Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base?

  		Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Favourite Films >> RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? Page: <<   < prev  480 481 [482] 483 484   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 27/9/2012 4:02:29 PM   
evil bill


Posts: 6560
Joined: 19/7/2006
From: mordor/ uk
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nexus Wookie

Evil Bill, could you tell me which page number I could find that John Carter review of yours? I've been scouring through them but to no avail.

Just watching it right now.

Thanks!

To save you the search here it is enjoy.
JOHN CARTER (2012)

The film tells the story of war-weary, former military captain John Carter (Taylor Kitsch), who is inexplicably transported to Mars where he becomes reluctantly embroiled in a conflict of epic proportions amongst the inhabitants of the planet, including Tars Tarkas (Willem Dafoe) and the captivating Princess Dejah Thoris (Lynn Collins). In a world on the brink of collapse, John rediscovers his humanity when he realizes that the survival of Barsoom and its people rests in his hands

The Film is based on a classic novel by Edgar Rice Burroughs,one book i barely remmber to be honest as i read it back in the 80's,but his highly imaginative adventures have served as inspiration for many filmmakers,and seem perfect for Disney.Bad news first is this fantasy adventure directed for Disney by Andrew Stanton should have been a sweeping action-adventure/fantasy film up there with say Star Wars or Avatar,but instead we get a sci-fi epic,that is over long,has  a 12A cert(which i can't understand it's a tame PG at most)and has some creatures that look too much like Jar Binks.

So on too the good news,the story is epic as it go's from American Civil War,too Martian Civil war,set on the mysterious planet of Barsoom IE Mars,with a strong performance from it's two  leads,and decent acting from all the non CGI cast.The CGI effects are first rate top notch,and when the action kicks in it's awesome to view,up there with the Star Wars films at least.Also i did love the story and how well it blended Western with Space Fantasy,a hard task with so much history thrown in,which in the wrong hands can implode.Also even with some cheesy unfashionable dialog,it was a true fun entertaining film,but my kids(and i think most kids) don't go for long winded films,unless the action keeps running.I feel they should of reduced the running time,if as normal Disney was aiming for there core family viewers.But they in there wisdom they went for a more violent teen friendly film??,(IE PG violence,)which it's not to be honest as it's not violent enough for a 12A,or indeed long enough to give the story more depth,though it's not on the scale of the mess they made with The Black Hole ether,and it is a real shame this was a flop.For i for one enjoyed it,but my little people nearly made it imposable to watch,as they got bored by the the depth of story telling.I gave up watching it,and had to wait till last night to view it with the wife only.This is where it's all gone wrong for what is a high end produced,well directed film,it's to adult for family's with young kids,and not dark enough for teens to adults.

But enough of the negative/grip stuff,for if like me you love visually impressive films with great cinematography,awesome landscapes, panorama shots,well used CGI that takes you out of this world,with a complex story about power, resistance and of course love.Well this has it in spades,and has a super final reel that culminates in a very clever ending,IE great twist in the tale.At just over two hours it's not overlong for us Sci/Fi fans,and like Avatar has a message about how wrong it is to destroy your own home planet,or worse still kill those you know noting about,for those you cannot trust.Of course the film steals from so many i'm not going to list them all,but it is well directed and blends all the elements with great skill,to give you a fun blockbuster with a kick in it's tail.7/10
PS Don't watch this with under 12's you'll end up a mass killer.

Now don't forget to let us know what you think,so far it's been pretty postive,with me and the Dr scoreing it about the same,and from memory i bel;ive it's getting above average ratings from most on here??Maybe not LH of course.


< Message edited by evil bill -- 27/9/2012 4:06:18 PM >

_____________________________

"You listen to me now,i will find you and i will kill you!"

