Movies

[Stuart Galbraith]

I get the impression they dont reckon much to Bogart movies.

That would be an entirely appropriate way to sell Steven Segal movies though...

[Stuart Galbraith]

7 hours ago, lucklucky said:

Those don't count, they are not part of the canon. 😝

Picky picky picky. 

The first Casino Royale is, admittedly, a  bloody mess. But it does still have some good elements to it. For example, it does have one of the best Bond themes  not actually in a Bond film. Which puts it ahead of the other non Bond Bond film, Never Say Never Again, a much better film but musically largely empty.

 

 

 

Edited April 9, 2024 by Stuart Galbraith

[Soren Ras]

I retain much fondness for the 1967 Casino Royale, a flawed film to be sure, but one I still enjoy immensely for its silliness.  

Kinda funny how relatively quickly the James Bond movie franchise, which started in 1962 attracted a string of parody films and even parody franchises (The Silencers with Dean Martin as Matt Helm and James Coburn as Derek Flint In Like Flint were both from 1966, of course, but there was a Carry On entry from 1964 already - Carry On Spying, which featured Charles Bind, agent 000 -  and in Denmark they made a James Bond spoof in 1965 - Slå Først Frede).   Says something about how quickly James Bond became a cinema sensation.

--
Soren

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

One of the earliest Ive heard of (Ive not seen personally) was operation little brother, which was an Italian based comedy, witht he lead taken by Sean Connery's brother! Its probably apalling, but Id like to see it, if only for seeing just a bit more of Daniela Bianchi, whom they also managed to talk into it.

The lesson being, the Broccollis have always been pretty good at looking at what else is going on in films, and taking elements into the Bond films. First off there were the parodies, so by the 1970's we got what was in many ways a fun, light hearted Bond.  Then in the 1980's we got more action films, like Stallone/Schwarzenegger were making, so they copied that. Then Jason Bourne came a long, a more realist, humourless approach, so they copied that. And now...

Well thats the question. What do they copy now? I think they have exploited Bourne to death, and there are no other obvious role models around. They have done the 'get back to Fleming'. Think they mined that. It will be interesting to see what they come up with.

[Ssnake]

They need to marvel up, obviously.

[Ivanhoe]

Interesting review on the "Civil War" movie. The guy dissects all sorts of tropes used to send a cultural/political message. Given how the left perpetually accuses the right of sins the left habitually commits, while this movie is another attempt at dehumanizing the center and right (any surprise it was released in an election year?), its probably really telling us what the left fantasizes about doing.

 

 

[Stargrunt6]

It comes across as Hollywood trying to be Tom Clancy and, predictably, failing hard.

[Rick]

Just finished watching "The Searchers" with John Wayne. Again. One of if not the finest Western movie ever made. 

[Ivanhoe]

On 4/18/2024 at 9:25 AM, Stargrunt6 said:

It comes across as Hollywood trying to be Tom Clancy and, predictably, failing hard.

I'm enjoying all the ratio-ing that movie is getting. That said, there are all sorts of naive fools who aren't seeing any subtext.

[Ivanhoe]

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

From what ive heard on the Fighting on Film review of it, they projected it so the President could be either Republican or Democrat. It was far more about how a civil war in the US would look and feel, than any attempt to say how a civil war against Donald Trump would look. They kept the causes of the war, and the political aspects of it distinctly opaque, just concentrate on the fighting and the experience of the main characters.

https://shows.acast.com/fightingonfilm/episodes/civil-war-2024

 

[Mikel2]

9 hours ago, Rick said:

Just finished watching "The Searchers" with John Wayne. Again. One of if not the finest Western movie ever made. 

 

Indeed. Just watched it for the first time.

[Stargrunt6]

11 hours ago, Ivanhoe said:

I'm enjoying all the ratio-ing that movie is getting. That said, there are all sorts of naive fools who aren't seeing any subtext.

Did you see the Apache flying low between buildings? WWith a gatling gun in the chin?  And it gets shot down by a tank?????

[Stuart Galbraith]

I do it in Gunner Heat PC all the time.

 

[Soren Ras]

15 hours ago, Rick said:

Just finished watching "The Searchers" with John Wayne. Again. One of if not the finest Western movie ever made. 

Agreed. Absolutely wonderful movie. 

[Ivanhoe]

https://deadline.com/2024/04/28-years-later-movie-aaron-taylor-johnson-jodie-comer-ralph-fiennes-1235894028/

 

Quote

 

EXCLUSIVE: The new 28 Years Later trilogy from director Danny Boyle and Sony Pictures is gaining momentum, and some serious star power. Sources tell Deadline that Jodie Comer, Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Ralph Fiennes have boarded the first pic, a sequel to the original 28 Days Later.

Boyle is directing the first movie from a script by Alex Garland. Sony will release the film in theaters globally.

 

 

[Stargrunt6]

Rewatched Dune pt deux, and I still love it. Everyone has a problem with Zendaya, but my main problem was Jessica. I don't like this cynical neurotic version.

 

I have Criterion Channel now and a brandy snifter to match. I watched Assault on Precinct 13 (awesome) and Deal of the Century (zzz) so far.

[TrustMe]

2 hours ago, Stargrunt6 said:

Rewatched Dune pt deux, and I still love it. Everyone has a problem with Zendaya, but my main problem was Jessica. I don't like this cynical neurotic version.

