return has several problems, although one of the big ones mentioned in the past is that it undercuts the end of RotJ ... and after Episodes VII and VIII, that ship has not just sailed but run aground, crashed, and caught on fire.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 13, 2019, 02:05:24 PM
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1083180
If some of the rumors I heard a few months ago are true, it's going to be flashbacks and Palpatine's last secret/master plan, although the possibility of them bringing him back a la Dark Empire is also there. Any of those do seem to be ways to get things out of the plot cul-de-sac TLJ left things in. A straight return has several problems, although one of the big ones mentioned in the past is that it undercuts the end of RotJ ... and after Episodes VII and VIII, that ship has not just sailed but run aground, crashed, and caught on fire.

When watching the Hobbit movies, I think it was the second one, I got to this zen state of saying "Why not?" in a kind of sarcastic tone. I'm only around because I'm a fan of the original movies, (Or in the case of The Hobbit, the book) the new stuff is gonna do what it does, and I can laugh at it. So bring back the Emperor. Have him create an army of Ewok cyborg clone warriors who can blow up planets with their spears. Why not?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Doom on April 13, 2019, 10:09:28 PM
I think they should just "Highlander 2" the Star Wars franchise, simply forget the last couple of movies even existed, and start over.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 16, 2019, 09:54:22 PM
Quote from: Doom;1083206
I think they should just "Highlander 2" the Star Wars franchise, simply forget the last couple of movies even existed, and start over.

Any day now they will announce the NEW Highlander movie franchise. Or TV series.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on April 16, 2019, 10:14:38 PM
Quote from: Omega;1083490
Any day now they will announce the NEW Highlander movie franchise. Or TV series.

As long as it's better than Raven or that last direct to disc movie, I'm down.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 18, 2019, 07:49:51 AM
Raven was not too bad from what little I saw of it. Seemed to keep the same feel of the Highlander TV series.

Least it wasnt the complete mess of the cartoon or the weirdness of that one off anime movie.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on April 18, 2019, 01:22:29 PM
I liked that wierd water punk cartoon.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 19, 2019, 03:27:42 AM
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1083704
I liked that wierd water punk cartoon.

The anime? Search for Vengeance?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on April 19, 2019, 01:43:31 PM
Quote from: Omega;1083786
The anime? Search for Vengeance?

Nah, there was a unfortunately short lived cartoon by DIC in the late 90's. It's a weird post-apocalypse where the bad guys tech was water based. At least that's the impression I got.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 21, 2019, 09:49:45 PM
DIC did not produce the Highlander animated show. If I recall right it was a French or Canadian animation studio, (Galmont?) and I believe Bobbot? Could be wrong though. Been a few decades! And it has been so long I am not sure if their tech was water based or not. Seems unlikely as there was at least one episode where they had to deal with ocean dwelling people? It ran for I think two seasons. So it outlasted Xyber 9.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Godfather Punk on April 24, 2019, 12:00:17 PM
Avengers : Endgame

As a capstone to 10 years MCU, I give it an 8. Could have been a nine if they had made it a 100 minutes Avengers movie without the 80 minutes schmalz, emo and non-action stuff. When you keep checking your watch and wondering when something is going to happen.

As a movie I give it a 6,5 , maybe a 7. Ok, I enjoyed it but the humor didn't work this time for me. And too many characters that didn't get their chance to really shine.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on April 26, 2019, 03:01:00 AM
Quote from: Godfather Punk;1084386
Avengers : Endgame

As a capstone to 10 years MCU, I give it an 8. Could have been a nine if they had made it a 100 minutes Avengers movie without the 80 minutes schmalz, emo and non-action stuff. When you keep checking your watch and wondering when something is going to happen.

As a movie I give it a 6,5 , maybe a 7. Ok, I enjoyed it but the humor didn't work this time for me. And too many characters that didn't get their chance to really shine.

I liked it well enough, but I did find the "get all the females characters on-screen for this shot for no particular reason other than they're female and make sure none of the boys are in the shot" to be outrageously stupid. Thankfully, it was only a few seconds of the film.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 26, 2019, 12:02:20 PM
Quote from: Godfather Punk;1084386
Avengers : Endgame

As a capstone to 10 years MCU, I give it an 8. Could have been a nine if they had made it a 100 minutes Avengers movie without the 80 minutes schmalz, emo and non-action stuff. When you keep checking your watch and wondering when something is going to happen.

As a movie I give it a 6,5 , maybe a 7. Ok, I enjoyed it but the humor didn't work this time for me. And too many characters that didn't get their chance to really shine.

Was Satan in it?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Godfather Punk on April 26, 2019, 12:29:13 PM
If the devil is in the details,  you could make a case, but I saw no actual evidence of him.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 26, 2019, 04:07:18 PM
Quote from: Godfather Punk;1084650
If the devil is in the details,  you could make a case, but I saw no actual evidence of him.

Meh. It's not Infinity War without a cameo by the Devil himself.

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Cs5YwHRuW8Y/VAtBDoLpqSI/AAAAAAAAd7k/_YtrsWkQUv0/s1600/ig5_20b.jpg)
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on April 28, 2019, 03:06:00 AM
Saw Endgame, wasn't overly impressed.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: deadDMwalking on April 29, 2019, 12:03:14 PM
I enjoyed it.  I am looking forward to the point where most people have seen it so I can discuss some of the plot points without spoiling anything.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 30, 2019, 05:02:54 PM
Just came across another recording of the Russian musical Dragonlance: The Last Trial. This one an older production with a different crew.

Seemed to have slightly better costuming and, er, acrobats? But some of the characters did not look as close to their origins as one might like whereas the ones in the final showing looked their parts overall. A bald Caramon stood out in this one for example. Though I rather like this version of Dalamar as he comes across as so sly and conniving. The rest were ok. At a bit over 2 hours it is an impressive production for both.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on May 02, 2019, 10:31:36 PM
Just saw the trailer for the Sonic the Hedgehog movie and holy hell Paramont actually did worse than I expected.

So we have YET ANOTHER damn adaption where the characters are dropped into the real world. Rather than the subjects setting. Or I should say. Character. Singular. As pretty much Sonic is the only character from the games in the movie. There is Jim Carey playing what is supposed to be Dr Robotnic/Eggman. But its so scant a nod it barely counts. Worse though is the CGI model for Sonic. really. WTF were they thinking? Apparently Sony is not happy. But they should have known better by now and lever signed control of the character off to someone else.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warboss Squee on May 03, 2019, 01:41:11 AM
Quote from: Omega;1085885
Just saw the trailer for the Sonic the Hedgehog movie and holy hell Paramont actually did worse than I expected.

So we have YET ANOTHER damn adaption where the characters are dropped into the real world. Rather than the subjects setting. Or I should say. Character. Singular. As pretty much Sonic is the only character from the games in the movie. There is Jim Carey playing what is supposed to be Dr Robotnic/Eggman. But its so scant a nod it barely counts. Worse though is the CGI model for Sonic. really. WTF were they thinking? Apparently Sony is not happy. But they should have known better by now and lever signed control of the character off to someone else.

Jim Carrey is so 90's in his delivery that I'm wondering if he went back to his old practice of taking his pay in cocaine.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on May 03, 2019, 12:01:25 PM
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1085900
Jim Carrey is so 90's in his delivery that I'm wondering if he went back to his old practice of taking his pay in cocaine.

True. Though re-watching the trailer I am starting to like Carey's Robotnik/Eggman as it seems like maybe he is gradually growing into looking more and more like he does in the games.

Meanwhile re-watching the trailer the CG for Sonic looks really bad. Like something from the 90s. The CG TV show looks better than this.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spinachcat on May 04, 2019, 09:59:57 PM
I saw ALITA: BATTLE ANGEL and it was good. Not great, but fun enough and decent cyberpunk.

I read the manga too long ago to comment how much the movie deviated from the source material.

Surprisingly, the movie didn't have any SJW nonsense. That alone felt like a throwback to when we could have strong female leads without politics. Nobody in the movie does an acting job worth mentioning (either good or bad), and the characters/location makes enough sense to suspend disbelief for 120 minutes. Is it perfect? Far from it, but the pace, combat sequences and futuretech visuals were worth the viewing.

Most importantly, the movie offers lots of RPG idea potential. Fans of sci-fi, post-apoc or cyberpunk will pull some inspiration, even if the action does feel "live anime" which actually isn't bad for most RPGing.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on May 06, 2019, 12:02:34 PM
Quote from: Omega;1085885
Just saw the trailer for the Sonic the Hedgehog movie and holy hell Paramont actually did worse than I expected.

So we have YET ANOTHER damn adaption where the characters are dropped into the real world. Rather than the subjects setting. Or I should say. Character. Singular. As pretty much Sonic is the only character from the games in the movie. There is Jim Carey playing what is supposed to be Dr Robotnic/Eggman. But its so scant a nod it barely counts. Worse though is the CGI model for Sonic. really. WTF were they thinking? Apparently Sony is not happy. But they should have known better by now and lever signed control of the character off to someone else.


Director has responded saying they're going to change the design for Sonic.
https://www.destructoid.com/sonic-the-hedgehog-s-director-vows-to-redesign-the-character-after-fan-backlash-552262.phtml

I agree with they guys at Cinemassacre (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex5UEYEMDTo). Sonic would probably make a good enough animated film. Not everything has to be reinterpreted as live action.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on May 07, 2019, 10:27:10 PM
Finally saw Captain Marvel. Not bad, the story was generally fun. Her super powers became a little too much of a plot device at the end. Not really into the mid-1990s retro vibe, but they did it well. Character development was pretty good. The supporting cast was almost uniformly excellent -- I think the skrull leader could make reciting the phone book sound fascinating, the Kree mentor and the little Captain Marvel to be both had lots of charm, and Fishburne made a good if odd and slightly goofy Fury. Overall, the weakest part of the movie was Brie Larson. She was supposed to be tough, but came across as stiff. And a dry sense of humor was central to her character, but everything fell flat. I think the woman who played Marie Rambeau would have made a far better Captain Marvel. Wasn't a huge fan of the cat, but the audience loved it.

Don't see why there was any fuss about feminism. Really nothing about the Patriarchy. Some anti-imperialism, but it wasn't a clear analogue of anything. There was some girl-power stuff in reaction to how women weren't allowed to fly combat missions, but she's the protagonist and a pilot, so what would you expect?

Edit: By little Captain Marvel to be, I mean the other little Captain Marvel to be.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: deadDMwalking on May 08, 2019, 01:17:21 PM
Quote from: Pat;1086631
Fishburne made a good if odd and slightly goofy Fury.


Quote from: IMDB
Samuel L Jackson....Nick Fury

Watch him correct someone else who ought to have known better (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Y1o8910Xs4)
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on May 08, 2019, 01:25:54 PM
Quote from: deadDMwalking;1086749
Watch him correct someone else who ought to have known better (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Y1o8910Xs4)

I knew better, and I still wrote it. In my defense, he's even more Fishburne than usual in Captain Marvel. :)
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on May 08, 2019, 06:05:14 PM
Quote from: Pat;1086754
I knew better, and I still wrote it. In my defense, he's even more Fishburne than usual in Captain Marvel. :)

Fishburne was in Ant Man and Wasp. With his son playing him in the flashback.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on May 08, 2019, 06:54:49 PM
Quote from: Omega;1086807
Fishburne was in Ant Man and Wasp. With his son playing him in the flashback.

Not where it came from. I knew Samuel L. Jackson played Fury in the Avengers movies, and during Captain Marvel I was asking myself did they recast him? I think I respond more to demeanor than to faces.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on May 10, 2019, 07:39:09 AM
Quote from: Pat;1086815
Not where it came from. I knew Samuel L. Jackson played Fury in the Avengers movies, and during Captain Marvel I was asking myself did they recast him? I think I respond more to demeanor than to faces.

Fishburne has come a long way from Pee Wee Herman... :eek:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dg8vmS6VAAQuF31.jpg)
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on May 18, 2019, 11:16:41 PM
Quote from: Godfather Punk;1084386
Avengers : Endgame

As a capstone to 10 years MCU, I give it an 8. ....

As a movie I give it a 6,5 , maybe a 7. ....

Now that I've seen it, I see what you mean. It's really weighed down by the need to incorporate as many elements as possible from earlier in the franchise. It felt very old, and it wasn't because of the time travel. No, it felt old because it was so focused on the past; there was very little that was new, and what was new (like the 5 year leap) was underexplored. Plot-wise, it was really just one big fight that existed mostly to showcase all the different characters, bookended by the very backward-looking setup, and an extended denouement. It's not bad, but it's more a coda than a proper movie.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on June 18, 2019, 12:22:36 PM
I didn't want to make a new thread for this-

https://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/john-boyega-tells-feels-disney-star-wars/

Looks like Boyega isn't pleased with the direction the sequels took, and may have some things to say after the final film releases.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spinachcat on June 19, 2019, 04:55:21 AM
The new SW trilogy achieved the impossible. They made the prequels look good.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Delete_me on June 20, 2019, 03:33:35 PM
Now to voice what... I believe... is probably an unpopular opinion: I LIKED THE MATRIX SEQUELS.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on June 20, 2019, 08:00:26 PM
Quote from: Tanin Wulf;1092960
Now to voice what... I believe... is probably an unpopular opinion: I LIKED THE MATRIX SEQUELS.

I didn't hate them. It's an odd disconnect when someone bashes the Matrix sequels and I'm like, wut?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on June 22, 2019, 01:25:02 AM
Same. I liked the two Matrix sequels. The animated anthology was... peculiar... to say the least. Only seen parts of one of the console games. And the MMO went in some pretty odd directions as a sort of followup to the last movie.

And as have noted before. I liked the first two SW prequels. Especially the second. Im not as fond of the 3rd prequel mainly because A: things move and change too fast. Way too fast. And B: Anakins fall to the dark side is also way too fast. Same with the sequels. The pacing and some character shifts are way too fast or out of the blue. I thought the first sequel was ok. Rey was just a little too good with the force. But I liked the fact she was fairly inexperienced with the lightsaber and it showed. Which baffles me why some critics keep bitching about how amatureishly she fights. Its because she IS you morons!

The second sequel I just do not like at all. And that's without even factoring in how mean spirited the producer and some crew were treating fans. I think a better ending would have been Rey and Kylo joining forces.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on June 22, 2019, 01:55:57 AM
Quote from: Omega;1093145
The second sequel I just do not like at all. And that's without even factoring in how mean spirited the producer and some crew were treating fans. I think a better ending would have been Rey and Kylo joining forces.

God, what a wasted opportunity. For all Kylo's bluster, in the end everyone was right back where they started. The movie should have ended with Kylo and Rey flying off in a spaceship, leaving both Resistance and First Order behind. The only two times I've given a shit about her character is in the beginning of TFA, when she was scrounging parts, and in TLJ when she and Kylo were interacting.
---

I Am Mother (Netflix original)

I really liked this. A nice little thriller wtih tons of ambiance. Not gonna spoiler it. Reccomend.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on June 22, 2019, 05:12:31 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1093149
I Am Mother (Netflix original)

I really liked this. A nice little thriller wtih tons of ambiance. Not gonna spoiler it. Reccomend.
Watched it last night as well. Slow burning, strong acting, mostly subtle but effective f/x, not at all cinematic, ends up with dealing with some serious philosophical issues. Impressive.

Strongly recommend anyone who might be interested in watching not Google anything. It's the kind of movie you want to see fresh.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on June 22, 2019, 12:12:53 PM
Quote from: Pat;1093161
Watched it last night as well. Slow burning, strong acting, mostly subtle but effective f/x, not at all cinematic, ends up with dealing with some serious philosophical issues. Impressive.

Strongly recommend anyone who might be interested in watching not Google anything. It's the kind of movie you want to see fresh.

Yeah. I don't know if 'thriller' was the right term. It's laser focused on characters. More like a drama?

[spoiler]I imagine most people would disagree with Mother's decision to make the human race better by destroying everyone and starting over. Her brave new world has a foundation of murder. Perhaps that will inadvertently cause Daughter to reject what she's been taught, maybe not. The strength of the movie is that it doesn't ram morals down your throat. It presents the situation and lets the viewer make up their own mind. [/spoiler]
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on June 22, 2019, 05:41:04 PM
If you haven't seen the movie, don't click on Ratman's spoiler block. Just don't.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Armchair Gamer on June 22, 2019, 08:41:55 PM
Quote from: Omega;1093145
Same. I liked the two Matrix sequels. The animated anthology was... peculiar... to say the least. Only seen parts of one of the console games. And the MMO went in some pretty odd directions as a sort of followup to the last movie.

And as have noted before. I liked the first two SW prequels. Especially the second. Im not as fond of the 3rd prequel mainly because A: things move and change too fast. Way too fast. And B: Anakins fall to the dark side is also way too fast. Same with the sequels. The pacing and some character shifts are way too fast or out of the blue.

   RotS is my favorite of the prequels (although I like all of them), but I think Lucas wrote himself into a corner back in 1980 when he defined Empire as "Episode V"--meaning that he only had three films' worth of space to handle the fall of Anakin and the Republic. Adding The Clone Wars between Episodes II and III has helped in that regard, but has added problems of their own.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spinachcat on June 22, 2019, 09:26:09 PM
Quote from: Tanin Wulf;1092960
Now to voice what... I believe... is probably an unpopular opinion: I LIKED THE MATRIX SEQUELS.


I love all the Matrix flicks.

I have NO clue what the sequels were supposed to be about. The action sequences and music were so spectacular, thrilling and fun that I still don't care it made no sense.

The animated Matrix was an odd experiment collective storytelling inside the IP and I wish they had done another one in the years post-trilogy. I don't recommend them for anyone who isn't a Matrix junkie, but I found over half the stories worth watching.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on July 16, 2019, 10:25:13 PM
Here is another odd western I either missed, or saw so long ago and only once that I'd forgotten it.

Curse of the Undead. This is a supernatural western from 1959 and features a more traditional vampire than the made up hollywood ones. The vampire is a suicide that was not buried at a crossroads. He can walk arounf in daylight, and victims killed do not rise as new undead. Pretty interesting and fairly well produced too for an obscure piece like this. It was on a DVD collection I have had for years and never looked at as thought it was a different movie. doh!

It gets mentioned in one of the Blood Brothers modules for Call of Cthulhu.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 18, 2019, 12:54:19 AM
Shazam!

Liked it. Didn't love it. I was impressed that they didnt' kill off the main villian. Haven't seen that in a while. The Mr. Mind cameo was fun.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on July 25, 2019, 07:05:52 PM
The so called "live action" Lion King was like 90%+ CGI. Felt about as pointless as it can possibly get as they went with a "realistic" tone which made nearly everything very washed out and just short of expressionless due to that "realistic" constraint which Jungle Book did not suffer as much from.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 14, 2019, 12:38:38 AM
Avengers Endgame

A disappointing ending to a franchise that had outstayed it's welcome.

I came in late, but I'd been spoiled to most of the important bits of the movie. I knew they killed Thanos in the beginning. I came in when Ant-Man got out of the quantum realm and discovered that everyone was sad.

I think this is the first time travel movie where I couldn't understand the time travel aspect. All that jazz was confusing, and I was getting very bored with it all.

End battle was CGI nonsense.

Tony Stark dying was a cop out. We knew from the first Avengers movie that he was willing to sacrifice himself for the good. A much more interesting fate for his character would be to see if the womanizing playboy could settle down and have a successful family life. Wasted opportunity there, but I suppose RD Junior was done being Iron Man.

Thor, meh, whatever. Really most of the other characters were meh, whatever. All the comic book time travel meant I lost track of who was alive and who was dead and why I should even care.

I did like Captain America's ending.

Sequel bloat was inevitable, but it was sad to see the series, which I did very much like in the beginning, get augered into the ground for the finale.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Aglondir on August 22, 2019, 12:59:10 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1099347
I think this is the first time travel movie where I couldn't understand the time travel aspect. All that jazz was confusing, and I was getting very bored with it all.

Yeah, I couldn't follow it either.

And I still don't know what the soul stone does.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on August 22, 2019, 01:21:44 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf
I think this is the first time travel movie where I couldn't understand the time travel aspect. All that jazz was confusing, and I was getting very bored with it all.
Quote from: Aglondir;1100486
Yeah, I couldn't follow it either.

And I still don't know what the soul stone does.
I thought the time travel in Endgame was interesting, mostly in that it doesn't follow the established standards, but is still mostly consistent. The two common standards are

1) Closed-loop like the first Terminator movie, or The Final Countdown. The past and future are fated, so if you go back and change the past, you're just fulfilling what happened. It's consistent, but the predestination can feel frustrating - like none of the character's choices matter. If you try to change the known past, you are fated to fail.

2) Open-loop like Back to the Future, where the timeline overwrites itself in a fuzzy sort of way. There can be paradoxes like killing your own grandfather, but they cause mysterious and illogical problems - like photograph images fading from the feet up. You *can* change the past, but it's generally considered bad according to semi-mystic laws. There is still a sense of Fate - that history is supposed to go a certain way - and the characters act to support it.


Endgame seems to follow a branching model, which appears in a number of books but almost no movies. You can't change your own past - that just creates new branches without changing your own timeline. But you can take items out of the past, and use them in your present. I liked it because it avoids the issue of Fate. Characters weren't trying to change the past, and they also weren't trying to fix the past. They were focused on their own unknown future.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 22, 2019, 11:44:54 PM
Annihilation

I'd been wanting to see this for a while, but it never came up on a Netflix search. So I finally got the DVD.

What to say, without spoilers? I liked it. I think it delivered what I was expecting. The acting was rather flat. There's a scene

[spoiler]Where the main character, Leena, is talking to her co-worker about their affair, and they both sound like robots. None of the dialog matched what I'd expect humans to say. But I suspect that was the point of the whole movie. People alienated from their humanity. Was it intentional? I don't know. I fancy it was the changed Leena's memories of human events? But that could have been conveyed much more effectively.
I liked the ending. I dig strange experiences, and the movie certainly was that. [/spoiler]

So. Watch it if you want to see a trippy flick about a strange and unsettling event.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on August 23, 2019, 02:27:59 AM
Annihilation is worth watching for the imagery, but nothing else.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Godfather Punk on August 23, 2019, 07:15:10 AM
Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood is a very long and beautifully shot movie, with some very strong and well acted scenes, but these scenes jump out because it really feels like the story could have been told in 90 minutes too.
I'm not sorry I paid full ticket price, but I was expecting something more dynamic from Q T.
(I'd compare it to Death Proof, which was imo 90% blabla and 10% boomboom).
I am probably also 10 years too young to fully appreciate all the period references although I do remember watching F.B.I. and Mannix in the early 70's. And the music never gets old.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on August 25, 2019, 11:02:19 AM
Saw the trailer for the new Catz movie. Its one long WTF. Who the hell thought this was a good idea? It looks like bad bodypaint. Combined with the usual insane over-reliance on CGI. The stage show looks a billion times better with good ol practical effects and prosthetics.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 30, 2019, 05:09:15 PM
Terminator Dark Fate trailer

As much as I liked Terminator 2, that film opened the door to endless sequels, where they tell the same basic story over and over.

Not excited for this one.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spinachcat on August 30, 2019, 07:32:43 PM
The Terminator, Predator and Aliens franchises all seem to suffer from the inability to improve upon their original movies.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: kosmos1214 on August 30, 2019, 08:57:32 PM
It would probably help if Hollywood wasn't pretty much a dumpster fire at this point.
And sadly its been a long time in comeing.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on August 31, 2019, 11:32:15 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1101632
The Terminator, Predator and Aliens franchises all seem to suffer from the inability to improve upon their original movies.

All 3 had pretty good and fairly different sequels. Problems is... that is where they all should have ended as each one screwed up with its third and subsequent sequels. All three are the general exception to the overall rule that sequels tend to lose something, sometimes slowly, sometimes appallingly fast.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on August 31, 2019, 11:35:01 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1101607
Terminator Dark Fate trailer

As much as I liked Terminator 2, that film opened the door to endless sequels, where they tell the same basic story over and over.

Not excited for this one.

Actually the ending of T2 seemes to be THE END. But Hollywood just would not leave it at that and so BOOM! "Hey that ending really means we can just keep time looping this movie till doomsday really comes! Horray!" much like with Star Trek now.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on August 31, 2019, 05:35:48 PM
Not a movie, but I don't care.

Just finished watching Season 8 of the Walking Dead, the "all out war".

The only way it makes sense is if Rick, Maggie, and Ezekiel are name level characters with their own domains facing off against an even higher level enemy who rules multiple domains, Neegan. Most of the named supporting cast are high level as well, allowing them to face threats with ease that used to be deadly, and clearly and categorically outclassing everyone else around them. For all its flaws, and there are many, it's the D&D endgame, zombieapocalypse version.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on September 01, 2019, 03:57:45 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat
The Terminator, Predator and Aliens franchises all seem to suffer from the inability to improve upon their original movies.
Quote from: Omega;1101698
All 3 had pretty good and fairly different sequels. Problems is... that is where they all should have ended as each one screwed up with its third and subsequent sequels. All three are the general exception to the overall rule that sequels tend to lose something, sometimes slowly, sometimes appallingly fast.
I concur. I found T2 and Aliens particularly to both be the exceptions of sequels that built excellently on the original movie. But after that, the sequels didn't just fail to improve, they quite imploded.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: crkrueger on September 01, 2019, 11:33:10 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1101767
I concur. I found T2 and Aliens particularly to both be the exceptions of sequels that built excellently on the original movie. But after that, the sequels didn't just fail to improve, they quite imploded.


Predator II isn't quite in the same class as Aliens and Terminator II, but it still does a good job of building on what came before.

After that though, Jesus Christ, what the hell are these people thinking?

Trivia:  There are two actors I can think of who were in all three series of Alien, Predator and Terminator. Can you think of any?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: ArrozConLeche on September 03, 2019, 10:47:49 AM
Predator was really hard to top without Arnold, but I think Predator 2 is serviceable. I liked it better than the comicbook follow ups with the wannabe Arnold clone who was really corny and annoying. I did like the WWI story though.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on September 03, 2019, 09:53:27 PM
Quote from: CRKrueger;1101791
Trivia:  There are two actors I can think of who were in all three series of Alien, Predator and Terminator. Can you think of any?


Lance Hendriksen. The cop in Terminator, the android in Aliens, the expedition leader in Aliens vs Predator.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Mind Crime on September 12, 2019, 08:36:44 PM
Bill Paxton was in all 3 franchises too I believe. Aliens, Predator 2 and Terminator.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on September 13, 2019, 06:46:10 AM
Quote from: Mind Crime;1103711
Bill Paxton was in all 3 franchises too I believe. Aliens, Predator 2 and Terminator.

You are correct. Terminator, Aliens, and Predator 2.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: danskmacabre on September 17, 2019, 07:06:16 PM
I watched an old Horror movie by John Carpenter called "Prince of darkness"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_of_Darkness_(film)

This was a digitally remastered, cleaned up version of the movie.

It wasn't really a great movie to be honest.
I DID enjoy the practical effects that were used as opposed to lots of CGI you see in more modern movies.
Although, some of the fakeness if the practical effects really came through due to the image quality being improved so much in this remastered version.

It had a lot of familiar old actors from the 80s it. Particularly actors from the "Big trouble in little China" movie.
For me, it was worth watching just to see these actors.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: deadDMwalking on September 17, 2019, 07:51:01 PM
Quote from: danskmacabre;1104524
Although, some of the fakeness if the practical effects really came through due to the image quality being improved so much in this remastered version.

You're not alone in noticing that (https://www.cracked.com/index.php/article_26567_hd-remakes-are-making-all-your-favorite-shows-unwatchable.html).  I think the linked article is interesting.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: danskmacabre on September 17, 2019, 10:25:09 PM
Quote from: deadDMwalking;1104532
You're not alone in noticing that (https://www.cracked.com/index.php/article_26567_hd-remakes-are-making-all-your-favorite-shows-unwatchable.html).  I think the linked article is interesting.

Ah yeah. I've heard of the terrible Buffy conversion.
I watched the entire Buffy series again with my daughter (who loved it) last year. But it was the original quality SD version.
I wasn't aware of a cleaned up version at the time.
I watched a comparison Youtube video of old vs cleaned up Buffy a while back and it was a disaster.

It wasn't so much that the clean up was done badly with the "Prince of darkness" movie though. It was done REALLY well.
So well that the practical special effects just LOOKED like special effects and really fake.
I wouldn't have noticed so much or at all when viewing it on VHS years ago when that was all that was available.

On a slight tangent. I have also been watching the original Star Trek series on Netflix, which has been cleaned up and additionally some of the old cheesy special effects have been updated/replaced etc and I REALLY love it.
Even in the old days watching Original Star Trek on old grainy TV or VHS had pretty awful special effects. Although to me that was part of its charm.
Re-watching it now, I feel whoever did the clean up, did it tastefully and appropriately. It was a pleasure to watch. The old Star Trek got a new lick of paint and it was done well.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 17, 2019, 11:48:32 PM
Quote from: danskmacabre;1104549
On a slight tangent. I have also been watching the original Star Trek series on Netflix, which has been cleaned up and additionally some of the old cheesy special effects have been updated/replaced etc and I REALLY love it.
Even in the old days watching Original Star Trek on old grainy TV or VHS had pretty awful special effects. Although to me that was part of its charm.
Re-watching it now, I feel whoever did the clean up, did it tastefully and appropriately. It was a pleasure to watch. The old Star Trek got a new lick of paint and it was done well.

Agree. I typically don't like CGI remasters, but the orignal series stuff looks so good, and not out of place. I prefer them to the old effects.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on September 18, 2019, 06:17:32 AM
Saw the trailer for the Batwoman show. Just... wow. WTF were they thinking? Is this serious or a parody?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 18, 2019, 12:52:08 PM
Quote from: Omega;1104578
Saw the trailer for the Batwoman show. Just... wow. WTF were they thinking? Is this serious or a parody?

Thanks to Progressives, I don't even want to see the trailer. Any female super hero is going to be an exaggerated version of feminism, in an attempt to make her stronk and brave wymn.
*Goes to wiki. Eyes roll into back of skull*
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on September 19, 2019, 05:41:56 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1104619
Thanks to Progressives, I don't even want to see the trailer. Any female super hero is going to be an exaggerated version of feminism, in an attempt to make her stronk and brave wymn.
*Goes to wiki. Eyes roll into back of skull*

Quote
Kate: I need you to fix the suit.
Luke Fox: The suit is literal perfection!
Kate: It will be... when it fits a woman.
Also. Why not Batgirl? She made her own suit rather than co-opting someone elses. Hell this isn't even the Batwoman from the comics. She at least had a story and personality. Or the Huntress. Or the new female Question whos been around a while. Was not a SJW feminist insert co-opt and was still more interesting and competent with no powers at all.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spinachcat on September 23, 2019, 12:00:42 AM
If you want some cheap fun, bring up almost any review of Rambo: Last Blood and enjoy the deplorable scum in the comment section tearing the movie reviewer a fresh new asshole. No surprise at Rotten, the critics have it at 27% vs. 84% audience.

I'll see it at the El Cheapo when it shows up after Christmas, but the trailer didn't look too impressive. I'm sure it delivers on all the points for a revenge fantasy and of course, Stallone is gonna Stallone so everybody already knows what they're gonna get from the movie.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: danskmacabre on September 23, 2019, 06:42:14 PM
I watched Call of Cthulhu. A Movie adaption of HP Lovecraft's short story of the same name.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Call_of_Cthulhu_(film)

What makes this special is it was made in 2005, but was done as a Black and White silent movie.
Basically made in the style of 1920s movies with text cards for conversations etc.

It was really fun to watch and appreciate the work they (they being http://www.hplhs.org/ , HP Lovecraft Historical society) put into it.

They put in artifacts in the film. Using the white make up like they used to use years ago and so on.

The special effects are stop motion and using minis for terrain. This is on purpose I think to show the limited technology that would have been available in the 1920s.

It's a fairly short movie at 47 minutes, but then it was a short story and movies in those days were often fairly short anyway.

All in all, I had a blast watching this and being a HP Lovecraft fan it was a joy to watch.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: danskmacabre on September 23, 2019, 06:44:19 PM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1105531
If you want some cheap fun, bring up almost any review of Rambo: Last Blood....

Seeing this in a couple of days with a friend.
It'll be a laugh and if it's anything like the Gore fest that the last Rambo movie was, it'll be worth watching.
Not expecting a masterpiece work of art, so it'll probably deliver what it does well.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on September 24, 2019, 05:35:49 AM
Quote from: danskmacabre;1105647
I watched Call of Cthulhu. A Movie adaption of HP Lovecraft's short story of the same name.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Call_of_Cthulhu_(film)

What makes this special is it was made in 2005, but was done as a Black and White silent movie.
Basically made in the style of 1920s movies with text cards for conversations etc.

The special effects are stop motion and using minis for terrain. This is on purpose I think to show the limited technology that would have been available in the 1920s.

It's a fairly short movie at 47 minutes, but then it was a short story and movies in those days were often fairly short anyway.

All in all, I had a blast watching this and being a HP Lovecraft fan it was a joy to watch.

1: Have that one. Very impressively done. Sadly their Whisperer in Darkness adaption is a total mess and I did not like it at all.

2: News Flash: Miniature terrain is still used even today. Just not as often. And Miniature terrain was used extensively in the original three Star Wars movies for example, as did the minecart scene in Temple of Doom. League of Extraordinary Gentlemen also made use of miniatures. Apparently the Harry Potter movies had some really impressive miniature sets as well. Even Lord of the Rings made use of some miniature sets and some impressive foam latex swords for the armies.

3: Actually some were long even by todays standards. I have an old copy of Calabria from 1914 and it is a sprawling 2 hours long and surprisingly clear for a movie from that era.

4: It is surprisingly well done and they put alot of effort into it.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: danskmacabre on September 24, 2019, 07:04:26 PM
I quite liked "Whisperer in the darkness".  Not as much as "Call of Cthulhu" which to me was a work of art. But it was still good to watch. I noticed they added a lot at the end of Whisperer in the Darkness, but I think in general, Lovecraft's stories must be hard to translate to film.

Yeah I'm aware about Miniatures still being used somewhat, although it's seen as a cheaper option to use CGI more these days.

I noticed "The Colour out of space" has been made too, but as a bigger budget movie. I wonder how that will go.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on September 25, 2019, 07:27:34 AM
Quote from: danskmacabre;1105835
I quite liked "Whisperer in the darkness".  Not as much as "Call of Cthulhu" which to me was a work of art. But it was still good to watch. I noticed they added a lot at the end of Whisperer in the Darkness, but I think in general, Lovecraft's stories must be hard to translate to film.

Yeah I'm aware about Miniatures still being used somewhat, although it's seen as a cheaper option to use CGI more these days.

I noticed "The Colour out of space" has been made too, but as a bigger budget movie. I wonder how that will go.

There is actually an older loose adaption of Colour out of Space, featuring Nick Adams and Boris Karloff. Die Monster Die! from 1965. Very loose adaption indeed. But I rather like the effects in the big finali. Sometime in the 2010s there was an I believe German adaption. I'd have to look it up. Apparently there is also an Italian adaption I have not been able to pin down a copy of yet. Then there is the movie The Curse which I have never seen but others have noted is a fairly good adaption of the story. Another on the to find list.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: ArrozConLeche on September 25, 2019, 09:38:34 AM
I seem to remember a late 80s or early 90's straight-to-cable movie called Curse: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbETC9rF2MA  It seemed inspired by Colour out of Space. There's a follow up that is all about snakes. Both were kind of gross. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8t-BaEElZRg
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: danskmacabre on September 25, 2019, 06:40:09 PM
Ooh that's interesting re the Colour out of space adaptions, inspirations etc.
I'll defo try to chase those up.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on September 25, 2019, 08:56:22 PM
Necronomicon and Dagon I absolute despised.

I personally really like the original Dunwitch Horror movie. The remake is garbage. There is bemusingly a rather well done and faithful Japanese adaption done with puppets and stop motion. Part of a set all from the same person apparently for some Japanese horror anthology far as I can tell. The pieces were, The Picture in the House, The Dunwitch Horror, and The Festival.

There is also a rather well done fan adaption of The Shadow out of Time. And the stop motion animator of that has gone on to animate many more Mythos pieces.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on September 26, 2019, 04:48:05 PM
I saw Ad Astra earlier this week. It was painful. The Moon Pirates (I'm serious...) were absurd, the inconsistency in gravity and acceleration, and the final spacewalk that begins with riding a spinning sensor array until it flings him to a ship well out of sight based upon "eyeballing" it (bonus points for using a piece of the array as a shield against impacts with Neptune's rings like he's Starlord meets Captain America). Yeah, a total turd.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spinachcat on September 28, 2019, 12:40:55 AM
From the trailers, I can't tell what Ad Astra's genre is supposed to be. Is it supposed to be a Buck Rogers space fantasy? Or does it try to be hard scifi?

Does it have any redeeming value?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on September 28, 2019, 08:07:49 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1106325
From the trailers, I can't tell what Ad Astra's genre is supposed to be. Is it supposed to be a Buck Rogers space fantasy? Or does it try to be hard scifi?

Does it have any redeeming value?

My wife likes to look at Brad Pitt's face, but even she thought this movie was crap.

It tries to be a deep and reflective character story... with MOON PIRATES!!! It goes for a hard sci-fi backdrop, but then fails to be consistent in any of its science (the moon seems to have normal gravity until it becomes dramatic for it not to... sort of like activating a scene aspect in FATE) and it also fails for trying to constantly push Pitt's character into being an over-the-top action star rather than something more realistic. He's so unrealistic that the self-reflection just fails because there's no humanity in his character.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on October 20, 2019, 05:39:40 PM
Just recently saw a 1963 Japanese fantasy movie called Yoso, AKA: The Bronze Magician and a couple of other titles. Stars Raizô Ichikawa who unfortunately died a few years after making this.

It is about a Buddist monk who is granted powers over life and death after a long dedication. He leaves his mountain retreat and soon becomes hopelessly entangled in courtly royal intrigue when he is called on to save the ailing queen. Things go downhill from there for the monk. What is interesting about this one is its glacial pace, lack of major action really, and overall focus on the emotional turmoil of the monk and the political plotings of the villains. What really helps this movie is Raizo's intense yet subdued performance as the humble, yet powerful monk. Alot of good acting throughout.

Raizo also played the main character of Nemuri Kyoshiro in the long running "Sleepy Eyes of Death" series of movies. He was in at least 10!
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on January 11, 2020, 01:59:38 PM
Another forgotten gem. The Great Bandit from 1963, AKA Samurai Pirate, AKA The Lost World of Sinbad. This one is a fun little fantasy adventure set in feudal Japan with none other than Toshiro Mifune as the hero Sukezaemon. Sadly the US version takes a few, ok lots, of liberties. But hey, who knew that back then?

Also on a Horror DVD collection came across an odd one War of the Zombies. Actually Rome Against Rome/Rome contro Rome, a 1964 Italian movie in the same style as many of the Hercules and Machiste movies of the era with John Barrymore jr as the hero. Not sure why they dropped it in the horror collection. I guess someone just read the title and thought it was an actual zombie movie???
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on January 22, 2020, 02:03:12 PM
Well against all odds the Thundercats Roar series is out now and its actually worse than the preview 2 years ago suggested. But that was the intent. Horay for yet another series handed off to someone who hates the source material.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on January 22, 2020, 03:18:30 PM
Quote from: Omega;1119736
Well against all odds the Thundercats Roar series is out now and its actually worse than the preview 2 years ago suggested. But that was the intent. Horay for yet another series handed off to someone who hates the source material.

Foul: That's no movie.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on January 23, 2020, 06:18:08 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1119747
Foul: That's no movie.

Well to be fair. It not even a cartoon. :rolleyes:
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: danskmacabre on January 23, 2020, 06:16:51 PM
I watched on Netflix Cargo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_(2017_film))
An Australian Zombie Apocalypse movie.
It wasn't very action packed, but instead focused on the the Australian terrain, the harshness of it. Human stories of handling survival and so on.
It DID push the "Evil white men are evil" thing that seems to be popular these days.
But overall, I quite enjoyed the movie and Martin Freeman plays the main character, which was cool.