(in reply to Nexus Wookie)
Post #: 14431
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 27/9/2012 7:11:31 PM   
Nexus Wookie


Posts: 2247
Joined: 24/9/2011
From: the Godcity
 Ah finally! thanks for that mate. I remember reading it a little while ago but couldn't locate it. A really excellent review and I agree with your points. I must say I enjoyed it - it does sag a little in the middle, but I loved the final third and the begining. The ending was brilliant! I was totally aghast at Edgar R. Burroughs (sniggers) seeming folly, but Carter was there to save his bacon! I didn't see that coming!

God I have to say that the Princess Dejah (Lynn Collins) was absolutely hot! I knew I saw her somewhere else before, then I remember Wolverine! (her role in that tripe was underwritten), but in John Carter she was perfect. Eh hold on - Taylor Kitcsh also appears in Wolverine! maybe they should have given a role to Hugh Jackman to complete the set!

A few qualm's I had was that Mars did not look too red enough! It looks like some random desert on earth (with some CGI vista's of course). Also I felt Dominic West's baddie was un-menacing, basically it felt like the same role he played in Zack Snyder's 300 albeit with less hair. We also did not get to know too much about the Mark Strong led Thetan's.

I thought the CGI was good - not great. Doug Chiang's design work for the ships were stunning though.

And I absolutely loved Carter's alien/ dog buddie!


Overall, an enjoyable sci-fi, action/ romance fare.

< Message edited by Nexus Wookie -- 27/9/2012 8:04:20 PM >

_____________________________

My blog: http://nexuswookie.wordpress.com/

(in reply to evil bill)
Post #: 14432
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 27/9/2012 8:25:14 PM   
Dr Lenera

 

Posts: 3447
Joined: 19/10/2005

A great white shark follows some water skiers into Florida’s SeaWorld and throws the gate off its rails while it is closing. Meanwhile the opening of SeaWorld’s new underwater tunnels is announced. Katherine “Kay” Morgan, the senior marine biologist, and her assistants wonder why the dolphins, Cindy and Sandy, are so afraid of leaving their dolphin pen. A mechanic trying to repair the gate and two coral stealers are killed, whereupon Kay and her boyfriend Michael Brody go underwater to investigate. They are attacked by the shark but then saved by the dolphins. The news of the shark is not believed by Calvin Bouchard, the SeaWorld park manager, although it’s exciting to his hunter friend, Phillip FitzRoyce, who states his intention to kill the shark on network television. Kay protests, arguing that while killing the shark would be good for one headline, capturing and keeping a great white shark alive in captivity would guarantee TV crews and money constantly rolling into SeaWorld……..

The general opinion about Jaws 3[1983] is that it is a very poor outing indeed, but I don’t really agree with that. As entertainment I enjoy it almost as Jaws 2 and it certainly wins points for being a bit different to the first two films. The location has changed and the story rings some changes on the premise, though of course upon watching it monster movie fans will immediately recognise that the plot is really a combination of The Creature Walks Among Us, where The Creature From The Black Lagoon is captured and taken to a Florida theme park, and Gorgo, where a Godzilla – type creature is captured and taken to London, only for its mother to come along to save it [Gorgo itself was copied by the Japanese movie Gappa The Triphibian Monster]. There are also similarities [especially the climax] to The Last Shark, an 1981 Italian picture which Universal won a lawsuit against for stealing from Jaws and Jaws 2. So not really much originality then, and Jaws 3 lacks even the occasional, mild fear of Jaws 2, but as a fun monster movie, albeit one with the feel of an Irwin Allen disaster film more than anything else, it just about does the job.

The original plan after Jaws 2 was to make a spoof to be called Jaws 3, People 0, but this idea was actually nixed by Steven Spielberg who threatened to leave Universal. As with Jaws and Jaws 2 the script went through many changes and there is debate on who wrote what, with Richard Matheson supposedly writing the story even though it is credited to Guerdon Trueblood, and Matheson’s script heavily altered by script doctors, in the process severely weakening it according to Matheson. His original premise had a shark swim upstream and become trapped in a lake where it eats people, without the SeaWorld setting. At least Universal’s initial idea of the shark from Jaws 2 featuring in the film, even more burnt, wasn’t used, and Carl Gottlieb returned again to do some work on what was becoming a serious mess of a script, though many other people wrote bits and pieces too. Production designer Joe Alves was promoted to director for Jaws 3, and the film, which was actually originally called Jaws 3D, became part of a minor revival in 3D with other films such as Amityville 3D and Friday The 13th Part 3. Jaws 3 was the most commercially successful of these films though for some reason Universal pulled it from theatres when it was still making money. As usual ,US TV showed a version with a few minor deleted scenes.