 

I have Criterion Channel now and a brandy snifter to match. I watched Assault on Precinct 13 (awesome) and Deal of the Century (zzz) so far.

 

Yeahn I thought that to. It was like her whole personality had changed from loving mother to brutal and uncompassionate psycho. 

Edited April 27, 2024 by TrustMe

[Ssnake]

Well, drinking the "water of life" (hah!) certainly seems to have the potential to mess you up. Insofar I think her change of personality was quite plausible.

Did it have to be this change? Maybe not.

[Soren Ras]

14 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Well, drinking the "water of life" (hah!) certainly seems to have the potential to mess you up. Insofar I think her change of personality was quite plausible.

Did it have to be this change? Maybe not.

I had no problem with Lady Jessica leaning into her ruthless side, given what happened and the stakes in play. Zendaya was, er, ok, I guess. She's just there, not really screwing anything up, but not exactly setting the screen on fire either.  I was way more distracted by Christopher Walken as the Emperor. Only casting choice that really failed, IMO. Everyone else is pretty solid or even great (hello mr Bardem). Was surprised at how well young Chalamet managed to pull off the more serious and ruthless warlord/messiah side of Paul Atreides at the end of part II, frankly, though truth told, my expectations were pretty low.

[Stargrunt6]

1 hour ago, Soren Ras said:

I had no problem with Lady Jessica leaning into her ruthless side, given what happened and the stakes in play. Zendaya was, er, ok, I guess. She's just there, not really screwing anything up, but not exactly setting the screen on fire either.  I was way more distracted by Christopher Walken as the Emperor. Only casting choice that really failed, IMO. Everyone else is pretty solid or even great (hello mr Bardem). Was surprised at how well young Chalamet managed to pull off the more serious and ruthless warlord/messiah side of Paul Atreides at the end of part II, frankly, though truth told, my expectations were pretty low.

Walken did not seem imperial, just feeble.

 

When Chalamet yells, it's epic, ie, "That's not hope!"

[Ivanhoe]

I'm currently watching "The Girl With All The Gifts" which is a Brit zombie movie. Pretty good, very reminiscent of 28 Days Later. 

Every time I watch one of these flicks I always end up on ammoseek.com checking the price of M193 (about 40c per round for Prvi).

 

[urbanoid]

5 hours ago, Ivanhoe said:

I'm currently watching "The Girl With All The Gifts" which is a Brit zombie movie. Pretty good, very reminiscent of 28 Days Later. 

Every time I watch one of these flicks I always end up on ammoseek.com checking the price of M193 (about 40c per round for Prvi).

 

28 Years Later will be released next year.

[Stuart Galbraith]

Hmm, Ralph Fiennes and Jodie Comer, thats going to be worth watching.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10548174/

[Skywalkre]

Finally Saw Dune Part Two and... honestly, did not care for it.

For context I've never read the books.  I thought the 80s movie was an abomination and it scarred me for life.  Turned me off of ever considering reading the books.  Then I heard great things about Dune Part One and gave it a chance when it hit streaming.  I ended up watching it a dozen times in that first month... and another dozen over the next year.  That movie is probably the best sci-fi/fantasy film to come out of Hollywood since... the OP Star Wars in '77.  It's just a remarkable piece of film.

There were just so many blatant issues with this film.

- It's remarkable to say for a 3h movie but it felt rushed.  This film really needed to be two, or maybe even three films (those familiar with the books can chime in here).  The wonderful character development of the first film was ditched for nonstop, staccato story elements that were just squeezed into too short of a timeframe.

- That rushed feeling is probably why so many of the characters just felt... off.  Stilgar was this noble, stoic leader of the Fremen in the first film who seemed to give hints that he was aware of Paul's potential.  In this one he's just a raving zealot.  It probably makes sense that eventually he would get there... but it happens too fast in this movie.

Lady Jessica's transformation kind of makes sense after she drank the worm piss... but compared to the first film I would have much preferred more development there.  The film also didn't do enough in explaining everything going on with her daughter.  I had to pause the film and google that to make sense of everything.  Contrast that with the first film where I never felt the need and everything made sense in time.

Paul's arc was... ok... but again just everything was rushed.  In just the first few sequences of the film he goes from this awkward, off-worlder tagging along with the Fremen to leading them against the Harkonnen in a guerilla fight?  That needed way more development.

The only character that felt right was Gurney, honestly.

On a different note... why does everyone love Zendaya?  Her character was... meh.  Frankly, she also looks like she's in desperate need of a meal.  It's actually uncomfortable looking at her in pics IRL (thankfully the stillsuits made it look like she had meat on her bones).

- The final duel at the end was awful.  Paul takes two serious wounds (three, actually, if you include him grabbing the blade with his hand... I was grimacing at that) and keeps going while Feyd-Rautha takes one and keels over immediately?  How about having Paul actually win?  That fight was so anti-climatic.  The whole sequence reeked of Blue-Eyed Samurai where the heroine there started out human and somehow transformed into a God midway without the proper development which just made everything feel off.

- And how did all those Fremen get so close to the Harkonnen and the Emperor?  Maybe the books explain this but in a world with this much tech how are the Fremen not spotted?  The last ten minutes of the film just felt all too... convenient.

Edited May 26, 2024 by Skywalkre