A decent enough watch with a few eye rolling moments.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on February 08, 2020, 04:16:41 PM
I saw Birds of Prey and something, something Harley Quinn. It had great reviews but OMG what a piece of shit. The reviews compared the humor and action favorably to Deadpool, and I have to wonder if they ever watched Deadpool. I'm trying not to be too critical, but IMO, there was nothing worthwhile in this movie.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spinachcat on February 08, 2020, 10:53:17 PM
I enjoyed Suicide Squad...but I only paid $2 at the El Cheapo. I thought Margot Robbie's Harley was fun, Leto was an odd, but okay Joker and I like Will Smith. He's pretty much always Will Smith, but he doesn't phone it in and he clearly enjoyed playing Deadshot.

But Birds of Prey? The trailers just screamed Woketard Nonsense. No surprise its flopping.

Anybody see The Grudge reboot?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on February 09, 2020, 07:33:46 AM
The original? The american adaption? Or a Grudge re-reboot?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: rgalex on February 10, 2020, 09:18:24 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1121512
Anybody see The Grudge reboot?

Quote from: Omega;1121549
The original? The american adaption? Or a Grudge re-reboot?

It's a side-story that take place during and after the American 2004 movie.

I got scared off last minute by some terrible word of mouth from a few people who's opinion on horror movies I trust.  I plan to still watch it, just not until it's on a streaming service.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: ArrozConLeche on February 10, 2020, 11:30:40 AM
Haven't seen The Grudge reboot and not really inspired to watch yet another reboot of a movie that is not that old and was already pretty good. That's not even counting the fact that the franchise has been milked pretty well.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Stephen Tannhauser on February 10, 2020, 12:48:11 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1121482
I saw Birds of Prey and something, something Harley Quinn. It had great reviews but OMG what a piece of shit. The reviews compared the humor and action favorably to Deadpool, and I have to wonder if they ever watched Deadpool. I'm trying not to be too critical, but IMO, there was nothing worthwhile in this movie.

If you like Margot Robbie's performance as Harley Quinn, which in all fairness I do (I enjoyed Suicide Squad), BoPatFEooHQ (which I'm typing only because it amuses me how clunky that acronym is) is about, eh, 40% of a good movie.

Unfortunately the 60% which is bad is just awful, including:

1) Critically defanging Harley herself in terms of what she's actually allowed to do: when she raids a police station to kidnap Cassandra Cain, she uses a beanbag gun because post-breakup Harley apparently now has moral qualms about killing cops;
2) Criminally underusing the rest of the Birds, and spending almost no time on how the characters actually, you know, relate to one another because they don't actually form a single complete team until the last 15 minutes;
3) Having no idea how to create a villain or conflict worthy of the name -- like, seriously, the arc plot vs. Roman "Black Mask" Sionis is fanfic-level "Mary Sue" bad in how utterly lacking in any engagement, suspense or tension it has;
4) A series of juggled, nonsequential plot threads in the first act which doesn't seem like anything except an attempt to be Tarantino-esque and clever for its own sake -- I have no problem with nonsequential storytelling, but you need a reason for it;
5) Not allowing any male character whatsoever (except for one briefly mentioned aside in the Huntress's backstory) to be decent, likeable or competent at all (the closest we get is Chris Messina's Victor Szasz, and the writer and director go out of their way to make him both so physically creepy nobody can like him and to get rid of him before he can really affect the final showdown);
6) Casting Rosie Perez. (Okay, that one's entirely personal, I'm sure she's a decent person and fine performer given the right material, but I've never seen her in anything where she didn't set my teeth on edge.)

It also doesn't help that most reviewers want so badly to praise the film for its feminist cred that they can't be honest about its actual flaws as a piece of storytelling. My own wife, whom I love dearly and who is herself an award-winning horror writer, loves Harley so much as a character that she thinks the film is better than it is, which is part of why I'm ranting about it here rather than at home. :o
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 10, 2020, 12:57:37 PM
What I don't get is the fetishization of Harley as some kind of quirky anti-hero. The bitch killed babies and children for the Joker. She's reprehensible with no redemption arc to excuse her being a protagonist in a comic book film.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on February 10, 2020, 04:00:02 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1121664
What I don't get is the fetishization of Harley as some kind of quirky anti-hero. The bitch killed babies and children for the Joker. She's reprehensible with no redemption arc to excuse her being a protagonist in a comic book film.

You just named why so many fans love her. Shes a killer who gets a pass because shes sooooo cute!

This is a recurring problem with DC and even marvel and even manga overseas. Fans, or sometimes the parent company will latch onto the most offensive or un-likable character and elevate them totally out of proportion.

Lobo. Deathstroke, Ambush Bug, etc from DC with Harley being the ongoing fetish.
Deadpool and Squirrel Girl, oh so very very these two. Marvels idea of 'funny' tends to be the most un-funny characters ever.
Anime and Manga? Theres a long long long list.

All of these characters, with the exception of Lobo, were interesting initially and when used sparingly.

In the animated series Harley was interesting because you could never quite get a handle on her. Much akin to the Joker. Just marginally less homicidal.

Not helped that, as with everything, different writers have different ideas for what these characters are.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on February 11, 2020, 12:01:26 PM
My issue with Birds of Prey is that I read comics, and I know who the Birds of Prey are, and Cassandra Cain, and Black Mask, and I don't recognize any of them in the trailer.

For that matter, even Harley Quinn is considerably toned down from her sex appeal role in Suicide Squad.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on February 11, 2020, 06:59:33 PM
Quote from: Lurkndog;1121808
My issue with Birds of Prey is that I read comics, and I know who the Birds of Prey are, and Cassandra Cain, and Black Mask, and I don't recognize any of them in the trailer.

For that matter, even Harley Quinn is considerably toned down from her sex appeal role in Suicide Squad.

Im getting progressively more tired of superhero shows who spend what feels like 90% of the movie more or less plainclothes.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on February 12, 2020, 06:34:52 PM
Quote from: Omega;1121875
Im getting progressively more tired of superhero shows who spend what feels like 90% of the movie more or less plainclothes.

That was a big problem with the Birds of Prey TV series from the 2000's. Harleen Quinzel was their big bad, but she didn't go full Harley Quinn until the last episode. Also they had Dina Meyers as Batgirl/Oracle, but they only got her into costume as Batgirl once. Huntress just dressed like she was going out dancing, and Black Canary was even more forgettable.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on February 17, 2020, 06:26:40 PM
Apparently the movie is not doing well and the producers believe that the moviegoers were too stupid to realize Harley Quinn was in the movie and renamed it Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey.

Yup. That will change everything.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on March 05, 2020, 03:38:33 PM
Been doing a series of Horror reviews this month to celebrate Strange Tales. I enjoyed all three of the following for different reasons.

LEGEND OF THE MOUNTAIN: http://thebedrockblog.blogspot.com/2020/03/legend-of-mountain-1979.html
This movie is definitely not going to be for everyone because it is on the slow side, very subtle in how it handles horror, and a bit of an artsy film. I like it though. It is directed by King Hu (who did Come Drink With Me, Dragon Inn and Touch of Zen), and set during the Song Dynasty on a fort in the mountains along a march between the empire and the Xi Xia. It is a ghost story, my review is spoiler-ridden, but here I will say it is atmospheric, blurs the boundary between the human and ghostly world, and does a great job of using mundane details to create a sense of unease. Not a lot of action, but very interesting and subdued magic battles.


THE ENCHANTING GHOST: http://thebedrockblog.blogspot.com/2020/03/the-enchanting-ghost-1970.html
A classic Chinese Horror Movie. It is subtle, but not as lengthy or artsy as Legend of the Mountain. Definitely feels like it was made in a prior era of film making. And there is a long lead up before anything super natural happens. However that lead up really gives the supernatural stuff its impact.

LEGEND OF THE DEMON CAT: http://thebedrockblog.blogspot.com/2020/02/legend-of-demon-cat.html
A mystery set in the Tang Dynasty that follows a monk and official investigating a demon cat who feeds on peoples eyes. The sets in this one are quite elaborate (really good fodder for a GM looking for locations in a historical Chinese setting). Devotes a lot of energy to painting pretty scenes (I have seen some people complain about the CG in places).
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on March 06, 2020, 05:33:04 AM
If you ever get a chance. Check out Yoso, AKA: The Bronze Magician. I commented on it a few pages back.

Still hunting for a copy of the Japanese movie Dai Touzoku, that was renamed The Lost World of Sinbad
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 06, 2020, 12:42:56 PM
Watched Gerald's Game last night.

I haven't read the book, but I got a strong vibe of Misery, especially when Paul Sheldon was left alone by Annie. In this case, King swapped sexes and made it all about the protagonist's dirty sexual secrets.

Strong start, woman goes off with husband for a kinky weekend vacation to try and put the spark back in their relationship. Dude has a heart attack while she's handcuffed to the bed. She's faced with trying to survive while various things happen.
Goes mental fairly quickly, with her discussing her issues with imaginary versions of her husband and herself.
Ending was weak, in that Stephen King way. He's great at setup and building tension, but only in a few cases has he pulled a satisfying ending out of his stories. (I really loved The Dead Zone)

Mostly, I was dissapointed that the main character's personality could be summed up with "Was sexually abused as a kid." Got it. Anything else? Nope. Everything about her revolves around that.
Maybe in the book she was a more interesting character.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 08, 2020, 06:44:31 AM
The thread on sword and planet reminded me indirectly of an old pulp author used to read. Manly Wade Wellman and one of his non SF anthologies that was turned into a movie back in the 70s. Who Fears the Devil, featuring his recurring "Silver John" character. Though if I recall correctly in the books hes only ever called John. A wanderer who carries a guitar with strings of pure silver. And is sort of an Apellation based lovecraftian investigator sort due to his frequent encounters with creatures from the mountain legends.

The movie is based mostly on two of those stories. "The Desrick on Yandro" and "O Ugly Bird" and they actually got a folk singer to play John.

Thie stories and film can be an interesting take on how to do a CoC adventure that is not based on the standard oddities, yet still treads some familliar ground. John comes across as what a CoC PC character might be if they actually lived past one adventure. ahem.

Finding the movie though is a pain as does not seem to have come out on VHS or DVD that I've ever seen yet.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 08, 2020, 05:36:03 PM
Finally got to sit down and finish watching Avengers: Endgame. And have to say that overall I liked it. Theres a few low moments. But they are brief or not too onerous, or both. Captain ManHater is not a huge presence and is not the show stealer Marvel was building her up to be in this. Definitely did not go in the directions I expected.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Shrugged Out Atlas on April 14, 2020, 12:48:39 AM
Who Fears the Devil sometimes goes by The Legend of Hillbilly John. Not sure if that helps but you never know.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 14, 2020, 06:28:47 AM
Yes. Though that version is apparently edited. Not sure what was edited.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on April 14, 2020, 09:25:42 AM
I don't know about the movie, but the Silver John stories are great. Manly Wade Wellman does a good job of keeping them grounded, but creepy. The idea of a man-eating house-monster is ludicrous, for instance, but he makes it work.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 14, 2020, 12:04:22 PM
I watched Garm Wars, The Last Druid (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garm_Wars:_The_Last_Druid) last week. At least, I put it on Netflix and watched it out of the corner of my eye while playing video games. It looks interesting, in a B movie level of acting and story. The visuals are superb. I plan to give it another go after finishing up season 3 of The Good Place.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 15, 2020, 04:50:58 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1126816
I watched Garm Wars, The Last Druid (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garm_Wars:_The_Last_Druid) last week. At least, I put it on Netflix and watched it out of the corner of my eye while playing video games. It looks interesting, in a B movie level of acting and story. The visuals are superb. I plan to give it another go after finishing up season 3 of The Good Place.

Saw it as well. Its a collab between a Japanese crew and I believe a Canadian one. The plots really murky, but there. But dang it looks good. This is what Abrams should aspire to.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 15, 2020, 05:08:57 AM
Quote from: Lurkndog;1126807
I don't know about the movie, but the Silver John stories are great. Manly Wade Wellman does a good job of keeping them grounded, but creepy. The idea of a man-eating house-monster is ludicrous, for instance, but he makes it work.

Yes. I've read that one and he makes it a very believable threat and its fairly well thought out a trap. All the more diabolical because it just sits there waiting, looking like an old shack.

Oh and this is the guy that can make killer bunnies disturbing. If polite.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 17, 2020, 12:41:03 PM
Since it's a TV series but I don't think it warrants it's own thread

The Good Place Seasons 1-3
Because the final Season 4 hasn't been put up yet.

I got turned on to this series by a pastor (Paul Vanderklay on youtube) talking about philosophy. I wound up binge-watching season 1, and finishing up seasons 2-3 the week after.
Great series. It's superbly written. Very funny. I'd laugh out lout at least once per epiosde, and usually a few times.
The creator was inspired by Lost, and I'd say the twists are very Lost-ey, except so far there is actually something of substance behind the twists, and not just plot black holes.
If you're interested, I won't even spoil the series setup, because part of the fun is not knowing what's going to happen next. A woman dies and goes to "heaven". Don't spoil the show for yourself if you can help it.

[spoiler]After the big reveal of season 1, they go into this annoying cycle of having lots of drama, and then resetting the characters so they can go through it all again. It gets tiresome and while I'm still looking forward to season 4, the constant resets are not part of the reason. It feels like a soap opera where everyone gets amnesia all the time.[/spoiler]

Occasional social justicey jokes pop up, and those fall really flat for me. I give them a quick eye roll and move on.

Reccomend.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on May 01, 2020, 09:41:01 PM
The Platform

I made it to three minutes before getting tired of the film smacking me in the face with a sledgehammer.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spinachcat on May 02, 2020, 05:33:27 AM
Haven't watched any movies lately, but I've been watching standup on Netflix.

I'm a big fan of Jim Gaffigan, Bill Burr, Norm MacDonald, Joe Rogan, Demetri Martin, Anthony Jeselnik and John Mulaney, but among the newer / lesser known comedians, I highly recommend checking out Todd Barry, Kanan Gill, Ryan Hamilton, James Acaster and Lavell Crawford.

As for comediennes, I think Kathy Madigan has no equal, but Ilza Schlesinger does a very good job. Also, just discovered Gina Brillon whose opened for Fluffy (Gabriel Inglesias) and she's a fellow Bronx born, but she did a very fun special.

The whole Comedians in Cars is extremely hit and (mostly) miss.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on May 04, 2020, 02:12:44 AM
Just finished watching the 1975 movie The Hindenburg, with George C Scott and many other familiar faces gaceing a really well done movie. The sets look great and from all accounts were very accurate, and the cast all plays off well. Havent had a chance to see this since it came out.

Interestingly enough the movie plays out more as an investigative mystery rather than a disaster movie. And it spends probably 90% of the movie on that and taking its time the various passengers, crew, investigators and law enforcement go about trying to solve the mystery both on board and groundside.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on May 06, 2020, 11:24:27 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1128555
The Platform

I made it to three minutes before getting tired of the film smacking me in the face with a sledgehammer.

*looks up movie*

Oh, THIS piece of schlock. Yeah, I saw the trailer for this and was like... 'uh huh... that's not pushing a sociopolitical view, no, of course not *snort*'
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on May 17, 2020, 05:39:19 PM
Lifeforce

Much maligned movie from the 80's. Accused of being cheesy, exploitative and schlocky. Mostly due to Mathilda May being nude for most of her scenes.
Summary: Astronauts exploring Hayley's Comet (Hayley's Comet comes up in a few movies of the time, due to it's real world passage near the earth) find a seemingly derelict spacecraft 150 miles long. They investigate and find a bunch of "dead" bat aliens and three nude humans whom they take to earth. Turns out they're space vampires who suck the life force from other beings.

I remembered this movie fondly, and recently bought it on Blu-Ray. On rewatching, I still love it, warts and all. And there's a lot of warts.
A lot of the dialog is goofy. Many important plot points happen off-screen. And the story goes off into a pointless goose (vampire) chase for the middle of the film.

I'm not going to use spoiler blocks for a 30 year old film.

But there's so many great scenes! One of the most memorable is when they're flying back to London in a helicopter, and the space vampire girl creates a body out of the blood and goo from two bodies they were transporting with them. The bodies are clearly mannequins and look terribly fake, but the blood-body is very convincing and freaky.
There's some very shitty FX, but a lot of good stuff too, especially for the time. And it's all practical, of course. None of this fake, glossy CGI crap.

I love the end where London is in flames, soul explosions everywhere, and it gives a proper creepy end of the world vibe.

One thing I noticed on rewatch is one of the last scenes is Carlsen and the space girl flying up into the alien ship as disembodied "life force", and there's a quick scene, only lasts a few seconds, where they show the crystal coffins reform full of space babies. It's at  that point, 30 years later, I realized the space girl was mating with Carlsen.
Another small detail is, at home on blu-ray in high-def, you can see the vampires and their "zombie" victims have spiral contact lenses on their eyes.

So, I thoroughly reccomend this flick. I bought the Blu-Ray because it's only occasionally available on streaming services, and I especially wanted to make sure I got the Director's Cut, because the US theatrical release was butchered.

(https://media.giphy.com/media/13dLRUuiqWKOQM/giphy.gif)
Watch the crazy space vampire movie!
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: GeekyBugle on May 17, 2020, 05:54:22 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1130358
Lifeforce

Much maligned movie from the 80's. Accused of being cheesy, exploitative and schlocky. Mostly due to Mathilda May being nude for most of her scenes.
Summary: Astronauts exploring Hayley's Comet (Hayley's Comet comes up in a few movies of the time, due to it's real world passage near the earth) find a seemingly derelict spacecraft 150 miles long. They investigate and find a bunch of "dead" bat aliens and three nude humans whom they take to earth. Turns out they're space vampires who suck the life force from other beings.

I remembered this movie fondly, and recently bought it on Blu-Ray. On rewatching, I still love it, warts and all. And there's a lot of warts.
A lot of the dialog is goofy. Many important plot points happen off-screen. And the story goes off into a pointless goose (vampire) chase for the middle of the film.

I'm not going to use spoiler blocks for a 30 year old film.

But there's so many great scenes! One of the most memorable is when they're flying back to London in a helicopter, and the space vampire girl creates a body out of the blood and goo from two bodies they were transporting with them. The bodies are clearly mannequins and look terribly fake, but the blood-body is very convincing and freaky.
There's some very shitty FX, but a lot of good stuff too, especially for the time. And it's all practical, of course. None of this fake, glossy CGI crap.

I love the end where London is in flames, soul explosions everywhere, and it gives a proper creepy end of the world vibe.

One thing I noticed on rewatch is one of the last scenes is Carlsen and the space girl flying up into the alien ship as disembodied "life force", and there's a quick scene, only lasts a few seconds, where they show the crystal coffins reform full of space babies. It's at  that point, 30 years later, I realized the space girl was mating with Carlsen.
Another small detail is, at home on blu-ray in high-def, you can see the vampires and their "zombie" victims have spiral contact lenses on their eyes.

So, I thoroughly reccomend this flick. I bought the Blu-Ray because it's only occasionally available on streaming services, and I especially wanted to make sure I got the Director's Cut, because the US theatrical release was butchered.

(https://media.giphy.com/media/13dLRUuiqWKOQM/giphy.gif)
Watch the crazy space vampire movie!

Oh yeah, I liked it, now I gotta find that fabled bluray.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on May 17, 2020, 06:11:33 PM
Lifeforce is epic nonsense, with gloriously cheesy special effects and actors chewing the scenery. Can't forget the "I am the feminine in your mind" scene with Patrick Stewart (if it matters, major spoilers -- it's the movie's big infodump):


Another fun 1980s movie is The Night of the Creeps. It's not as epic, and has less cheesecake and chewing the scenery, but it has equally fun special effects, and better characters and plot.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on May 17, 2020, 11:36:11 PM
Lifeforce is a pretty good move really. sure its all over the place. But it is interesting to follow it as it bounces around. Feels a bit like a Quatermass plot.

The effects are pretty good even now and lack the "cartoon" feel so many modern CGI overloaded movies have.

And its an interesting twist on the whole vampire theme and is relatively consistent with its mechanics.

I had the book this was based on, "Space Vampires" I believe, way back and have to say the movie is alot better.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on June 08, 2020, 06:29:46 PM
Top Secret

I watched this ages ago, and was reminded of it via a RLM reView (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVC5n6hYTFY).
I laughed a lot. Still a great comedy. Very 80's if that's a factor for some people.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on June 08, 2020, 08:15:31 PM
I just recently watched, or rather re-watched, Darkman. Haven't seen it in 25 years, more or less. Held up pretty good, though that's not saying much.  I also re-watched Bulletproof Monk. It didn't exactly hold up, though again, that's not saying much.  BM pretty much relies entirely on the charm and charisma of its actors to make up for its vapid, shallow... everything.  Conversely, Darkman doesn't seem to give its actors much to do to carry the film, relying instead on its action and premise.

Of the two I think I will be revisiting Darkman in another 25 years or so, but I am actually done with Bulletproof Monk for good. Not 100% on that (unlike, say, Drop Dead Fred or Tank Girl...), but maybe 50% sure.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on June 09, 2020, 12:21:02 AM
Quote from: Spike;1133188
I just recently watched, or rather re-watched, Darkman. Haven't seen it in 25 years, more or less. Held up pretty good, though that's not saying much.  I also re-watched Bulletproof Monk. It didn't exactly hold up, though again, that's not saying much.  BM pretty much relies entirely on the charm and charisma of its actors to make up for its vapid, shallow... everything.  Conversely, Darkman doesn't seem to give its actors much to do to carry the film, relying instead on its action and premise.

Of the two I think I will be revisiting Darkman in another 25 years or so, but I am actually done with Bulletproof Monk for good. Not 100% on that (unlike, say, Drop Dead Fred or Tank Girl...), but maybe 50% sure.

I need to rewatch Tank Girl. I remember really liking it.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on June 09, 2020, 08:22:36 AM
Finally finished watching Don Bluth's An American Tail. Yeesh the movie pulls no punches and poor Fivel gets put through multiple wringers. On the other hand Fivel pretty much puts himself into said wringers a several times. Sometimes by just being a trusting little kid. And others by poking into things he really ought not to.

Haven't made it through the sequel yet. Hard to believe this is Jimmy Stewart's last movie.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on June 09, 2020, 08:56:07 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1133212
I need to rewatch Tank Girl. I remember really liking it.

I cannot condone this course of action...


No, I really liked Tank Girl when it came out, and was shocked to find that I was very much in the minority. Then I re-watched it a few years back.  It was... not pleasant, though the Kangaroos still hold up in a 'so bad they are good' sort of way, but that's just about the only part that does.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on June 09, 2020, 10:59:24 AM
Quote from: Spike;1133249
I cannot condone this course of action...


No, I really liked Tank Girl when it came out, and was shocked to find that I was very much in the minority. Then I re-watched it a few years back.  It was... not pleasant, though the Kangaroos still hold up in a 'so bad they are good' sort of way, but that's just about the only part that does.
What's so terrible?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on June 09, 2020, 02:02:06 PM
Quote from: Pat;1133269
What's so terrible?

Take your pick: Tone, Acting, Plot, Story, weird musical number in the middle of the film, half-ass comic book panel filler...


I mean, I suppose I could be persuaded to do one of my super-massive reviews of a 25 year old film, but really who would even want that, other than sadists who know I'd have to watch it again...
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on June 09, 2020, 02:39:48 PM
Quote from: Spike;1133293
Take your pick: Tone, Acting, Plot, Story, weird musical number in the middle of the film, half-ass comic book panel filler...
I'll have to watch it again. I have positive memories of that film.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on June 09, 2020, 02:47:01 PM
Quote from: Pat;1133304
I'll have to watch it again. I have positive memories of that film.

So did I. Until I watched it again after a decade plus away from it.  Lori Petty's snarking did not age well, and Malcolm McDowell's scenery chewing isn't as good as you remember either.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: danskmacabre on June 10, 2020, 07:37:28 PM
I rewatched Tank girl not that long ago.
It is kinda cringe I suppose. It's very typical of the "hip 90s" quirky type style at the time.
But once I got past the cringe feeling, it was ok.
It's true it doesn't bear any sort of scrutiny plot, acting, effects etc, but if you look past that, it was a fun watch.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on June 10, 2020, 11:38:26 PM
Saw it when it came out. Didnt think much of it. Its a nonsense show. But doesnt take advantage of that enough.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spinachcat on June 18, 2020, 03:47:51 AM
I had forgotten to recommend SCARY STORIES TO TELL IN THE DARK. Or maybe I did. Who knows anymore.

For PG-13, it was surprisingly intense with some genuine scary parts. The wrap around storyline was pretty good and even the "politically correct" elements didn't break the movie. Compared to recent horror movies, I'd say it was on par with IT part 1, and far superior to IT part crapholio.

I could see this movie getting a cult following in the future.

THIS was one extremely messed up monster...

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4577[/ATTACH]
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: loveoffice on July 06, 2020, 02:42:52 AM
I recently watched this movie Blue is the warmest color. its a great movie about a girl discovering his sexuality but thats all i think ! abit over-rated but still a very beautiful movie to watch. and i know its not a movie but its an honorable mention to name "the office" (comedy) . i recently discovered the office and i must say WOW. just that ! the office is definitely worth watching.:)
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: ArrozConLeche on July 07, 2020, 09:35:20 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1134799
I had forgotten to recommend SCARY STORIES TO TELL IN THE DARK. Or maybe I did. Who knows anymore.

For PG-13, it was surprisingly intense with some genuine scary parts. The wrap around storyline was pretty good and even the "politically correct" elements didn't break the movie. Compared to recent horror movies, I'd say it was on par with IT part 1, and far superior to IT part crapholio.

I could see this movie getting a cult following in the future.

THIS was one extremely messed up monster...

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4577[/ATTACH]

Wasn't this a collection of short stories at one point? The monster looks familiar.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Stephen Tannhauser on July 11, 2020, 01:32:17 AM
So I watched the Netflix movie of The Old Guard with my wife today, and she enjoyed it more than I did.

Pluses: Charlize Theron and Chiwetel Ejiofor are never not watchable, and the main villain character is a not unentertaining turn by actor Harry Melling, whom everyone knows as Dudley Dursley from the Harry Potter movies.  Newcomer Kiki Layne is not bad, if a little lightweight, and those who like action choreography for its own sake will find much good work here. And the theme of the movie -- that people do more good than they know -- is uplifting, if a touch clumsily executed.

Minuses: Several, unfortunately.

First: If the primary plot point of your protagonists is that they're immortal to all normal threats, then you have to come up with something that threatens them in some way for the story to engage us. Immortals fighting mortals is boring by definition because you know your heroes can't possibly lose, which is exactly why Highlander was exciting where Guard's fights are just dull (unless you're a fight-choreography junkie). If your heroes can't be personally hurt, then threaten something they care enough about that that's worse, which would have been easier had these characters been given enough personality to have such people or things in their life.

Second: If the villain doesn't start out with a personal connection to the heroes, he'd better acquire one damn quick to make the story interesting. Melling does the best he can with his villain role but his problem is that he really doesn't care anything about who our immortal crew are, or have anything personal against them beyond their natural reluctance to be his guinea pigs for reverse-engineering immortality.  As a result the fights are basically exercises in choreography and nothing more.

Third: If the audience can think of a simple and more effective tactic against the heroes than any the villain uses, requiring only what the villain already knows, then the villain is a dull villain. If your immortals can cut down entire squadrons with their blades while ignoring firearms, then do not get near them -- stay out of range, use tear gas, Tasers and tranq darts.

Fourth: The great thing about the immortals of Highlander was that, even though we never knew where they truly came from or why they had to fight for the Prize (I am ignoring HIGHLANDER II here, but doesn't everyone?), the simple fact that there was a Prize and a fight they couldn't escape put a forward motion on all their life-arcs, no matter what else they did. The immortals of Old Guard don't seem to have any reason for their existence, and no reason for the only possible way they appear to be able to die: [SPOILER]One day, with no warning or predictability, their immortality simply "runs out" and they start aging again and will die if lethally wounded like anyone else. (I asked my wife, "Doesn't decapitation work? What happens then, does the head grow a new body or the body grow a new head?")[/SPOILER] Also, the immortals we see on screen are, with one or two exceptions, all there ever are or have been; the story deliberately cuts off any hint of a larger, mysterious world.

Fifth: I loathe the SJ advocacy movement with a passion for putting these thought patterns in my brain, but they're there now, and I cannot help notice: Of our five immortals, the one who turns out to be a traitor to the group is, predictably, the lone straight white guy of the bunch, and the gay couple who've been lovers for a thousand years also happen to have been on opposite sides in the Crusades. My good faith that such choices aren't a not-so-subtle "eff you" to certain viewers has, sadly, declined in recent years.

Final score: 1.5/5 solely on visual style and good acting jobs from Charlize and Chiwetel. If you really want a good story about immortals go back and watch your Highlander DVD.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 11, 2020, 02:13:44 AM
Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser;1139056
Final score: 1.5/5 solely on visual style and good acting jobs from Charlize and Chiwetel. If you really want a good story about immortals go back and watch your Highlander DVD.

Yeah. There's so much stuff to sift through on Netflix. When I browsed and saw this title's summary, I was like, "Eh, I'll just re-watch Highlander."
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on July 13, 2020, 09:49:26 AM
Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser;1139056


Fifth: I loathe the SJ advocacy movement with a passion for putting these thought patterns in my brain, but they're there now, and I cannot help notice: Of our five immortals, the one who turns out to be a traitor to the group is, predictably, the lone straight white guy of the bunch, and the gay couple who've been lovers for a thousand years also happen to have been on opposite sides in the Crusades. My good faith that such choices aren't a not-so-subtle "eff you" to certain viewers has, sadly, declined in recent years.

.


This point right here is pretty much why I've all but stopped watching... everything. Well, everything American, anyway... though its not like I'm an expert on finding new and exciting korean films (Not, you know, that I've seen a bad one), or what not.

Though I will admit to breaking down and, though this is the movie thread, I'll cheat and bring up TV, I just watched season one of Lucifer.  I'll probably watch season two, at least.  Its not... good exactly... but I like how it almost hints at an actually thought out metaphysics, and... unlike a lot of religious themed stuff out of hollywood actually seems to treat the subject with a modicum of respect.  I dunno, I get weird when it comes to religion in writing: There is a fine line between juvenile mockery and pedantic literalism where really good storytelling and though provoking ideas can exist and I feel Lucifer actually threaded that needle.

I mean as much as I enjoyed Legion (just to name an example), its utter lack of respect for the mythology it was treading on made it also far more painfully stupid than it needed to be, which is why I never really want to rewatch it. Ruined any deeper meaning the conflict between... was it Michael and Gabriel?... over how to best obey God that the movie wanted to have.

Back to Lucifer though: Weirdly enough, Its not the main two characters (Lucifer, who is by turns charming and annoyingly overdone, and Chloe Decker, the mortal woman who (Spoiler!) love will redeem him (or whatever...) that make the show work. Its the psychiatrist.  The devil's therapist.  That shit's a riot.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Stephen Tannhauser on July 13, 2020, 02:56:22 PM
Quote from: Spike;1139463
I will admit to breaking down ... I just watched season one of Lucifer.  I'll probably watch season two, at least.  Its not... good exactly... but I like how it almost hints at an actually thought out metaphysics, and... unlike a lot of religious themed stuff out of hollywood actually seems to treat the subject with a modicum of respect.  I dunno, I get weird when it comes to religion in writing: There is a fine line between juvenile mockery and pedantic literalism where really good storytelling and though provoking ideas can exist and I feel Lucifer actually threaded that needle.

Well, as a practicing (though very far from perfect) Roman Catholic I have to admit that when it comes to religion, I prefer erring towards pedantic literalism (or what I call, y'know, "getting it right"). So I unsurprisingly don't have the same good opinion of the show's philosophy. In my experience the only reason anybody starts a story with the idea of, "What if the Devil wasn't really evil?" is so that they can immediately play with the logical follow-up idea, "And what if that meant God wasn't really good or perfect, either?" as a way to delegitimize any particular plank the writers dislike in traditional religion.

That said, I agree with you that it's the supporting characters that make the show watchable despite itself -- my wife quite enjoyed the first three seasons and thus I found myself seeing more of it than I would have chosen on my own hook -- and that Rachael Harris's therapist character is a hoot. (I must admit to really disliking Mazikeen, though; I acknowledge not being familiar with all her arcs, so this is possibly an unfair evaluation, but she sticks in my mind mostly in the two modes of "smug bitch" or "abusive bitch", and I've never liked either type.)
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on July 13, 2020, 09:05:54 PM
Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser;1139525
Well, as a practicing (though very far from perfect) Roman Catholic I have to admit that when it comes to religion, I prefer erring towards pedantic literalism (or what I call, y'know, "getting it right"). So I unsurprisingly don't have the same good opinion of the show's philosophy. In my experience the only reason anybody starts a story with the idea of, "What if the Devil wasn't really evil?" is so that they can immediately play with the logical follow-up idea, "And what if that meant God wasn't really good or perfect, either?" as a way to delegitimize any particular plank the writers dislike in traditional religion.


Well, I come at it from a generally atheistic-strongly agnostic perspective, I accept the unknowable as unknowable and I am deeply cynical that any organization run by men (or women, if you need that pedantic clarification) that proclaims to know the absolute truth is inherently flawed and corrupt, or at least will become corrupt VERY quickly.   Personally, I find there are plenty of hints in the old testament that 'The Devil' is more a job than the traditional stories of The Fall would indicate.   I prefer my fictional depictions of God to remain more unknowable for just the reason you state. I'm reminded of the Clips on  Youtube I've seen from Supernatural when Chuck reveals himself to be God... I found the Winchesters reactions to be very well handled, all told, but the depiction of God (as Chuck) to be so far from the mark that I was glad I had stopped watching the show many many seasons earlier.



Quote
That said, I agree with you that it's the supporting characters that make the show watchable despite itself -- my wife quite enjoyed the first three seasons and thus I found myself seeing more of it than I would have chosen on my own hook -- and that Rachael Harris's therapist character is a hoot. (I must admit to really disliking Mazikeen, though; I acknowledge not being familiar with all her arcs, so this is possibly an unfair evaluation, but she sticks in my mind mostly in the two modes of "smug bitch" or "abusive bitch", and I've never liked either type.)


At least in Season 1 Mazikeen has nothing to do but be generally a bitch, which I suppose is a flaw in having an otherwise excellent supporting cast... someone gets the shaft. I thought her character arc was doing well, with her relationship with... amendola?... until she said something dumb about being used as a pawn by 'both of them'... utterly missing the fact that she OFFERED to be a pawn to Lucifer a whole... two episodes... earlier? AFTER she'd seduced the angel.  Then there was the wasted opportunity of her having stolen one of Lucifer's feathers in secret...

So yeah, I agree that Mazikeen isn't really a likeable character, beyond a few fun moments (mostly, again, with the therapist).

I will say that I am curious about your take on the Father Frank episode, as a Roman Catholic. I found it to be one of the highlights of the season, and a reason to 'trust' these writers not to be too... blasphemous?... with the show's premise.  Better to say that they seem to be as respectful as their premise allows, I suppose.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Stephen Tannhauser on July 14, 2020, 12:30:27 AM
Quote from: Spike;1139603
Personally, I find there are plenty of hints in the old testament that 'The Devil' is more a job than the traditional stories of The Fall would indicate.

Granted; the word "satan" was after all a term for an adversary rather than a name per se. Nonetheless, much like your own (and not unmerited) cynicism about human organizations whose people get more concerned with being right -- or worse, looking right -- rather than teaching by example what is right, I admit to the same cynicism about any storyteller who wants to "subvert traditional imagery of good and evil"; I've never seen that fail to end up anywhere except calling good evil and evil good, to which the Bible promises only woe.

Quote
I am curious about your take on the Father Frank episode, as a Roman Catholic. I found it to be one of the highlights of the season, and a reason to 'trust' these writers not to be too... blasphemous?... with the show's premise.  Better to say that they seem to be as respectful as their premise allows, I suppose.

I actually enjoyed the Father Frank episode immensely. But that only made it all the more disappointing when they failed to follow up on any of its implications.

If I'd been running that show, I would have had Father Frank come back as a saint, and had a lot of fun with the conflicts between him and Amenadiel about their different approaches to facing evil despite being nominally on the same "side".
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on July 14, 2020, 06:11:49 AM
Watched the Riverworld movie. Oddly enough for a SyFy movie its not bad really. But then I know only the basics of the book. Production values were actually not bad. Acting was not bad overall. My main irk is it feels like alot of the draw of the book is missing from the movie. That and for some reason the main protagonist of the book is in the movie the villain? I really hate that. Same when they did that with John Carter.

Speaking of John Carter. Finally had a look at Asylum's John Carter of Mars movie. You know things are bad when a low budget tag-along movie is somehow vaugly closer to the source than the big budget version. Both though take various liberties with the story and characters.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 21, 2020, 03:59:12 PM
Quote from: Omega;1139679
Watched the Riverworld movie. Oddly enough for a SyFy movie its not bad really. But then I know only the basics of the book. Production values were actually not bad. Acting was not bad overall. My main irk is it feels like alot of the draw of the book is missing from the movie. That and for some reason the main protagonist of the book is in the movie the villain? I really hate that. Same when they did that with John Carter.

Speaking of John Carter. Finally had a look at Asylum's John Carter of Mars movie. You know things are bad when a low budget tag-along movie is somehow vaugly closer to the source than the big budget version. Both though take various liberties with the story and characters.

The Asylum mockbuster of Battleship is supposedly better done than the original film. I cannot offer direct testimony as I've seen neither film.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 23, 2020, 06:57:52 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1141059
The Asylum mockbuster of Battleship is supposedly better done than the original film. I cannot offer direct testimony as I've seen neither film.

I liked Battleship. It's like a Michael Bay film (it's obviously made to copy his 'style') but about half as obnoxious.

Can't comment on the Asylum version.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on July 26, 2020, 07:05:46 AM
I've seen American Warships and its... ok. Better than some Asylum movies. Same for their Giant robot movie. Its still an Asylum movies though so set your bar low before going in.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on July 26, 2020, 12:15:51 PM
Quote from: Omega;1141782
I've seen American Warships and its... ok. Better than some Asylum movies. Same for their Giant robot movie. Its still an Asylum movies though so set your bar low before going in.

I often have Asylum movies or something like them playing in the background when I'm doing prep work for my games (or completing payroll audits). They have some vaguely interesting moments, but rarely anything that keeps me so interested that they distract me from what I'm really working on.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 03, 2020, 10:13:55 AM
Transformers, War for Cybertron

Since the TV thread slid off the front page, and I can't find it.

I'm up to episode 2, and have a few opinions.
It's... not baaaad. I'm not going to say it's great. The CGI is ok, the animation is odd. A lot of watching robots sashay around swinging their hips conspicuously. Weird thing to notice, but I did.
Dialog and writing is very, very bland. Characters all sound pretty much the same. It's a very down, mopey version of Transformers that takes itself a little too seriously for my tastes.
Set during the end of the Great War, the Transformers are sick of fighting, but don't want to surrender or give up. Optimus is trying to keep his battle weary forces together, while Megatron initiates a plan concocted by his science officer, Shockwave to do a dirty and end the war through a fitting evil scheme.

I like the nuance, of course. Just because it's a kid's IP, doesn't mean they can't tell interesting stories. The music and sound effects are very bland.

I plan to finish the first season over the next few days. I'm watching one a day. But like most Transformer-centric stories, I think it appeals mostly to the die hard fans. Casuals who want to drop in and see what it's all about are likely to be put off by depressing CGI robots bitching about how sucky their robot lives have become.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on August 03, 2020, 11:19:06 AM
The transformers in this one look very much like the toys, excepting a few (like Ratchet, Jetfire and Bumblebee that all look like the old cartoon).
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on August 04, 2020, 06:16:00 AM
Speaking of Transformers
About 2 decades ago at GenCon I picked up some fan translated VHS tapes of the first couple of episodes for Beast Wars II and Beast Wars Neo. Two transformers anime that far as I know still havent made it to the US.