The first thing one really needs to emphasise about Jaws 3 is that most of the bits that were in 3D look awful in 2D. The 3D shots, with things like a severed arm and head looming at you and liquid being squirted at the audience, stick out like a sore thumb and usually look they were superimposed onto the film. I would imagine that two scenes; the shark crashing through glass which would fly all over the audience, and its explosive demise, would have been quite spectacular in 3D, but they just look very cartoony in 2D. This is a major flaw with Jaws 3 as it stands now. Every few minutes or so an incredibly fake-looking shot comes along to take you out of the film, but the overall picture resolution is poorer than a normal 35mm print too because of how it was shot.

Matheson hated the idea of having Chief Brody’s two sons appear in Jaws 3 though it does provide a bit of continuity. The first half hour is a bit of a slog with little mounting suspense, the dialogue quite poor, and the acting mostly indifferent except for Louis Gossett Jnr and Simon MacCorkindale who are both very hammy but at least look they are having some fun. Gossett Jnr has a terrific moment as he addresses the park guests in the underwater tunnels over the p.a. system. He turns on the fake executive public relations charm and asks them all to calmly exit the park just as the giant shark is bearing down on them. The younger brother Sean’s fear of the water does lead to a nice scene where a girl he has just met, Kelly Ann Bukowski (an early role for Lea Thompson] tries to get him to conquer his fear by stripping in the water, but much of this stuff is closer to the types of scenes you would find in a slasher movie and one misses the intelligence of many of the ‘non-shark’ sequences in the first and even second films. Some things are not capitulised on either, such as Philip, the arrogant hunter, being ‘after’ Kay despite her being with Michael; it only plays a part in one scene, so why did they bother introducing it? Even though the odd cast member does a good job the film just lacks a strong human centre. Michael Brody[ Dennis Quiad], who just runs around all over the place, doesn’t really have a character except that he’s really fearless.

So it all hinges on the shark stuff then, which does mostly succeed, though, as I said earlier, the film is hardly scary at all and even unintentionally funny at times with the two dolphins being rather heroic. There is a bit of sadness though when the young shark dies and you almost want the mother to come along as soon as possible and take her revenge. Most of the action is underwater, and these scenes are very well choreographed and shot so you can almost see always see what is going on. This means that there is far less employment of model sharks this time round, though of course that works both ways; when a model is used it jars somewhat. Still, the final two thirds of the film keep the action coming and there’s a bit more gore this time around, with much shark chomping [the film opens with the decapitation of a fish!] and a bit where one poor guy is stuck in the shark’s throat. The UK cinema version was cut by 7 seconds to get a ‘PG’, removing a gruesome shot of a mutilated body and a sea worm emerging from a mouth. The cuts were restored for home viewing and the certificate upped to a ‘15’, though the DVD got a ‘12’.

Except for the underwater scenes, Joe Alves does a pretty weak job of director, with awkward transitions and uneven pacing, and it isn’t surprising that he didn’t direct another film. John Williams turned down the job of scoring Jaws 3 so Alan Parker [not the film director] was hired to compose a score that would incorporate Williams’s famous shark theme. He does a reasonable job and provides an especially exciting action cue for the climax, but at times the music seems too upbeat for the material and rather ‘TV movie-ish’. Despite falling short in some areas, I think that Jaws 3 is different enough to the first two films to stand on its own two feet and is certainly a lot of fun.



ORDER OF SERIES IN TERMS OF QUALITY

1/ Jaws Rating: 9.5/10

2/ Jaws 2 Rating: 7.5/10

3/ Jaws 3 Rating: 6/10



_____________________________

check out more of my reviews on http://horrorcultfilms.co.uk/

(in reply to Nexus Wookie)
Post #: 14433
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 27/9/2012 8:33:03 PM   
Dr Lenera

 

Posts: 3447
Joined: 19/10/2005

On the island of Amity, Sheriff Martin Brody, the hero of previous shark attacks, has died from a heart attack. His wife Ellen thinks it was from fear of the shark. She now lives with their son Sean and his fiancee Tiffany. Sean works as a police deputy and is sent to clear a log from a buoy a few days before Christmas. As he does so, a massive great white shark bursts out of the water and kills him. Ellen is convinced that the shark targeted Sean on purpose and goes to the Bahamas to spend time with her older son Michael, who works there as a marine biologist, his wife Carla, and their five-year-old daughter Thea. There, Ellen has nightmares about the shark but begins a friendship with carefree airplane pilot Hoagie. However, it seems the shark has made its way to the Bahamas……

Jaws: The Revenge 1986], which is the shortest of the Jaws films but feels the longest, has a reputation as one of the worst sequels of all time and it’s a reputation which is pretty much justified. This is an awful film, terribly conceived, barely coherent, and extremely dumb, but is also, for much of its length, dull and tedious, so that it’s not even fun the way many bad movies can be. Basically it’s a failure on virtually every level. Idiotic story, poor acting, lacklustre action; you name it. It’s probably the worst film Michael Caine ever appeared in. When he was asked about this movie in an interview, he answered, “I have never seen it, but by all accounts it is terrible. However, I have seen the house that it built, and it is terrific.” Fair enough I suppose.

They decided to pretend the events of Jaws 3 never happened. Michael De Guzman was entrusted with writing the script, but took so long with his final draft that production started before he had finished. Overall it was an easier film to make than the other three…..until it came to the first test screenings, where the original ending, in which one character Jake is killed by the shark and Ellen rams the shark with Michael’s boat, causing it to bloodily die. This was considered unsatisfactory, so they hurriedly shot another ending where Jake manages to put an explosive in the shark’s mouth and Mchael stabs it with a broken bowsprit, causing it to explode….though the explosion was actually very badly pasted from the shark explosion at the end of Jaws. Also, Jake now survived with just an injured arm even though he was seen gorily mauled a few minutes before. Some versions of the film, including one shown on UK TV, retain the original ending and it is slightly better than the re-shot one, though frankly no ending would have been good enough to save this piece of crap. As before, some US TV versions contain minor footage that was cut out though. Jaws: The Revenge flopped, thankfully.

The film actually seems like it’s going to be pretty good at first, with the shark attack on Sean beginning in a quite nerve-wracking fashion as it suddenly looms out of the water to bloodily bite off his arm, though after that much of the scene is shot the way it probably would be now, with loads of tiny edits so you can’t see what is going on. This scene, along with a later attack scene, was cut down drastically for the ‘PG’ rated UK cinema release. Still, it’s a dramatic beginning, but that’s it folks for practically the first half of the film, which then forgets it’s supposed to be a Jaws film to concentrate on Ellen, her moving to the Bahamas, and her friendship with Hoagie the pilot. The film takes forever establishing all this and is just plain dull when the characters aren’t spouting out atrocious lines like:

Michael [to torch-wielding welder wife Carla]: I’ve always wanted to make love to an angry welder. I’ve dreamed of nothing else since I was a small boy.



And this goodie from Michael Caine:

Hoagie: I’ve got a bone in my foot that hasn’t thawed out yet



The Hoagie/Ellen friend ship may have been quite sweet if it wasn’t for this stuff, though of course it doesn’t help that the acting is often quite poor. Caine is okay but Gary alternates between over-the-top ham and showing no emotion at all. When she breaks down crying, she sounds like she has a really bad cough. Lance Guest as Michael is so wooden you can almost smell the bark. Mario Van Peebles’s Jamaican accent is so weird half the time you cannot understand what he is saying.