Beast Wars II is interesting in it follows a set of warriors from a different group who are dealing with a new batch of villains with machine theme vs the heroes with the beast theme. LEad by Leo Convoy on one side and Galvatron and his brother Megatron on the other. Good animation and lots of different stuff going on each episode. Not sure who the two moon goddesses are. Certainly better than the awful Beast Machines.

Beast Wars Neo is an odd one. Really odd. Follows a bunch of students who get a new leader Big Convoy and travel from planet to planet searching for errant energy capsules and opposing a bunch of dinosaur themed villains. This one seems aimed at a slightly younger audience. Good animation and at least the stories are varied.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: anime_qui on August 16, 2020, 10:22:46 AM
man transformers was nice, they just had to stop like few movies before !!!!
they kept it going for too long
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 16, 2020, 01:58:26 PM
Well, I made it to episode 2 of the Netflix Cybertron series and lost interest. That should tell you something.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on August 16, 2020, 02:34:58 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1145115
Well, I made it to episode 2 of the Netflix Cybertron series and lost interest. That should tell you something.

Without more explanation, it doesn't really tell us much.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on August 17, 2020, 04:49:14 AM
Quote from: anime_qui;1145093
man transformers was nice, they just had to stop like few movies before !!!!
they kept it going for too long


They needed to stop at no movies. Hated the first one, didnt like the second one, and was pretty meh on the third one. They are all so damn lacking in individuality now its hard to tell whos who, especially in a fight.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on August 17, 2020, 04:51:21 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1145115
Well, I made it to episode 2 of the Netflix Cybertron series and lost interest. That should tell you something.

Which one? I think theres like two or 3 now?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 17, 2020, 01:36:39 PM
Quote from: Omega;1145204
Which one? I think theres like two or 3 now?

The one I previously posted about. War For Cybertron, Siege.

Quote from: Omega;1145203
They needed to stop at no movies. Hated the first one, didnt like the second one, and was pretty meh on the third one. They are all so damn lacking in individuality now its hard to tell whos who, especially in a fight.

I saw glimmers of a decent movie in the first Bay Transformers. The sequels were dumpster fires and turned the stupid up to 11.

I consider Bumblebee to be the best of the live action films so far.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 28, 2020, 09:41:27 PM
Bill and Ted Face the Music

Eh. It was funny and entertaining. Not as good as the first two, but not a disaster like so many nostalgia cash ins.
Reccomend.

*Edit* In hindsight and listening to Midnight's Edge review, I agree that this was a good passing the torch film, because they didn't have to piss on Bill & Ted to make the daughters look good in comparison.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on August 29, 2020, 03:28:39 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1145274
I saw glimmers of a decent movie in the first Bay Transformers. The sequels were dumpster fires and turned the stupid up to 11.

I consider Bumblebee to be the best of the live action films so far.

I liked the first one, the second and third ones ruined pretty much everything I liked about the first one, and the rest were barely worth renting as dumb action flicks.

I did like Bumblebee. I knew I was being pandered to with the manic pixie dreamgirl mechanic, but I liked it anyway. Hopefully the sequel won't suck.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on August 29, 2020, 05:51:10 PM
New Mutants is pretty fucking terrible. There's perhaps 5 minutes of amusing material buried in 90 minutes of shit. I can't even recommend this one as an on-demand what-the-hell-it's-only-six-bucks option. Just say no.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on August 30, 2020, 03:06:03 AM
This is about as close to the comics as Power Pack was. EG: Not even remotely. And it just feels so utterly off kilter. But we knew this from the trailers well ahead.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on August 30, 2020, 05:00:39 PM
There was a Power Pack movie?
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 31, 2020, 08:16:30 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1146848
Bill and Ted Face the Music

Eh. It was funny and entertaining. Not as good as the first two, but not a disaster like so many nostalgia cash ins.
Reccomend.

*Edit* In hindsight and listening to Midnight's Edge review, I agree that this was a good passing the torch film, because they didn't have to piss on Bill & Ted to make the daughters look good in comparison.

All I gotta say is that Keanu Reeves looks -very- strange without his mustache and beard. Although Alex Winter has aged pretty well all things considered.
Title: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on August 31, 2020, 10:35:41 AM
Quote from: Pat;1146978
There was a Power Pack movie?

TV series pilot that never got past a limited showing. One of my players way back knew some of the production crew. That and the New Mutants pilot. But that one at least followed the comics a little more. Ive seen both.

Im pretty sure there was one more from Marvels tries at superhero TV series in the 90s.

addendum: Ohh yeah! Nick Fury with David Hasselhoff as a pretty darn good Fury actually.

Also didnt know Marvel was behind the Nightman TV series? Thought that was Malibu's gig?
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 12, 2020, 06:31:50 AM
Cuties


Nothing like a big controversy to get me interested. So I went ahead and watched it. I rather liked it. Despite all the people flipping their caps on social media over pedo bait, this is not that kind of film. It's not even anti-child sexualization (though that it a part of the film) so much as about children growing up and trying to find acceptance in an adult world, and doing it very poorly as you'd expect of a child.


To sum up, a young girl, Amy is upset, I would go so far as to say traumatized, by her father bringing another woman into their family. IE polygamy. She rebels in various ways, by stealing from her mother, getting in fights, and yes, doing some rather inappropriate sexualized behavior. It's a biting criticism of tradition and Islam in specific and how that impacts a young girl who can't process it all.



Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on September 12, 2020, 11:15:03 PM
addendum: Ohh yeah! Nick Fury with David Hasselhoff as a pretty darn good Fury actually.
He looked the part, but that was the only good thing about the production.

Those Marvel TV movies were an in-depth study in missing the mark.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on September 14, 2020, 12:00:14 PM
More like trying to do comics as more "real world" well before the Nolan Batman movies. Which ends up feeling very lacking. That and trying to keep the SFX budgets down.
Same reason so many of these live action adaptions of say cartoon and game characters keep failing as near invariably they are set in the real world or so close that they lose huge chunks of what makes them interesting. The new Sonic movie is just one in a long long depressingly long line if these and its just as lacking.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: RandyB on September 14, 2020, 02:33:21 PM
Cuties


Nothing like a big controversy to get me interested. So I went ahead and watched it. I rather liked it. Despite all the people flipping their caps on social media over pedo bait, this is not that kind of film. It's not even anti-child sexualization (though that it a part of the film) so much as about children growing up and trying to find acceptance in an adult world, and doing it very poorly as you'd expect of a child.


To sum up, a young girl, Amy is upset, I would go so far as to say traumatized, by her father bringing another woman into their family. IE polygamy. She rebels in various ways, by stealing from her mother, getting in fights, and yes, doing some rather inappropriate sexualized behavior. It's a biting criticism of tradition and Islam in specific and how that impacts a young girl who can't process it all.





Counterpoint:

https://www.menofthewest.net/cuties-boiling-the-cultural-frog/
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 14, 2020, 05:32:23 PM
Cuties


Nothing like a big controversy to get me interested. So I went ahead and watched it. I rather liked it. Despite all the people flipping their caps on social media over pedo bait, this is not that kind of film. It's not even anti-child sexualization (though that it a part of the film) so much as about children growing up and trying to find acceptance in an adult world, and doing it very poorly as you'd expect of a child.


To sum up, a young girl, Amy is upset, I would go so far as to say traumatized, by her father bringing another woman into their family. IE polygamy. She rebels in various ways, by stealing from her mother, getting in fights, and yes, doing some rather inappropriate sexualized behavior. It's a biting criticism of tradition and Islam in specific and how that impacts a young girl who can't process it all.





Counterpoint:

https://www.menofthewest.net/cuties-boiling-the-cultural-frog/ (https://www.menofthewest.net/cuties-boiling-the-cultural-frog/)


I unwisely spent the weekend arguing on twitter over the film. I disagree with the article and I'll leave it at that, because the argument just goes in circles at this point.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on September 15, 2020, 05:21:44 AM
Quote from: Pat;1146978
There was a Power Pack movie?
TV series pilot that never got past a limited showing. One of my players way back knew some of the production crew. That and the New Mutants pilot. But that one at least followed the comics a little more. Ive seen both.
Huh! Thanks for the info, I hadn't known about this. I just watched the pilot with my son. It was cheesy with terrible effects, but it captured a lot of the original comics that he loved when he was young, so it was fun to watch. It got the kids spot on, I thought - good casting.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on September 16, 2020, 03:20:15 PM
While net was down recently sat down and watched a Russian movie called Koma that was recently translated and released subbed and dubbed. I went with the subbed version.
The movie is about an architect, well either that or a player who realllllly likes Star Frontiers too much and built a while diorama city in his apartment... heh. Said architect was recently in a car accident. Then the cracks start to show, quite literally, that he is essentially still in the accident. He is in a coma in a hospital somewhere and his mind is in some sort of shared universe composed of the memories of everyone whos ever been in a coma. Its a truely weird alien geometry.
The architect is helped by some fellow coma patients and very quickly learns that this mindscape is not safe as there are things dwelling in it that hunt the patients relentlessly.
From there the rules of this otherworld are learned. Some of the inhabitants have a power of some sort, such as healing, sensing the monsters, mapping the network of connections between memory nodes, and so on.
The movie is well made and looks great. The mindscape is really well done and the monsters are unusual (though could have been a bit more alien looking. But there is a reason they are not.) The story itself goes in some interesting and unexpected twists and turns even. Its not great of course, but its fairly entertaining and a fun concept that does not get used much.
Feels a bit like what you'd get if you mixed The Odyssey TV series from the 90s with The Matrix and a touch of White Wolf's Orpheus.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: harryhouse on September 26, 2020, 08:40:21 AM
Since we have almost nothing to do but to  sit at home, i recently watched the whole harry potter movie collection. man i though im not gonna like it because i watched them when i was a kid but to be honest some of them are good !
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on September 29, 2020, 05:41:40 PM
this is funny funny timing as just came across an old kids movie from the 80s called... The Worst Witch. based on the YA series from the 70s by Jill Murphy.

Any of this sound familliar?
 
A young student at a witches boarding school. She is a bit accident prone and picked on by the other students except for 2 friends who help or hinder her efforts. She has a snobbish upperclass rival and one of the teachers has it in for her while the head of the academy tries to help her.

The movie has Faruza Balk as Mildred, yep, Dorothy from Return to Oz. (and Mercedes in GTA Vice City), Diana Rigg from the Avengers as Mrs Hardbroom, and... Tim Curry? Yep, Tim Curry, singing...Some of the visuals arent bad for an 80s movie and of course Diana Rigg allways looks good in black. ahem.

Double-bill this with Babes in Toyland featuring Drew Barrymore and... Keanu Reeves? yup, Keanu.

The 80s was a weird era mm-hmm.


Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: soundchaser on September 29, 2020, 06:46:25 PM
Recently made it to theaters to watch Tenet and Infidel. Both pretty good. I have Caviezel's son in a college class this semester... I had some nice chats about the movie and other acting topics with him.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 07, 2020, 11:08:14 AM
Movie related:

https://cbsaustin.com/news/local/texas-grand-jury-indicts-netflix-over-cuties-movie-claiming-it-sexually-exploits-minors (https://cbsaustin.com/news/local/texas-grand-jury-indicts-netflix-over-cuties-movie-claiming-it-sexually-exploits-minors)

TLDR: Texas grand jury just indicted Netflix over 'Cuties'.

Hard to say if this will stick or not.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on October 08, 2020, 09:18:19 PM
Watched Bride of Frankenstein last night for the first time in ages. Forgot how fun it was as a horror movie. I always remembered the tragic end, but forgot about things like the ballerina homunculi. Definitely enjoy this one more than the first Frankenstein film (though that is good too). Classic horror movies often have a bit more fun and humor in them, and it was refreshing to see that on display. Hoping to watch some of my favorites this month if I have time.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on October 09, 2020, 07:58:42 AM
Check out the two "House of" movies as well as they are actually pretty good. John Carridine makes for a rather dapper Dracula and Lon Chaney Jr reprises his role as the Wolf Man in House of Frankenstein with Boris Karloff as the mad scientist. And House of Dracula has some interesting twists and turns in it. Carridine and Chaney return and Glenn Strange plays the Monster in both. House Of Dracula was one of Lionel Atwills last movies. Jane Adams who plays the Hunchback in House of Dracula also played Vicky Vale in the two Batman serials.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on October 10, 2020, 04:14:09 PM
Check out the two "House of" movies as well as they are actually pretty good. John Carridine makes for a rather dapper Dracula and Lon Chaney Jr reprises his role as the Wolf Man in House of Frankenstein with Boris Karloff as the mad scientist. And House of Dracula has some interesting twists and turns in it. Carridine and Chaney return and Glenn Strange plays the Monster in both. House Of Dracula was one of Lionel Atwills last movies. Jane Adams who plays the Hunchback in House of Dracula also played Vicky Vale in the two Batman serials.

That is a good idea. I have not watched those since I was a kid
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on November 01, 2020, 03:48:53 PM
Saw "The Call Up" since it was officially on YouTube for free.

In what appears to be a very near future setting MMO players are invited to play in a new game called The Call Up in a large rented office building.
The players wear a bodysuit armour and helmet that puts them into a high end VR experience. Things start to look odd pretty quick when they discover they can not leave. And things only get worse from there as they play a VR military sim. As you can likely guess. It turns out to be a deadly game.

This one was 50-50 for me. I liked the sets and characters and the initial premise was good.
But...
The execution of the plot got progressively un-likable and at points a bit too predictable. What was not predictable was the bewilderingly arbitrary way many die in this.

Can I recommend it? Not sure really. Its a bit too YMMV. But hey its free for now.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Sparrowhawk131 on November 18, 2020, 01:32:24 AM
Social Dilemma was a very interesting piece to watch. Nothing was shown that I wouldn't be aware of already but still, well-made and builds a very negative feeling about this whole deal of social media
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Thornhammer on November 30, 2020, 10:56:30 PM
Mosul on Netflix is pretty damn good.

It is about the Ninevah SWAT team fighting against ISIS. Violent. Intense. Something a little different that isn’t from the American perspective.

If you like modern war movies, don’t miss it.

Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on December 13, 2020, 05:57:22 AM
I watched The Rise of Skywalker. It's not brilliant and doesn't break any new ground, but it's much better than I expected. The trappings were great, and the emotional beats were solid. The plot was a bit of rushed nonsense, but it held together enough. The climax wasn't that great, but the denouement and the wrapping up of the various plot and character threads were better. They powered up Ren too much, but, to be fair, that did that to the other force users as well (it wasn't her uberpower during the finale). The nostalgia got a little heavy for my taste, but it was integrated fairly well. The dialog was functional at presenting information and reinforcing characterization, but not a single line rises to the level of poetry. The acting was sufficient. It's not memorable, but it is watchable.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 13, 2020, 07:25:53 AM
I watched The Rise of Skywalker. It's not brilliant and doesn't break any new ground, but it's much better than I expected. The trappings were great, and the emotional beats were solid. The plot was a bit of rushed nonsense, but it held together enough. The climax wasn't that great, but the denouement and the wrapping up of the various plot and character threads were better. They powered up Ren too much, but, to be fair, that did that to the other force users as well (it wasn't her uberpower during the finale). The nostalgia got a little heavy for my taste, but it was integrated fairly well. The dialog was functional at presenting information and reinforcing characterization, but not a single line rises to the level of poetry. The acting was sufficient. It's not memorable, but it is watchable.

I'm going to indulge myself just a little here.
Rise of Skywalker is going to be the first Star Wars film that I never plan to watch, even on streaming to have an informed criticism like Last Jedi. I was never fond of the sequels, and TLJ killed my interest in them. Your mini-review makes me think I'm making the right decision, if the best I could hope for is "watchable".
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Sparrowhawk131 on December 14, 2020, 02:33:03 AM
I did enjoy the Underworld saga, just haven't seen the newest one
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on December 14, 2020, 03:38:03 AM
I'm going to indulge myself just a little here.
Rise of Skywalker is going to be the first Star Wars film that I never plan to watch, even on streaming to have an informed criticism like Last Jedi. I was never fond of the sequels, and TLJ killed my interest in them. Your mini-review makes me think I'm making the right decision, if the best I could hope for is "watchable".
If it matters, Rise of Skywalker in many ways is a repudiation of The Last Jedi.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 14, 2020, 04:54:29 AM
I'm going to indulge myself just a little here.
Rise of Skywalker is going to be the first Star Wars film that I never plan to watch, even on streaming to have an informed criticism like Last Jedi. I was never fond of the sequels, and TLJ killed my interest in them. Your mini-review makes me think I'm making the right decision, if the best I could hope for is "watchable".
If it matters, Rise of Skywalker in many ways is a repudiation of The Last Jedi.

Yeah, I've seen the Red Letter Media review for RoS. That's kind of amusing. But it sounds like they took everything I disliked from Force Awakens and dialed it up to 11.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on December 14, 2020, 04:57:24 AM
I'm going to indulge myself just a little here.
Rise of Skywalker is going to be the first Star Wars film that I never plan to watch, even on streaming to have an informed criticism like Last Jedi. I was never fond of the sequels, and TLJ killed my interest in them. Your mini-review makes me think I'm making the right decision, if the best I could hope for is "watchable".
If it matters, Rise of Skywalker in many ways is a repudiation of The Last Jedi.

Yeah, I've seen the Red Letter Media review for RoS. That's kind of amusing. But it sounds like they took everything I disliked from Force Awakens and dialed it up to 11.
That's the Half in the Bag review? It's pretty good. But yes, The Rise of Skywalker is definitely more akin to The Force Awakens.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on December 14, 2020, 09:48:43 AM
I'm going to indulge myself just a little here.
Rise of Skywalker is going to be the first Star Wars film that I never plan to watch, even on streaming to have an informed criticism like Last Jedi. I was never fond of the sequels, and TLJ killed my interest in them. Your mini-review makes me think I'm making the right decision, if the best I could hope for is "watchable".
If it matters, Rise of Skywalker in many ways is a repudiation of The Last Jedi.

Yeah, I've seen the Red Letter Media review for RoS. That's kind of amusing. But it sounds like they took everything I disliked from Force Awakens and dialed it up to 11.
They dialed it even higher, but the gauge wouldn't read past 11. There are some good visuals (not great for Star Wars, it's like they tried too hard and ended up overshooting being great), but the story and characters (but not necessarily the actors) are crap.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 18, 2020, 06:49:32 AM
Johnny Mnemonic



Cyberpunk Red got me thinking about this film, so I had to give it a re-watch.

I like Johnny Mnemonic. It's got it's problems. Oh boy, does it. I noticed that it's shot like a TV show. The story elements don't quite all mesh together. There's some dated CGI in the hacking scenes.

But for all that I think Johnny Mnemonic is the most cyberpunk film I've watched. The Matrix (for example) is a better film, but Johnny Mnemonic has more of the iconic cyberpunk RPG elements. The Yakuza, a powerful corporation, a "free city" where the law seems completely absent, cybernetics, street revolutions, a fixer in a bar hooking up people with jobs, plenty of double crosses and so on.
So watch it! Or re-watch it.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Trond on December 18, 2020, 11:15:13 PM
Just saw the Rocketeer a few days ago, and I was expecting very little, but was positively surprised. I think it's a bit of an overlooked pulp gem. A few points:

-I wonder if many reviewers didn't get the humor. It's full of it, and often self-deprecating humor (contra Ebert's review of the film).
-Many also didn't notice how much effort they put into the set designs. The zeppelin is actually quite accurate.
-Jennifer Connelly is young, a bit more "fleshy" than in recent years, and absolutely gorgeous.

Pretty nice inspiration for pulp adventures with fairly straightforward plots :)
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 19, 2020, 01:06:10 AM
Just saw the Rocketeer a few days ago, and I was expecting very little, but was positively surprised. I think it's a bit of an overlooked pulp gem. A few points:

-I wonder if many reviewers didn't get the humor. It's full of it, and often self-deprecating humor (contra Ebert's review of the film).
-Many also didn't notice how much effort they put into the set designs. The zeppelin is actually quite accurate.
-Jennifer Connelly is young, a bit more "fleshy" than in recent years, and absolutely gorgeous.

Pretty nice inspiration for pulp adventures with fairly straightforward plots :)

Good call. One of my favorites.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: consolcwby on December 20, 2020, 11:30:10 PM
I'm going to indulge myself just a little here.
Rise of Skywalker is going to be the first Star Wars film that I never plan to watch, even on streaming to have an informed criticism like Last Jedi. I was never fond of the sequels, and TLJ killed my interest in them. Your mini-review makes me think I'm making the right decision, if the best I could hope for is "watchable".
If it matters, Rise of Skywalker in many ways is a repudiation of The Last Jedi.
I'd rather watch The Star Wars Holiday Special on LOOP than see that shite again! (Man, TLJ must've really got to you to see RoS as anything as watchable! I broke an axel on some of those PLOTHOLES!)

Johnny Mnemonic

Cyberpunk Red got me thinking about this film, so I had to give it a re-watch.

I like Johnny Mnemonic. It's got it's problems. Oh boy, does it. I noticed that it's shot like a TV show. The story elements don't quite all mesh together. There's some dated CGI in the hacking scenes.
--snipp--
Yep.  I went to the movies to see this - I liked it, even if it seemed a bit, underwhelming at times. A good romp!
I always liked the Rocketeer, btw! :) Good call on that one!
--------------------------
I got one:
Repo Man (1984) Trailer: https://youtu.be/DLGrXGEMOSo (doesn't do the film justice tho...)
Stars Harry Dean Stanton and Emilio Estevez, and is my favorite 80's film (seeing that I was a punk back in the 80s!) -
A quick synopsis:
A loser punk meets up with an automobile repossessing agency and learns the TRUE meaning of EXTREME! Along the way he runs afoul of:
1) A Government conspiracy
2) Aliens
3) UFOlogists
4) Aging Hippies
5) Southern California Punk Rock
6) Television Evangelists
and finally 7) The creator of the Neutron Bomb and his car which everyone wants.
I'd like to say it's a heartwarming buddy-film, but FUCK NO! A romance? Only if quickies and BJs count!
But it does have style and was written and directed by Punks who knew the scene!
Excellent example of 80's Nihilism, Music, and Originality!
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 26, 2020, 01:18:54 AM
Wonder Woman 1984

Spoiler space. Turn back now, ye mortals who have not watched.
























I really wanted to like this movie. When it worked, it worked really well, When it didn't it stunk.

The first Wonder Woman was great up until the CGI garbage battle where WW won with the power of shooting the bad guy in the face with a laser beam.

This movie was like that, except sprinkled through the film. A great action sequence like the chase in Egypt broken up by some terrible nonsense action. A dramatic scene would end with CGI WW flinging herself into the sky with her magic lasso.

Wonder Woman can make things invisible, but only when it's important to the plot.

And I can't shake that they tried to make Maxwell Lord into a petty revenge porn version of Trump. I'm sure Trump haters will be jerking off to that shit.

I did like that they managed to resolve the story without blowing up the bad guy with a laser.

I feel like another re-write to smooth out the story, and toning down the excessive action silliness, would make this an A, but I have to give it a D+ as it is.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on December 26, 2020, 11:44:54 AM
WW84 Spoilers:
.
.
.
.

Short answer: it's good, but not quite great.

I agree that in many ways, Wonder Woman 84 is a hot mess. Powers were invented out of thin air and then forgotten about. Wonder Woman can suddenly fly now, it turns out flying isn't actually all that hard. And there is a lot of 80's groupthink that history proved wrong, like the Reaganesque president precipitating World War 3, instead of defeating the Soviets by standing up to them and making them eat the consequences of their own bad choices until they collapsed from their own rottenness. Plus a ton of other virtue-signalling and self-indulgence along the way.

It's over-wrought and in many ways a mindless spectacle, but it works.

I think the movie's strengths manage to outshine its weaknesses. And its strengths are definitely the characters it creates, which are solid and original and pretty much hold together and make the story work. Maxwell Lord isn't a political cartoon come to life, he's his own thing, well-acted, and you get where he is coming from while still understanding why he's wrong. Kristen Wiig really shines as Barbara Minerva, and is believable in both her frumpy stage and her supervillain stages. The conflict between Cheetah and Wonder Woman is well done. Chris Pine is absolute gold as Steve Trevor, and he tends to steal the scenes he is in, in a good way. And Gal Gadot is simply glorious as Wonder Woman. Kind, vulnerable, mortal, but strong and wise and clear-headed, and absolutely gorgeous but always on target.

Is it the best possible Wonder Woman movie? No, as I said it has a lot of weaknesses in the script, it just manages to get past them and succeed on its own strengths. I think the first one is probably a better movie, it certainly had a better script. But this one is definitely worth watching.

If I were to compare it to Ghostbusters 2016, WW84 is a much better movie because its central story works. WW84 is a superhero story that's super. GB16 was a comedy that wasn't funny.

If I were to compare it to a Marvel movie, I think I'd compare it to Avengers: Age of Ultron. Both movies have kind of rickety underpinnings, but manage to get past them to the good stuff. Both of them are kind of long, and have stretches that are somewhat dull before picking up again. I think WW84 is better than Age of Ultron, though. WW84's dull spots are shorter than Age of Ultron's, and its best bits are better than Age of Ultron's. WW84 sticks to its central storylines better than Age of Ultron, which had way too many characters and subplots, not all of which were compelling. WW84 has only a handful of storylines, and most of them land.

In the end I would say it was well worth watching, for sheer spectacle and craftsmanship, but you could certainly make up a Top 10 list of superhero movies that doesn't have WW84 on it.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Trond on December 26, 2020, 12:44:50 PM
I saw Mulholland Falls the other day. (No, not Mulholland Drive) Maybe I'm sniffing out old films showing off Jennifer Connelly's charms :)
This is a movie that seems to have fallen in between the cracks a bit, but I thought it was pretty good. Very noir, and a bit depressing, but well done. Nick Nolte was made for this rough detective role. Jennifer Connelly is the main murder victim of the story, so she's seen mostly in flashbacks (but a big part of her role is her sex appeal so there's that). I like the acting overall. Strange that not more people have heard of this one, but if you are into hard-hitting fedora-wearing detectives then this should be a must.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 26, 2020, 12:46:48 PM
After sleeping on it, I wonder if their mistake was in making it into a global catastrophe. The theme of wishes is very personal, and I think the story would have been more coherent if they kept it smaller. Like say, the core characters, a few of their aquaintances, and then Lord threatenes 'just' the city.

And  just for giggles, I'd like to point out that the DC universe now has an event in it's recent past where everyone in the world had their wishes granted and then everyone gave up their wish to save the world. Everyone knows something about Wonder Woman, even if it's just that she was the person convincing Lord to give up his wish.
After a few more movies, are we going to get to the point like in Dr Who where every Christmas London is attacked by aliens from outer space, and the average person expects it? That could get very silly very quickly.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on December 26, 2020, 01:28:42 PM
I'd really like the next Justice League movie to be a simple rumble between the Justice League and the Legion of Doom.

Keep it small, keep it fun, and best of all, it's something that Marvel hasn't done yet.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on December 27, 2020, 02:03:21 PM
I saw WW84. It was OK, neither great nor terrible. If you're already paying for HBOMax, give it a try. If you're not,  see if there's a free trial period because I wouldn't drop money specifically for WW84.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warder on December 27, 2020, 06:46:01 PM
I heard from a movie friend that people are slamming this movie(WW84) on the net cause its suuuper bad. I watched it. I laughed at some points. I was dissapointed at others. To sum up my thoughts(its late and i have little steam) i can only say; its based on a superhero comic book, the main character is a god, the world is full of silly ideas that make no sense. And people wanted this to be internally consistent with believable repercussions? In a movie set in the imaginary 1980s?.. Friggin Shazam and Aquaman are in this universe... Its only oke in my view, but i liked parts of it and your mileage may vary.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 27, 2020, 07:55:14 PM
I heard from a movie friend that people are slamming this movie(WW84) on the net cause its suuuper bad. I watched it. I laughed at some points. I was dissapointed at others. To sum up my thoughts(its late and i have little steam) i can only say; its based on a superhero comic book, the main character is a god, the world is full of silly ideas that make no sense. And people wanted this to be internally consistent with believable repercussions? In a movie set in the imaginary 1980s?.. Friggin Shazam and Aquaman are in this universe... Its only oke in my view, but i liked parts of it and your mileage may vary.

Yeah, but people draw the line at different points.

For example, Superman shooting heat rays of of his eyes is silly, but people roll with it.
Superman shooting a fix the Great Wall of China ray out of his eyes is generally agreed to be past that line.



Being internally consistent with believeable reprecussions is what makes the silliness acceptable.
I really hated the CGI scenes giving them the freedom to have Wonder Woman do whatever they wanted, whether it was a good idea or not. The scene where WW grabs a missile with her lasso so it can drag her along, for example, was just... eh it was more silly than exciting. If they showed her gritting her teeth and making an epic leap I think would have gone much better.

I will say that riding that line between silly and too silly in a movie based on comic book superheroes is challenging. The movies that have gotten it right are impressive, IMO.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on December 28, 2020, 06:26:48 PM
I heard from a movie friend that people are slamming this movie(WW84) on the net cause its suuuper bad. I watched it. I laughed at some points. I was dissapointed at others. To sum up my thoughts(its late and i have little steam) i can only say; its based on a superhero comic book, the main character is a god, the world is full of silly ideas that make no sense. And people wanted this to be internally consistent with believable repercussions? In a movie set in the imaginary 1980s?.. Friggin Shazam and Aquaman are in this universe... Its only oke in my view, but i liked parts of it and your mileage may vary.

Being internally consistent with believeable reprecussions is what makes the silliness acceptable.
I really hated the CGI scenes giving them the freedom to have Wonder Woman do whatever they wanted, whether it was a good idea or not. The scene where WW grabs a missile with her lasso so it can drag her along, for example, was just... eh it was more silly than exciting. If they showed her gritting her teeth and making an epic leap I think would have gone much better.

I will say that riding that line between silly and too silly in a movie based on comic book superheroes is challenging. The movies that have gotten it right are impressive, IMO.

Yeah, I found WW84 to be just dumb. The Shazam movie was far more internally consistent, for example. Also, it's not just internal consistency of powers. It's also having mundane things like airplanes and cars work in a remotely believable way, and also having characters act with consistent internal motivations.

Also, I just didn't find the ridiculous parts funny. The Shazam movie was also much more of a comedy, while WW84 just had lots of unfunny absurdity.

I feel like if this was coming out in an ordinary holiday time alongside other blockbusters, it would be a total flop. But people just really want *something* new.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Trond on December 28, 2020, 06:50:56 PM
I heard from a movie friend that people are slamming this movie(WW84) on the net cause its suuuper bad. I watched it. I laughed at some points. I was dissapointed at others. To sum up my thoughts(its late and i have little steam) i can only say; its based on a superhero comic book, the main character is a god, the world is full of silly ideas that make no sense. And people wanted this to be internally consistent with believable repercussions? In a movie set in the imaginary 1980s?.. Friggin Shazam and Aquaman are in this universe... Its only oke in my view, but i liked parts of it and your mileage may vary.

Being internally consistent with believeable reprecussions is what makes the silliness acceptable.
I really hated the CGI scenes giving them the freedom to have Wonder Woman do whatever they wanted, whether it was a good idea or not. The scene where WW grabs a missile with her lasso so it can drag her along, for example, was just... eh it was more silly than exciting. If they showed her gritting her teeth and making an epic leap I think would have gone much better.

I will say that riding that line between silly and too silly in a movie based on comic book superheroes is challenging. The movies that have gotten it right are impressive, IMO.

Yeah, I found WW84 to be just dumb. The Shazam movie was far more internally consistent, for example. Also, it's not just internal consistency of powers. It's also having mundane things like airplanes and cars work in a remotely believable way, and also having characters act with consistent internal motivations.

Also, I just didn't find the ridiculous parts funny. The Shazam movie was also much more of a comedy, while WW84 just had lots of unfunny absurdity.

I feel like if this was coming out in an ordinary holiday time alongside other blockbusters, it would be a total flop. But people just really want *something* new.

I agree with all of this, particularly the comedy parts. Iron Man movies typically have had much better humor for instance.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 28, 2020, 07:33:39 PM
I feel like if this was coming out in an ordinary holiday time alongside other blockbusters, it would be a total flop. But people just really want *something* new.

I hear WW84 is doing well financially. I expect a large part of it is people wanting a fun movie during their Covid stress.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 28, 2020, 07:41:49 PM
I heard from a movie friend that people are slamming this movie(WW84) on the net cause its suuuper bad. I watched it. I laughed at some points. I was dissapointed at others. To sum up my thoughts(its late and i have little steam) i can only say; its based on a superhero comic book, the main character is a god, the world is full of silly ideas that make no sense. And people wanted this to be internally consistent with believable repercussions? In a movie set in the imaginary 1980s?.. Friggin Shazam and Aquaman are in this universe... Its only oke in my view, but i liked parts of it and your mileage may vary.

Being internally consistent with believeable reprecussions is what makes the silliness acceptable.
I really hated the CGI scenes giving them the freedom to have Wonder Woman do whatever they wanted, whether it was a good idea or not. The scene where WW grabs a missile with her lasso so it can drag her along, for example, was just... eh it was more silly than exciting. If they showed her gritting her teeth and making an epic leap I think would have gone much better.

I will say that riding that line between silly and too silly in a movie based on comic book superheroes is challenging. The movies that have gotten it right are impressive, IMO.

Yeah, I found WW84 to be just dumb. The Shazam movie was far more internally consistent, for example. Also, it's not just internal consistency of powers. It's also having mundane things like airplanes and cars work in a remotely believable way, and also having characters act with consistent internal motivations.

My one nit with Shazam is when he catches the bus. That thing should have crumpled around his hands and collapsed from the impact. But it was such a great scene, seeing a superhero actually save people and not just punch the villain, I give it a pass. :D

*I probably should have made that one reply. Ah well.*
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on December 29, 2020, 12:09:18 AM
Just saw the Rocketeer a few days ago, and I was expecting very little, but was positively surprised. I think it's a bit of an overlooked pulp gem. A few points:

-I wonder if many reviewers didn't get the humor. It's full of it, and often self-deprecating humor (contra Ebert's review of the film).
-Many also didn't notice how much effort they put into the set designs. The zeppelin is actually quite accurate.
-Jennifer Connelly is young, a bit more "fleshy" than in recent years, and absolutely gorgeous.

Pretty nice inspiration for pulp adventures with fairly straightforward plots :)

It is a surprisingly good movie despite its various deviations from the source comics. I liked the actors and as you noted the sets and everything are really well done.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on December 29, 2020, 12:20:55 AM
Yeah, but people draw the line at different points.

For example, Superman shooting heat rays of of his eyes is silly, but people roll with it.
Superman shooting a fix the Great Wall of China ray out of his eyes is generally agreed to be past that line.


Most agree the whole of Quest for Peace was past all lines. heh.

As for Wonder Woman and being a comic book character. The problem is the movies do not use the comic book character and instead make up over the top stuff for god knows what reason.

Wonder Woman in the comics has some fairly well defined abilities and limitations even into the 70s where she had by then experienced some upgrading like everyone else. If the movies had stuck to that it would have been believable because its not drifting towards Quest for Peace weirdness.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on December 29, 2020, 12:25:02 AM

My one nit with Shazam is when he catches the bus. That thing should have crumpled around his hands and collapsed from the impact. But it was such a great scene, seeing a superhero actually save people and not just punch the villain, I give it a pass. :D

*I probably should have made that one reply. Ah well.*

If hes still powered by magic as the original then the buss not crumpling makes sense. In the comics hes one of the few people who can go toe-to-toe with superman because his powers are magic based. To which Superman is vulnerable. Or was well into the 90s. Wonder Woman is another who can for similar reasons.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on December 29, 2020, 09:25:54 AM
I feel like if this was coming out in an ordinary holiday time alongside other blockbusters, it would be a total flop. But people just really want *something* new.

I hear WW84 is doing well financially. I expect a large part of it is people wanting a fun movie during their Covid stress.

It made $19 million in theaters its opening weekend. Plus a lot more on streaming.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on December 29, 2020, 09:30:31 AM
If hes still powered by magic as the original then the buss not crumpling makes sense. In the comics hes one of the few people who can go toe-to-toe with superman because his powers are magic based. To which Superman is vulnerable. Or was well into the 90s. Wonder Woman is another who can for similar reasons.

The Kingdom Come miniseries has Shazam facing off with Superman in an apocalyptic future scenario. Wonder Woman also has a sword and her golden armor in that one.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Trond on December 29, 2020, 10:53:48 AM

I have a weird pet peeve that I realize not that many people agree with; what is it with Hollywood movies about heroic characters and portraying their childhood? I get that it’s about establishing characters but I rarely like it. Superman is supposed to be superb at nearly everything, smashing bad guys with his bare hands, but wait, what was he like as a baby?? Even Conan the barbarian has had his childhood covered twice, but all Robert E Howard ever said was that he was born on the battlefield. And now they had to go back to WW’s childhood....again (it was done better the first time).
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on December 29, 2020, 12:29:21 PM
I have a weird pet peeve that I realize not that many people agree with; what is it with Hollywood movies about heroic characters and portraying their childhood? I get that it’s about establishing characters but I rarely like it. Superman is supposed to be superb at nearly everything, smashing bad guys with his bare hands, but wait, what was he like as a baby?? Even Conan the barbarian has had his childhood covered twice, but all Robert E Howard ever said was that he was born on the battlefield. And now they had to go back to WW’s childhood....again (it was done better the first time).

One big difference between film and books is that film tends to be a more emotional medium. Humans instinctively empathize with facial expressions especially, moreso than with words on a page. Being able to see the actor's face in close-up means the audience tends to have closer identification with the film's protagonist. As a result, mainstream films tend to have more of a relatable protagonist whose face is onscreen.

Seeing someone's childhood is one way of making them relatable, plus a child's face is even more instinctively emotional to people than an adult's.

So I'm not really surprised at film adaptations where they make the protagonist into a more likeable, relatable character -- and including childhood scenes.

That said, there are a lot better ways to do this - and to buck the trend while still being successful.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 29, 2020, 01:47:24 PM
I have a weird pet peeve that I realize not that many people agree with; what is it with Hollywood movies about heroic characters and portraying their childhood? I get that it’s about establishing characters but I rarely like it. Superman is supposed to be superb at nearly everything, smashing bad guys with his bare hands, but wait, what was he like as a baby?? Even Conan the barbarian has had his childhood covered twice, but all Robert E Howard ever said was that he was born on the battlefield. And now they had to go back to WW’s childhood....again (it was done better the first time).

One big difference between film and books is that film tends to be a more emotional medium. Humans instinctively empathize with facial expressions especially, moreso than with words on a page. Being able to see the actor's face in close-up means the audience tends to have closer identification with the film's protagonist. As a result, mainstream films tend to have more of a relatable protagonist whose face is onscreen.

Seeing someone's childhood is one way of making them relatable, plus a child's face is even more instinctively emotional to people than an adult's.

So I'm not really surprised at film adaptations where they make the protagonist into a more likeable, relatable character -- and including childhood scenes.

That said, there are a lot better ways to do this - and to buck the trend while still being successful.

I think they also wanted to show Themyscara again.
The problem with superhero movie sequels is that they're past the 'origin story', but there's a lot of backstory that need to be explained for someone new jumping into the series.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on December 29, 2020, 03:22:37 PM
I think they also wanted to show Themyscara again.
The problem with superhero movie sequels is that they're past the 'origin story', but there's a lot of backstory that need to be explained for someone new jumping into the series.

Actually, I feel that it's an annoying trend to always have an origin story as the first movie. One of the reasons I liked "Spider-Man: Homecoming" was that it rebooted without trying to do the origin story again. Likewise, while Guardians of the Galaxy has a flashback to pre-origin, it starts with Star-Lord already as superhero-y as he's going to get. Origin stories have their place, but characters don't need to start with their origin story. That's not how it is in most of the comics.

I think needing to start with origin stories was mostly because mainstream audiences weren't used to superheroes, so they need an explanation to handle "How could someone possibly be a superhero?"  But once one accepts that, then we can just start with characters already as superheroes.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 29, 2020, 04:45:56 PM
I think they also wanted to show Themyscara again.
The problem with superhero movie sequels is that they're past the 'origin story', but there's a lot of backstory that need to be explained for someone new jumping into the series.

Actually, I feel that it's an annoying trend to always have an origin story as the first movie. One of the reasons I liked "Spider-Man: Homecoming" was that it rebooted without trying to do the origin story again. Likewise, while Guardians of the Galaxy has a flashback to pre-origin, it starts with Star-Lord already as superhero-y as he's going to get. Origin stories have their place, but characters don't need to start with their origin story. That's not how it is in most of the comics.

I think needing to start with origin stories was mostly because mainstream audiences weren't used to superheroes, so they need an explanation to handle "How could someone possibly be a superhero?"  But once one accepts that, then we can just start with characters already as superheroes.

I think the thing the recent Marvel Cinematic Universe got right is that it brought non-comic fans up to speed on the characters though their origin stories. As a comic fan, I'll roll with the idea of an amazon princess who fights crime, but that's a huge buy in for Joe Movie Goer, and needs some explanation so they can get into the concept.

Once the MCU movies had established a world full of super hero stuff, they could relax the origin stories a bit. It helps that Star Lord is (in the first movie) more a Star Wars type character than a superhero character.

Plus, I think the origin story is the strongest story for these characters. It tends to be personal, simpler and a more coherent story. Once you start adding in comic bizzareness like star gods and invisible jets and time travelling versions of existing characters side-by-side with their current versions, things get a little too bizzare for the average moviegoer.
I think the MCU managed to wrangle comic bizzareness towards the end, but I don't think they could have kept it up for much longer. And now that the Infinity War arc is over, I expect the movies to either back way off and kind of soft-reboot, or flounder and finally fall off the pop culture radar.

(Plus, Robert Downey Junior carried that franchise on his back. With him retiring from being Tony Stark, I think the franchise is going to lose an important keystone that kept the edifice standing.)
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on December 29, 2020, 06:10:28 PM
I think the thing the recent Marvel Cinematic Universe got right is that it brought non-comic fans up to speed on the characters though their origin stories. As a comic fan, I'll roll with the idea of an amazon princess who fights crime, but that's a huge buy in for Joe Movie Goer, and needs some explanation so they can get into the concept.

Once the MCU movies had established a world full of super hero stuff, they could relax the origin stories a bit. It helps that Star Lord is (in the first movie) more a Star Wars type character than a superhero character.

Right. Yes, this sounds what I was trying to say. I would add that with so many more mainstream superhero movies in general, this need for an origin story can be relaxed even outside the MCU. That is, after a decade of mainstream superhero movies, Joe Movie Goer is now more accepting of the idea of a crimefighting superhero - and doesn't require as huge a buy-in.


Plus, I think the origin story is the strongest story for these characters. It tends to be personal, simpler and a more coherent story. Once you start adding in comic bizzareness like star gods and invisible jets and time travelling versions of existing characters side-by-side with their current versions, things get a little too bizzare for the average moviegoer.
I think the MCU managed to wrangle comic bizzareness towards the end, but I don't think they could have kept it up for much longer. And now that the Infinity War arc is over, I expect the movies to either back way off and kind of soft-reboot, or flounder and finally fall off the pop culture radar.

It depends on the character, of course, but I often find that the origin story isn't very strong. I feel the origin story formula tends to be very expository - trying to explain all the qualities of the character, instead of just showing them.

A good intro story, I think, is a simple story that shows off the character in their classic action. It shouldn't involve complexities or bizarreness, but rather a clean story about who they are. Like an introduction to Sherlock Holmes doesn't have to focus on his childhood or how he became that way -- it should rather show off Holmes being Holmes.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 29, 2020, 06:41:55 PM
A good intro story, I think, is a simple story that shows off the character in their classic action. It shouldn't involve complexities or bizarreness, but rather a clean story about who they are. Like an introduction to Sherlock Holmes doesn't have to focus on his childhood or how he became that way -- it should rather show off Holmes being Holmes.

Sure, but Sherlock Holmes has a lot less buy-in than a superhero. If Sherlock Holmes dressed up as a wombat and had a belt full of gadgets, there would be a lot more questions compared to him being just a really good detective.

It also doesn't help that IMO the superhero sequel movies, with very few notable exceptions, have been much less entertaining than the first films which tend to feature origin stories. I can't tell if that's because the sequels are bad, or because they're not origin stories though. Still chewing on that one.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on December 29, 2020, 07:25:19 PM
A good intro story, I think, is a simple story that shows off the character in their classic action. It shouldn't involve complexities or bizarreness, but rather a clean story about who they are. Like an introduction to Sherlock Holmes doesn't have to focus on his childhood or how he became that way -- it should rather show off Holmes being Holmes.

Sure, but Sherlock Holmes has a lot less buy-in than a superhero. If Sherlock Holmes dressed up as a wombat and had a belt full of gadgets, there would be a lot more questions compared to him being just a really good detective.

It also doesn't help that IMO the superhero sequel movies, with very few notable exceptions, have been much less entertaining than the first films which tend to feature origin stories. I can't tell if that's because the sequels are bad, or because they're not origin stories though. Still chewing on that one.

I think there's a survivors bias here. Movies that suck tend to do poorly in the box office, and not get a sequel produced. So the first movie of a franchise tends to be better, even if the later movies are strictly average.

That said, I'm not convinced that sequels are so frequently inferior - though obviously that is subjective taste. Personally, I thought Superman II was superior to the original; X2 was superior to The X-Men; The Dark Knight was better than Batman Begins; Captain America: The Winter Soldier was superior to The First Avenger; and Ant-Man and the Wasp was superior to Ant-Man. Plus there are some very good non-origin standalones like Black Panther and Spider-Man: Homecoming. There are plenty of bad sequels as well, though, but I think those are enough to make the record mixed.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on January 02, 2021, 07:52:57 PM
Saw Monster Hunter. Amusingly, it shows us how Rifts does SDC/MDC. In the other world, 
the MDC monsters are immune to bullets and even an anti-armor rocket from our (obviously SDC) world, but are vulnerable to swords and arrows from their own world.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on February 08, 2021, 12:05:08 PM
I finally got around to seeing Quentin Tarantino's Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. It has some good moments, but not nearly enough, and the story inexplicably goes off the rails about two-thirds of the way through, leading up to a very underwhelming ending. Ultimately, it's an alternate history of the Manson murders, told from the perspective of people with almost no involvement. There's some nice character work, but it really doesn't come together in the end.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on March 18, 2021, 07:14:33 PM
Just finished the 4h+ Snyder version of Justice League. I liked it far more than the Whedon version. Better characters and the story felt like it fit together a lot better. Of course, both of things are made easier when you double the run time, but I found it enjoyable.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on March 19, 2021, 06:41:15 PM
I'm about halfway through it. So far I think the Snyder Cut illustrates that Joss Whedon had the right idea. Comparing scenes, it is clear to me how much more effective Whedon's edits and dialog are.

Some of the stuff added for the Snyder cut is nice, but it is wildly uneven. There are some nice new effects, but also a lot of places where the effects look rushed and unconvincing. Four minutes in, there is a lovingly crafted shot of the new Steppenwolf, followed immediately by a poorly-photoshopped shot of Lex Luthor standing in a pool of water that wouldn't have passed muster on Hercules and Xena.

Story-wise, it's also hit and miss. There's a scene where Barry saves Iris West, but it's not that great, and then we see Barry crushing on Wonder Woman. There is a lot more interplay between Cyborg and his dad, and most of that is good, but overall the movie is still just way too damn long. And IMHO, the things that were weak in the theatrical cut are still weak in the Snyder cut, they're just drawn out twice as long.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Spike on March 19, 2021, 10:24:49 PM
Well. I just rewatched The Man from U.N.C.L.E.

... The film by Guy Ritchie, not the old TV Show (which... I guess I should watch?).

I am reminded that Alicia Vikander is... an actress. 

No, I seriously have to wonder how she got so much press and so much attention (even, I believe, an award for playing a robot or something), all the up through her reprisal of Lara Croft.  She made zero impact on me the first watch through this film (four years ago?), and knowing who she was for the second watch through I realized all her BEST scenes were ones where she didn't speak*, or spoke only a little to accentuate the physical acting. I assume she was cast for her (lack of) height, in order to make Armie Hammer look even bigger, which in turn was to make up for the tall, and more importantly massive, Henry Cavill, having to be impressed by Hammer's size/physicality.

Still, its a damn charming movie, though one does wish they'd put more time in for the Villian, played by Elizabeth Debricki (Spelling?), who ironically is taller even than Armie Hammer I believe.





*For Stalkerish Trufans of ms Vikander, that's actually meant to be somewhat complimentary.  She did and OUTSTANDING job with the more silent, physical parts of her acting, while her dialog delivery was... adequet.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on March 22, 2021, 10:00:10 AM
Ultimately, I don't think the Snyder Cut fixes Justice League. That's because the problem with Justice League is that it has Death of Superman jammed into the middle of it. Death of Superman is an end-of-cycle storyline, and they're putting it into the origin, and that doesn't work. All it does is bring the movie to a crashing halt for a half hour.

It doesn't do any justice to Death of Superman, either.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on March 22, 2021, 10:48:13 AM
Ultimately, I don't think the Snyder Cut fixes Justice League. That's because the problem with Justice League is that it has Death of Superman jammed into the middle of it. Death of Superman is an end-of-cycle storyline, and they're putting it into the origin, and that doesn't work. All it does is bring the movie to a crashing halt for a half hour.

It doesn't do any justice to Death of Superman, either.
There seems to be a pattern. Synder likes certain stories and wants them to recreate them, but then he doesn't bring along enough context. Miller's Superman v. Batman fight from Dark Knight Returns is another example. They're dropped into stories about other things, without enough development to make them compelling.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 22, 2021, 06:43:23 PM
Makes me think of Star Trek, Into Darkness. A lot of that movies drama relies on having watched Wrath of Khan, and the characters established in that film.
But Into Darkness is a reboot, and that characterization hasn't been established for these characters. Culminating in the utterly cringey scene where Spock calls out "Kaaahn!" over the death of a character he didn't really seem to like in the first place.  :o

I'm going to star calling it a Drama Hijack, where a story tries to borrow drama from another source without putting in the work to build up it's own characters and situations.

---

I do kinda want to watch the Snyder cut, after watching the RLM review. Leads me to believe that if it's still not good, it's at least palatable with some interesting scenes.


Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on March 23, 2021, 09:27:09 AM
Makes me think of Star Trek, Into Darkness. A lot of that movies drama relies on having watched Wrath of Khan, and the characters established in that film.
But Into Darkness is a reboot, and that characterization hasn't been established for these characters.
Yes! Also, Ricardo Montalban in The Star Seed was bigger and more muscular than Shatner, he looked like he could kick Kirk's ass. Benedict Cumberbatch is a fine actor, but not nearly so physically intimidating.


I do kinda want to watch the Snyder cut, after watching the RLM review. Leads me to believe that if it's still not good, it's at least palatable with some interesting scenes.
If you want to watch it, watch it. Just don't pay a lot of money to watch it.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on March 23, 2021, 10:02:49 AM
There seems to be a pattern. Synder likes certain stories and wants them to recreate them, but then he doesn't bring along enough context. Miller's Superman v. Batman fight from Dark Knight Returns is another example. They're dropped into stories about other things, without enough development to make them compelling.

They come across as fan service, rather than a fully-fleshed storyline in their own right. And they rob future movies of stories that could be great if done at the right point in the series.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on March 24, 2021, 04:05:30 PM
I didn't finish watching because their review was too long, but Red Letter Media made an interesting point about the Snyder cut: It should have been 2 movies, like the Infinity Stone saga. The fight with Steppenwolf (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-7uwshsfFI) at the 2 hour mark would have served as the perfect break.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warder on March 29, 2021, 06:35:35 PM
I havent watched the Snyder cut and im not going to. Ive seen the original, im just not interested. Now the thing that has interested me are the articles and vids on youtube about other possible 4 hour long adaptations. Hollywood will not scrape the botton of the barrel, it will remove it and dig into the ground to find anything resembling interest or nostalgia it seems. I really dont want to know this was the start of a trend. Who knows if it would ever stop escalating.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: GeekyBugle on March 31, 2021, 10:59:46 PM
For those So Bad it's Good movies go to tubi.tv
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on April 01, 2021, 05:52:13 AM
For those So Bad it's Good movies go to tubi.tv
How are these different from Amazon Prime's "So Bad It's Painful" collection?
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 01, 2021, 03:18:00 PM
For those So Bad it's Good movies go to tubi.tv
How are these different from Amazon Prime's "So Bad It's Painful" collection?

No idea, I don't have Amazon Prime because I have to fork out money, tubi is free.

But the ones I found there are from way back when I used to go see two bad kung-fu flicks at the cinema.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: hedgehobbit on April 02, 2021, 06:38:29 PM
Took the kids to see Godzilla vs Kong today. It had way more monster action than Godzilla 2014 and way fewer stupid parts than KoAM. It's not a work of art but these days I can appreciate a movie that's just entertaining. It isn't woke, but does have the improbably diverse cast we've all come to expect from modern movies. Fortunately, it's also lacking a Chicom insert character. There are plenty of references to other Godzilla movies, both the classic ones and the ones never shown in the US, so it was clearly made by someone that respects the source material.

Overall, the Monsterverse is similar to the DCEU in that their isn't a consistent theme or style running through all the movies. This one is probably closest to Skull Island in how most of the monster fights take place in the daytime with clear skies so you can tell what's happening.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on April 07, 2021, 10:30:38 AM
I took a quick look at Tubi today. It reminds me a lot of the early days of Hulu.

Thanks for the heads-up, GeekyBugle.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Warder on April 12, 2021, 06:27:22 PM
Saw the movie Nobody with Bob Odenkirk few days back. Its like John Wick but way less cynical and over the top. The movie manages to keep one interested as in not breaking the suspension of disbelief. John Wick is still John Wick thou.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 16, 2021, 02:52:21 PM
Friend of mine, for reasons unfatomable, forked out 30$ to see Raya and the Last Dragon. And was oddly un-impressed and impressed at the same time. Apparently looks nice and they liked the chain-sword. But did not linger long enough in each land visited to enjoy the differences. They also did not like the message near the end as it came across badly. Apparently others felt the same to some degree.

From their description sounded like someone in writing liked Final Fantasy: Spirits Within... ahem.  8)
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Thornhammer on April 19, 2021, 06:47:03 PM
That Shang-Chi trailer looks awesome. Marvel martial arts flick? Hell yes.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on April 19, 2021, 09:42:39 PM
The special effects look decent, don't really have any feel for what the movie is about or the character. And it's nothing like the Shang-Chi comics I used to read, but that's okay. A lot of the comics stuff wouldn't translate well to the screen, like all his inner dialog while fighting.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 22, 2021, 06:20:23 PM
I agree it looks nothing like the original comics so far. But that really is par for the course. None of the Marvel movies have been all that close to their comics and with each movie after, they drift further and further away.

I figured they would either ditch or replace Fu Manchu with some other villain. Points for not making it yet another eeeeevil white guy which would have totally broke it.

Parts of the trailer look like they were meant for some asian fantasy movie. Not sure what that will entail. Could be flashbacks to the origins of the Mandarin's rings which seems to be the crux of the movie.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Wntrlnd on April 25, 2021, 04:16:26 PM
They couldnt have the Mandarin be Chinese in Iron Man 3 because "we gotta play nice with the chinese so they watch our movies. Can't make them (or the SJWs) think we're racists" 

So they went with a white mandarin with Ben Kingsley as his front because he was frikking Gandhi once and nobody complained about that.

But in Shang-Chi its fine to have a chinese villain because the hero is chinese too, yay. Nice one, Disney.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Thornhammer on April 25, 2021, 11:15:39 PM
Mortal Kombat was fucking dumb fun. The story is absolute steaming garbage, and the person who wrote it needs to be fired out of a cannon in to the sun.

The fights were good, the fatalities were great, and Kano was an absolute treat.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on April 26, 2021, 01:15:00 AM
Mortal Kombat was fucking dumb fun. The story is absolute steaming garbage, and the person who wrote it needs to be fired out of a cannon in to the sun.

The fights were good, the fatalities were great, and Kano was an absolute treat.
I thought that the fight between Scorpion and Subzero seemed oddly slow compared to the other fights, like it had a very different fight choreographer.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Wntrlnd on April 26, 2021, 04:39:30 AM
Mortal Kombat was fucking dumb fun. The story is absolute steaming garbage, and the person who wrote it needs to be fired out of a cannon in to the sun.

The fights were good, the fatalities were great, and Kano was an absolute treat.

You just described every Mortal Kombat movie ever.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on April 26, 2021, 06:17:05 PM
I actually like the second movie. I think it captured the feel more of the games than the first did.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on April 29, 2021, 07:36:53 PM
This week I watched Hotel Artemis, which was a 2018 movie about a bad day at a black market hospital in near future Los Angeles. It features an ensemble cast including Dave Bautista, Jodie Foster, Charlie Day, Sofia Boutella, Zachary Quinto, and Jeff Goldblum. Take one part film noir, one part sci fi supermedicine, one part cyberpunk, and one part crime movie, mix well, and garnish with violence and regret.

I thought it was a well made mix of genres, and I'll probably buy the blu-ray at some point.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Thornhammer on April 30, 2021, 09:17:53 AM
This week I watched Hotel Artemis, which was a 2018 movie about a bad day at a black market hospital in near future Los Angeles. It features an ensemble cast including Dave Bautista, Jodie Foster, Charlie Day, Sofia Boutella, Zachary Quinto, and Jeff Goldblum. Take one part film noir, one part sci fi supermedicine, one part cyberpunk, and one part crime movie, mix well, and garnish with violence and regret.

I thought it was a well made mix of genres, and I'll probably buy the blu-ray at some point.

Yeh - I enjoyed it. Seemed like a concept that would fit nicely in the John Wick setting.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on April 30, 2021, 06:58:35 PM
Yeah, it had similarities in some ways. Both movies present shadowy organizations with strict rules of conduct, and play out the consequences when the rules are broken, for good or for evil.

Both Waikiki and John Wick are criminals with a heart of gold.

They both have themes of imposing one's personal morality on a fundamentally immoral world. I'm not 100% behind that as a worldview, but I do like movies where heroes choose to do the right thing even when it's the hard way.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Thornhammer on May 01, 2021, 04:16:02 PM
Anyone watched Without Remorse yet?

I have about half of the last episode of Generation Kill to finish tonight, and then I'll start in on it.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: hedgehobbit on May 03, 2021, 10:09:16 AM
Anyone watched Without Remorse yet?

I was also curious about this. Because it's Amazon, I'm afraid that all the action from the trailer will be in one episode and the rest of the show will just be people sitting around talking. Also, I can't really take Michael B Jordan seriously as an action hero.

Right now though, my daughter and I are working our way through season 1 of Demon Slayer, so I don't have much free time.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on May 03, 2021, 11:11:00 AM
Anyone watched Without Remorse yet?

I was also curious about this. Because it's Amazon, I'm afraid that all the action from the trailer will be in one episode and the rest of the show will just be people sitting around talking. Also, I can't really take Michael B Jordan seriously as an action hero.

Right now though, my daughter and I are working our way through season 1 of Demon Slayer, so I don't have much free time.
It's a movie, not a series. Plot is weak. Dialogue is weak. Action is OK. Pacing is terrible. I put it at  🌟 🌟 at best.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Thornhammer on May 04, 2021, 09:15:15 AM
I was also curious about this. Because it's Amazon, I'm afraid that all the action from the trailer will be in one episode and the rest of the show will just be people sitting around talking. Also, I can't really take Michael B Jordan seriously as an action hero.

It was forgettable, is about the long and short of it. It is a film whose purpose is to deliver unto you the two minute mid-credits scene, which explicitly spells out where they're going next.

MBJ did a decent job. Others, not as much.

I think this is probably something they should have turned into a short series - maybe 3 or 4 episodes tops - instead of trying to cram it into one movie.






Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on May 05, 2021, 10:32:07 AM
Does Without Remorse bear any resemblance whatsoever to the original Tom Clancy novel?
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Thornhammer on May 05, 2021, 10:50:58 PM
Well...the movie and the book share the same name.

The main character is John Kelly. And there's a character named Pam.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on May 06, 2021, 04:39:31 PM
  Couple movies I really liked and dont know if they have been mentioned here were L.A. Confidential and Snatch.  I like both movies a whole lot as they are pretty good at incorporating multiple interesting characters and story lines at one time.   I have always like the move Prophecy as well, its low budget, but I thought Christopher Walken as  an angel with an attitude was fantastic.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Reckall on May 15, 2021, 06:18:52 AM
Anyone watched Without Remorse yet?

Sadly, I did  :(

Let's ignore the fact that the main character in the books is white (in a novel he muses that he could be played in a movie by Tom Selleck). This isn't "Without Remorse". Not even remotely. I wonder if they took another script and slapped the name on it. It is not even a good movie. Boring and implausible storyline, flat characters, listless direction... Not even the action scenes are any good.

(The best way to infiltrate Russia is to openly violate their airspace and try to reach Murmansk onboard a normal plane...)

As someone who grew up with Alec Baldwin, Harrison Ford, James Earl Jones, Harry Czerny and Harris Yulin (not to mention Willem Dafoe as Clark) playing various Clancy's characters so well that I now picture them as these actors in the novels, there is nothing in this movie that makes me think of Clancy.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Thornhammer on May 15, 2021, 09:48:55 AM
Yep. It was about as "based on the novel by Tom Clancy" as the film The Lawnmower Man was "based on the story by Stephen King."
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on May 15, 2021, 12:49:40 PM
This week I watched Hotel Artemis, which was a 2018 movie about a bad day at a black market hospital in near future Los Angeles. It features an ensemble cast including Dave Bautista, Jodie Foster, Charlie Day, Sofia Boutella, Zachary Quinto, and Jeff Goldblum. Take one part film noir, one part sci fi supermedicine, one part cyberpunk, and one part crime movie, mix well, and garnish with violence and regret.

I thought it was a well made mix of genres, and I'll probably buy the blu-ray at some point.

I am a little behind, but that is a really unusable ensemble. How did they work together in terms of performance?
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on May 15, 2021, 08:00:55 PM
Anyone watched Without Remorse yet?

Sadly, I did  :(

Let's ignore the fact that the main character in the books is white (in a novel he muses that he could be played in a movie by Tom Selleck). This isn't "Without Remorse". Not even remotely. I wonder if they took another script and slapped the name on it. It is not even a good movie. Boring and implausible storyline, flat characters, listless direction... Not even the action scenes are any good.

(The best way to infiltrate Russia is to openly violate their airspace and try to reach Murmansk onboard a normal plane...)

As someone who grew up with Alec Baldwin, Harrison Ford, James Earl Jones, Harry Czerny and Harris Yulin (not to mention Willem Dafoe as Clark) playing various Clancy's characters so well that I now picture them as these actors in the novels, there is nothing in this movie that makes me think of Clancy.

   That is too bad, if the book is the same one I am thinking of... IS it the one where Clark waged a private war on street criminals after a prostitute he fell in love with is murdered?   That was an excellent book IMO (I like some of Clancy's stuff, but I remember that book being good) even though it did read a bit like "what if Charles Bronson was a SEAL instead of a doctor"? 
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on May 15, 2021, 08:07:07 PM
  Read the wiki recap of the movie "without remorse"....holy crap its nothing like the book I am thinking of at all.  The movie recap reads like a huge anti russia propaganda piece.   Why did they gender swap the Admiral?  It also seems odd to race swap Clark, i mean the guy in  charge in the book is Greer....ah well I guess boxes have to checked. 
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on May 16, 2021, 01:00:02 AM
Because blackfacing characters is all the rage in Idiotlwood, again. Just pushed this time to even more stupid levels than the last iteration did.
Expect to see more and more offensive redoes soon.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on May 16, 2021, 09:13:03 PM
Because blackfacing characters is all the rage in Idiotlwood, again. Just pushed this time to even more stupid levels than the last iteration did.
Expect to see more and more offensive redoes soon.
  Well, the thing is, I do not think I would mind if Clark is now a black guy in the movie....but it seems to be for no reason other than to just make him black.  In the book Greer is the high ranking officer, the person with real power and influence.  Clark is just a former SEAL who is pissed and from what I remember more or less unemployed, a nobody in the context of the world (beyond his past exploits and accomplishments).  On any scale Greer is a the black guy and a much bigger fish.  So it does perplex me as to why they gender swapped Greer, and made Clark black just to be black....I guess they though Mike Jordan was going to draw bigger numbers than any white dude they could find, but heck they changed the story completely from the book anyway, so why not just make a different story with different characters and just do that?   Art by committee is a shit show.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: hedgehobbit on May 16, 2021, 10:17:42 PM
they changed the story completely from the book anyway, so why not just make a different story with different characters and just do that?

Because the vast majority of people have no idea what the original story is about and they just think "I like Tom Clancy movies". Of course, it doesn't take too many of these for it to turn into "Tom Clancy movies suck".

The real question is why do IP holders seem to care so little if their IP get attached to crappy projects?
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Godfather Punk on May 17, 2021, 02:51:30 AM
Wasn't it this line of reasoning that killed the Die Hard franchise? Not sure about Die Hard 4.0, but definitely A Good Day to Die Hard was a generic spy thriller with McClane bolted on for brand recognition.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on May 17, 2021, 09:28:52 AM
Wasn't it this line of reasoning that killed the Die Hard franchise? Not sure about Die Hard 4.0, but definitely A Good Day to Die Hard was a generic spy thriller with McClane bolted on for brand recognition.

   I know this, John McClane leveled up his character like nothing I have ever seen before.  He went from a lucky grunt to a guy who makes John Matrix run and hide when he comes around.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on May 17, 2021, 10:14:13 AM
This week I watched Hotel Artemis, which was a 2018 movie about a bad day at a black market hospital in near future Los Angeles. It features an ensemble cast including Dave Bautista, Jodie Foster, Charlie Day, Sofia Boutella, Zachary Quinto, and Jeff Goldblum. Take one part film noir, one part sci fi supermedicine, one part cyberpunk, and one part crime movie, mix well, and garnish with violence and regret.

I thought it was a well made mix of genres, and I'll probably buy the blu-ray at some point.

I am a little behind, but that is a really unusable ensemble. How did they work together in terms of performance?

The movie holds together quite well. Jodie Foster is in full character actor mode, playing the Nurse who runs the black market hospital as a collection of quirks masking her inner insecurity, and this is effective. Bautista plays the hospital's orderly/bouncer, and he does a good job being loyal but conflicted, and staying on the same page as the other actors. Charlie Day plays a scumbag, and Sofia Boutella plays an assassin whose personal history gets tangled up in her mission. The actor playing Waikiki does a good job as a gangster with a heart of gold.

If you like a good B-movie, I think you will be entertained at the very least.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on May 17, 2021, 11:52:20 AM
they changed the story completely from the book anyway, so why not just make a different story with different characters and just do that?

Because the vast majority of people have no idea what the original story is about and they just think "I like Tom Clancy movies". Of course, it doesn't take too many of these for it to turn into "Tom Clancy movies suck".

The real question is why do IP holders seem to care so little if their IP get attached to crappy projects?
Well, for starters, Clancy died in 2013. Death of the primary creator is usually when things start to unravel unless someone steps into the role of wrangling the idiots. The Tolkien estate is facing this with Christopher Tolkien's demise, and I strongly believe Good Omens avoided sucking because Neil Gaiman was there with Pratchett's notes to step on the necks of the retards.

Also, Hollywood is by and large a sausage-making machine. By which I mean whatever you get out of the meetings may only bear a passing resemblance to what you fed into it. Well before wokeist crap was a thing, executive meddling and lawyers could fuck up a production in fascinating ways.

Hollywood loves waving fat gobs of cash at people for their IPs, and they don't always even make it into movies. That's a heck of an inducement if you're not J.K. Rowling and can wipe your ass with $100 bills. Clive Cussler optioned out 'Raise The Titanic' disliked the result, avoided doing it again for the longest time, and then I guess he needed to pay some bills and optioned out the rights for 'Sahara'... which was a disaster. Cussler then committed a very stupid move and sued over it, lost the suit, and pretty much spent the rest of his days cranking out potboilers to pay off the judgement. Sometimes the wisest decision is to walk away.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on May 18, 2021, 11:34:48 AM
Sometimes they make these movies by slapping the name of one IP on the script for another simply to retain the IP and cut losses on scripts bought.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Zelen on May 19, 2021, 01:05:50 AM
Cash is a big motivator. As a creative person, lets say some Hollywood studio wanted to option a story or novel I wrote. I am not at all interested in my work being used for pushing Hollywood propaganda, but if I could get 5-10 million and live comfortably for the rest of my life without ever having to work again? Not ruling it out.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Wntrlnd on May 19, 2021, 06:46:55 PM
Wasn't it this line of reasoning that killed the Die Hard franchise? Not sure about Die Hard 4.0, but definitely A Good Day to Die Hard was a generic spy thriller with McClane bolted on for brand recognition.

The Die Hard movies have one singular theme. The bad guy wants to do a heist, tricks the police into thinking its about something else like terrorism, and McClane is there in the middle, just minding his own business and caught up with having to stop it.
Basically, the bad guys are just trying to steal something in the guise of being fanatics as a diversion.

That pretty much describes the first 3 movies. 4.0 might be about cyberterrorism but I dont remember what the actual heist is.

Only thing I remember about the last one is that they're trying to steal something from the abandoned Chernobyl and a CIA agent trying to stop it..  Remove Bruce Willis character and it would not much different a movie.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on May 21, 2021, 04:10:18 PM
Wasn't it this line of reasoning that killed the Die Hard franchise? Not sure about Die Hard 4.0, but definitely A Good Day to Die Hard was a generic spy thriller with McClane bolted on for brand recognition.

The Die Hard movies have one singular theme. The bad guy wants to do a heist, tricks the police into thinking its about something else like terrorism, and McClane is there in the middle, just minding his own business and caught up with having to stop it.

Actually, the second and third and fifth Die Hard movies were all generic thrillers with McClane bolted on for brand recognition. The second movie was based on Walter Wager's 1987 novel 58 Minutes. The third movie was based on a spec script called Simon Says by Jonathan Hensleigh, that the studios originally wanted to make into a Lethal Weapon sequel. I think the closest thing to an original was the fourth movie, which adapted material from a non-fiction article, but the plot was at least written for McClane.

And the first movie was adapted from the 1979 novel Nothing Lasts Forever by Roderick Thorp, though with a bunch of changes.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Thornhammer on May 22, 2021, 04:58:10 PM
The first fifteen minutes of Army of the Dead are absolute perfection.

Boobs, zombies ripping people apart, somebody getting torn to gobbets with a .50 cal machine gun, A-10s hammering the Vegas Strip, all with Richard Cheese belting out Viva Las Vegas.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on May 23, 2021, 06:22:58 AM
Saw some of Falcon and the Winter Soldier. Its one idiot plot after another wrapped in woke agenda.
Called it that they would replace Captain America with jackass John Walker Cap.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on May 23, 2021, 12:16:38 PM
Saw some of Falcon and the Winter Soldier. Its one idiot plot after another wrapped in woke agenda.
Called it that they would replace Captain America with jackass John Walker Cap.
I think it's amusing that most of the people talking about Falcon & the Winter Soldier think it's woke because of stuff like a patriotic white guy set up as the villain, and the scene where the Falcon is threatened by a cop because he's black. But a significant minority seem to think it's anti-woke, because the white villain gets redeemed, the real villains are basically Antifa, and one of the key scenes has faux-Antifa literally being beaten to death with an American flag (Cap's shield). Critical Drinker is an example in the first category, Tim Pool in the second. I haven't seen it myself, so I can't reconcile the opposing views.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: BoxCrayonTales on May 23, 2021, 12:21:15 PM
Sometimes they make these movies by slapping the name of one IP on the script for another simply to retain the IP and cut losses on scripts bought.
That's what happened with Starship Troopers. They took an unrelated script and slapped the name on it.

It's really frustrating because the movie is supposedly a satire/parody of the book but utterly fails in every way.

Namely, Johnny is Filipino. Sure, he grew up in Brazil but ethnically his family is Filipino. He speaks Tagalog!

The book is also very progressive for the time (http://www.bookinginheels.com/2021/01/starship-troopers-review-by-robert-a-heinlein.html/) in terms of representing racial diversity, women, and persons with disabilities in the military. If Heinlein had written it now, then I suspect he'd include brief references to marines being LGBT+ or autistic.

We don't get a lot of insight into how the Terran Federation is actually run. It's extremely vague and comes across as extremely cynical about human nature in spots (e.g. a teacher dismissing the Declaration of Independence as idealistic nonsense, when ironically nowadays only far leftists think that), but it's definitely not obviously fascist as detractors claim (https://www.tor.com/2016/09/06/a-genre-cornerstone-starship-troopers-by-robert-a-heinlein/) (or dystopian, or utopian, either). It's basically Heinlein saying "I think human nature sucks, I'm angry about that, I'm not sure my fictional government can fix the problems."

I don't know how you could make a genuine satire of the book given that it doesn't provide much material to work with. Maybe depict the Federation as some kind of neutropia/uchronia where it's both militaristic and socialist? I bet that would make heads explode on both sides of the political isle. A society that is both socialist and respects the armed forces couldn't possibly exist, could it?
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on May 23, 2021, 08:54:06 PM
Sometimes they make these movies by slapping the name of one IP on the script for another simply to retain the IP and cut losses on scripts bought.
That's what happened with Starship Troopers. They took an unrelated script and slapped the name on it.

It's really frustrating because the movie is supposedly a satire/parody of the book but utterly fails in every way.

Namely, Johnny is Filipino. Sure, he grew up in Brazil but ethnically his family is Filipino. He speaks Tagalog!

The book is also very progressive for the time (http://www.bookinginheels.com/2021/01/starship-troopers-review-by-robert-a-heinlein.html/) in terms of representing racial diversity, women, and persons with disabilities in the military. If Heinlein had written it now, then I suspect he'd include brief references to marines being LGBT+ or autistic.

We don't get a lot of insight into how the Terran Federation is actually run. It's extremely vague and comes across as extremely cynical about human nature in spots (e.g. a teacher dismissing the Declaration of Independence as idealistic nonsense, when ironically nowadays only far leftists think that), but it's definitely not obviously fascist as detractors claim (https://www.tor.com/2016/09/06/a-genre-cornerstone-starship-troopers-by-robert-a-heinlein/) (or dystopian, or utopian, either). It's basically Heinlein saying "I think human nature sucks, I'm angry about that, I'm not sure my fictional government can fix the problems."

I don't know how you could make a genuine satire of the book given that it doesn't provide much material to work with. Maybe depict the Federation as some kind of neutropia/uchronia where it's both militaristic and socialist? I bet that would make heads explode on both sides of the political isle. A society that is both socialist and respects the armed forces couldn't possibly exist, could it?

    He grew up in Argentina.   Which is one reason I suspect they made him white in the movie, because all they knew about him was being from Argentina and his name.   Which I will add, I never gave a thought as to his race and I only remember one character's ethnicity discussed (other than very briefly where they finally mention he is filipino), and that was the Japanese recruit in his company who would test the Drill Instructor in the hand to hand combat sparring.

    But maybe they just made him white because hollywood thought it would sell better, I sort of have doubts they know Argentina is pretty pasty, and I think Buenos Ares is really Pasty.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on May 24, 2021, 08:34:16 AM
The godawful adaptation of Starship Troopers has always been irritating to me, because the CG-animated series was even better and closer to the source material.

Heinlein, IMO, holds to the view of the 'constrained vs unconstrained' (as per Thomas Sowell). Short form, humans are fallible, mortal, and prone to fuckery; so we should build our institutions in such a way that if we DO get a bad egg in there, we can limit the damage they do. This is the 'constrained' viewpoint. In SST, there's a hard gate to any form of elected office or the franchise: tangible service to said government. Think of it as 'skin in the game'. It's not perfect, but it acts as a filter for petty time-servers and sociopaths.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: BoxCrayonTales on May 24, 2021, 10:49:02 AM
The godawful adaptation of Starship Troopers has always been irritating to me, because the CG-animated series was even better and closer to the source material.

Heinlein, IMO, holds to the view of the 'constrained vs unconstrained' (as per Thomas Sowell). Short form, humans are fallible, mortal, and prone to fuckery; so we should build our institutions in such a way that if we DO get a bad egg in there, we can limit the damage they do. This is the 'constrained' viewpoint. In SST, there's a hard gate to any form of elected office or the franchise: tangible service to said government. Think of it as 'skin in the game'. It's not perfect, but it acts as a filter for petty time-servers and sociopaths.
Roughnecks: Starship Troopers Chronicles was closer in the sense that it didn't hate its source material, but it's only very loosely similar to the source material. It essentially takes place in the same setting as the novel, but the plot is completely new. Which I think is for the better, because the novel can get pretty boring.

Too bad the show is so difficult to get ahold of now. It's not available on streaming and the DVDs are OOP.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on May 24, 2021, 12:16:08 PM
... because the novel can get pretty boring.
The slim novel that's packed with action is... boring?

Getting back to the movie, I liked it. It's an entertaining satire in itself. It's just not a good adaptation of the novel.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Zelen on May 25, 2021, 12:37:27 AM
... because the novel can get pretty boring.
The slim novel that's packed with action is... boring?

Getting back to the movie, I liked it. It's an entertaining satire in itself. It's just not a good adaptation of the novel.

The movie is interesting mostly in that it presents itself as a propaganda film, whose its schtick is that it's supposed to subvert the propaganda you're viewing. However, if you take the movie at face value on what it presents -- Then a reasonable viewer is probably going to look at what's going on and say that the society we see isn't so bad, and makes sense in a world with humans fighting for survival against a sophisticated and deadly alien threat.

The film ends up revealing its own subversive message as the real propaganda. It's a tremendous self-own that I'd almost say was genius if I had any confidence at all that Verhoeven intended it.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on May 25, 2021, 04:28:43 AM
Saw some of Falcon and the Winter Soldier. Its one idiot plot after another wrapped in woke agenda.
Called it that they would replace Captain America with jackass John Walker Cap.
I think it's amusing that most of the people talking about Falcon & the Winter Soldier think it's woke because of stuff like a patriotic white guy set up as the villain, and the scene where the Falcon is threatened by a cop because he's black. But a significant minority seem to think it's anti-woke, because the white villain gets redeemed, the real villains are basically Antifa, and one of the key scenes has faux-Antifa literally being beaten to death with an American flag (Cap's shield). Critical Drinker is an example in the first category, Tim Pool in the second. I haven't seen it myself, so I can't reconcile the opposing views.

It is weird really as it ping pongs back and fourth like theres two opposing writers or something. As for my ref to Walker, was more that it was a given they'd toss him in as the next cap. He was part of the 90s iteration of SJW push. Though in the comics hes a jerk and doesnt much change that attitude all the way to becomming USAgent. Pretty much a Guy Gardner wanna be. Only much less abrasive and utterly unlikable. Still unlikable though. But then Gardner set a really low bar to beat. If they can pull Walker out of the gutter thats ok.

But the background is just, ugh. Unfortunately anything Marvel/Disney related is pretty much doomed anyhoo. If it isnt fucked up. They WILL fuck it up.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on May 25, 2021, 09:29:59 PM
But a significant minority seem to think it's anti-woke, because the white villain gets redeemed, the real villains are basically Antifa,
In situations like these, I generally think about the person (or entity) making the product.
Disney is in general woke, I would say believes 70% of what they say, but also make generally tepid takes and are primarily motivated by money over any other principle.
If the money split was equal, and they had a choice, I believe they would support wokeness all the way. Thats how your 'friends' tell you to think in hollywood.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on May 26, 2021, 01:50:24 AM
But a significant minority seem to think it's anti-woke, because the white villain gets redeemed, the real villains are basically Antifa,
In situations like these, I generally think about the person (or entity) making the product.
Disney is in general woke, I would say believes 70% of what they say, but also make generally tepid takes and are primarily motivated by money over any other principle.
If the money split was equal, and they had a choice, I believe they would support wokeness all the way. Thats how your 'friends' tell you to think in hollywood.