Unlike before, there is hardly anything in the way of shark stuff intermingled with all this so we’re stuck with these people for what seems like an eternity. Eventually though, the shark turns up again…in the Bahamas, with Ellen having some psychic link to it. Yes, we are supposed to believe that a shark can track a human all the way from Maine to the Bahamas even though that person got there by airplane. Not only that but it can roar, scream [impressive considering sharks have no vocal chords, doubly impressive when it’s underwater] and balance on its tail fin. The thing about all this is that, if Jaws: The Revenge had employed a light, tongue-in-cheek approach, in the manner of Deep Blue Sea, then it may have got away with it. Because it thinks it’s being serious, it doesn’t. Nor does it bother to explain why the shark is after the Brody family. I think we are supposed to assume, given the title of the film, it is in revenge for the death of another shark, but then this film is full of random bits and pieces, with scenes often looking like they are unfinished, like when Ellen and Michael are talking on the beach and he suddenly goes for a run.

Of course we do eventually get an action climax, and this one has no bones about showing the model sharks throughout; in fact, I wonder if they used actual shark footage at all in this one. It looks like there are two model sharks; one fat one with a mouth that moves quite well, and a sleeker, better looking one that does hardly anything. Unfortunately, there are some shots in which the support structure of the first shark is visible under the outer layer and even what appears to be a seam in the back of the shark’s main fin. The final scenes are so incompetently staged, especially in the re-shot ending, that it’s hard to tell what is going on, but then the filmmaking is shoddy throughout. An underwater chase goes past the same few rocks about four times. Caine emerges from the water and his shirt is suddenly dry. A boat has part of it chewed of but is intact the next scene. A girl is killed by the shark, an incident which is seen by many and obviously heard of by many others but only Ellen goes out to hunt it. All these continuity errors and script holes may have bearable if the film was entertaining. Sadly, it isn’t.

Director Joseph Sargent and cinematographer John McPherson have a knack for framing characters interestingly, and as a whole the film looks better than Jaws 3. Michael Small’s score approximates the John Williams sound reasonably well when he uses his main Jaws theme and writes some other strong action cues, occasionally of a knowing, almost tongue-in-cheek nature. It’s a much better score than the film deserves, though it didn’t get a soundtrack release till 2000. For the most part, Jaws: The Revenge is utter rubbish, a painful viewing experience, especially when one considers how well the Jaws franchise began. Steven Spielberg should have sued.



FINAL ORDER OF SERIES IN TERMS OF QUALITY

1/ Jaws Rating: 9.5/10

2/ Jaws 2 Rating: 7.5/10

3/ Jaws 3 Rating: 6/10

4/ Jaws: The Revenge Rating: 1.5/10




_____________________________

check out more of my reviews on http://horrorcultfilms.co.uk/

(in reply to Dr Lenera)
Post #: 14434
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 27/9/2012 9:24:53 PM   
Platter

 

Posts: 81
Joined: 14/8/2010
Quentin Tarantino.


[DETOUR

The Killing (1956)
Very fast paced for its day, and still remains quick and fleet footed by modern standards. It's hard to imagine a swiftly paced Kubrick movie since he became a big fan of bloated, overlong, slow pacing in his later movies. The heist itself is surprisingly clever and sensible. It's not just a smash and grab. Visually there are a lot of good bits of camera work (the use of foreground objects in the apartments was stylish). A very strong movie with an excellent script, good actors and a powerful director. The ending was painful to watch as you know he's going to be caught. The last shot was too abrupt as we don't get to see his final reaction to being arrested. Some of the violent parts (usually to do with guns) were poorly filmed, but that might be because of censorship. The jigsaw timeline structure is still fresh and startling today. The film really hasn't dated that much with many elements still feeling very modern. An impressive movie.