I don't think that Disney as a *company* believes even a 10% fraction of what they say. They might put forward some creative types who are 70% believers and lean Democrat, but the corporate controllers just want to make money - and that is the primary function.

Minor spoilers for the series, but I thought it hit a bunch of conservative themes as well as liberal ones. They'd played up Sam as a small-town Southerner just trying to help his working-class family. And Bucky was obsessed with redeeming his past of horrific communist mind-control. And both of them are military veterans. As Pat notes, the main villains are antifa - and the revealed extra villain at the end is the political elite.

It seems to me that Disney is doing a very skillful dance of blending in different themes, such that people can see the side that they want to in it. Black Panther was masterful in this - winning praise as one of the most conservative films of the decade in multiple lists, while also winning lots of liberal praise.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on May 26, 2021, 10:34:53 AM
I don't think that Disney as a *company* believes even a 10% fraction of what they say. They might put forward some creative types who are 70% believers and lean Democrat, but the corporate controllers just want to make money - and that is the primary function.

True. But from my familiarity with the corporations, they believe more of their BS than people say. Especially on the creative team side.

As for the series: I don't give a rats behind. I was done with marvel superheroes since the first avegers. Everything since then has just been more noise and general blandness.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on May 26, 2021, 10:46:34 AM
  When we say Disney as a *company* we mean the top officers of the corporation and the Board of directors right?  Well list off who those people are and lets dig into what they do or do not believe.  I will bet my left pinkie over 70 percent of them contributed money to the democratic party.  Like lots of democrats, especially the ones with shitloads of money, they keep their finances super conservative but sure to trumpet out about those liberal causes and what "is good for small folk".   I mean they gave millions of dollars to BLM.   Parse what you will about a person's super secret real thoughts, but when you give millions to an openly marxist organization, I think that says a whole lot more about you than whatever super secret "real" belief you may have.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on May 26, 2021, 06:30:55 PM
True. But from my familiarity with the corporations, they believe more of their BS than people say. Especially on the creative team side.

As for the series: I don't give a rats behind. I was done with marvel superheroes since the first avegers. Everything since then has just been more noise and general blandness.

I thought a number of the later movies were actually less bland than the original ones. The originals were mostly origin stories without much individual style. But some of the later individual movies were a lot more stylish. Guardians of the Galaxy with its in-character 70s soundtrack was great fun, and Doctor Strange had its amazing psychedelic visuals, Ant-Man with its size-changing and perspective-changing gimmicks, and Spider-Man was a refreshing take on the teen superhero. One of my favorites was Thor: Ragnarok with its quirky humor and heavy metal soundtrack, though I know some people hated it.

I did think that the big event movies were noisy and bland - Ultron, Civil War, and especially Infinity War which I hated. I did like Endgame, but I had low expectations after Infinity War.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on May 26, 2021, 07:04:17 PM
I thought a number of the later movies were actually less bland than the original ones.
It's like a 5% difference to me. Structure, art, direction, design, story...Nearly everything but a slight gimmick-wise, all the marvel films are near indistinguishable.
It's a mass-manufactured malibu Stacy, with a different hat. Every film feels like its just fiddling with the comedy/action/drama knobs just a little bit, with maybe a minor aesthetic twinge. But execution wise everything is nearly the same.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on May 28, 2021, 02:23:07 PM
... because the novel can get pretty boring.
The slim novel that's packed with action is... boring?

Getting back to the movie, I liked it. It's an entertaining satire in itself. It's just not a good adaptation of the novel.

The movie is interesting mostly in that it presents itself as a propaganda film, whose its schtick is that it's supposed to subvert the propaganda you're viewing. However, if you take the movie at face value on what it presents -- Then a reasonable viewer is probably going to look at what's going on and say that the society we see isn't so bad, and makes sense in a world with humans fighting for survival against a sophisticated and deadly alien threat.

The film ends up revealing its own subversive message as the real propaganda. It's a tremendous self-own that I'd almost say was genius if I had any confidence at all that Verhoeven intended it.

The only way I can enjoy the film is as a self-own. It's an unintentional parody of a satire of fascism.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on May 28, 2021, 08:11:56 PM
The godawful adaptation of Starship Troopers has always been irritating to me, because the CG-animated series was even better and closer to the source material.

Heinlein, IMO, holds to the view of the 'constrained vs unconstrained' (as per Thomas Sowell). Short form, humans are fallible, mortal, and prone to fuckery; so we should build our institutions in such a way that if we DO get a bad egg in there, we can limit the damage they do. This is the 'constrained' viewpoint. In SST, there's a hard gate to any form of elected office or the franchise: tangible service to said government. Think of it as 'skin in the game'. It's not perfect, but it acts as a filter for petty time-servers and sociopaths.
Roughnecks: Starship Troopers Chronicles was closer in the sense that it didn't hate its source material, but it's only very loosely similar to the source material. It essentially takes place in the same setting as the novel, but the plot is completely new. Which I think is for the better, because the novel can get pretty boring.

Too bad the show is so difficult to get ahold of now. It's not available on streaming and the DVDs are OOP.

What made the movie interesting to me was that it hated the source material. It felt like a conversation with the book. I thought the book was great. It is one of my favorites. But I also thought the movie was equally good. Politically I probably am closer to the movie (and Verhoeven in general) but with movies and books, if they make a compelling case for their point of view, and do it in an entertaining way, I am pretty open minded. With Starship Troopers the book, I found he made a compelling case for his position even if I ultimately disagree with it, and there were some moments where the text was just captivating to read. Also I like that they are so different from one another, people who go to the book because of the movie (which today is probably the most common path) will have quite a surprise. This was my experience. I saw the movie when it came out, and I had a conversation with my friend Bill about it, and he mentioned the book. But he described it as not being satyrical at all (and I just assumed he missed the satire, because it didn't occur to me the movie and book would have contrary messages). When I sat down to read the book for the first time, I actually found it thrilling that it was so different from the movie. And that it had a substantive way of presenting its position.

Also I think that the movie went over many peoples' heads, which I always found surprising, is a mark in its favor. It seems on the nose, but obviously it wasn't on the nose enough for a lot of people.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on May 28, 2021, 08:21:25 PM
Sometimes they make these movies by slapping the name of one IP on the script for another simply to retain the IP and cut losses on scripts bought.
That's what happened with Starship Troopers. They took an unrelated script and slapped the name on it.

It's really frustrating because the movie is supposedly a satire/parody of the book but utterly fails in every way.

Namely, Johnny is Filipino. Sure, he grew up in Brazil but ethnically his family is Filipino. He speaks Tagalog!

The book is also very progressive for the time (http://www.bookinginheels.com/2021/01/starship-troopers-review-by-robert-a-heinlein.html/) in terms of representing racial diversity, women, and persons with disabilities in the military. If Heinlein had written it now, then I suspect he'd include brief references to marines being LGBT+ or autistic.

We don't get a lot of insight into how the Terran Federation is actually run. It's extremely vague and comes across as extremely cynical about human nature in spots (e.g. a teacher dismissing the Declaration of Independence as idealistic nonsense, when ironically nowadays only far leftists think that), but it's definitely not obviously fascist as detractors claim (https://www.tor.com/2016/09/06/a-genre-cornerstone-starship-troopers-by-robert-a-heinlein/) (or dystopian, or utopian, either). It's basically Heinlein saying "I think human nature sucks, I'm angry about that, I'm not sure my fictional government can fix the problems."

I don't know how you could make a genuine satire of the book given that it doesn't provide much material to work with. Maybe depict the Federation as some kind of neutropia/uchronia where it's both militaristic and socialist? I bet that would make heads explode on both sides of the political isle. A society that is both socialist and respects the armed forces couldn't possibly exist, could it?

My understanding, and it could be wrong, is the screen writer was a fan of the book. But Verhoeven couldn't get past the militarism and what he felt was a fascist message. I think it is probably better he never finished the book, because the movie surely would have turned out very different in its details and what we got on the screen works (it is a kind of weird political satire that feels like beverly hills 90210 fascism in space-----which makes sense given it was made by the guy who did Robocop as his interpretation of American Jesus). Obviously there is a lot more nuance in the book, which is one of the things that make it such a compelling read.

Heinlein was progressive in a lot of ways (in ways that coincide with a lot of Verhoeven's progressivism oddly enough). But I don't think that was the issue Verhoeven had with the book. His issue was the militarism.

Also I don't think it is a parody of the book. I think what happened was Verhoeven signed on to do a film based on the book, but when he started reading it, just had an instinctual dislike of the message. And so he made a movie that was a parody of militaristic fascism. Whether the book itself has a fascist message, I think is somewhat debatable. I see it more as a militaristic message. But I've met plenty of smart science fiction fans (including a history professor who was no political reactionary) who felt it had fascist undertones. Honestly I would need to give it a thorough reading again to really weigh in as it has been about 7 years since I last read it (which for me is enough time to forget crucial details). But I remember feeling like it wasn't fascist, as much as it was written by someone who had familiarity or background with military matters and was presenting a pro-military point of view (but it is possible I am forgetting some key detail about the government in the book).
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on May 28, 2021, 09:15:30 PM
Also I think that the movie went over many peoples' heads, which I always found surprising, is a mark in its favor. It seems on the nose, but obviously it wasn't on the nose enough for a lot of people.

That aspect makes me uneasy. While watching the movie, I felt like Verhoeven was sitting on my chest with a bullhorn in my face screaming "FASCISM IS BAD!" for two hours. I can't imagine anyone missing that message unless they were in a coma.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on May 29, 2021, 12:24:07 AM
Also I think that the movie went over many peoples' heads, which I always found surprising, is a mark in its favor. It seems on the nose, but obviously it wasn't on the nose enough for a lot of people.

That aspect makes me uneasy. While watching the movie, I felt like Verhoeven was sitting on my chest with a bullhorn in my face screaming "FASCISM IS BAD!" for two hours. I can't imagine anyone missing that message unless they were in a coma.
It was like Verhoeven just couldn't bring himself to actually -portray- the book, much less read it.

There's so much busted in the SST film it's hard to know where to start. The tactics and gear are wrong -- in the book, troopers wear powered armor and certainly do not use stupid WW1/WW2 era tactics. Training is strictly segregated by gender (that whole coed shower scene was absurd) to the point where in the book there's a joke made about one recruit insisting he saw a girl and nobody believes him.  Speaking of training, the live-fire ranges with no way to block stray shots? Really? They combine the characters of Rasczak and DuBois, which is just strange. And they don't even give Carmen a short haircut (in the book she shaves her head because long hair is a pain to manage in zero-g).

The kindest thing I can say is that it might've gotten people interested in reading Heinlein's work. But nowadays especially, I don't want Hollyweird anywhere near my favorite authors. They fuck it up more often than not.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Zelen on May 29, 2021, 02:06:43 AM
That aspect makes me uneasy. While watching the movie, I felt like Verhoeven was sitting on my chest with a bullhorn in my face screaming "FASCISM IS BAD!" for two hours. I can't imagine anyone missing that message unless they were in a coma.

That's what the director wants to beat you over the head with, but the movie itself shows a bunch of heroic, good-looking people bravely putting it all on the line to save the human race.

Sorry Paul, I'm not going to root against the continuation of the human species. Anyone who does is evil.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on May 29, 2021, 09:37:38 AM
There's so much busted in the SST film it's hard to know where to start. The tactics and gear are wrong -- in the book, troopers wear powered armor and certainly do not use stupid WW1/WW2 era tactics.
I was always disappointed that we never got to see the Marauder suits on screen. In the movie, the fights are massed close combat, with the mobile infantry almost shoulder to shoulder, wearing what looks like cheap plastic armor that doesn't seem to do anything, and running around like ordinary people with exposed faces. It's tight, close, personal, and human scale. They frequently faces hordes of enemies, but they're treated as cheap and disposable.

In the fbookilm, they wear massive suits that makes them look like giant metal gorillas, with jets they can use to bounce across the battlefield, while spraying massive amounts of firepower, including strings of baby nukes. They're widely distributed, the distances covered are vast, they have enough firepower to take out cities, and they have sensor arrays that make modern fighters look blind.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on May 29, 2021, 10:57:14 AM
Also I think that the movie went over many peoples' heads, which I always found surprising, is a mark in its favor. It seems on the nose, but obviously it wasn't on the nose enough for a lot of people.

That aspect makes me uneasy. While watching the movie, I felt like Verhoeven was sitting on my chest with a bullhorn in my face screaming "FASCISM IS BAD!" for two hours. I can't imagine anyone missing that message unless they were in a coma.

I thought it was too obvious to miss too when I first saw it in the theater, but I kept running into people who thought it was a film promoting fascism.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on May 29, 2021, 12:38:44 PM
The kindest thing I can say is that it might've gotten people interested in reading Heinlein's work. But nowadays especially, I don't want Hollyweird anywhere near my favorite authors. They fuck it up more often than not.

I think it just got more people to believe the books are fascist indoctrination pamphlets and avoided it. I hated the movie and Kat detested it.

As for modern adaptions. Expect more and expect hollowood to rape as many characters as they can. Because no one can just tinker with stuff anymore for tinkerings sake. No. They have to make it into another agenda platform.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on May 29, 2021, 12:44:42 PM
In the fbookilm, they wear massive suits that makes them look like giant metal gorillas, with jets they can use to bounce across the battlefield, while spraying massive amounts of firepower, including strings of baby nukes. They're widely distributed, the distances covered are vast, they have enough firepower to take out cities, and they have sensor arrays that make modern fighters look blind.

The anime series adaption plays to the book alot better than the movies. It still takes alot of liberties with things.
(https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/starshiptroopers/images/3/3c/St%281988%29-poweredsuit-ep01-heshell.jpg)
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on June 02, 2021, 03:23:34 PM
  When a director who probably feels Dirty Harry is a fascist makes a movie trying to portray a government body as fascist he fails badly IMO.   I think Paul wanted to make that message, "Fascism is BAD!!"  But he also showed a government that tells the public pretty much the whole story all the time.  That is not, IMO ever a real portrayal at all of a totalitarian fascist government (again the only type of fascist there is).  He does portray the military as complete fucktards though, since they are attacking huge monsters with small arms that are largely ineffective.  In the book they used the proper gear for the fight.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on June 03, 2021, 03:59:18 AM
  When a director who probably feels Dirty Harry is a fascist makes a movie trying to portray a government body as fascist he fails badly IMO.   I think Paul wanted to make that message, "Fascism is BAD!!"  But he also showed a government that tells the public pretty much the whole story all the time.  That is not, IMO ever a real portrayal at all of a totalitarian fascist government (again the only type of fascist there is).  He does portray the military as complete fucktards though, since they are attacking huge monsters with small arms that are largely ineffective.  In the book they used the proper gear for the fight.

The part in training where Zim intenionally breaks a recruit's arm when sparring, and later throws a knife and intentionally impales a recruit's hand shows to me that Verhoeven was/is in the childish mindset that the military is bad because they're too mean, and so he crafted a strawman that directly contradicts the book, in which Zim accidentally breaks a recruit's arm when sparring and apologizes.
The difference between those scenes encapsulates my issues with the film as an adaptation.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on June 03, 2021, 07:48:26 AM
  When a director who probably feels Dirty Harry is a fascist makes a movie trying to portray a government body as fascist he fails badly IMO.   I think Paul wanted to make that message, "Fascism is BAD!!"  But he also showed a government that tells the public pretty much the whole story all the time.  That is not, IMO ever a real portrayal at all of a totalitarian fascist government (again the only type of fascist there is).  He does portray the military as complete fucktards though, since they are attacking huge monsters with small arms that are largely ineffective.  In the book they used the proper gear for the fight.

The part in training where Zim intenionally breaks a recruit's arm when sparring, and later throws a knife and intentionally impales a recruit's hand shows to me that Verhoeven was/is in the childish mindset that the military is bad because they're too mean, and so he crafted a strawman that directly contradicts the book, in which Zim accidentally breaks a recruit's arm when sparring and apologizes.
The difference between those scenes encapsulates my issues with the film as an adaptation.

  I agree, leaving out the recruit (I dont remember his name, just that he was the son of a Judo/martial arts master) who actually beat Zim in a few goes during sparring and Zim takes it with a grin, pat on the back and a willingness to go again and encourages recruits to learn from it, also shows us why writers who have NEVER BEEN IN THE MILITARY should get some sort of professional advice.   Reminds me of the high school football trope....2nd string quarterback who is almost always some artistic romantic type has to take over the team mid season and is an "outsider" and wants to give long rousing speeches (that football players wouldnt get) or create intricate plays on the field in a huddle.   That does not happen in HS, at least not in top end programs.  Football players are like athletic drones, you wind them up and they do as programmed.   There is no re writing the program in real time. 
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on June 03, 2021, 09:42:24 AM
  When a director who probably feels Dirty Harry is a fascist makes a movie trying to portray a government body as fascist he fails badly IMO.   I think Paul wanted to make that message, "Fascism is BAD!!"  But he also showed a government that tells the public pretty much the whole story all the time.  That is not, IMO ever a real portrayal at all of a totalitarian fascist government (again the only type of fascist there is).  He does portray the military as complete fucktards though, since they are attacking huge monsters with small arms that are largely ineffective.  In the book they used the proper gear for the fight.

The part in training where Zim intenionally breaks a recruit's arm when sparring, and later throws a knife and intentionally impales a recruit's hand shows to me that Verhoeven was/is in the childish mindset that the military is bad because they're too mean, and so he crafted a strawman that directly contradicts the book, in which Zim accidentally breaks a recruit's arm when sparring and apologizes.
The difference between those scenes encapsulates my issues with the film as an adaptation.

  I agree, leaving out the recruit (I dont remember his name, just that he was the son of a Judo/martial arts master) who actually beat Zim in a few goes during sparring and Zim takes it with a grin, pat on the back and a willingness to go again and encourages recruits to learn from it, also shows us why writers who have NEVER BEEN IN THE MILITARY should get some sort of professional advice.   Reminds me of the high school football trope....2nd string quarterback who is almost always some artistic romantic type has to take over the team mid season and is an "outsider" and wants to give long rousing speeches (that football players wouldnt get) or create intricate plays on the field in a huddle.   That does not happen in HS, at least not in top end programs.  Football players are like athletic drones, you wind them up and they do as programmed.   There is no re writing the program in real time.
I've heard the bit with Shujumi (I believe that was the recruit's name you're looking for) is based on some actual training doctrines. A recruit who possesses skills at that level may be tapped to assist in training. He still has to comport himself as a recruit and possesses no actual rank, but he is allowed to work with other recruits with the blessing of the instructors. Rare, but not unheard of.

But yeah. The film depiction of Zim is like a bad parody of R. Lee Ermey from Full Metal Jacket. Verhoeven is a hack.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: BoxCrayonTales on June 04, 2021, 03:00:41 PM
There's also no shortage of chuckleheads who get their opinion of the book from detractors and wikipedia summaries without actually reading it. I talked to one who thought Heinlein was an "asshole" and a "fascist" because he didn't recount SST before he died. This idiot thinks SST is a bad evil book because it supposedly promotes capital punishment.

There is one scene where a convicted rapist serial killer is executed, but it's such a minor element that you could cut it entirely and lose nothing of value.

I don't support corporal punishment or capital punishment because they're abuse. Full stop. No studies have shown them to have any efficacy and there's plenty of examples of innocent people being executed or corporal punishment increasing likelihood of antisocial behavior. I'm not going to demonize people who think it does work, because there's no shortage of hypocritical leftist fascists who claim to oppose capital punishment but openly support imprisonment, rape, and outright extrajudicial murder of people (particularly women) who don't agree with them.

If you tweaked the execution scene so that the criminal was a lesbian being executed for refusing to have sex with a transwoman, then the twitterati would be praising the book as "stunning" and brave" (and "antiracist" for featuring a Filipino protagonist). I'm not going to take advice on SST from those sick fucks.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on June 04, 2021, 06:22:31 PM
  I can buy that capital punishment as carried out in the USA is usually unfair, can not be undone, and does not deter the crimes it is there for.  It is also hideously expensive.   That said, if I caught a person who killed, or say, sexually assaulted my wife or kids, I would have no issue torturing them to death for a few days.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on June 04, 2021, 06:40:38 PM
There are, however, two good arguments in favor of capital punishment:

One, you won't have to feed, house, or deal with that person again.

Two, their chance of recidivism is zero.

That being said, the huge issues we have been seeing with our judicial system make me disinclined to support the death penalty. Too many errors, too many dirty prosecutions, too much crap. So yeah, sorry, I can't support it.

Self-defense is a thing, however, and if you die because you kicked in the wrong door, well... think of it as evolution in action.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: BoxCrayonTales on June 04, 2021, 08:13:22 PM
The problem is human nature.

Reject humanity, embrace the bugs.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on June 05, 2021, 05:43:28 AM
There are, however, two good arguments in favor of capital punishment:

One, you won't have to feed, house, or deal with that person again.

Two, their chance of recidivism is zero.

That being said, the huge issues we have been seeing with our judicial system make me disinclined to support the death penalty. Too many errors, too many dirty prosecutions, too much crap. So yeah, sorry, I can't support it.

Self-defense is a thing, however, and if you die because you kicked in the wrong door, well... think of it as evolution in action.

Wayyy off topic. But that is my view too. Especially after seeing just how badly the judicial system is now.
Cull out the corrupt in the system and then the death sentence works because then theres little to no chance a killer can cheat their way free.

Back on topic thats been the subject of a few movies and TV, especially CSI, and even the second of the PC RPGs Freedom Force where one of the superheroes, Tombstone, is falsely tried for the murder of his wife and sentenced to death.


Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on June 05, 2021, 05:51:56 PM
  I can buy that capital punishment as carried out in the USA is usually unfair, can not be undone, and does not deter the crimes it is there for.  It is also hideously expensive.   That said, if I caught a person who killed, or say, sexually assaulted my wife or kids, I would have no issue torturing them to death for a few days.

There's a big difference between the legal process and personal reaction. If someone harmed my immediate family, I'd likely have a similar reaction. But I'm also glad that we have a legal system to prevent everyone from going there when a person is victimized. I think it would soon devolve into vigilante justice, which is always lurking underneath our attempts to create law and order.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on June 05, 2021, 07:09:51 PM
  I can buy that capital punishment as carried out in the USA is usually unfair, can not be undone, and does not deter the crimes it is there for.  It is also hideously expensive.   That said, if I caught a person who killed, or say, sexually assaulted my wife or kids, I would have no issue torturing them to death for a few days.

There's a big difference between the legal process and personal reaction. If someone harmed my immediate family, I'd likely have a similar reaction. But I'm also glad that we have a legal system to prevent everyone from going there when a person is victimized. I think it would soon devolve into vigilante justice, which is always lurking underneath our attempts to create law and order.

    Vigilante justice also lurks just beneath when it is pretty clear the law will not be applied the same way to everyone.  I already know a rapist or child molester will not get the death penalty, and it should be a capital crime, if we are going to have capital crimes.     But I agree I like an impartial justice system.  I am just not too convinced our justice system in the USA is fair or impartial, and has never really been. 
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on June 05, 2021, 07:21:00 PM
Forbidden Empire (Viy in the original Russian). The name is utterly generic, and has nothing to do with the film (there are no empires; it's almost entirely set in a village). The cover is utterly generic as well. And I'm pretty sure I picked up it up at a dollar store, though it was apparently the highest grossing film in Russia in 2014. But there were problems with international distribution, so ended up direct to video in most countries. The dub isn't great. I had a hard time keeping the characters straight, because too many look alike. The plot doesn't seem like it's going anywhere for a lot of the film, and relies too heavily on a twist ending.

But it's spectacular. The special effects aren't the best I've ever seen, but they're great in a cheesy way, and very imaginative. It draws from Russian folklore rather than standard fantasy tropes, so it's distinctly different from generic Western fantasies without being completely unfamiliar. The plot is convoluted, but mostly holds together, and all the early scenes that initially seemed random or disconnected become essential parts of the climax. Reminds me most of Gilliam's The Brothers Grimm, or maybe Van Helsing.

It's very much an Age of Enlightenment fairy tale, mixing the wondrous and the meta. There are ugly little fairies, terrifying ghostly wolves, a weird eye creature, witches, horned beasts, body horror transformations, Science!, overly religious villagers, deception, betrayals, cartography, and an extended fight with a coffin. If you're running a fantasy game with fairy tale or weird fantasy elements, it's probably worth a watch. In fact, the whole thing could be adapted into an interesting adventure.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on June 05, 2021, 07:38:36 PM
  Speaking of Russian movies, I enjoyed the Movies Nightwatch and Daywatch.  I thought there was supposed to be a third, but if memory serves the director got sucked into hollywood and never did the third movie.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on June 05, 2021, 08:25:43 PM
They're very different movies (more Russian World of Darkness), so I avoided making a direct comparison, but a few of the mythological elements in Forbidden Empire do have a similar feel to the Day/Nightwatch duology. (Which I also recommend.)
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: BoxCrayonTales on June 05, 2021, 09:19:41 PM
They're very different movies (more Russian World of Darkness), so I avoided making a direct comparison, but a few of the mythological elements in Forbidden Empire do have a similar feel to the Day/Nightwatch duology. (Which I also recommend.)
Urban fantasy. The genre you’re trying to name is Urban Fantasy. There are over 60,000 urban fantasy books being sold on Amazon right now. Urban fantasy in its modern form has been around since the late 70s.

It’s not “Russian World of Darkness” by a long shot. Russian Lost Girl is a much more apt comparison. It uses the same Light/Dark distinction.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on June 05, 2021, 09:41:59 PM
They're very different movies (more Russian World of Darkness), so I avoided making a direct comparison, but a few of the mythological elements in Forbidden Empire do have a similar feel to the Day/Nightwatch duology. (Which I also recommend.)
Urban fantasy. The genre you’re trying to name is Urban Fantasy. There are over 60,000 urban fantasy books being sold on Amazon right now. Urban fantasy in its modern form has been around since the late 70s.

It’s not “Russian World of Darkness” by a long shot. Russian Lost Girl is a much more apt comparison. It uses the same Light/Dark distinction.

Patronizing much? I've read more than my fair share of authors like de Lint, Bull, and Gaiman. If I wanted to name the genre, I would have. But it's an RPG forum, so I made an RPG analogy instead. And note I said World of Darkness, not Vampire: The Whatever. That includes Changeling. And the corporate stuff in *watch is similar to that across several Storyteller games. Lost Girl isn't an RPG, and it's already partly Russian anyway, with Kenzi and episodes like the one with Baga Yaga.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: BoxCrayonTales on June 06, 2021, 03:02:22 PM
They're very different movies (more Russian World of Darkness), so I avoided making a direct comparison, but a few of the mythological elements in Forbidden Empire do have a similar feel to the Day/Nightwatch duology. (Which I also recommend.)
Urban fantasy. The genre you’re trying to name is Urban Fantasy. There are over 60,000 urban fantasy books being sold on Amazon right now. Urban fantasy in its modern form has been around since the late 70s.

It’s not “Russian World of Darkness” by a long shot. Russian Lost Girl is a much more apt comparison. It uses the same Light/Dark distinction.

Patronizing much? I've read more than my fair share of authors like de Lint, Bull, and Gaiman. If I wanted to name the genre, I would have. But it's an RPG forum, so I made an RPG analogy instead. And note I said World of Darkness, not Vampire: The Whatever. That includes Changeling. And the corporate stuff in *watch is similar to that across several Storyteller games. Lost Girl isn't an RPG, and it's already partly Russian anyway, with Kenzi and episodes like the one with Baga Yaga.
I just despise World of Darkness (and not just because the owners are psycho SJWs) and wish that there were other games in the genre with communities worth discussing with. Sorry if I came across as patronizing.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on June 06, 2021, 03:39:26 PM

I just despise World of Darkness (and not just because the owners are psycho SJWs) and wish that there were other games in the genre with communities worth discussing with. Sorry if I came across as patronizing.
Appreciate the de-escalation. It's a nice change from the norm. The wording in my reaction was probably a bit too strong, as well.

I don't disagree with you about World of Darkness (though I probably don't care as much), but it is the default reference point in the RPG world for the genre, and it shares a number of elements with Night/Daywatch, because they draw from the same urban fantasy tradition. Though it's worth noting that's a specific subset of urban fantasy in general -- de Lint is from a very different tradition, for instance.

Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on June 07, 2021, 01:26:10 PM
Think mentioned this before. But since we are on the topic of Russian movies.

Picked up a copy of Koma and overall was an interesting idea. Really uneven, but interesting. Reminded me a tiny bit of the old superhero Horror series Dream Warriors.

Older Russian movies have liked include the various live action and animated tellings of the folk hero Ilya Muromets.

And the original unedited version of Cesta do praveku (Road to Prehistory), dubbed back in the 50s as Journey to the Beginning of Time is actually fairly entertaining and well done. Moves at a glacial pace but part of the point is the journey itself.

And if East Germany/Poland counts then there is The Silent Star, AKA: First Spaceship on Venus. Based off the Stanislaw Lem book. And speaking of whom. Theres at least 3 Solaris movies now. 2 Russian made and one rather lacking US remake.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on June 11, 2021, 01:21:54 PM
Rewatched the Exorcist III the other day (and did a podcast on it): https://www.podbean.com/ew/pb-nyag2-105be97

I first saw this one working in a local video store back when it came out and remember being surprised by how good it was (Part III's at that time, I think had a somewhat bad reputation, and Exorcist II wasn't very well loved). But this is a totally different feel from the first movie, and is more crime thriller, police procedural, with possession thrown in. It has a pretty cool core premise, and one of the most well constructed jump scares I have ever seen in a movie. Plus an entertaining performance from George C. Scott

Going to be doing a debate on whether Sleepwalkers (1992) is terrible or enjoyable soon
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on June 19, 2021, 01:09:14 AM
Near Extinction: Shangri-La: This is a weird one. Post-apocalypse. The world's frozen. There's a war between the surviving humans and the konglings. This is all established in a voiceover narration before the movie starts. The action starts in media res, with no idea who anybody is, or what they're doing. But they feel like a party of PCs. Everyone has a distinct appearance and quirky personality, a backstory with pathos, and a schtick or powers. But while the party is established fairly quickly, who is fighting who and why isn't clear. The start is really confusing. It's not clear the movie is going anywhere, it just feels like a random mess.

This is a fault, but it's also clearly a deliberate choice made by the movie's creators. There are a couple major twists, and they're holding back details to set up big reveals. But they do clear up most of the mess as the movie progresses, relying very heavily on flashbacks to both establish characters, and to establish the world. And there's a lot of world. Factions, complicated backstory, different allies, different enemies, a MacGuffin hunt or three, and so on. Again, it feels like an RPG, in particular someone's homebrew setting. I'm not going to pretend it all makes sense, but if you accept the the internal logic (lasers caused an ice age?), the plot mostly comes together. It's not great, but it is interesting in a weird way.

But even so, it feels like the pilot episode in a series. There's plot, but it's fairly light. The movie is mostly about establishing the world, the characters, and the mission; ends at the start of a quest rather than at the end; and there are a lot of loose ends, or just bizarre things that aren't explained (why everyone sleeps together half naked, for instance).

Definitely low budget. All the secret bases and high tech labs that are clearly just warehouses or empty offices. But not zero budget. They have practical and CGI special effects, and they're not complete garbage. Acting isn't amazing, but mostly seems serviceable. I'd watch a sequel.

Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on June 20, 2021, 12:48:33 PM
Saw the trailer for it and passed. Seemed like an interesting post-apoc feeling premise. But the trailer I saw was really disjointed. Like I was seeing clips from 3 or 4 different shows. Makes more sense now that some of those must be flashbacks. Just didnt click for some reason.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on June 21, 2021, 12:04:39 AM
I'm surprised anyone's heard of it, at all. It's a weird little thing.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on June 24, 2021, 04:27:48 PM
Netflix just put up the first three Gundam movies.
My first exposure to Gundam was an untranslated, bootleg VHS tape that I think was a condensed version, like these films. It's been a long time, so I'm not sure if it's the exact same thing.
Anyway, gonna watch these.

https://www.netflix.com/title/70014611
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on June 24, 2021, 07:36:48 PM
Been bingewatching classic Chuck Norris movies on Prime. Love movies like Lone Wolf McQuade and Octagon. Just finished A Force of One, where he is a karate instructor and champion karate competitor, moonlighting with local law enforcement to take on cop killing drug dealers. By the end of the movie it it becomes personal and that leads to a big showdown with Bill "Superfoot" Wallace. It was made in 1979 and still has some of that 70s grit. These are pretty straightforward types of martial arts action films, with a clear good guy and a somewhat predictable but emotionally rewarding plot. Maybe growing up on this stuff is part of it, but for me this just works.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on June 25, 2021, 08:56:59 AM
Been bingewatching classic Chuck Norris movies on Prime. Love movies like Lone Wolf McQuade and Octagon. Just finished A Force of One, where he is a karate instructor and champion karate competitor, moonlighting with local law enforcement to take on cop killing drug dealers. By the end of the movie it it becomes personal and that leads to a big showdown with Bill "Superfoot" Wallace. It was made in 1979 and still has some of that 70s grit. These are pretty straightforward types of martial arts action films, with a clear good guy and a somewhat predictable but emotionally rewarding plot. Maybe growing up on this stuff is part of it, but for me this just works.

   Octagon annoyed the shit out of me with him whispering to himself in his head the whole movie.   Lone Wolf McQuade will make a teenager grow chest hair just watching it (I mean, how manly is it to drink a hot beer and then drive your supercharged bronco out from under being buried alive with sheer horsepower and Manliness).  I always loved the fight scene with Chuck and Bill where he kicks the suitcase full of cocaine out of the air in their battle.  I could be remembering that wrong, but I thought it happened just before he beats a coke charged Bill up.   

    You are giving me a nostalgia overload, these are the movies I saw as a kid when they were new. 
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on June 25, 2021, 10:08:43 AM
Been bingewatching classic Chuck Norris movies on Prime. Love movies like Lone Wolf McQuade and Octagon. Just finished A Force of One, where he is a karate instructor and champion karate competitor, moonlighting with local law enforcement to take on cop killing drug dealers. By the end of the movie it it becomes personal and that leads to a big showdown with Bill "Superfoot" Wallace. It was made in 1979 and still has some of that 70s grit. These are pretty straightforward types of martial arts action films, with a clear good guy and a somewhat predictable but emotionally rewarding plot. Maybe growing up on this stuff is part of it, but for me this just works.

   Octagon annoyed the shit out of me with him whispering to himself in his head the whole movie.   Lone Wolf McQuade will make a teenager grow chest hair just watching it (I mean, how manly is it to drink a hot beer and then drive your supercharged bronco out from under being buried alive with sheer horsepower and Manliness).  I always loved the fight scene with Chuck and Bill where he kicks the suitcase full of cocaine out of the air in their battle.  I could be remembering that wrong, but I thought it happened just before he beats a coke charged Bill up.   

    You are giving me a nostalgia overload, these are the movies I saw as a kid when they were new.

It was some kind of square metal box for holding drugs (can't remember if it was coke or powdered heroin---or something else....but exploded in a blast of white powder). That was a cool scene. Basically Bill was on the ground, chuck had just shown mercy at the urging of the detective, and bill then got up and threw the box at Chuck if I recall (just saw it the other day but might be fuzzy on the precise flow of action in that scene). I loved how evil Bill Superfoot Wallace was in that movie.

The whispering never really bothered me too much in the Octagon but I could see that getting on someone's nerves.

I was too young to see a force of one when it came out (was probably 3 years old) but I remember seeing Chuck Norris movies as they came out in the mid-80s and I remember watching films like A Force of One on television (tons of those 70s crime thriller and action movies were on the syndication channels). And we watched a ton of these movies on video at the time. 
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on June 25, 2021, 01:39:41 PM
Been bingewatching classic Chuck Norris movies on Prime. Love movies like Lone Wolf McQuade and Octagon. Just finished A Force of One, where he is a karate instructor and champion karate competitor, moonlighting with local law enforcement to take on cop killing drug dealers. By the end of the movie it it becomes personal and that leads to a big showdown with Bill "Superfoot" Wallace. It was made in 1979 and still has some of that 70s grit. These are pretty straightforward types of martial arts action films, with a clear good guy and a somewhat predictable but emotionally rewarding plot. Maybe growing up on this stuff is part of it, but for me this just works.

   Octagon annoyed the shit out of me with him whispering to himself in his head the whole movie.   Lone Wolf McQuade will make a teenager grow chest hair just watching it (I mean, how manly is it to drink a hot beer and then drive your supercharged bronco out from under being buried alive with sheer horsepower and Manliness).  I always loved the fight scene with Chuck and Bill where he kicks the suitcase full of cocaine out of the air in their battle.  I could be remembering that wrong, but I thought it happened just before he beats a coke charged Bill up.   

    You are giving me a nostalgia overload, these are the movies I saw as a kid when they were new.

It was some kind of square metal box for holding drugs (can't remember if it was coke or powdered heroin---or something else....but exploded in a blast of white powder). That was a cool scene. Basically Bill was on the ground, chuck had just shown mercy at the urging of the detective, and bill then got up and threw the box at Chuck if I recall (just saw it the other day but might be fuzzy on the precise flow of action in that scene). I loved how evil Bill Superfoot Wallace was in that movie.

The whispering never really bothered me too much in the Octagon but I could see that getting on someone's nerves.

I was too young to see a force of one when it came out (was probably 3 years old) but I remember seeing Chuck Norris movies as they came out in the mid-80s and I remember watching films like A Force of One on television (tons of those 70s crime thriller and action movies were on the syndication channels). And we watched a ton of these movies on video at the time.

   I think a big problem for me with the Octagon, is I thought it was a little light on the action ( as a kid watching it) and I probably saw it 20 times on HBO; it always felt like I was watching a whole bunch of whispering to finally see Chuck face off against the Alpha Ninja (not his adopted brother (Sho kiyosoge I think, but dont remember and I dont try to use google to cover memory), but the big one played by I think; Richard Norton? Who if I remember correctly was also a doofus in another role in the same movie) which to me as a kid was a very cool scene. 
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on June 30, 2021, 10:07:29 PM
Been bingewatching classic Chuck Norris movies on Prime. Love movies like Lone Wolf McQuade and Octagon.

Octagon is pretty good. Lots of quirky characters.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: hedgehobbit on July 07, 2021, 02:13:13 PM
I watched Amazon's movie The Tomorrow War with Chriss Pratt and I agree with the general assessment that the time travel part doesn't make any sense.

That got me thinking ... Are there any good time travel movies that actually hold up to scrutiny? Even ones that are serious, like Primer, fall apart of you think about them too much. The only one that seems to work out is The Terminator. Skynet sends back a T-800 and the humans send someone to protect Sarah Connor who ends up being the father of the man that Skynet was trying to get rid of. A nice neat loop that fits together. Of course, it ceases to work with T2.

Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 07, 2021, 02:17:25 PM
I watched Amazon's movie The Tomorrow War with Chriss Pratt and I agree with the general assessment that the time travel part doesn't make any sense.

That got me thinking ... Are there any good time travel movies that actually hold up to scrutiny? Even ones that are serious, like Primer, fall apart of you think about them too much. The only one that seems to work out is The Terminator. Skynet sends back a T-1000 and the humans send someone to protect Sarah Connor who ends up being the father of the man that Skynet was trying to get rid of. A nice neat loop that fits together. Of course, it ceases to work with T2.

Amusingly enough, I think the whole Back to the Future series manages this. The Time Travel is consistent in how it works, and they don't handwave any of it.

(The T-1000 was the liquid metal one from T2. The T-800 was the model from the first film.)
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: hedgehobbit on July 07, 2021, 02:25:10 PM
Amusingly enough, I think the whole Back to the Future series manages this. The Time Travel is consistent in how it works, and they don't handwave any of it.