9 out of 10 stars

DETOUR ENDS]



Reservoir Dogs (1991)
The start was a little iffy. It took about half an hour for it to get into its groove and really begin to work. I think it either becomes more confident, or there is an accumulation of impact as it goes on. The jigsaw narrative gives it a big kick and is definitely one of the main pleasures of the movie. I thought there was the occasional bit of unconvincing acting from almost everyone, although that's probably the dialogue being hard to perform. Some of the camera work and editing was weak (many shots are badly framed and there are too many long shots that are held too long). It's a good movie, and its a classic, but it's not perfect. It's very hard to see why this was banned by the BBFC as the violence is minor and infrequent, and the torture scene is far from long and gratuitous.

7 out of 10 stars



Pulp Fiction (1994)
What is good or great about the movie is undeniable. It's a classic and probably the most important movie made in the last thirty or so years. Many scenes are outright classics (the gimp, the drug overdose, Jack Rabbit Slim etc). The sprawl of the story shows a wonderful sense of ambition as Tarantino crams as much as he can into the film. And the cast is perfect. The pacing is very start stop with the film often coming to a screeching halt for overlong and overwritten (as in too many lines when a few would cover it) dialogue moments. I treated it like a stage play which is all dialogue so I just sunk back and let it happen without overt complaint. Having said that, it must be said that the movie would benefit greatly from a bit of editing. I'm not talking about removing actual content, just excessive lines and detours to keep the dialogue on track and mildly to the point. The last hour is overall weaker than what went before. The pacing takes a big hit during the Bruce Willis cab scene and subsequent hotel room talks with his girlfriend. Those bits aren't very interesting and drag quite badly. Also I felt the Wolf sequence was vastly overlong with way too much overwritten dialogue for what felt like a rather clichéd and straightforward situation. And the same goes for the diner hold up. A lot could have been cut from those sections without removing any of the good bits. A lot of the dialogue is great, but not all of it is wonderful. Some chopping here and there throughout the whole entire movie to keep it on track would have really speeded the film up. There is a classic, excellent film here at two and a half hours. I think there's an even better film here in a nearer two hour edit. It might lose some of the grandeur but it wouldn't be so stop start with poor pacing. The fractured timeline stuff is good and funny, and a big pleasure of the movie, but it is close to a gimmick. Reservoir Dogs used the timeline as an important part of the structure and that film would have been significantly poorer and less interesting if told in a linear fashion. Pulp Fiction could be told in a linear way. It would lose some resonance and jokes but it wouldn't hurt the movie (I'm not suggesting I would prefer it that way, I'm just observing that it isn't essential). It's a borderline great movie in my own opinion. It just needs to be trimmed back a bit. With better pacing I would happily give it 10 out of 10.

8 out of 10 stars



Jackie Brown (1997)
You can see why it disappointed when it was released in 1997. Now with the weight of expectations taken off it you can see what a decent, solid, if unspectacular little movie it is. It's a bit overlong and the fate of Samuel L Jackson's character made me think it was a long time to wait for so little. The characters were a fairly uninteresting bunch for the most part. The story is nothing special and it's mostly all told in a linear start to finish way. The only jigsaw time fracturing took place during the second money drop-off. It added zero to the film, no jokes or new information resulted in it. He couldn't resist it and just play it straight, which would have been better I think. The pace is quite slow and deliberate but it's consistent and very rarely grinds to a halt like in Pulp Fiction. There a few moments that stretched my patience such as Jackson taking forever to kill Beaumont in the car (the bit when he puts his gloves on and plays the radio took forever). It's not as overwritten, with usually only a few lines to cover each bit of dialogue instead of the six or seven he would have used in Pulp. It's a sedate movie with no overwhelming desire to dazzle with cool moments and so it comes across as more mature and thoughtful work. It's a minor movie, but it was quite good. Nothing about it was particularly memorable and if it was made by a no name director it's doubtful if it would be well remembered.