I liked these movies but the idea that a picture would slowly start to disappear because the people in the picture no longer exists is pretty silly. Especially since time travel in these movies create alternate histories so it shouldn't matter to the time traveling Marty if the Marty in that universe doesn't exist.

But you are correct in that at least they are consistent and nobody does anything that's blatantly stupid.

Quote
(The T-1000 was the liquid metal one from T2. The T-800 was the model from the first film.)

Fixed
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 07, 2021, 02:38:31 PM
Amusingly enough, I think the whole Back to the Future series manages this. The Time Travel is consistent in how it works, and they don't handwave any of it.

I liked these movies but the idea that a picture would slowly start to disappear because the people in the picture no longer exists is pretty silly. Especially since time travel in these movies create alternate histories so it shouldn't matter to the time traveling Marty if the Marty in that universe doesn't exist.

But you are correct in that at least they are consistent and nobody does anything that's blatantly stupid.

I was actually thinking about this point after typing out my reply.

It's consistent in that someone outside of their original time, who has altered history, have a period where the changes are "catching up" to them. When they return to their original time, the changes have caught up. That's why Biff (in the deleted scene) dissapeared when he got out of the Delorean, and Hill Valley was changed both times when Marty returned to 1985.
There are alternate histories, but they replace the current history. Marty coudn't simply return to his 1985, he had to alter events so that his 1985 was the current one.

It's a movie convention, so that Marty could know that history had been changed, and have an opportunity to alter it again, but it's consistent in that he didn't return to his original time to find out. Then it would have been "too late".

*Edit* I think I'm quibbiling now.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 08, 2021, 08:19:23 AM
As you said, Ratman, at least BttF was consistent in how it worked. Even Avengers Endgame managed to fuck it up (Loki's escape should've had all sorts of repercussions).
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on July 08, 2021, 10:19:20 AM
I watched Amazon's movie The Tomorrow War with Chriss Pratt and I agree with the general assessment that the time travel part doesn't make any sense.

That got me thinking ... Are there any good time travel movies that actually hold up to scrutiny? Even ones that are serious, like Primer, fall apart of you think about them too much. The only one that seems to work out is The Terminator. Skynet sends back a T-800 and the humans send someone to protect Sarah Connor who ends up being the father of the man that Skynet was trying to get rid of. A nice neat loop that fits together. Of course, it ceases to work with T2.

Is that in any way related to the Forever War?

I am sure some do, I can't think of any off the top of my head. I try not to be too pedantic with time travel stuff. It something really leaps out immediately as off or as violating the rules they lay out, it bothers me. But its more about what rules they cleave to (like the first bill and ted just seems to have that one big rule that the clock in the present is always running, and they stick to it---in the first movie at least---so that is good enough for me even if they aren't worried about the other time travel issues)
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on July 08, 2021, 01:03:24 PM
I agree the time travel in Tomorrow War didn't really work. For instance, if we use the rafts analogy, how did they make the first jump back in the first place? And they ignore whether events in the present can affect the future, which leads to some really big questions that should be answered but aren't.

But I have a bigger issue with the entire third act. It seems to exist for no reason except to it wants to make all the major characters big heroes, except they don't become big heroes and their actions almost ended the world.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on July 08, 2021, 02:10:00 PM
Even Avengers Endgame managed to fuck it up (Loki's escape should've had all sorts of repercussions).
So, there's this entire show called "Loki" that covers exactly this. They went with "bug as feature" and embraced that it should have had repercussions...and why it (maybe?) didn't.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 08, 2021, 03:21:01 PM
I watched Amazon's movie The Tomorrow War with Chriss Pratt and I agree with the general assessment that the time travel part doesn't make any sense.

That got me thinking ... Are there any good time travel movies that actually hold up to scrutiny? Even ones that are serious, like Primer, fall apart of you think about them too much. The only one that seems to work out is The Terminator. Skynet sends back a T-800 and the humans send someone to protect Sarah Connor who ends up being the father of the man that Skynet was trying to get rid of. A nice neat loop that fits together. Of course, it ceases to work with T2.

Is that in any way related to the Forever War?

Nope. I'm kinda glad. Nowadays I don't want any more adaptations of my favorite books turned into shit by Hollyweird.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 08, 2021, 03:41:36 PM
I watched Amazon's movie The Tomorrow War with Chriss Pratt and I agree with the general assessment that the time travel part doesn't make any sense.

That got me thinking ... Are there any good time travel movies that actually hold up to scrutiny? Even ones that are serious, like Primer, fall apart of you think about them too much. The only one that seems to work out is The Terminator. Skynet sends back a T-800 and the humans send someone to protect Sarah Connor who ends up being the father of the man that Skynet was trying to get rid of. A nice neat loop that fits together. Of course, it ceases to work with T2.

Is that in any way related to the Forever War?

Nope. I'm kinda glad. Nowadays I don't want any more adaptations of my favorite books turned into shit by Hollyweird.

God, yes. I don't look forward to movies anymore, I just kinda hope a few decent ones squeak by the Process they use to generate their bland but noisy garbage.
Dune, Foundation, Star Trek, Star Wars, etc, etc...
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on July 08, 2021, 05:34:00 PM
  Tomorrow war did have the "bad" time travel.   I have only ever seen one movie where the time travel was made to look like anything that could actually follow a consistent rule/law (Primer) and there is no way the modern movie audience is going to watch that movie en masse.  To be honest the time travel was about 4th on my list of WTF!! on really, really bad ideas people in the future seemed to be overflowing with.  I guess maybe that was intentional given the path society is taking, a massive alien invasion fought 30 years down the road by the folks I see reimagining society...well its a lost cause. 

    That said, bad time travel and some other REALLY bad ideas for how to handle the problem at hand, it entertained me and honestly that is all I am looking for from a movie these days. 
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 09, 2021, 08:26:00 AM
I watched Amazon's movie The Tomorrow War with Chriss Pratt and I agree with the general assessment that the time travel part doesn't make any sense.

That got me thinking ... Are there any good time travel movies that actually hold up to scrutiny? Even ones that are serious, like Primer, fall apart of you think about them too much. The only one that seems to work out is The Terminator. Skynet sends back a T-800 and the humans send someone to protect Sarah Connor who ends up being the father of the man that Skynet was trying to get rid of. A nice neat loop that fits together. Of course, it ceases to work with T2.

Is that in any way related to the Forever War?

Nope. I'm kinda glad. Nowadays I don't want any more adaptations of my favorite books turned into shit by Hollyweird.

God, yes. I don't look forward to movies anymore, I just kinda hope a few decent ones squeak by the Process they use to generate their bland but noisy garbage.
Dune, Foundation, Star Trek, Star Wars, etc, etc...
It's kind of heartbreaking in a way. I'd love to see an adaptation of some of David Weber's works.

But I don't trust Hollywood. Honestly, I haven't trusted them to not fuck it up for a long time. The current day just cements my opinion on the issue. I'd sooner turn the treatment over to Bollywood (India's homegrown cinema industry) even if we got jank sFX and weird musical numbers.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: hedgehobbit on July 09, 2021, 09:07:14 AM
I agree the time travel in Tomorrow War didn't really work. For instance, if we use the rafts analogy, how did they make the first jump back in the first place? And they ignore whether events in the present can affect the future, which leads to some really big questions that should be answered but aren't.

When the people from 2061 show up in 2021, it was clear that they were from an alternate future as the people of 2061 didn't experience the time travel 40 years ago. This is explicit when they have death records for everyone sent forward in time even though they died of other reasons. So there is no reason for the people of 2021 to send poorly equipped and untrained citizens to the future when that future isn't the future that they will experience.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: hedgehobbit on July 09, 2021, 09:10:55 AM
  Tomorrow war did have the "bad" time travel.   I have only ever seen one movie where the time travel was made to look like anything that could actually follow a consistent rule/law (Primer) and there is no way the modern movie audience is going to watch that movie en masse.

I liked Primer but it didn't make sense for them to physically travel back in time just to play the stock market when it would have been easier for them to send a newspaper back in time instead and make their stock trades with that information. This is especially true once the people find out that time travel damages their nervous system (which, itself, doesn't make sense as they aren't making copies of themselves but are just sitting in a box).
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on July 09, 2021, 10:36:40 AM
I agree the time travel in Tomorrow War didn't really work. For instance, if we use the rafts analogy, how did they make the first jump back in the first place? And they ignore whether events in the present can affect the future, which leads to some really big questions that should be answered but aren't.

When the people from 2061 show up in 2021, it was clear that they were from an alternate future as the people of 2061 didn't experience the time travel 40 years ago. This is explicit when they have death records for everyone sent forward in time even though they died of other reasons. So there is no reason for the people of 2021 to send poorly equipped and untrained citizens to the future when that future isn't the future that they will experience.
Yep, that's the mess I was referring to. The entire plot requires a single timeline, while the details only make sense with alternate timelines. Two more details that add to the confusion are the wave of worldwide nihilism after the connection is cut, and the way only people who were recorded as having died between the two time periods are qualified to make the jump. As I hinted, the narration spends almost no time on explaining how time travel works, so there's never even an attempt at in-movie explanation. Which is probably a smart move -- if the time travel in your movie makes no sense, it's probably better not to draw attention to it, and hope people just get swept up in the action and don't think about it.

I watched a few reviews on YouTube that seemed to entirely miss this. They just assume changes in the present make changes in the future, and treat that as established fact, despite all the details that contradict it.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on July 09, 2021, 02:28:55 PM
I agree the time travel in Tomorrow War didn't really work. For instance, if we use the rafts analogy, how did they make the first jump back in the first place? And they ignore whether events in the present can affect the future, which leads to some really big questions that should be answered but aren't.

When the people from 2061 show up in 2021, it was clear that they were from an alternate future as the people of 2061 didn't experience the time travel 40 years ago. This is explicit when they have death records for everyone sent forward in time even though they died of other reasons. So there is no reason for the people of 2021 to send poorly equipped and untrained citizens to the future when that future isn't the future that they will experience.
Yep, that's the mess I was referring to. The entire plot requires a single timeline, while the details only make sense with alternate timelines. Two more details that add to the confusion are the wave of worldwide nihilism after the connection is cut, and the way only people who were recorded as having died between the two time periods are qualified to make the jump. As I hinted, the narration spends almost no time on explaining how time travel works, so there's never even an attempt at in-movie explanation. Which is probably a smart move -- if the time travel in your movie makes no sense, it's probably better not to draw attention to it, and hope people just get swept up in the action and don't think about it.

I watched a few reviews on YouTube that seemed to entirely miss this. They just assume changes in the present make changes in the future, and treat that as established fact, despite all the details that contradict it.

   I think the best way to view it is as I did Pacific Rim.  The drift technology in that movie is just fucking stupid, and so are lot of other things.  Then I realized...I am here to WATCH GIANT ROBOTS PUNCH GIANT MONSTERS!!! and let my brain relax and enjoyed what I was looking for from the movie.   I have to shut my brain off for probably 99 percent of movies that fight scenes are there, so I just pretend all movies are in some magical universe where stuff is just different. 
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on July 09, 2021, 02:33:26 PM

   I think the best way to view it is as I did Pacific Rim.  The drift technology in that movie is just fucking stupid, and so are lot of other things.  Then I realized...I am here to WATCH GIANT ROBOTS PUNCH GIANT MONSTERS!!! and let my brain relax and enjoyed what I was looking for from the movie.   I have to shut my brain off for probably 99 percent of movies that fight scenes are there, so I just pretend all movies are in some magical universe where stuff is just different.
Agreed. My bigger issues are the stupid third act and that they didn't utilize Chris Pratt very well. His comedic charm didn't get enough play. But overall, it works as a forgettable popcorn movie.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on July 09, 2021, 04:19:25 PM

   I think the best way to view it is as I did Pacific Rim.  The drift technology in that movie is just fucking stupid, and so are lot of other things.  Then I realized...I am here to WATCH GIANT ROBOTS PUNCH GIANT MONSTERS!!! and let my brain relax and enjoyed what I was looking for from the movie.   I have to shut my brain off for probably 99 percent of movies that fight scenes are there, so I just pretend all movies are in some magical universe where stuff is just different.
Agreed. My bigger issues are the stupid third act and that they didn't utilize Chris Pratt very well. His comedic charm didn't get enough play. But overall, it works as a forgettable popcorn movie.

   Yeah, you would think a guy who can smuggle you into Russia would have a sat link you could at least send an email with very specific GPS coordinates before doing something so foolish.  It made no sense, for the one person who had a good idea (find out where the problem originated) to go in solo and hope for the best.   Now one thing that did occur to me, I was a big fan of the Dark Horse run on Alien years and years ago.  In that series, the government tries to turn the xenomorphs into bioweapons.  In this case, there is an alien space craft and accompanying technology along with what is an uber bio weapon.  I can understand to a degree being distrustful of the same people who can not give straight answers about virology labs they did, or did not have any connection to.

    That, and if there is one things humans do on the regular, is make mistakes.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on July 09, 2021, 05:47:40 PM
As you said, Ratman, at least BttF was consistent in how it worked. Even Avengers Endgame managed to fuck it up (Loki's escape should've had all sorts of repercussions).
So, there's this entire show called "Loki" that covers exactly this. They went with "bug as feature" and embraced that it should have had repercussions...and why it (maybe?) didn't.

So, I haven't seen any of the Loki series, but I really liked that Endgame at least could fit with a logically consistent branching scheme. I'm disappointed that it sounds like the Loki series doesn't stick to the branching scheme, but I haven't seen it.

Open-loop movies like "Back to the Future" have a mystic one true timeline, and if you stray from it too far there are supposed problems - but it makes no sense because it leads to out-of-sync points -- like Marty disappears from his own photo and his hand starts to fade, but he can see his own head disappear. Not to mention the ethical oddity that it's supposedly wrong to make yourself rich, but somehow it is OK to get a cool and better new life by other means.

In Endgame, the rule that they say is that the past is unchangeable. If you go back, you create a branched timeline. That's a consistent and sensible rule for time travel, and the movie plot perfectly fits with this -- they don't change the past at all, but just use the past to change their own future. The only unclear point is when Steve Rogers appears as an old man. Since he doesn't appear on the platform, some suggest that he rewrote the main timeline and old man Steve was actually around all the time in the background of the previous movies. However, it's also consistent that he lived out his life in a branched timeline, but some time over the decades his suit broke, and he had to use an alternate means to jump back (like getting help from the Hank Pym in his branch).
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: hedgehobbit on July 09, 2021, 06:52:37 PM
In that series, the government tries to turn the xenomorphs into bioweapons.  In this case, there is an alien space craft and accompanying technology along with what is an uber bio weapon.  I can understand to a degree being distrustful of the same people who can not give straight answers about virology labs they did, or did not have any connection to.

While it would have been cool in Tomorrow War if the government swooped in at the last minute to steal an alien for "research", it's a nice change of pace for a movie to just be a standalone movie and not sequel bait for a new franchise.

...
...

And they just announced Tomorrow War 2.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on July 10, 2021, 03:36:59 AM
In that series, the government tries to turn the xenomorphs into bioweapons.  In this case, there is an alien space craft and accompanying technology along with what is an uber bio weapon.  I can understand to a degree being distrustful of the same people who can not give straight answers about virology labs they did, or did not have any connection to.

While it would have been cool in Tomorrow War if the government swooped in at the last minute to steal an alien for "research", it's a nice change of pace for a movie to just be a standalone movie and not sequel bait for a new franchise.

...
...

And they just announced Tomorrow War 2.

LOL yeah, I was just thinking that myself when I saw that announcement.   I do wish creatives would take some time to be...creative.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on July 11, 2021, 03:03:37 PM
Watched Black Widow. I like almost all of the Marvel films, but this one just didn't hold my attention. IMO, it was mediocre at best (on par with Iron Man 3).
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on July 12, 2021, 04:03:14 PM
Spoiler warnings for Endgame...

Watched Black Widow. I like almost all of the Marvel films, but this one just didn't hold my attention. IMO, it was mediocre at best (on par with Iron Man 3).

I was pleasantly surprised by Black Widow. I think the major problem with it is in the way it was released. It's a prequel where the main character was already killed off without much ceremony in the last big event, and it doesn't give much direction to the plot going forward. I think with a few changes, this could have been a great follow-up to Civil War that sets up for Phase 3, and could have made her struggle and death so much more memorable in Endgame. But released as it is, it's a struggle to engage with it.

That said, I thought it had some great material. I loved David Harbour as Red Guardian and Florence Pugh as Yelena. And it nicely kept up that Natasha is the Avenger who consistently outsmarts her opponents. It's a clever superspy movie within the MCU background.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on July 18, 2021, 11:17:09 AM
I tried to watch The Tomorrow War. I figured "Chris Pratt, Yvonne Strahovski, that sounds pretty good." It wasn't.

It's like a bunch of A-List scripts were involved in a horrible car accident. There's the one movie that has Chris Pratt leading a ragtag group of civilians into combat for the first time, and that's pretty compelling. There's another one where Chris Pratt is a would-be scientist who's stuck teaching high school, and that's OK too. There's a time travel movie with Chris Pratt going into the future and meeting Yvonne Strahovski, and that's also really good stuff. There's one where Chris Pratt is trying to be a good father to his kid while reconciling with his crazy paramilitary dad. And there's a bad video game where Chris Pratt has to shoot a bunch of aliens that look like Spider-man villains.

All of these get slammed together at 100 MPH, and it doesn't do good things to any of them. After the accident, they had to graft together what was left into a grotesque mockery of a movie. Storylines start up, get going, build some momentum, and then crash to halt when the movie suddenly switches tracks, and the audience is left hanging. There are multiple places where it feels like the movie should have ended there and it would have been OK. Eventually, I just got tired of being yanked around at random, and just hit stop.

Your mileage may vary. If you have Amazon Prime, it's free at least.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Wntrlnd on July 20, 2021, 07:26:11 AM
I agree about Black Widow. It reminds me of Solo. A prequel (midquel?) movie that are just supposed to tie up some loose ends but doesn't really have any important twists to validate releasing it after Endgame.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on July 20, 2021, 11:18:26 AM
I agree about Black Widow. It reminds me of Solo. A prequel (midquel?) movie that are just supposed to tie up some loose ends but doesn't really have any important twists to validate releasing it after Endgame.

They have a similar problem - telling the story of a character who just died in the main plotline. But Solo set out to be an origin story, and I felt it was much more about filling in holes. ("It's the ship that made the Kessel Run in less than twelve parsecs!") There was no way it could have been released in order as the first film.

While it has flashbacks to her childhood, Black Widow is mostly about her as the already-established character around the time of the Civil War movie. With just a few tweaks, Black Widow *could* have been released during the main sequence of movies, and along with Black Panther it might have been a nice bridge between the Earth-bound plotlines of the earlier movies and the cosmic clash of Infinity War.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 20, 2021, 12:08:33 PM
I agree about Black Widow. It reminds me of Solo. A prequel (midquel?) movie that are just supposed to tie up some loose ends but doesn't really have any important twists to validate releasing it after Endgame.

They have a similar problem - telling the story of a character who just died in the main plotline. But Solo set out to be an origin story, and I felt it was much more about filling in holes. ("It's the ship that made the Kessel Run in less than twelve parsecs!") There was no way it could have been released in order as the first film.

While it has flashbacks to her childhood, Black Widow is mostly about her as the already-established character around the time of the Civil War movie. With just a few tweaks, Black Widow *could* have been released during the main sequence of movies, and along with Black Panther it might have been a nice bridge between the Earth-bound plotlines of the earlier movies and the cosmic clash of Infinity War.

I heard a reviewer say that Black Widow should have been released in the place of Captain Marvel, A super powerful character shoehorned in at the last minute who went on to have fuckall to do with the Infinity War business.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Wntrlnd on July 20, 2021, 12:48:04 PM
I agree about Black Widow. It reminds me of Solo. A prequel (midquel?) movie that are just supposed to tie up some loose ends but doesn't really have any important twists to validate releasing it after Endgame.

They have a similar problem - telling the story of a character who just died in the main plotline. But Solo set out to be an origin story, and I felt it was much more about filling in holes. ("It's the ship that made the Kessel Run in less than twelve parsecs!") There was no way it could have been released in order as the first film.

While it has flashbacks to her childhood, Black Widow is mostly about her as the already-established character around the time of the Civil War movie. With just a few tweaks, Black Widow *could* have been released during the main sequence of movies, and along with Black Panther it might have been a nice bridge between the Earth-bound plotlines of the earlier movies and the cosmic clash of Infinity War.

I heard a reviewer say that Black Widow should have been released in the place of Captain Marvel, A super powerful character shoehorned in at the last minute who went on to have fuckall to do with the Infinity War business.

Still.
Captain Marvel did at least introduce the Skrulls as well as Monica Rambeau. It fleshed out the Kree a bit more than Guardians of the Galaxy did. It set up Fury's drive to create the Avengers and also likely lead to splitting S.H.I.E.L.D into two with S.W.O.R.D

CM set up more for future movies than BW who pretty much only sets up a Dark Avengers and maybe some russian superteam in the future with Red Guardian and Ursa Major (the huge guy that arm wrestles with Red Guardian.)
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on July 20, 2021, 02:59:01 PM
Captain Marvel did at least introduce the Skrulls as well as Monica Rambeau. It fleshed out the Kree a bit more than Guardians of the Galaxy did. It set up Fury's drive to create the Avengers and also likely lead to splitting S.H.I.E.L.D into two with S.W.O.R.D

CM set up more for future movies than BW who pretty much only sets up a Dark Avengers and maybe some russian superteam in the future with Red Guardian and Ursa Major (the huge guy that arm wrestles with Red Guardian.)

I think the two movies have very different focuses. Captain Marvel is about setting up a connection between SHIELD and the cosmic plot.

Black Widow is about closing off Earth plots. All three of Winter Soldier, Age of Ultron, and Civil War had featured Hydra as an enemy - but they were never rooted out and dealt with on their own ground after being exposed in Winter Soldier. Instead, they were red herrings and eventually became overshadowed by the giant cosmic plot. Black Widow gives a decisive win as a transition point to the cosmic plot.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on July 20, 2021, 04:32:22 PM
I gotta say Im amazed how people keeping going to see marvel films. Its like the same cake over and over with different frosting.
They are painfully formulaic. I felt the series reached its peak by Avengers 1. Everything since then could only be more of the same but biggerererer.

Which it has been with a few minor variants.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 21, 2021, 02:46:08 AM
I gotta say Im amazed how people keeping going to see marvel films. Its like the same cake over and over with different frosting.
They are painfully formulaic. I felt the series reached its peak by Avengers 1. Everything since then could only be more of the same but biggerererer.

Which it has been with a few minor variants.

Oh, I agree. I hit saturation with the first Avengers movie, coasted to Ant Man (which I really liked as a change of pace) and only watched some of the subsequent movies because they were on and I had nothing better to do. Watched Infinity War and Endgame because my brother/roommate is still an MCU fan so I watched them out of the corner of my eye while doing other stuff, for example.

I think they're really going to run the franchise into the ground with "Phase 4". They've told the big story, and what's left is one big anticlimax. It's time to put this franchise on the shelf and be proud of what they've accomplished, but doing that means going out and taking a chance on something new instead.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on July 21, 2021, 02:49:48 AM
I think they're really going to run the franchise into the ground with "Phase 4".

I sure hope so. Because that will give me hope that modern audiences can get sick of SOMETHING.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 21, 2021, 03:44:06 AM
I think they're really going to run the franchise into the ground with "Phase 4".

I sure hope so. Because that will give me hope that modern audiences can get sick of SOMETHING.

The live action Transformers series cured me of that hope.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on July 21, 2021, 04:07:16 AM
I gotta say Im amazed how people keeping going to see marvel films. Its like the same cake over and over with different frosting.
They are painfully formulaic. I felt the series reached its peak by Avengers 1. Everything since then could only be more of the same but biggerererer.

Oh, I agree. I hit saturation with the first Avengers movie, coasted to Ant Man (which I really liked as a change of pace) and only watched some of the subsequent movies because they were on and I had nothing better to do. Watched Infinity War and Endgame because my brother/roommate is still an MCU fan so I watched them out of the corner of my eye while doing other stuff, for example.

Interesting. The first phase were some of my least favorite, mostly because they were generic origin stories - which I found dull. The Avengers was quite good, but where I thought the series got the most interesting was when it started branching out. I found the later solo movies the most interesting because they had more distinct style and difference, and got out of being generic origin stories.

For example, Guardians of the Galaxy isn't a generic superhero story the way that the first phase were. While Doctor Strange is a standard-ish origin story, it at least was really visually distinct and creative. I liked that the Spider-Man movies skipped having an origin, and got straight to doing interesting stuff with the character.

The Avengers was better than the team-up sequels (with Infinity War being particularly dull for me) -- but I thought the solo movies got more interesting and varied over time, and those are my favorites of the series. All series have their ups and downs - but by the standards of action movie franchises, I think it's been quite good.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 21, 2021, 08:08:27 AM
I think they're really going to run the franchise into the ground with "Phase 4".

I sure hope so. Because that will give me hope that modern audiences can get sick of SOMETHING.

The live action Transformers series cured me of that hope.
In defense, everyone knew what they were getting into with the live-action TF films. Two words: Michael Bay.

(I do love the guy, he does great pyrotechnics work and sFX and he's got a work ethic that keeps films coming in on time and within budget. But I don't have any illusions either. :) )
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on July 21, 2021, 11:55:12 AM
I think they're really going to run the franchise into the ground with "Phase 4". They've told the big story, and what's left is one big anticlimax. It's time to put this franchise on the shelf and be proud of what they've accomplished, but doing that means going out and taking a chance on something new instead.

IMHO we hit "peak Marvel" around Infinity War. They told the big story, and they are losing a lot of their top stars as they age out of action movie roles, or just want to do other things. They've also cherry-picked a lot of the classic storylines, and the content coming out of present day Marvel Comics is decidedly inferior.

The problem is, the movie biz is the only thing keeping Marvel afloat. The comics side of the business has already gone financially bankrupt in the 1990s, and is probably not breaking even at present. They have enough money in the bank to keep the lights on in the Marvel bullpen for decades to come, but if the movies falter, the comics industry won't save them.

I'm wondering if Marvel won't completely reboot the MCU at some point. That would allow them to recast their tentpole characters, and properly integrate Fantastic Four and X-Men from day one.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: hedgehobbit on July 21, 2021, 06:16:51 PM
I'm wondering if Marvel won't completely reboot the MCU at some point. That would allow them to recast their tentpole characters, and properly integrate Fantastic Four and X-Men from day one.

Between all the alternate timelines and multi-verses they shouldn't have any trouble introducing "new" versions of old characters. I'm surprised that they haven't announced any plans for an X-Men X-Force movie.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on July 21, 2021, 07:13:11 PM
I'm wondering if Marvel won't completely reboot the MCU at some point. That would allow them to recast their tentpole characters, and properly integrate Fantastic Four and X-Men from day one.

Between all the alternate timelines and multi-verses they shouldn't have any trouble introducing "new" versions of old characters. I'm surprised that they haven't announced any plans for an X-Men X-Force movie.
The first hint will be s casting call looking for actors with tiny feet.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on July 21, 2021, 07:24:31 PM
Interesting. The first phase were some of my least favorite, mostly because they were generic origin stories - which I found dull. The Avengers was quite good, but where I thought the series got the most interesting was when it started branching out. I found the later solo movies the most interesting because they had more distinct style and difference, and got out of being generic origin stories.

Then you have a much higher threshold for repitition then I do. Its like watching the same movie with 90% repeats and 10% original footage.

Ant man is a marvel film with a dash of hiest
Captain america is a marvel film with a dash of spy thriller (emphasis on dash)
Spiderman is fucking nothing the movie and has butfuck anything to do with Spiderman or his themes.

This is Malibu stacey with a new hat. Yes the original series malibu stacey didn't come with a hat but it was by itself original.

Quote
For example, Guardians of the Galaxy isn't a generic superhero story
Its a largely generic hero story - IN SPAAAAACE!

Villian, Music, Cinematography, Dialoge, Artstyle, Story Structure....All largely the same and executed the same way. I guess there are less superpowers.

Quote
Doctor Strange is a standard-ish origin story, it at least was really visually distinct and creative.
This is where I will heavily differ. I really hate how marvel does its special effects, with a focus on busy visually blobby effects (because those are easier to do through disposable render farms in korea).

Compare The original spiderman films to any marvel film if you want a example of something that is executed and feels different. In terms of music choice, dialogue, effects etc.

I think we have had this exact discussion as before, and I called the Marvel films as the Activision blizzard to Michael bays Electronic Arts.

Both shallow and formulaic, but AB general attracts a larger audience through superior (yet still shallow) execution of mass appeal. Also they both suck up to china.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on July 22, 2021, 02:10:25 PM
Interesting. The first phase were some of my least favorite, mostly because they were generic origin stories - which I found dull. The Avengers was quite good, but where I thought the series got the most interesting was when it started branching out. I found the later solo movies the most interesting because they had more distinct style and difference, and got out of being generic origin stories.

Then you have a much higher threshold for repitition then I do. Its like watching the same movie with 90% repeats and 10% original footage.

Ant man is a marvel film with a dash of hiest
Captain america is a marvel film with a dash of spy thriller (emphasis on dash)
Spiderman is fucking nothing the movie and has butfuck anything to do with Spiderman or his themes.

This is Malibu stacey with a new hat. Yes the original series malibu stacey didn't come with a hat but it was by itself original.

Quote
For example, Guardians of the Galaxy isn't a generic superhero story
Its a largely generic hero story - IN SPAAAAACE!

Villian, Music, Cinematography, Dialoge, Artstyle, Story Structure....All largely the same and executed the same way. I guess there are less superpowers.

Quote
Doctor Strange is a standard-ish origin story, it at least was really visually distinct and creative.
This is where I will heavily differ. I really hate how marvel does its special effects, with a focus on busy visually blobby effects (because those are easier to do through disposable render farms in korea).

Compare The original spiderman films to any marvel film if you want a example of something that is executed and feels different. In terms of music choice, dialogue, effects etc.

I think we have had this exact discussion as before, and I called the Marvel films as the Activision blizzard to Michael bays Electronic Arts.

Both shallow and formulaic, but AB general attracts a larger audience through superior (yet still shallow) execution of mass appeal. Also they both suck up to china.


  I have a feeling the formula worked for him and me much better because we grew up reading marvel comics and saw MANY attempts that were pretty terrible to adapt those stories to tv and screen.   Now if you were a marvel fan as a youngster, maybe not the case.  I am assuming you did not grow up in the USA on marvel comics (and spin off cartoons and so forth).   The movies were in effect the world's most expensive TV series that was able to absolutely hijack nostalgia and apply it for people who grew up in the 70's,80's and 90's on Marvel and similar productions comic books. 

   That said, the run is over for me.  I saw the infinity thing to a close, but I am likely done with marvel movies from here on out.  I suspect if they end up on some tv channel I surf I may watch one, but since they are likely to be held hostage on Disney channel for perpetuity, not likely I see another one.    I agree about the repetition, I was sucked in from a nostalgic gravity well I could not escape.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 22, 2021, 07:36:45 PM
Interesting. The first phase were some of my least favorite, mostly because they were generic origin stories - which I found dull. The Avengers was quite good, but where I thought the series got the most interesting was when it started branching out. I found the later solo movies the most interesting because they had more distinct style and difference, and got out of being generic origin stories.

Then you have a much higher threshold for repitition then I do. Its like watching the same movie with 90% repeats and 10% original footage.

Ant man is a marvel film with a dash of hiest
Captain america is a marvel film with a dash of spy thriller (emphasis on dash)
Spiderman is fucking nothing the movie and has butfuck anything to do with Spiderman or his themes.

This is Malibu stacey with a new hat. Yes the original series malibu stacey didn't come with a hat but it was by itself original.

Quote
For example, Guardians of the Galaxy isn't a generic superhero story
Its a largely generic hero story - IN SPAAAAACE!

Villian, Music, Cinematography, Dialoge, Artstyle, Story Structure....All largely the same and executed the same way. I guess there are less superpowers.

Quote
Doctor Strange is a standard-ish origin story, it at least was really visually distinct and creative.
This is where I will heavily differ. I really hate how marvel does its special effects, with a focus on busy visually blobby effects (because those are easier to do through disposable render farms in korea).

I'm sick of GCI in general. It allows them too much freedom and the results are typically not as good (IMO) as practical effects.
I think the last movie with CGI that I thought was really good was the original Jurassic Park.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Wntrlnd on July 23, 2021, 07:06:36 PM

I'm sick of GCI in general. It allows them too much freedom and the results are typically not as good (IMO) as practical effects.
I think the last movie with CGI that I thought was really good was the original Jurassic Park.

The best CGI are the ones you never notice. So I reckon there is a amount of movies out there you have watched and never noticed the CGI
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 23, 2021, 10:02:52 PM

I'm sick of GCI in general. It allows them too much freedom and the results are typically not as good (IMO) as practical effects.
I think the last movie with CGI that I thought was really good was the original Jurassic Park.

The best CGI are the ones you never notice. So I reckon there is a amount of movies out there you have watched and never noticed the CGI

Maybe. One example that I detest is the "roller coaster" shots, where the "camera" zooms in and around and through things. Compare the opening shot of the castle in Dark Crystal. Moody and full of wonder and interest - with the opening scene in Age of Resistance where the camera zooms quickly from the underground to the surface, and it's just a kalidescope of colors and shapes and I felt more bewildered than anything. Or the space combat from Wrath of Khan to any of the JJ Abrams Trek space combats.

Or all of the damn action scenes where the hero does or goes through incredibly comical action scenes. Everyone is Neo from the Matrix now, even people without powers or abilities. And the worst of it is when they lack weight and momentum. I laughed at Black Panther's car chase scene. I don't expect it was meant to be funny, and it set the tone of the film for me that this was an unintentional comedy.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on July 24, 2021, 01:02:14 AM
  I have a feeling the formula worked for him and me much better because we grew up reading marvel comics and saw MANY attempts that were pretty terrible to adapt those stories to tv and screen.   Now if you were a marvel fan as a youngster, maybe not the case.  I am assuming you did not grow up in the USA on marvel comics (and spin off cartoons and so forth).   The movies were in effect the world's most expensive TV series that was able to absolutely hijack nostalgia and apply it for people who grew up in the 70's,80's and 90's on Marvel and similar productions comic books.

Not exactly true for me. I only got into comics after I got to college - and the comics I got into were independent-ish comics like Sandman, Strangers in Paradise, and Astro City. I was exposed to more mainstream superhero comics as my son grew up, but that was alongside the MCU movies coming out so I wouldn't call it nostalgia.


I'm sick of GCI in general. It allows them too much freedom and the results are typically not as good (IMO) as practical effects.
I think the last movie with CGI that I thought was really good was the original Jurassic Park.

I agree that CGI is hugely overused and serves as a crutch way too often. There are some later CGI movies I thought were good -- Forrest Gump and Fury Road come to mind, along with Gravity and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.

But there's no really getting away from CGI within sci-fi/fantasy movies these days. In my experience, the MCU films have more practical effects than most other mainstream sci-fi/fantasy movies. I would add to the above list the first half of Captain America as an excellent use of CGI, though it was ruined by the dull second half.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Wntrlnd on July 24, 2021, 05:35:20 AM

I'm sick of GCI in general. It allows them too much freedom and the results are typically not as good (IMO) as practical effects.
I think the last movie with CGI that I thought was really good was the original Jurassic Park.

The best CGI are the ones you never notice. So I reckon there is a amount of movies out there you have watched and never noticed the CGI

Maybe. One example that I detest is the "roller coaster" shots, where the "camera" zooms in and around and through things. Compare the opening shot of the castle in Dark Crystal. Moody and full of wonder and interest - with the opening scene in Age of Resistance where the camera zooms quickly from the underground to the surface, and it's just a kalidescope of colors and shapes and I felt more bewildered than anything. Or the space combat from Wrath of Khan to any of the JJ Abrams Trek space combats.

Or all of the damn action scenes where the hero does or goes through incredibly comical action scenes. Everyone is Neo from the Matrix now, even people without powers or abilities. And the worst of it is when they lack weight and momentum. I laughed at Black Panther's car chase scene. I don't expect it was meant to be funny, and it set the tone of the film for me that this was an unintentional comedy.

I don't know gow you feel about youtube. Maybe you are one of those who have decided to boycott it. But here is a not to long video made about the subject. Take a look, and maybe you will come away with "Wait. THAT was CGI??!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL6hp8BKB24

Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on July 24, 2021, 08:09:24 AM
I liked these movies but the idea that a picture would slowly start to disappear because the people in the picture no longer exists is pretty silly. Especially since time travel in these movies create alternate histories so it shouldn't matter to the time traveling Marty if the Marty in that universe doesn't exist.

But you are correct in that at least they are consistent and nobody does anything that's blatantly stupid.

In Back to the Future there are not different timelines. Changes in the past ripple forward to erase or modify the future. So the photo changes, eventually everything changes.

So it stays fairly consistent.

Another one is the original Time Machine movie. The traveler never does anything that contradicts or changes what has happened and seems to be careful in this. Taking things to help the future from the point he left, rather than trying to go back and undo anything.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 24, 2021, 09:40:43 AM

I'm sick of GCI in general. It allows them too much freedom and the results are typically not as good (IMO) as practical effects.
I think the last movie with CGI that I thought was really good was the original Jurassic Park.

The best CGI are the ones you never notice. So I reckon there is a amount of movies out there you have watched and never noticed the CGI

Maybe. One example that I detest is the "roller coaster" shots, where the "camera" zooms in and around and through things. Compare the opening shot of the castle in Dark Crystal. Moody and full of wonder and interest - with the opening scene in Age of Resistance where the camera zooms quickly from the underground to the surface, and it's just a kalidescope of colors and shapes and I felt more bewildered than anything. Or the space combat from Wrath of Khan to any of the JJ Abrams Trek space combats.

Or all of the damn action scenes where the hero does or goes through incredibly comical action scenes. Everyone is Neo from the Matrix now, even people without powers or abilities. And the worst of it is when they lack weight and momentum. I laughed at Black Panther's car chase scene. I don't expect it was meant to be funny, and it set the tone of the film for me that this was an unintentional comedy.

I don't know gow you feel about youtube. Maybe you are one of those who have decided to boycott it. But here is a not to long video made about the subject. Take a look, and maybe you will come away with "Wait. THAT was CGI??!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL6hp8BKB24

That's not my point. I am not against CGI in principle. It's just another tool. My argument that the video seems to agree with, is that there's a lot of bad CGI. But maybe more importantly, my point is that it allows filmmakers the freedom to do things that maybe aren't a great idea.
Again, back to Age of Resistance as an example. Digitally removing the puppeteers is neat. Using CGI to make a Skeksis jump around like a hyperactive jack in the box? Terrible, no matter what effects technique they used, but CGI facilitated that bad decision.

Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on July 24, 2021, 09:46:54 AM
I think they're really going to run the franchise into the ground with "Phase 4".

I sure hope so. Because that will give me hope that modern audiences can get sick of SOMETHING.

It took a while but looks like the mainstream have gotten tired of zombie movies and series finally as their interminable proliferation in everything hit saturation years ago.

We'll see the same with superhero shows just like the last two waves.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on July 24, 2021, 09:49:58 AM
The live action Transformers series cured me of that hope.

The movies werent as prolific and were so forgettable. Much like the horrible TMNT efforts lately. The Transformers have seen some dramatic lowring in quality across the board.

Neanwhile in Japan its been puttering along with quite a few series, some of which have not made it to the US far as know like Beast Wars II and Beast Wars Neo, Scramble City and a few others.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on July 24, 2021, 10:55:32 AM
That's not my point. I am not against CGI in principle. It's just another tool. My argument that the video seems to agree with, is that there's a lot of bad CGI. But maybe more importantly, my point is that it allows filmmakers the freedom to do things that maybe aren't a great idea.
Again, back to Age of Resistance as an example. Digitally removing the puppeteers is neat. Using CGI to make a Skeksis jump around like a hyperactive jack in the box? Terrible, no matter what effects technique they used, but CGI facilitated that bad decision.

CGI used for cleanup is fine, its no different from older methods like hand touching up to remove wires and the like..
CGI used for some effects is fine. Also no different from stop motion or minis. Except for the feeling of fakeness CGI has thats different from seeing a miniature.
CGI used for every damn thing is the problem. Some movies are more cartoon now than live action. Moreso because more companies are uing CGI not just for pose processing of small things, but in larger things as well and often with stupidly short deadlines. The Black Panther movie was a severe victim of this.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on July 24, 2021, 09:15:43 PM
CGI used for every damn thing is the problem. Some movies are more cartoon now than live action. Moreso because more companies are uing CGI not just for pose processing of small things, but in larger things as well and often with stupidly short deadlines. The Black Panther movie was a severe victim of this.

I agree that the Black Panther movie used way too much CGI. However, that trend is true of *all* mainstream fantasy and sci-fi movies. I feel that compared to its peers, the MCU tends to use *more* practical effects and stunts - and more often merges CGI and practical effects. Black Widow, for example, has a lot of good stunt work. Captain America also has had a lot of good stunt work -- the elevator fight in Winter Soldier is a classic.

There's still a lot of overuse of CGI, but that's true for the vast majority of mainstream fantasy/sci-fi, not something particular to the MCU.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on July 25, 2021, 01:14:41 PM
I am not a big fan of CGI. Some movies have done it well. Some movies I enjoy despite the CGI, because otherwise the films are well crafted. But I find pretty consistently CGI creates this lighter than air effect where nothing seems to contact anything else. It feels very cartoony for me. I find it works best for things like lighting effects or energy effects . say you want to show someone showing a bolt of lightning from their finger, there it makes sense, but when it is other characters that actors are supposed to be interacting with or fighting with, or when its cars doing physically impossible things, it just takes me out of the movie: it is also not why I go to an action flick (I want to see real stunts in a movie, not CGI.

Lately I've been going back and watching a lot of 60s, 70s, and 80s movies, and really am enjoying the practical effects. Sometimes they fall well short of success, but even then they are at least something physical that is in the actor's hands.

Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on July 25, 2021, 01:16:59 PM

I'm sick of GCI in general. It allows them too much freedom and the results are typically not as good (IMO) as practical effects.
I think the last movie with CGI that I thought was really good was the original Jurassic Park.

The best CGI are the ones you never notice. So I reckon there is a amount of movies out there you have watched and never noticed the CGI

Maybe. One example that I detest is the "roller coaster" shots, where the "camera" zooms in and around and through things. Compare the opening shot of the castle in Dark Crystal. Moody and full of wonder and interest - with the opening scene in Age of Resistance where the camera zooms quickly from the underground to the surface, and it's just a kalidescope of colors and shapes and I felt more bewildered than anything. Or the space combat from Wrath of Khan to any of the JJ Abrams Trek space combats.

Or all of the damn action scenes where the hero does or goes through incredibly comical action scenes. Everyone is Neo from the Matrix now, even people without powers or abilities. And the worst of it is when they lack weight and momentum. I laughed at Black Panther's car chase scene. I don't expect it was meant to be funny, and it set the tone of the film for me that this was an unintentional comedy.

I don't know gow you feel about youtube. Maybe you are one of those who have decided to boycott it. But here is a not to long video made about the subject. Take a look, and maybe you will come away with "Wait. THAT was CGI??!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL6hp8BKB24

That's not my point. I am not against CGI in principle. It's just another tool. My argument that the video seems to agree with, is that there's a lot of bad CGI. But maybe more importantly, my point is that it allows filmmakers the freedom to do things that maybe aren't a great idea.
Again, back to Age of Resistance as an example. Digitally removing the puppeteers is neat. Using CGI to make a Skeksis jump around like a hyperactive jack in the box? Terrible, no matter what effects technique they used, but CGI facilitated that bad decision.

I agree that a big part of the problem seems to be this 'well we can do it so we should' attitude that has crept in with CGI. I also suspect it is just a part of how movies are made today with CGI and special effects being outsourced the way they are. I do remember being very impressed when I saw Jurassic Park for the first time. And there have been a few movies that managed that well for me (I liked how interstellar used CGI but also used practical effects in instances where they thought it was needed).
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on July 25, 2021, 01:32:59 PM
I agree that the Black Panther movie used way too much CGI. However, that trend is true of *all* mainstream fantasy and sci-fi movies.

Not just fantasy and SF. CGI is infesting just about everything now on the larger and even mid-range budget movies.

Weird thing is. Some of the smaller budget shows actually intigrate oft extensive CGI into a movie far far better than the big budget ones.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on July 25, 2021, 01:36:16 PM
I've seen far too many rubbery monsters to consider practical effects to be superior to CGI, and the masks and makeup they used to use to age actors were usually found deep in the uncanny valley.

That said, a lot of very visible CGI is terrible. Monsters and digital super heroes still don't move right (Black Panther immediately comes to mind), and there are often problems with texture and conveying grime. While it's worth remembering that this is just the tip of the CGI iceberg, most of which is invisible to the viewer, that doesn't doesn't erase the terrible examples, either.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Wntrlnd on July 25, 2021, 01:41:21 PM
Are scenes shot in "the Volume" considered CGI?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bErPsq5kPzE
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 25, 2021, 05:26:20 PM

I'm sick of GCI in general. It allows them too much freedom and the results are typically not as good (IMO) as practical effects.
I think the last movie with CGI that I thought was really good was the original Jurassic Park.

The best CGI are the ones you never notice. So I reckon there is a amount of movies out there you have watched and never noticed the CGI

Maybe. One example that I detest is the "roller coaster" shots, where the "camera" zooms in and around and through things. Compare the opening shot of the castle in Dark Crystal. Moody and full of wonder and interest - with the opening scene in Age of Resistance where the camera zooms quickly from the underground to the surface, and it's just a kalidescope of colors and shapes and I felt more bewildered than anything. Or the space combat from Wrath of Khan to any of the JJ Abrams Trek space combats.

Or all of the damn action scenes where the hero does or goes through incredibly comical action scenes. Everyone is Neo from the Matrix now, even people without powers or abilities. And the worst of it is when they lack weight and momentum. I laughed at Black Panther's car chase scene. I don't expect it was meant to be funny, and it set the tone of the film for me that this was an unintentional comedy.

I don't know gow you feel about youtube. Maybe you are one of those who have decided to boycott it. But here is a not to long video made about the subject. Take a look, and maybe you will come away with "Wait. THAT was CGI??!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL6hp8BKB24

That's not my point. I am not against CGI in principle. It's just another tool. My argument that the video seems to agree with, is that there's a lot of bad CGI. But maybe more importantly, my point is that it allows filmmakers the freedom to do things that maybe aren't a great idea.
Again, back to Age of Resistance as an example. Digitally removing the puppeteers is neat. Using CGI to make a Skeksis jump around like a hyperactive jack in the box? Terrible, no matter what effects technique they used, but CGI facilitated that bad decision.

I agree that a big part of the problem seems to be this 'well we can do it so we should' attitude that has crept in with CGI. I also suspect it is just a part of how movies are made today with CGI and special effects being outsourced the way they are. I do remember being very impressed when I saw Jurassic Park for the first time. And there have been a few movies that managed that well for me (I liked how interstellar used CGI but also used practical effects in instances where they thought it was needed).

I will say that one issue is HD. We have movies and TV shows that are magnitudes more "crisp" than before. And that's not very kind to practical effects. Again with the Resistance, because that's where I first really noticed it. The puppets looked worse than the ones from the original Dark Crystal IMO, and I think that's because we could see so much more detail. They're great puppets, but they looked more puppet-like.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 25, 2021, 05:36:33 PM
Are scenes shot in "the Volume" considered CGI?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bErPsq5kPzE

Why do you ask?

it's a pretty neat tool, if used effectively. Since it projects a CGI environment on a screen around the actors, I'd say yes, it's CGI.
The first I learned of the thing was on The Mandalorian, and that show generally does many things right.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on July 26, 2021, 10:29:46 AM
I will say that one issue is HD. We have movies and TV shows that are magnitudes more "crisp" than before. And that's not very kind to practical effects. Again with the Resistance, because that's where I first really noticed it. The puppets looked worse than the ones from the original Dark Crystal IMO, and I think that's because we could see so much more detail. They're great puppets, but they looked more puppet-like.

That's very true for TV, but much less true for feature films. Projected feature films have always been in high definition, and puppets have always looked puppet-ish. The difference between 1980s film projection and 2020s is relatively minor - it's more that audiences are keyed to expect more of special effects these days.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 26, 2021, 11:57:11 AM
I will say that one issue is HD. We have movies and TV shows that are magnitudes more "crisp" than before. And that's not very kind to practical effects. Again with the Resistance, because that's where I first really noticed it. The puppets looked worse than the ones from the original Dark Crystal IMO, and I think that's because we could see so much more detail. They're great puppets, but they looked more puppet-like.
Also, HD/60FPS remasters of older material (even relatively recent stuff) can look very, very odd.

I watched a Rifftrax of the 1994 Street Fighter movie, and the crisper video actually made some of the dated SFX look terrible (granted, the dated SFX were the LEAST of that movie's problems. But it really sticks out at a higher framerate).
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on July 26, 2021, 02:44:08 PM
     Anyone have any news regarding the Conan the Barbarian series netflix is supposed to be making?  I had some hopes the show might actually be good, but given Netflix's track record... I am unsure of what direction they will take and do not care to see a Soynan the seamstress instead.   I always thought the tales Howard told would easily make for a series (well produced series anyway) of tales that would lend well to screen.  If smart, Netflix will stick to the toxic masculinity and dismembering, and steer clear of making current year Conan.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on July 26, 2021, 09:10:23 PM
  I have a feeling the formula worked for him and me much better because we grew up reading marvel comics and saw MANY attempts that were pretty terrible to adapt those stories to tv and screen.
I grew up with marvel comics. I actually bought them at the corner shop in my home country reliably for over a decade.
In addition because of how TV worked in my home country, TV shows and the like where on something of a 10 year delay. So I grew up with 90s animated adaptations of Marvel stuff (its own mini universe in a way).

I just see no benefit to film adaptations. In terms of adaptation, a film is the WORST medium for a ongoing or long story. Maybe books (of a certain length) adapt sorta well to film. But thats about it. Give me animated series with a good voice cast and talented animation crew, if I want a adaptation at all.

Why would I want a hyper condensed version of the original stories condensed into the same bland formula? Like yeah they did make it more streamlined and cut the fat in parts, but in other ways they really removed the OOMPH from so many stories because they had to follow the exact same goddam formula.

And I am so fucking tired of films with buckets of animation in them. Just fucking make a animated film at that point and get somebody with a talented design aesthetic.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on July 27, 2021, 08:32:43 AM
  I have a feeling the formula worked for him and me much better because we grew up reading marvel comics and saw MANY attempts that were pretty terrible to adapt those stories to tv and screen.
I grew up with marvel comics. I actually bought them at the corner shop in my home country reliably for over a decade.
In addition because of how TV worked in my home country, TV shows and the like where on something of a 10 year delay. So I grew up with 90s animated adaptations of Marvel stuff (its own mini universe in a way).

I just see no benefit to film adaptations. In terms of adaptation, a film is the WORST medium for a ongoing or long story. Maybe books (of a certain length) adapt sorta well to film. But thats about it. Give me animated series with a good voice cast and talented animation crew, if I want a adaptation at all.

Why would I want a hyper condensed version of the original stories condensed into the same bland formula? Like yeah they did make it more streamlined and cut the fat in parts, but in other ways they really removed the OOMPH from so many stories because they had to follow the exact same goddam formula.

And I am so fucking tired of films with buckets of animation in them. Just fucking make a animated film at that point and get somebody with a talented design aesthetic.

   Fair enough, and I agree about film being a poor long term story telling medium.   I am curious as to how the next phase of marvel movies profit.  They will do it without me, but no idea how fatigued the general public is of the super hero movies.  I expected big budget deconstructions to start, but those tend to be a touch cynical and depressing.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: jhkim on July 27, 2021, 07:44:52 PM
   Fair enough, and I agree about film being a poor long term story telling medium.   I am curious as to how the next phase of marvel movies profit.  They will do it without me, but no idea how fatigued the general public is of the super hero movies.  I expected big budget deconstructions to start, but those tend to be a touch cynical and depressing.

Other film genres like gangster movies and westerns had heydays that lasted multiple decades, continuing well after their basic tropes had gotten very tired.

I don't feel that quality is a simple function of time. Some of my favorite westerns were from after the peak, like Silverado and Unforgiven. There are many great classics - but it's also true that a lot of the early and middle period westerns were pretty dull.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on July 27, 2021, 08:51:21 PM
Other film genres like gangster movies and westerns had heydays that lasted multiple decades, continuing well after their basic tropes had gotten very tired.

We might have another 5-8 years of this. Joy. But that sounds pretty accurate.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: hedgehobbit on July 27, 2021, 11:58:27 PM
We might have another 5-8 years of this. Joy. But that sounds pretty accurate.

That depends on when you start counting. The modern super-hero movie trend started with Batman in 1989 (IMHO) so it's been going for 30 years now. I'd like to return to the days when we only got one super-hero movie every two years or so. That was pretty tolerable.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on July 28, 2021, 01:32:22 AM
We might have another 5-8 years of this. Joy. But that sounds pretty accurate.

That depends on when you start counting. The modern super-hero movie trend started with Batman in 1989 (IMHO) so it's been going for 30 years now. I'd like to return to the days when we only got one super-hero movie every two years or so. That was pretty tolerable.
The mere existence of a few movies, which you don't have to watch, is intolerable?

You must have a lot of difficulty with everyday life.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on July 28, 2021, 08:04:13 AM
The mere existence of a few movies, which you don't have to watch, is intolerable?

You must have a lot of difficulty with everyday life.
You can’t manage to detect simple hyperbole and exaggeration?

You must have a lot of difficulty with everyday life.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on July 28, 2021, 02:21:57 PM
The mere existence of a few movies, which you don't have to watch, is intolerable?

You must have a lot of difficulty with everyday life.
You can’t manage to detect simple hyperbole and exaggeration?

You must have a lot of difficulty with everyday life.
Exactly.

We live in a world where fun killers think it's okay to police what other people like. I think it's better to avoid their rhetoric and say something like hey, I'm not a fan of that myself, but if other people are having fun that's awesome!

Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on July 28, 2021, 06:01:58 PM
We live in a world where fun killers think it's okay to police what other people like.

Thats called having different taste and said world has existed since the beggining of time. Id say the opposite has been very much true recently: more people have been needing hype more then the actual product itself and so need everybody to validate their opinion.

If you like what you like, what does it matter to you if somebody else finds your decisions poor? If your fun is founded in intentional ignorance, then thats a very fragile kind of fun.

As for me, more people liking sequels and remakes validates Hollywood to make more of said trash which effects me because I have less stuff to talk to people about. And I think it gets people to think in a very dependant fashion. Instead of taking the values from the products they take this consumeristic mindset instead.

Thats why I shake my head at idiots that want Star Wars to be 'returned to form'. Star Wars itself was inspired by previous stuff, but your dependant on it and not its ideas.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: hedgehobbit on July 28, 2021, 08:59:10 PM
The mere existence of a few movies, which you don't have to watch, is intolerable?

I'm using the term "tolerable" in the sense of how many super-hero movies can the market tolerate. IOW, how many super-hero movies can be released each year before they begin to cannibalize their own audience. The average person only goes to the movie theater 2.3 times a year. So we are at a point where there are so many super-hero moves that most people will pick and choose one over another. Back before MCU went full steam it was easy to see every major super-hero movie in the theater every year.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on July 28, 2021, 09:35:37 PM
The mere existence of a few movies, which you don't have to watch, is intolerable?

I'm using the term "tolerable" in the sense of how many super-hero movies can the market tolerate. IOW, how many super-hero movies can be released each year before they begin to cannibalize their own audience. The average person only goes to the movie theater 2.3 times a year. So we are at a point where there are so many super-hero moves that most people will pick and choose one over another. Back before MCU went full steam it was easy to see every major super-hero movie in the theater every year.
Okay, that's very different.

But I think assessments of the movie-going public will have to wait a bit, because the 15 very long days of lockdown could have killed theatres entirely or there could be a huge rebound, and might have made everyone stick of streaming or increased their threshold. I think it'll lead to a net upswing in viewing time, and tolerance of long stretches of binge watching, but we'll have to see.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Godfather Punk on July 29, 2021, 01:06:26 AM
Coming back a little bit on superhero movies, as much as I hated Suicide Squad and Justice League (theatre cut), The Suicide Squad is FUN. More bloody juvenile fun than the average summer 'comedy'.
Not perfect, there's some slow moments and the story still follows the basic blockbuster beats, but it has more gore than the 2 Deadpools combined in the opening act alone, has some brief frontal full male nudity. And appears to care about the characters. And unlike many DC movies they don't shy away from using colour; that final Boss  :o ;D .

After Druk and Black Widow, SS was my third theatre experience since the lockdowns ended. Druk (Another Round) is a good character movie, Black Widow was a missed opportunity for an interesting character, but The Suicide Squad was a bonkers anti-hero extravaganza. I'm glad I skipped FF9 and watched this one instead.

(disclaimer: I never read a single Suicide Squad comic, and did not watch Birds of Prey. So I even didn't pick up on when Harley mentions her former abusive lover, she was talking about Joker).

edit: for what it's worth, it's currently at 97% on Rotten Tomatoes and the one negative critic says "It’s about as anti-woke as you could possibly fathom, and there’s a complete disregard for what might be offensive to some viewers." as if that were a bad thing in a Suicide Squad film.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on July 29, 2021, 07:49:03 AM
   Fair enough, and I agree about film being a poor long term story telling medium.   I am curious as to how the next phase of marvel movies profit.  They will do it without me, but no idea how fatigued the general public is of the super hero movies.  I expected big budget deconstructions to start, but those tend to be a touch cynical and depressing.

Other film genres like gangster movies and westerns had heydays that lasted multiple decades, continuing well after their basic tropes had gotten very tired.

I don't feel that quality is a simple function of time. Some of my favorite westerns were from after the peak, like Silverado and Unforgiven. There are many great classics - but it's also true that a lot of the early and middle period westerns were pretty dull.

Genres definitely get stuffy and can die without enough new life in them. A lot of genres get reinvigorated when people start breathing new life into them. I think gangster movies and wuxia are two good examples of that. They both have waves where the quality shoots up a bit. Some of my favorite wuxia films are ones in the 70s where you can tell the directors are intentionally drawing on other genres or movies and trying to mix them in for a new result (a movie like Killer Constable which is at the tail end of the Shaw Brothers reign---when they start throwing anything at the wall to see what sticks---it always struck me as a blend of wuxia with Dirty Harry and films in that style). Intimate Confessions of a Chinese Courtesan blends in a lot of horror movie visuals for interesting effect (it isn't a horror movie, nothing supernatural outside the standard stuff you find in wuxia, but many of the shots, especially of the antagonist, have an 'enter the vampire' feel to them and there are lots vampiric mannerisms with the character: much more to the film than this, but it is one of the things that stands out). And tons of those 70s wuxia films started blending in spaghetti western elements, including things like Ennio Morricone tracks (which I think works really well, and gives them an interesting remixed vibe).

I am not as into westerns but agree. I remember watching Silverado and Pale Rider when they came out and both made a really strong impression on me (even though it was a genre I thought of as my grandfather's by that time). 
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on July 29, 2021, 10:37:11 AM
Are scenes shot in "the Volume" considered CGI?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bErPsq5kPzE

No if the backgrounds are real or mattes. Yes if the backgrounds are CGI.

Its just a new version of backscreening I believe it was called. A process that goes way the heck back.

The problem with it is the same. It can produce some odd perspecta quirks. Though I think the new systems may deal better with that.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on July 29, 2021, 12:37:28 PM
Are scenes shot in "the Volume" considered CGI?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bErPsq5kPzE

No if the backgrounds are real or mattes. Yes if the backgrounds are CGI.

Its just a new version of backscreening I believe it was called. A process that goes way the heck back.

The problem with it is the same. It can produce some odd perspecta quirks. Though I think the new systems may deal better with that.

There is a movie called Legend of the Demon Cat, which does make heavy use of CGI but considering how much it used, did a great job blending it with real elements. One of the big things that made it work was they pretty much designed a song dynasty city set, so while I am sure CGI was used to touch things up, the locations felt very solid and real. Which worked well when the more fantastical CGI stuff happened (not all the CGI was perfect, but even when it wasn't the colors and stuff were artfully done so it didn't bother as much as a bunch of ugly muddy things moving all over the screen)
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on August 02, 2021, 10:15:06 AM
Watched a pretty cool Kung Fu revenge film called White Butterfly Killer the other night. It stars Hsu Feng, the actress from a Touch of Zen and The Fate of Lee Khan. Enjoyed the fight sequences a lot. Quite liked the unique weapon of Hsu Feng's character (a cut braid that she could make heart to bludgeon or stab with, or soft to whip with). Basically the movie is all set at an inn/brothel/gambling hall, where she has set up a revenge scheme after being raped and watching her grandfather killed by bandits six years ago (we don't see it, but presumably she has spent the last six years training and dedicating herself to revenge, and picking up some female disciples to help her in her endeavor-----it is a little unclear how planned or happenstance the revenge is). The opening fight scene really won me over. It spends a good amount of time building backstory and tension between fight scenes. It does make for a slower pace at times, but I felt all that effort made the revenge sequences more emotionally rewarding. It is an older movie, and it shows. Still it is good quality in terms of the fight choreography and the story works well. Hsu Feng really elevates the material as well. I ended up just watching the Wu Tang Collection version for free on youtube (not issues with cropping and not being able to see all the movements as sometimes happens on youtube with these films). It is available on prime to rent or buy but I didn't want to spend the extra money at the time (had just bought another film the previous night). The wu tang version is subtitles. You can see it here: https://youtu.be/unGJGBT_LT8

Did a podcast review of it in more depth here: https://www.podbean.com/ew/pb-j9d23-10a2490
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Godfather Punk on August 11, 2021, 04:46:11 AM
I live in a non-english speaking country so I didn't have to read 'Sir Gawain and the Green Knight' in highschool. And I never played Pendragon nor Lion & Dragon.
But I like Dev Patel, so I watched Green Knight in the theatre yesterday. Let's just say I was not the target audience for this movie; maybe you all will get more out of it. Or not.

Beautiful imagery of the Irish/Scottish landscape, which you'll have ample time to admire as there isn't anything else happening in most of the movie. I did some search on Wikipedia after watchin the movie and I think they did a bit of a Hobbit on this one as well, adding characters and storylines to pad the original poem into a +2hrs art-house experiment.

So if you like Arthurian legends and people travelling and talking a bit between long minutes of silence, then this may be something for you.
But if you expect an action packed fantasy movie or a fun night at the cinema, another Excalibur or First Knight or A Knight's Tale or even Holly Grail, then this is not it.
Beautiful but boring.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 11, 2021, 06:53:10 AM
Coming back a little bit on superhero movies, as much as I hated Suicide Squad and Justice League (theatre cut), The Suicide Squad is FUN. More bloody juvenile fun than the average summer 'comedy'.
Not perfect, there's some slow moments and the story still follows the basic blockbuster beats, but it has more gore than the 2 Deadpools combined in the opening act alone, has some brief frontal full male nudity. And appears to care about the characters. And unlike many DC movies they don't shy away from using colour; that final Boss  :o ;D .

After Druk and Black Widow, SS was my third theatre experience since the lockdowns ended. Druk (Another Round) is a good character movie, Black Widow was a missed opportunity for an interesting character, but The Suicide Squad was a bonkers anti-hero extravaganza. I'm glad I skipped FF9 and watched this one instead.

(disclaimer: I never read a single Suicide Squad comic, and did not watch Birds of Prey. So I even didn't pick up on when Harley mentions her former abusive lover, she was talking about Joker).

edit: for what it's worth, it's currently at 97% on Rotten Tomatoes and the one negative critic says "It’s about as anti-woke as you could possibly fathom, and there’s a complete disregard for what might be offensive to some viewers." as if that were a bad thing in a Suicide Squad film.

I'm tempted to watch SS only because... are we not spoiling it? The Big End Villian!
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Godfather Punk on August 11, 2021, 07:00:04 AM
I'm tempted to watch SS only because... are we not spoiling it? The Big End Villian!
Better than Scrappy Doo, that's for sure.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: hedgehobbit on August 11, 2021, 11:35:04 AM
edit: for what it's worth, it's currently at 97% on Rotten Tomatoes and the one negative critic says "It’s about as anti-woke as you could possibly fathom, and there’s a complete disregard for what might be offensive to some viewers." as if that were a bad thing in a Suicide Squad film.

Having now watched this movie, I really disagree with the assessment that it's somehow "anti-woke". While it might have been offensive, it was only offensive to the same groups of people that Hollywood says it's ok to offend: men, "homophobes", people who like America, etc. It was really a safe comedy.

But the main reason I didn't like it was that it wasn't a superhero movie or even a parody of a superhero movie (like Deadpool). Instead it was a parody of 80s action movies. The plot was basically Commando combined with the team from Predator (with a little bit of XXX thrown in). Overall the story didn't make any amount of sense but not in a way that pokes fun at old action movies. Mostly just in a way that doesn't make sense.


BTW- Did anyone else have trouble streaming this from HBO Max? I've streamed movies without issues on pretty much every streaming platform (even 4k movies) and this one buffered every three to five minutes.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on August 15, 2021, 10:27:29 AM
Enjoyed Free Guy earlier this weekend. I set without any expectations and found it to be a fun film.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on August 17, 2021, 08:33:58 AM
To me, The Suicide Squad (2021) asks the question "How grotesque can we make superheroes before the audience starts to tune out?" A question which, I warn you, it answers in excruciating detail.

I think after seeing the movie, you will have a pretty good idea where to draw that line.

From here on out, when a character in the DC Universe says "I've seen some weird shit," you will think of this movie.

It's not a badly made movie, it's just one I found difficult to enjoy.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on August 17, 2021, 09:02:43 AM
To me, The Suicide Squad (2021) asks the question "How grotesque can we make superheroes before the audience starts to tune out?" A question which, I warn you, it answers in excruciating detail.

I think after seeing the movie, you will have a pretty good idea where to draw that line.

From here on out, when a character in the DC Universe says "I've seen some weird shit," you will think of this movie.

It's not a badly made movie, it's just one I found difficult to enjoy.
I liked the interactions between IE and JC, but felt that the movie pays too much attention to MR's HQ in a "GM's girlfriend" sort of way after watching interviews.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on August 17, 2021, 09:49:04 AM
Finally watched Friends of Eddie Coyle. Great Boston crime film. Very slow paced even for the early 70s. I think it really boils down to whether you enjoy hanging out with these characters. I loved the dialogue. Found it to be quite authentic in terms of being a Boston film. Some of the accents fall a bit short, but everything else looked more real to me (some Boston movies spend a lot of time giving views and shots people who live here wouldn't even see most of the time: like the view of the state house in the departed---which was great but pretty alien to me). This looked and felt like the places I drive around. Very interesting ending as well. Like watching a slow moving train crash: https://www.podbean.com/ew/pb-8piv9-10b7d7a
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on August 18, 2021, 02:31:28 PM
I liked the interactions between IE and JC, but felt that the movie pays too much attention to MR's HQ in a "GM's girlfriend" sort of way after watching interviews.

I thought Idris Elba was a huge upgrade from Will Smith, and his HR Giger helmet was pretty cool.  His ability to unfold a packet of gum into an antitank rifle a la Iron Man 2 was cool looking but preposterous, but at least it was his own thing.

Margot Robbie has still got it, but I tend to agree with your about the "GM's girlfriend" feel. Yes, she should succeed wildly a lot of the time, but she should also fail wildly a lot of the time, and it would be every bit as entertaining. She's the wild card, not the ace.

Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on August 18, 2021, 04:39:16 PM
Margot Robbie has still got it, but I tend to agree with your about the "GM's girlfriend" feel. Yes, she should succeed wildly a lot of the time, but she should also fail wildly a lot of the time, and it would be every bit as entertaining. She's the wild card, not the ace.
The Colossal Screw-ups of Harley Quinn would make a great movie. Focus on all the times things went south, in spectacular ways.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: S'mon on August 20, 2021, 05:57:07 AM
I liked the interactions between IE and JC, but felt that the movie pays too much attention to MR's HQ in a "GM's girlfriend" sort of way after watching interviews.

I thought Idris Elba was a huge upgrade from Will Smith, and his HR Giger helmet was pretty cool.  His ability to unfold a packet of gum into an antitank rifle a la Iron Man 2 was cool looking but preposterous, but at least it was his own thing.

Margot Robbie has still got it, but I tend to agree with your about the "GM's girlfriend" feel. Yes, she should succeed wildly a lot of the time, but she should also fail wildly a lot of the time, and it would be every bit as entertaining. She's the wild card, not the ace.

I loved The Suicide Squad. Classic James Gunn.

The Harley Quinn solo stuff did feel a lot like a private session between GM and GM's Girlfriend - I could just imagine the look on the poor neckbeard's face when she (post-coitus) promptly blows away his poor GM's-Expy character. :D

It's certainly not explicitly anti-woke, and Gunn's politics are clearly Left-Liberal, but he equally clearly hates Deep State Democrats just as much as he hates Gun-Ho Republicans, so I was ok with that. And he's a fan of dank memes, I kept seeing weird stuff and thinking "Wait, is that a reference to ...surely not?!"

The actual plot is a mix of Action Movie themes, notably The Expendables - only done much much much better* - with a bit of Where Eagles Dare. I thought it worked fine for a black comedy, where plausibility takes a back seat to snappy one-liners and groteseque situations.

*As a world-builder nerd I pay attention to stuff like the population figures of the crappy Latin dictatorships and how well they could support the military resources shown, the hordes of fanatical mooks, their hardware etc. The Suicide Squad gave the banana republic's capital city a population in the 'millions'; in The Expendables AIR it was said to be 6,000!
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on August 20, 2021, 07:44:25 AM
Rented the Snake Eyes movie last night. Action scenes are fun, and the acting is fine (although the Baroness seems to struggle at keeping a consistent accent). However, the story features way more magic and monsters than I expected. Sure, they had some of that in the old cartoons, so it's not entirely unprecedented, but it still felt weird.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on August 21, 2021, 11:54:24 PM
I think The Dirty Dozen was the primary movie influence on the Suicide Squad comic book.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on August 22, 2021, 09:56:01 PM
Rented the Snake Eyes movie last night. Action scenes are fun, and the acting is fine (although the Baroness seems to struggle at keeping a consistent accent). However, the story features way more magic and monsters than I expected. Sure, they had some of that in the old cartoons, so it's not entirely unprecedented, but it still felt weird.

I did not like it simply because its A: another damn origin story. B: Snake Eyes without the mask? And talking? Its like making the turtles in TMNT all look different. It rather absolutely misses the point.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on August 23, 2021, 03:28:57 AM
Rented the Snake Eyes movie last night. Action scenes are fun, and the acting is fine (although the Baroness seems to struggle at keeping a consistent accent). However, the story features way more magic and monsters than I expected. Sure, they had some of that in the old cartoons, so it's not entirely unprecedented, but it still felt weird.

I did not like it simply because its A: another damn origin story. B: Snake Eyes without the mask? And talking? Its like making the turtles in TMNT all look different. It rather absolutely misses the point.
I kept.expecting him to get his face and vocal cords messed up before the end of the film, but...nope. That was a letdown.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 23, 2021, 11:59:45 PM
I kept.expecting him to get his face and vocal cords messed up before the end of the film, but...nope. That was a letdown.

The actor probably demanded facetime, or the writers thought you can't be expressive with a character that wears a mask. Not everybody can be cool like Karl Urban.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 24, 2021, 08:14:55 AM
I've read that working in a mask can be genuinely tricky as it requires a certain amount of over-exaggeration so your body language can transmit what your face normally would. It also requires some specific camera work.

Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on August 24, 2021, 08:20:19 AM
I've read that working in a mask can be genuinely tricky as it requires a certain amount of over-exaggeration so your body language can transmit what your face normally would. It also requires some specific camera work.
I wonder if that's similar to the over-exaggeration of facial expressions to replace vocal tone seen in those using sign language? I have a friend that teaches sign, and she says that some people just don't really have the face for it (not expressive enough).
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: hedgehobbit on August 24, 2021, 09:45:19 AM
I've read that working in a mask can be genuinely tricky as it requires a certain amount of over-exaggeration so your body language can transmit what your face normally would. It also requires some specific camera work.

It has worked for characters like Vader, Rorschach, and Deadpool. But for Snake Eyes, part of the appeal of the character is that you don't know what he's thinking or feeling. The producers of the movie could have leaned into that and made Snake Eyes silent through the majority of the film, say infiltrating an enemy compound, and interspersed that with short, targeted flashbacks to explain the character and situation.

But that would have been a risky move. I guess what defines Hollywood today is making the safe choice, but failing anyway.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 24, 2021, 10:05:49 AM
I've read that working in a mask can be genuinely tricky as it requires a certain amount of over-exaggeration so your body language can transmit what your face normally would. It also requires some specific camera work.

It has worked for characters like Vader, Rorschach, and Deadpool. But for Snake Eyes, part of the appeal of the character is that you don't know what he's thinking or feeling. The producers of the movie could have leaned into that and made Snake Eyes silent through the majority of the film, say infiltrating an enemy compound, and interspersed that with short, targeted flashbacks to explain the character and situation.

But that would have been a risky move. I guess what defines Hollywood today is making the safe choice, but failing anyway.
There are ways to emote that don't even require vocalization, let alone have a visible face.

But then, like you said, it would've been risky as well as tricky to pull off.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on August 24, 2021, 10:50:38 AM
I've read that working in a mask can be genuinely tricky as it requires a certain amount of over-exaggeration so your body language can transmit what your face normally would. It also requires some specific camera work.

It has worked for characters like Vader, Rorschach, and Deadpool. But for Snake Eyes, part of the appeal of the character is that you don't know what he's thinking or feeling. The producers of the movie could have leaned into that and made Snake Eyes silent through the majority of the film, say infiltrating an enemy compound, and interspersed that with short, targeted flashbacks to explain the character and situation.

But that would have been a risky move. I guess what defines Hollywood today is making the safe choice, but failing anyway.
Vader might have the most distinctive voice in all of cinema, and Rorschach and Deadpool, in very different ways, aren't far behind. And Deadpool in particular conveys a lot through exaggerated body language.

An interesting approach to Snake Eyes might have been to offload his characterization to the supporting cast. Snake Eyes remains an expressionless cipher, but other characters are brought in to express emotion during pivotal moments, which allows the audience to learn who Snake Eyes is through the reactions of others.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on August 24, 2021, 11:31:47 AM
Deadpool is only kind of wearing a mask, they overlay it with CGI to add in some expression.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on August 24, 2021, 12:37:16 PM
I've read that working in a mask can be genuinely tricky as it requires a certain amount of over-exaggeration so your body language can transmit what your face normally would. It also requires some specific camera work.

It has worked for characters like Vader, Rorschach, and Deadpool. But for Snake Eyes, part of the appeal of the character is that you don't know what he's thinking or feeling. The producers of the movie could have leaned into that and made Snake Eyes silent through the majority of the film, say infiltrating an enemy compound, and interspersed that with short, targeted flashbacks to explain the character and situation.

But that would have been a risky move. I guess what defines Hollywood today is making the safe choice, but failing anyway.
Vader might have the most distinctive voice in all of cinema, and Rorschach and Deadpool, in very different ways, aren't far behind. And Deadpool in particular conveys a lot through exaggerated body language.

An interesting approach to Snake Eyes might have been to offload his characterization to the supporting cast. Snake Eyes remains an expressionless cipher, but other characters are brought in to express emotion during pivotal moments, which allows the audience to learn who Snake Eyes is through the reactions of others.

    I think it can be done.  The Boys amazon series has a character, Black Noir, that I think can convey quite a bit just with body posture and how characters around him act and react to him.  Matter of fact Black Noir is basically a super powered Snake eyes/batman already, so for certain it could be done, especially with a good actor to play off of him.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Godfather Punk on August 24, 2021, 12:39:22 PM
Edward Norton managed to convey a lot of emotion, not only by voice but by his body language in Kingdom of Heaven.
I'm sure if King Baldwin had been a mute, he would have pulled that of too.

But again, talent in front and behind the camera...
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Godfather Punk on August 25, 2021, 04:49:37 PM
Candyman 2021 is a sequel to the 1992 classic.

I loved the opening credits scene. A variation of those from Devil, but more claustrophobic and definitely not for people who suffer from vertigo.
The music paid homage to Glass' themes but was it's own thing.
The story tells a good horror tale with the required spilling of blood, and what's blood for if not for shedding? Beautiful imagery, good acting and script.
I enjoyed this movie.

It also has Peele's fingerprints all over it, if there was any doubt about that, so if that raises your hackles you will find ample opportunity to rant.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 27, 2021, 11:49:54 PM
Watched Seven for the first time with the family.

We came about satisfied with a feeling that this felt like....A deconstruction of deconstructive literature in a way. Its so over the top, but it makes you feel its serious all the way till the end at which point it exposes itself as a farce.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 01, 2021, 01:04:07 PM
https://collider.com/new-the-rocketeer-movie-remake-disney-plus/

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/HsKeDcAKXvA/hqdefault.jpg)
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: hedgehobbit on September 01, 2021, 02:35:34 PM
https://collider.com/new-the-rocketeer-movie-remake-disney-plus/

The race swapping isn't a surprise. But what shocks me is that Disney thinks that some throwaway movie from the 90s is a franchise still has potential to be exploited. It sort of mirrors the MCU in how they are really digging deep in their IP library to come up with anything even remotely interesting to reboot.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on September 01, 2021, 09:55:48 PM
The comics the movie is based on still have a following. Despite the bestoefforts of others to drag it down.

The CGI animated series had the right idea. Pass the rocket on to the next generation. His daughter.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on September 01, 2021, 09:57:07 PM
https://collider.com/new-the-rocketeer-movie-remake-disney-plus/

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/HsKeDcAKXvA/hqdefault.jpg)

Outrage marketing. Its intended to get exactly the above reaction. Make fans scream and that will attract the curious. Some will watch it just to see how bad it is. Profit.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: hedgehobbit on September 01, 2021, 11:52:01 PM
The CGI animated series had the right idea. Pass the rocket on to the next generation. His daughter.

Ok. The movie makes more sense now. They already sex-swapped the character so they had no choice but to do a race-swap.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 02, 2021, 10:35:54 AM
https://collider.com/new-the-rocketeer-movie-remake-disney-plus/

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/HsKeDcAKXvA/hqdefault.jpg)

Outrage marketing. Its intended to get exactly the above reaction. Make fans scream and that will attract the curious. Some will watch it just to see how bad it is. Profit.

Making a whole movie around that idea seems like a big investment for a few curiosity watches.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: David Johansen on September 05, 2021, 01:09:46 AM
It's one of those movies that should never be remade.  I could see sequels but set in and around the WWII period.  It's a period piece and that's very important to its appeal.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on September 06, 2021, 06:24:41 PM
To the surprise of literally everyone, Shang-Chi is expected to bring in $90 million over the 4-day Labor Day weekend, literally tripling the previous Labor Day Weekend record ($30 million for Halloween in 2007).

https://news.yahoo.com/shang-chi-blows-past-labor-192430392.html
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on September 06, 2021, 08:27:55 PM
To the surprise of literally everyone, Shang-Chi is expected to bring in $90 million over the 4-day Labor Day weekend, literally tripling the previous Labor Day Weekend record ($30 million for Halloween in 2007).

https://news.yahoo.com/shang-chi-blows-past-labor-192430392.html
I liked it a lot. Action and humor were both good, and Awkwafina wasn't overdoing the goofiness for laughs (I haven't really liked any of her other works). Effects were nice, and I actually preferred this version of the not-Mandarin and his rings (bracelets) better than the old comic version.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: GriswaldTerrastone on September 06, 2021, 10:10:10 PM
For me 1981's "Dragonslayer" remains an AD&D-style classic.

"Excalibur" and the animated 1970's "The Hobbit" were inspiring, too.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on September 07, 2021, 12:05:01 PM
To the surprise of literally everyone, Shang-Chi is expected to bring in $90 million over the 4-day Labor Day weekend, literally tripling the previous Labor Day Weekend record ($30 million for Halloween in 2007).

https://news.yahoo.com/shang-chi-blows-past-labor-192430392.html
I liked it a lot. Action and humor were both good, and Awkwafina wasn't overdoing the goofiness for laughs (I haven't really liked any of her other works). Effects were nice, and I actually preferred this version of the not-Mandarin and his rings (bracelets) better than the old comic version.
Critical Drinker does a good job demolishing the plot and characters, and says the CGI toward the end is distractingly fake looking, but thinks there are some good fight scenes, and a good story underneath with an opportunity for strong character building, especially between Shang-Chi and the replacement for his canceled father Fu Manchu, but it ends up scattered and fragmented.

Spoilers ahoy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLJGVikolJs
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: BoxCrayonTales on September 07, 2021, 05:07:45 PM
I think they're really going to run the franchise into the ground with "Phase 4".

I sure hope so. Because that will give me hope that modern audiences can get sick of SOMETHING.

It took a while but looks like the mainstream have gotten tired of zombie movies and series finally as their interminable proliferation in everything hit saturation years ago.

We'll see the same with superhero shows just like the last two waves.
What I found most frustrating about the zombie trend was how derivative it was. There are basically only three types of zombies: slow zombies, fast zombies, and talky zombies.

All Flesh Must Be Eaten devised numerous fascinating takes on zombies in the 2000s. Without any exaggeration, it's more creative than the entire rest of the zombie genre combined.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on September 07, 2021, 05:18:12 PM
All Flesh Must Be Eaten devised numerous fascinating takes on zombies in the 2000s. Without any exaggeration, it's more creative than the entire rest of the zombie genre combined.
I felt they where more gimmicky then anything. Zombies are scariest as a disease or a plague. Everything else is a gimmick.

'Zombies BUT IN VEE  AARR!!!'
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 10, 2021, 05:13:11 PM
The Matrix, Ressurection announced.

https://www.polygon.com/22640030/matrix-4-trailer-resurrections-release-date

Hey guys, remember that movie about a dude stuck in a simulation? Let's do it again!

What's left to say about the Matrix? I feel like they covered the topic in the original three films. I didn't have the hate for the sequels that other fans seem to have had.
But I'm failing to have any enthusiasm for this announcement.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on September 10, 2021, 05:56:23 PM
Hey guys, remember that movie about a dude stuck in a simulation? Let's do it again!

Its a meta commentary on the nature of repetative sequels because he gets stuck in a simulation - AGAIN. ;P
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 10, 2021, 06:48:27 PM
Hey guys, remember that movie about a dude stuck in a simulation? Let's do it again!

Its a meta commentary on the nature of repetative sequels because he gets stuck in a simulation - AGAIN. ;P

We can only hope the movie is that self-aware.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on September 13, 2021, 08:20:50 AM
Sadly, my local movie theater has closed down. This was not unexpected, the entire mini mall it was in has been scheduled for demolition for some time. Unfortunately the multi-plex that was supposed to replace it has not yet opened, though construction should have been completed some time ago.

I'll miss the place, though. I'd been going there since the 1980s, and tickets were a bargain.

I probably won't see Black Widow or Shang-chi until I reactivate my Disney+ at the end of the year for Book of Boba Fett.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on September 14, 2021, 09:56:47 AM
The CGI animated series had the right idea. Pass the rocket on to the next generation. His daughter.

Ok. The movie makes more sense now. They already sex-swapped the character so they had no choice but to do a race-swap.

Well not so much Sex swap as just passing the mantle on to the kid. Thats actually a recurring thing in comics though dont think it happened in the actual Rocketeer Comics though there was a backup installment that would have fit right in with the CGI series. Bunch of young girls playing Space Ranger.

But this new so-called Rocketeer? Nah. Its the same ol same ol woke blackfacing everything.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on September 14, 2021, 10:00:31 AM
Making a whole movie around that idea seems like a big investment for a few curiosity watches.

Marketing keeps pushing that this is the road to riches. And companies across the board keep listening. Partially because it does work. But the loss usually far outweighs the gain.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on September 14, 2021, 10:04:44 AM
The Matrix, Ressurection announced.

https://www.polygon.com/22640030/matrix-4-trailer-resurrections-release-date

Hey guys, remember that movie about a dude stuck in a simulation? Let's do it again!

What's left to say about the Matrix? I feel like they covered the topic in the original three films. I didn't have the hate for the sequels that other fans seem to have had.
But I'm failing to have any enthusiasm for this announcement.

Plot cant go any weirder than what they did with the MMO.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on September 15, 2021, 12:14:04 PM
The Matrix, Ressurection announced.

https://www.polygon.com/22640030/matrix-4-trailer-resurrections-release-date

Hey guys, remember that movie about a dude stuck in a simulation? Let's do it again!

What's left to say about the Matrix? I feel like they covered the topic in the original three films. I didn't have the hate for the sequels that other fans seem to have had.
But I'm failing to have any enthusiasm for this announcement.

I think the issue with the sequels wasn't that they were bad (they were entertaining). It's that the first movie was so good, and so complete on its own, that the sequels kind of lowered the quality of the first one by existing. Normally I don't let bad sequels affect my appreciation of a part 1. But I do have to admit, found it hard not to allow the sequels to color my opinion. I also think while the first one definitely had these concepts and ideas behind it, the sequels might have gotten lost in the weeds delving into those ideas.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on September 15, 2021, 01:25:48 PM
The Matrix, Ressurection announced.

https://www.polygon.com/22640030/matrix-4-trailer-resurrections-release-date

Hey guys, remember that movie about a dude stuck in a simulation? Let's do it again!

What's left to say about the Matrix? I feel like they covered the topic in the original three films. I didn't have the hate for the sequels that other fans seem to have had.
But I'm failing to have any enthusiasm for this announcement.

I think the issue with the sequels wasn't that they were bad (they were entertaining). It's that the first movie was so good, and so complete on its own, that the sequels kind of lowered the quality of the first one by existing. Normally I don't let bad sequels affect my appreciation of a part 1. But I do have to admit, found it hard not to allow the sequels to color my opinion. I also think while the first one definitely had these concepts and ideas behind it, the sequels might have gotten lost in the weeds delving into those ideas.

  I thought they were bad, at least in a story telling (writing) context.   It felt, while watching them, like the work of people who had a fully finished complete product in the first movie, and were prodded to do more movies because of the huge success of the first movie.  Sort of like they were just making shit up as they went along instead of having a specific game plan for a trilogy from the beginning.   It led to a good deal of shark jumping, shitting on some of your established characters, and well, a bit of a hot mess.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Bedrockbrendan on September 15, 2021, 01:45:10 PM
The Matrix, Ressurection announced.

https://www.polygon.com/22640030/matrix-4-trailer-resurrections-release-date

Hey guys, remember that movie about a dude stuck in a simulation? Let's do it again!

What's left to say about the Matrix? I feel like they covered the topic in the original three films. I didn't have the hate for the sequels that other fans seem to have had.
But I'm failing to have any enthusiasm for this announcement.

I think the issue with the sequels wasn't that they were bad (they were entertaining). It's that the first movie was so good, and so complete on its own, that the sequels kind of lowered the quality of the first one by existing. Normally I don't let bad sequels affect my appreciation of a part 1. But I do have to admit, found it hard not to allow the sequels to color my opinion. I also think while the first one definitely had these concepts and ideas behind it, the sequels might have gotten lost in the weeds delving into those ideas.

  I thought they were bad, at least in a story telling (writing) context.   It felt, while watching them, like the work of people who had a fully finished complete product in the first movie, and were prodded to do more movies because of the huge success of the first movie.  Sort of like they were just making shit up as they went along instead of having a specific game plan for a trilogy from the beginning.   It led to a good deal of shark jumping, shitting on some of your established characters, and well, a bit of a hot mess.

The problem is the first movie didn't need a sequel at all. They shouldn't have made sequels. Period. You have a perfect movie. Anything more will muck it up. It functioned as a contained story, and any expansion of that world was only going to weaken it. I think the sequels were average movies. They definitely had storytelling problems, many average films do. But following on the heels of the matrix, the contrast was pretty severe. My reaction to them was very negative. But I was comparing them to a film that blew me away (and the sequels felt more like some kind of cyberpunk world of darkness fan fiction). I also do think they let their big ideas and concepts take over the story too much (because there are also certainly weird choices in those movies). I just feel if they were released individually, they'd be entertaining enough but pretty forgettable, not bad per se.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: oggsmash on September 15, 2021, 03:00:12 PM
The Matrix, Ressurection announced.

https://www.polygon.com/22640030/matrix-4-trailer-resurrections-release-date

Hey guys, remember that movie about a dude stuck in a simulation? Let's do it again!

What's left to say about the Matrix? I feel like they covered the topic in the original three films. I didn't have the hate for the sequels that other fans seem to have had.
But I'm failing to have any enthusiasm for this announcement.

I think the issue with the sequels wasn't that they were bad (they were entertaining). It's that the first movie was so good, and so complete on its own, that the sequels kind of lowered the quality of the first one by existing. Normally I don't let bad sequels affect my appreciation of a part 1. But I do have to admit, found it hard not to allow the sequels to color my opinion. I also think while the first one definitely had these concepts and ideas behind it, the sequels might have gotten lost in the weeds delving into those ideas.

  I thought they were bad, at least in a story telling (writing) context.   It felt, while watching them, like the work of people who had a fully finished complete product in the first movie, and were prodded to do more movies because of the huge success of the first movie.  Sort of like they were just making shit up as they went along instead of having a specific game plan for a trilogy from the beginning.   It led to a good deal of shark jumping, shitting on some of your established characters, and well, a bit of a hot mess.

The problem is the first movie didn't need a sequel at all. They shouldn't have made sequels. Period. You have a perfect movie. Anything more will muck it up. It functioned as a contained story, and any expansion of that world was only going to weaken it. I think the sequels were average movies. They definitely had storytelling problems, many average films do. But following on the heels of the matrix, the contrast was pretty severe. My reaction to them was very negative. But I was comparing them to a film that blew me away (and the sequels felt more like some kind of cyberpunk world of darkness fan fiction). I also do think they let their big ideas and concepts take over the story too much (because there are also certainly weird choices in those movies). I just feel if they were released individually, they'd be entertaining enough but pretty forgettable, not bad per se.

 yes.  When the first movie leaves with the main character as essentially a god....there is nothing else to say.  People's imagination will tell a better story than trying to create challenges for the now OP main character.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on October 11, 2021, 12:51:48 AM
Amazon Prime tops Netflix, Hulu, and all the others when it comes to some truly dismal, low budget movies.

Two I just ran across are Trump vs. the Illuminati (2.36/10 on IMDB) about a Chinese clone of the 45th president traveling into the future to fight the Illuminati in space and in hell; and Righteous Villains (4.9/10, many reviews seem to be shills), which seems to be a critique of Woke culture with Satan, and also the Illuminati.

I'm not sure I dare.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 11, 2021, 08:58:46 AM
Amazon Prime tops Netflix, Hulu, and all the others when it comes to some truly dismal, low budget movies.

Two I just ran across are Trump vs. the Illuminati (2.36/10 on IMDB) about a Chinese clone of the 45th president traveling into the future to fight the Illuminati in space and in hell; and Righteous Villains (4.9/10, many reviews seem to be shills), which seems to be a critique of Woke culture with Satan, and also the Illuminati.

I'm not sure I dare.
Did they hire some writers from SyFy? The original SyFy movies were (are) notorious for being on a par with half-assed Asylum Studios mockbusters.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on October 11, 2021, 09:50:39 AM
Amazon Prime tops Netflix, Hulu, and all the others when it comes to some truly dismal, low budget movies.

Two I just ran across are Trump vs. the Illuminati (2.36/10 on IMDB) about a Chinese clone of the 45th president traveling into the future to fight the Illuminati in space and in hell; and Righteous Villains (4.9/10, many reviews seem to be shills), which seems to be a critique of Woke culture with Satan, and also the Illuminati.

I'm not sure I dare.
Did they hire some writers from SyFy? The original SyFy movies were (are) notorious for being on a par with half-assed Asylum Studios mockbusters.
Compared to a lot of the movies on Amazon Prime, SyFy and Asylum movies are Citizen Kane. I've watch a few that looked like they were shot with handheld cameras in someone's basement, and not in the cinema verite sense. Though based on the trailer, the Villains movie looks more like the low end of Asylum. Speaking of:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMU_2ZaV3Hk

And I found the Trump v. Illuminati trailer as well:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kups2nlK54U
I don't even.

I think there are a lot of people making movies that nobody ever sees.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 11, 2021, 10:24:35 AM
It makes you wonder how they're paying for it.

I grant that moviemaking has been getting less expensive for a while now -- you can get excellent picture quality with a freaking smartphone, and a copy of Adobe Aftereffects isn't gonna set you back much.

But still. I'd sooner watch some Dust shorts on Youtube than some of that Amazon Prime crap :)
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on October 11, 2021, 10:27:11 AM
Amazon Prime tops Netflix, Hulu, and all the others when it comes to some truly dismal, low budget movies.

Two I just ran across are Trump vs. the Illuminati (2.36/10 on IMDB) about a Chinese clone of the 45th president traveling into the future to fight the Illuminati in space and in hell; and Righteous Villains (4.9/10, many reviews seem to be shills), which seems to be a critique of Woke culture with Satan, and also the Illuminati.

I'm not sure I dare.
Did they hire some writers from SyFy? The original SyFy movies were (are) notorious for being on a par with half-assed Asylum Studios mockbusters.

Speaking of! Anyone want to watch the new Dune movie?



Quote
Compared to a lot of the movies on Amazon Prime, SyFy and Asylum movies are Citizen Kane. I've watch a few that looked like they were shot with handheld cameras in someone's basement, and not in the cinema verite sense. Though based on the trailer, the Villains movie looks more like the low end of Asylum. Speaking of:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMU_2ZaV3Hk

And I found the Trump v. Illuminati trailer as well:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kups2nlK54U
I don't even.

I think there are a lot of people making movies that nobody ever sees.

That Trump v. the Illuminati sounds crazy enough to be fun. The trailer looks like a bunch of terrible CGI though.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 11, 2021, 10:34:14 AM
Dear God. They actually got Sean Young in that?

That looks like a bad Tremors-in-Space clone. Jeez. Someone get Burt Gummer, STAT!
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on October 11, 2021, 10:53:31 AM
Dear God. They actually got Sean Young in that?
I think it's a step up for her, at this point.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Banjo Destructo on October 11, 2021, 01:13:06 PM
Amazon Prime tops Netflix, Hulu, and all the others when it comes to some truly dismal, low budget movies.

Two I just ran across are Trump vs. the Illuminati (2.36/10 on IMDB) about a Chinese clone of the 45th president traveling into the future to fight the Illuminati in space and in hell; and Righteous Villains (4.9/10, many reviews seem to be shills), which seems to be a critique of Woke culture with Satan, and also the Illuminati.

I'm not sure I dare.

You could probably make some hilarious movies with these scripts/ideas basically being exactly the same if the right people were in charge
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: hedgehobbit on October 12, 2021, 10:57:24 AM
Amazon Prime tops Netflix, Hulu, and all the others when it comes to some truly dismal, low budget movies.

Amazon does have lots of garbage, but at least it also has the ability to hide movies that you know you'll never watch. Both Disney+ and HBO Max desperately need this feature. Netflix lets you block shows but only for accounts designated as "Kids".
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on October 15, 2021, 11:48:09 PM
Did they hire some writers from SyFy? The original SyFy movies were (are) notorious for being on a par with half-assed Asylum Studios mockbusters.
[/quote]

Thats because a huge chunk of SyFy movies ARE from Asylum.  8)
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 17, 2021, 01:03:15 PM
Did they hire some writers from SyFy? The original SyFy movies were (are) notorious for being on a par with half-assed Asylum Studios mockbusters.

Thats because a huge chunk of SyFy movies ARE from Asylum.  8)
I am shocked. Shocked! Well, not that shocked. :)
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on October 17, 2021, 10:45:52 PM
Some of Asylum's productions arent too bad. The rest... well...

Say what you will though. They are prolific. Over 200 movies so far.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 18, 2021, 08:07:49 AM
Some of Asylum's productions arent too bad. The rest... well...

Say what you will though. They are prolific. Over 200 movies so far.
Supposedly, their mockbuster of Battleship was actually better than the 'real' movie. Granted, that's an amazingly low bar to clear.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on October 18, 2021, 12:21:45 PM
Some of Asylum's productions arent too bad. The rest... well...

Say what you will though. They are prolific. Over 200 movies so far.
Supposedly, their mockbuster of Battleship was actually better than the 'real' movie. Granted, that's an amazingly low bar to clear.

I liked Battleship.  :- I mean, it was like a Michael Bay movie but 100X less annoying and stupid.
Maybe that is a low bar...
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on October 18, 2021, 12:40:22 PM
Some of Asylum's productions arent too bad. The rest... well...

Say what you will though. They are prolific. Over 200 movies so far.
Supposedly, their mockbuster of Battleship was actually better than the 'real' movie. Granted, that's an amazingly low bar to clear.

I liked Battleship.  :- I mean, it was like a Michael Bay movie but 100X less annoying and stupid.
Maybe that is a low bar...
I liked it, too. Battleship is a stupid movie, but it's kind of fun.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: tenbones on October 19, 2021, 12:05:47 PM
Just saw that movie Nobody.

https://youtu.be/wZti8QKBWPo

Fun movie. I hope this character is in the same universe as John Wick.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Mind Crime on October 20, 2021, 10:58:40 PM
I've been on an 80's kick, hunting down movies I haven't seen in decades. Recently watched "My Science Project" and "The Ice Pirates". The robots in that were fantastic, funnier than the actors most times.. "The Party Animal" for pure juvenile comedy. And one of my all time favorites "Night Patrol". Dumb offensive comedy. Maybe Pat Morita's finest performance.  :D
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 21, 2021, 08:13:09 AM
I've been on an 80's kick, hunting down movies I haven't seen in decades. Recently watched "My Science Project" and "The Ice Pirates". The robots in that were fantastic, funnier than the actors most times.. "The Party Animal" for pure juvenile comedy. And one of my all time favorites "Night Patrol". Dumb offensive comedy. Maybe Pat Morita's finest performance.  :D
Ahahaha, 'My Science Project' was such a weird little gem. I enjoyed the hell out of it as a kid.

"Sherman, what's he sayin'?"
"...He's going to kick our ass."
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Mind Crime on October 21, 2021, 06:36:15 PM
I've been on an 80's kick, hunting down movies I haven't seen in decades. Recently watched "My Science Project" and "The Ice Pirates". The robots in that were fantastic, funnier than the actors most times.. "The Party Animal" for pure juvenile comedy. And one of my all time favorites "Night Patrol". Dumb offensive comedy. Maybe Pat Morita's finest performance.  :D
Ahahaha, 'My Science Project' was such a weird little gem. I enjoyed the hell out of it as a kid.

"Sherman, what's he sayin'?"
"...He's going to kick our ass."

So many fun unknown movies like this. One reason I lurk threads like these, find those gems I haven't seen or barely remember.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on October 27, 2021, 11:58:20 AM
Lightyear Trailer



A fictional toy based on a fictional sci fi franchise, presented as a real movie? My brain hurts. Looks great though.

*Edit* I hit edit instead of adding a new post and effed up this one. Durp.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 02, 2021, 01:48:15 AM
The Spine of Night



I just heard about this tonight. It's a blatant homage (rip off?) of Ralph Bakshi style rotoscoping, and crazy 80's animation like Heavy Metal.

Just watching the trailer, the crisp line art contrasts so badly with the backgrounds. But the story itself looks crazy gonzo good.

I might have to watch this after I get some money in the ole checkin' account.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Eirikrautha on November 02, 2021, 06:42:56 AM
The Spine of Night



I just heard about this tonight. It's a blatant homage (rip off?) of Ralph Bakshi style rotoscoping, and crazy 80's animation like Heavy Metal.

Just watching the trailer, the crisp line art contrasts so badly with the backgrounds. But the story itself looks crazy gonzo good.

I might have to watch this after I get some money in the ole checkin' account.

Poor innocent natives, slaughtered for no reason by white men, fight back using their native powers (which are far superior to the white man's, even though he is somehow oppressing them).  And the female protagonist (who seems to defeat those white men in combat).  Oh, and Patton Oswald.  This is going to be woke trash.  Don't insult Heavy Metal by invoking it here (nor its truly legitimate female protagonist).
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on November 05, 2021, 06:11:37 AM
Some of Asylum's productions arent too bad. The rest... well...

Say what you will though. They are prolific. Over 200 movies so far.
Supposedly, their mockbuster of Battleship was actually better than the 'real' movie. Granted, that's an amazingly low bar to clear.

I liked Battleship.  :- I mean, it was like a Michael Bay movie but 100X less annoying and stupid.
Maybe that is a low bar...
I liked it, too. Battleship is a stupid movie, but it's kind of fun.

Battleship was one of those oddballs where executive meddling helped derail it. Also Hasbro was wanting a die in with their Unit-E concept and the Space Battleship board game. None of which you see in the movie really.

Overall its a muddled mess with a few interesting bits lost in the morass.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on November 05, 2021, 06:20:40 AM
Not sure if mentioned this one before. But before my accident came across an interesting little movie called Train Quest. Though it does not say in the credits. This is obviously either a Full Moon or their kids line Moonbeam movie.

Basically a model train fan gets a job at a strange train shop. But ends up shrunken down into the train diorama and racing the clock to escape before he gradually turns into a mini figure. Some nice effects too. Especially the figure people.

Seems like probably one of Full Moons last movies?
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Trond on November 07, 2021, 12:09:54 AM
My wife and a friend wanted to see eternals so we went…..

Holy shit that was bad. A lot of the jokes didn’t work. Acting was some of the worst I’ve seen in a superhero movie. The plot was a plot hole.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on November 07, 2021, 01:02:25 AM
My wife and a friend wanted to see eternals so we went…..

Holy shit that was bad. A lot of the jokes didn’t work. Acting was some of the worst I’ve seen in a superhero movie. The plot was a plot hole.
I heard a rumor that the straight white make eternal is made into the villain of the movie. Is that true?
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on November 07, 2021, 01:09:08 AM
My wife and a friend wanted to see eternals so we went…..

Holy shit that was bad. A lot of the jokes didn’t work. Acting was some of the worst I’ve seen in a superhero movie. The plot was a plot hole.

Saw the trailer. Does not feel at all like the Eternals from the comics so yet another "in name only" thing.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Godfather Punk on November 07, 2021, 07:54:15 AM
This was the first Marvel movie where I actually thought about leaving the cinema. It was 2h37 and it felt every minute like it.
(No time to die was about that runtime too, but al least there was some spectacle on the screen there, even if it was only to deconstruct demolish the 007 franchise).

Long, tedious, boring, with talk scenes that were either repetitive or so cliché I actually yawned, and when there was a fight scene it felt like any other cgi fight of the past decade.
And you have Rob Stark and Jonn Snow both wooing a woman named Cersi. I shit you not.

I'm a fan of Salma Hayek, but here her talent was wasted. And Jolie... was in there too somewhere.
The rest of the cast were a bunch of (to me) lesser known 'stars' that recite their bland lines
(Ma Dong-seok was good in Train to Busan but I don't know him from anything else;
Kumail Nanjiani I don't know; his character was always halfway between entertaining and then again failed jokes (and Karun is a weak copy of Happy);
Lia McHugh is young, so I'm going to cut her some slack, but again her performance felt forced:
Barry Keoghan specialises in not-emoting; I completely forgot he was in Dunkirk, disliked him in Green Knight, and found he was good but still the weakest actor in Chernobyl);
Lauren Ridloff is deaf so she gets to play a deaf character; we can't have actors playing against type or representing minorities they're not really part of; until the final part I even forgot she was in the intro;
Gemma Chan I should know from other roles she played, but here I didn't feel she was the right actress to play the lead role;
and Brian Tyree Henry also disappears from the movie after the first act, only to return for the finale; not sure if he represents a minority he's part of in real life).

According to some YouTube commenters this is a deep, meaningful movie with lots of symbolism, so I'm probably a rube who doesn't get it. Or just maybe those edgy artist should try and do their own thing and keep it out of our action blockbusters.

Ok, on a positive note, some of the visuals were impressive (Arishem rising). But the rest looked like an enhanced level from Prince of Persia or taken from Gods of Egypt or any other Marvel City Mayhem movie.

----

Also, to get rid of the bad taste, I just watched Free Fire  8)
And though it has Brie Larson in it, and though it was just a 90 minute shoot'em-up in one location, I enjoyed it very much.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Trond on November 07, 2021, 09:55:35 AM
This was the first Marvel movie where I actually thought about leaving the cinema. It was 2h37 and it felt every minute like it.
(No time to die was about that runtime too, but al least there was some spectacle on the screen there, even if it was only to deconstruct demolish the 007 franchise).

Long, tedious, boring, with talk scenes that were either repetitive or so cliché I actually yawned, and when there was a fight scene it felt like any other cgi fight of the past decade.
And you have Rob Stark and Jonn Snow both wooing a woman named Cersi. I shit you not.

I'm a fan of Salma Hayek, but here her talent was wasted. And Jolie... was in there too somewhere.
The rest of the cast were a bunch of (to me) lesser known 'stars' that recite their bland lines
(Ma Dong-seok was good in Train to Busan but I don't know him from anything else;
Kumail Nanjiani I don't know; his character was always halfway between entertaining and then again failed jokes (and Karun is a weak copy of Happy);
Lia McHugh is young, so I'm going to cut her some slack, but again her performance felt forced:
Barry Keoghan specialises in not-emoting; I completely forgot he was in Dunkirk, disliked him in Green Knight, and found he was good but still the weakest actor in Chernobyl);
Lauren Ridloff is deaf so she gets to play a deaf character; we can't have actors playing against type or representing minorities they're not really part of; until the final part I even forgot she was in the intro;
Gemma Chan I should know from other roles she played, but here I didn't feel she was the right actress to play the lead role;
and Brian Tyree Henry also disappears from the movie after the first act, only to return for the finale; not sure if he represents a minority he's part of in real life).

According to some YouTube commenters this is a deep, meaningful movie with lots of symbolism, so I'm probably a rube who doesn't get it. Or just maybe those edgy artist should try and do their own thing and keep it out of our action blockbusters.

Ok, on a positive note, some of the visuals were impressive (Arishem rising). But the rest looked like an enhanced level from Prince of Persia or taken from Gods of Egypt or any other Marvel City Mayhem movie.

----

Also, to get rid of the bad taste, I just watched Free Fire  8)
And though it has Brie Larson in it, and though it was just a 90 minute shoot'em-up in one location, I enjoyed it very much.

I agree, and I’m also a Salma Hayek fan. . The only “deep” thing about it is that it sort of tried to create some moral ambiguity. Although the right thing to do is still so obvious that it really isn’t very ambiguous.

As an added cherry on top it takes several heavy-handed turns into SJW territory; we learn that the ancient Babylonians were nice, the Aztecs were nice, but the conquistadors were bad, and Americans during WWII were bad.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on November 10, 2021, 09:19:10 PM
I saw Eternals. It was not good. Definitely on the bottom of MCU films,  but it's still not a The Last Jedi level of bad.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Aglondir on November 10, 2021, 09:31:44 PM
I don’t watch movies anymore. I watch the Pitch Meeting on You Tube. Those two guys are hilarious.



Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Thornhammer on November 19, 2021, 10:37:42 AM
Ghostbusters: Afterlife was not what I was expecting, but it was really good and was what it needed to be - passing the baton to the next generation. The kids are really the focus, the OG team is in it just enough.

Harold Ramis' passing hit me pretty hard back when it happened, as silly as that sounds, and this movie was a perfect way to say goodbye to an old friend.

There is a mid-credit scene that is pretty good (when you see a big name and think "hold on, I didn't see this person" just wait about three seconds), and a post-credit scene with Winston that cannot be missed.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 19, 2021, 10:46:35 PM
Cowboy Bebop Live action series on Netflix.

Just watch the original series.

I watched the first episode, and it's a shot for shot remake of the anime. Things that work in animation look really bad in live action. And since it's the same story, you're not missing anything.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on November 19, 2021, 11:58:07 PM
Cowboy Bebop Live action series on Netflix.

Just watch the original series.

I watched the first episode, and it's a shot for shot remake of the anime. Things that work in animation look really bad in live action. And since it's the same story, you're not missing anything.
If one isn't a fan of the anime medium and have never seen the original anime, is the live action worth watching for the story/characters? I don't really care if the effects are crap--afterall, I watch movies on Amazon Prime.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Thornhammer on November 21, 2021, 12:16:19 PM
If one isn't a fan of the anime medium and have never seen the original anime, is the live action worth watching for the story/characters? I don't really care if the effects are crap--afterall, I watch movies on Amazon Prime.

Uncertain. There is something nebulously "off" about it. Enough that I pick up on it, not enough that I can flat out say what it is.

The first episode is pretty much a straight up port of the first episode of the anime, with some changes here and there (most notably the introduction of Faye), so that will give you a pretty good idea of what to expect.


Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 21, 2021, 01:55:16 PM
If one isn't a fan of the anime medium and have never seen the original anime, is the live action worth watching for the story/characters? I don't really care if the effects are crap--afterall, I watch movies on Amazon Prime.

Uncertain. There is something nebulously "off" about it. Enough that I pick up on it, not enough that I can flat out say what it is.

For me, it looked like one of the Disney live action remakes of their animated movies. It's funky to see them not just make a live action version, but to attempt to make a live action version that looks somewhat like the animation. Usually involving simple costumes with exaggerated colors and accessories.

(https://www.etonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/max_970x546/public/images/2020-12/batb_gaston-lefou_1280.jpg?h=c673cd1c&itok=TxoSbIn8)

(https://cdn.pastemagazine.com/www/articles/2021/11/12/cowboy-bebop-netflix-main3.jpg)
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 21, 2021, 09:18:52 PM
Well, looks like the show goes off the rails later in the season.

https://www.cbr.com/cowboy-bebop-changes-overarching-antagonist/

Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Thornhammer on November 22, 2021, 12:04:00 PM
It's funky to see them not just make a live action version, but to attempt to make a live action version that looks somewhat like the animation. Usually involving simple costumes with exaggerated colors and accessories.

Yep, I think that nails down a fair chunk of what was bothering me.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Lurkndog on November 22, 2021, 12:19:34 PM
The Netflix Cowboy Bebop is a good example of how something can be reasonably faithful, and clearly expensive to make, and still fail hard.

They go to great lengths to replicate the costuming, mecha designs, and atmosphere of the original, and they keep the soundtrack, which is one of the all-time great anime soundtracks.

But the costumes look like cosplay, the lighting makes everything look cheap, the depth of field effects and color balance of the CGI makes it look like model shots and not match the live action bits, and the sound mix is off, so the soundtrack sounds muted and tinny instead of kicking things up to 11 like it does in the anime.

Also Spike is suddenly Asian, and Faye suddenly isn't. Also, Faye is basically Girl Spike now, when she was her own character in the anime.

Pro Tip: if you haven't watched the original anime, you need to. Even if you don't like anime, you will probably like this. It has a great English dub, arguably as good or better than the Japanese, so you won't have to read subtitles. Great music, great animation, and just a whole lot of fun.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on November 22, 2021, 12:47:22 PM
The Netflix Cowboy Bebop is a good example of how something can be reasonably faithful, and clearly expensive to make, and still fail hard.

They go to great lengths to replicate the costuming, mecha designs, and atmosphere of the original, and they keep the soundtrack, which is one of the all-time great anime soundtracks.

But the costumes look like cosplay, the lighting makes everything look cheap, the depth of field effects and color balance of the CGI makes it look like model shots and not match the live action bits, and the sound mix is off, so the soundtrack sounds muted and tinny instead of kicking things up to 11 like it does in the anime.

Also Spike is suddenly Asian, and Faye suddenly isn't. Also, Faye is basically Girl Spike now, when she was her own character in the anime.

Pro Tip: if you haven't watched the original anime, you need to. Even if you don't like anime, you will probably like this. It has a great English dub, arguably as good or better than the Japanese, so you won't have to read subtitles. Great music, great animation, and just a whole lot of fun.
How many of your criticisms would matter to someone that never watched the original anime? Costuming, lighting, and CGI still would, but "suddenly Asian/not-Asian" probably makes no difference whatsoever. Soundtrack probably matters to most, but I personally don't care (soundtracks are not something I care for/about).
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 22, 2021, 01:29:55 PM
Pro Tip: if you haven't watched the original anime, you need to. Even if you don't like anime, you will probably like this. It has a great English dub, arguably as good or better than the Japanese, so you won't have to read subtitles. Great music, great animation, and just a whole lot of fun.

It's a very "western" (pun not intended?) style of show, which I think makes it accessible to non-anime-fan viewers.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on November 22, 2021, 01:32:48 PM
It's funky to see them not just make a live action version, but to attempt to make a live action version that looks somewhat like the animation.

As an animator, I hope every person that goes see these live action adaptations suffers a non-life threadining but extremly painful condition on the anniversary of the day they went to see these movies every year for the rest of their lives. If they watch that film at home, they suffer the issue that day as well.
I can not get upset at the general public for allot of stupidiy, but their general disrespect for animation makes my blood boil.
People going to see these fifth rate adaptations is the reason why their not making more Animated things.

If you went to see this, unless it was under the threat of some really bad thing, I hope you stub your toe.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Pat on November 22, 2021, 02:22:59 PM
The Netflix Cowboy Bebop is a good example of how something can be reasonably faithful, and clearly expensive to make, and still fail hard.

They go to great lengths to replicate the costuming, mecha designs, and atmosphere of the original, and they keep the soundtrack, which is one of the all-time great anime soundtracks.

But the costumes look like cosplay, the lighting makes everything look cheap, the depth of field effects and color balance of the CGI makes it look like model shots and not match the live action bits, and the sound mix is off, so the soundtrack sounds muted and tinny instead of kicking things up to 11 like it does in the anime.

Also Spike is suddenly Asian, and Faye suddenly isn't. Also, Faye is basically Girl Spike now, when she was her own character in the anime.

Pro Tip: if you haven't watched the original anime, you need to. Even if you don't like anime, you will probably like this. It has a great English dub, arguably as good or better than the Japanese, so you won't have to read subtitles. Great music, great animation, and just a whole lot of fun.
How many of your criticisms would matter to someone that never watched the original anime? Costuming, lighting, and CGI still would, but "suddenly Asian/not-Asian" probably makes no difference whatsoever. Soundtrack probably matters to most, but I personally don't care (soundtracks are not something I care for/about).
I haven't seen it, and haven't been paying any real attention. But the costumes in the pic above look really goofy, so goofy it would be hard to take the show seriously. It feels like something that might appeal to kids into the Power Rangers, but it's going to a major clash for a show like Cowboy Bepop that's heavily focused on existential ennui.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 22, 2021, 03:47:07 PM
It's funky to see them not just make a live action version, but to attempt to make a live action version that looks somewhat like the animation.

As an animator, I hope every person that goes see these live action adaptations suffers a non-life threadining but extremly painful condition on the anniversary of the day they went to see these movies every year for the rest of their lives. If they watch that film at home, they suffer the issue that day as well.
I can not get upset at the general public for allot of stupidiy, but their general disrespect for animation makes my blood boil.
People going to see these fifth rate adaptations is the reason why their not making more Animated things.

If you went to see this, unless it was under the threat of some really bad thing, I hope you stub your toe.

The only Disney live action adaptation I've watched was Aladdin. All through it I was thinking they could tell a different type of story. One better suited to live action. The idea of the Genie living a mortal life was relly cool, and IMO the best part. The rest was a slavish recreation of a story I'd already seen.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on November 23, 2021, 10:09:30 AM
The only Disney live action adaptation I've watched was Aladdin. All through it I was thinking they could tell a different type of story. One better suited to live action.

Then why was it an adaptation of the ANIMATED MUSICAL? Alladin is bloody public domain!
If you want to tell a different kind of story - TELL A DIFFERENT KIND OF STORY!
Because nobody would go see it thinking 'Oh yeah remember the animated version? Why see an inferious version?'

This is pure nostaglia marketting and I hate the public at large for not respecting animation.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: HappyDaze on November 23, 2021, 06:02:27 PM
The Netflix Cowboy Bebop is a good example of how something can be reasonably faithful, and clearly expensive to make, and still fail hard.

They go to great lengths to replicate the costuming, mecha designs, and atmosphere of the original, and they keep the soundtrack, which is one of the all-time great anime soundtracks.

But the costumes look like cosplay, the lighting makes everything look cheap, the depth of field effects and color balance of the CGI makes it look like model shots and not match the live action bits, and the sound mix is off, so the soundtrack sounds muted and tinny instead of kicking things up to 11 like it does in the anime.

Also Spike is suddenly Asian, and Faye suddenly isn't. Also, Faye is basically Girl Spike now, when she was her own character in the anime.

Pro Tip: if you haven't watched the original anime, you need to. Even if you don't like anime, you will probably like this. It has a great English dub, arguably as good or better than the Japanese, so you won't have to read subtitles. Great music, great animation, and just a whole lot of fun.
How many of your criticisms would matter to someone that never watched the original anime? Costuming, lighting, and CGI still would, but "suddenly Asian/not-Asian" probably makes no difference whatsoever. Soundtrack probably matters to most, but I personally don't care (soundtracks are not something I care for/about).
I haven't seen it, and haven't been paying any real attention. But the costumes in the pic above look really goofy, so goofy it would be hard to take the show seriously. It feels like something that might appeal to kids into the Power Rangers, but it's going to a major clash for a show like Cowboy Bepop that's heavily focused on existential ennui.
I watched most of the first episode before turning it off. I doubt I'd have cared for the anime any more than the live action though.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on November 24, 2021, 01:55:54 AM
The Netflix Cowboy Bebop is a good example of how something can be reasonably faithful, and clearly expensive to make, and still fail hard.

They go to great lengths to replicate the costuming, mecha designs, and atmosphere of the original, and they keep the soundtrack, which is one of the all-time great anime soundtracks.

But the costumes look like cosplay, the lighting makes everything look cheap, the depth of field effects and color balance of the CGI makes it look like model shots and not match the live action bits, and the sound mix is off, so the soundtrack sounds muted and tinny instead of kicking things up to 11 like it does in the anime.

Also Spike is suddenly Asian, and Faye suddenly isn't. Also, Faye is basically Girl Spike now, when she was her own character in the anime.

Pro Tip: if you haven't watched the original anime, you need to. Even if you don't like anime, you will probably like this. It has a great English dub, arguably as good or better than the Japanese, so you won't have to read subtitles. Great music, great animation, and just a whole lot of fun.
How many of your criticisms would matter to someone that never watched the original anime? Costuming, lighting, and CGI still would, but "suddenly Asian/not-Asian" probably makes no difference whatsoever. Soundtrack probably matters to most, but I personally don't care (soundtracks are not something I care for/about).
I haven't seen it, and haven't been paying any real attention. But the costumes in the pic above look really goofy, so goofy it would be hard to take the show seriously. It feels like something that might appeal to kids into the Power Rangers, but it's going to a major clash for a show like Cowboy Bepop that's heavily focused on existential ennui.

Not sure what you mean by the colours other than they are NOT the usual hyper washed out tones movies have been using for the last 20 years. Its rather nice to see something that is fucking drab blacks and greys. Or fuzzy blue.
Title: Re: The Movie Thread Reloaded
Post by: Omega on November 24, 2021, 01:57:09 AM
The Bebop series just never interested me. Sorry. Some nice music though and the art is good and from what I saw its a fairly dynamic anime.