7 out of 10 stars



Kill Bill Volume 1 (2003)
It's a decent enough movie but it never one hundred percent clicks and truly works. Tarantino thinks of sequences as being self contained with their own pace, instead of thinking of the film as a whole and therefore pacing his sequences to keep the flow going. The sword maker sequence is a piece of unnecessary bloat that should have been excised as it's boring and uninformative. The final battle at the tea house was overlong and not particularly well done (he's not a great action director). There's a lot of excellent material in the film, but some of it doesn't feel perfectly integrated with everything else. More than his other movies this feels like a drawer full of cool ideas being stitched together with so-so cohesiveness. Also the fancy timeline structure feels particularly unnecessary with this one as it doesn't really add anything comically or dramatically to the film. The film is good.

7 out of 10 stars



Kill Bill Volume 2 (2004)
It feels much more like a Tarantino film. As it's almost all set in America it feels much more Western. It's maybe slightly better than Volume 1, which is odd as I remember originally being much more impressed with 1 over 2. The second film has better material - the Michael Madsen section, including the burial, in particular. Even the training section with the old bearded man was curiously entertaining in ways that the sword maker section in the first film was leaden and boring. The ending is fairly anti-climactic as it basically turns into a not very interesting talk-a-thon in the last forty or so minutes. And why does the film have two sets of end credits? Although not a great film, it is good.

7 out of 10 stars


[DETOUR STARTS

Sin City (2005)
Robert Rodriguez is very talented at his many jobs, apart from one of the more important ones. His script writing is usually very juvenile, silly and generally bad. With Sin City there are no obvious signs that he wrote anything new for it, so for once his talents are put to good use on a script that was worth filming. The visuals are innovative and often stunning. The hardboiled dialogue is funny and the pace is super fast as whole relationships or scenes are played out in only a few choice lines. A stunning movie.

9 out of 10 stars




Planet Terror - Full length Non-Grindhouse Version (2007)
The first half hour was quite good but a little underwhelming and not as strong as I remembered it to be. Then from about the bit when the cop played by Tom Savini loses his finger it picked up and became the silly over the top (action slanted) film I was expecting. It doesn't work as a horror as there is no proper tension or scares. Much more of a comedy than a horror, with the eventful missing reel being the funniest moment. Has a very pronounced George A Romero meets John Carpenter feel to it. Very well directed (although I thought the timing of the some of the editing in the first half hour was a little off). A very enjoyable movie with plenty of gore and a lot of action. It's funny how I can remember the Rose McGowan character with no problem, but I had completely one hundred percent blanked out the real lead actor, Freddy Rodríguez, from my memory.

8 out of 10 stars

DETOUR ENDS]



Death Proof - Full length Non-Grindhouse Version (2007)
The first half hour is iffy. It could be completely deleted and it wouldn't do the film any harm. The movie really only truly begins when Kurt Russell asks for a lap dance via the radio poem. The quality of the film spikes upwards from that moment on. The problem with the first batch of girls is that they don't have anything interesting to say. Their overlong dialogue scenes were far from gripping. I didn't mind the endless talking too much, and I didn't find it to be particularly boring. The bar room section is far too long and indulgent. I feel Tarantino decided in advance before writing it that he wanted it to be a long, long extended section. Unfortunately he couldn't dredge up enough proper content to fill it and has instead bloated it with unneeded material. The creepy treatment of the girl Kurt picked up in the bar, and the car crash in the middle, are excellent and very well done moments. It's got to be said, the good bits are very good. The second batch of girls are much more interesting and everything they have to say is significantly more entertaining and enjoyable. None of their many and extensive talking scenes felt too excessive or overly indulgent. The final chase was good, if a little overlong. There's only so many shots of cars driving fast on roads you can watch before you've seen it all. The climax itself is weirdly abrupt and disappointing. I have the distinct feeling that a last comic scene of the women returning the beat up car to the owner is missing. It's an overly talkative movie and it's second half is much stronger than its first. It could be argued that it fails as an exploitation or slasher movie because it's too talkative and not kill happy enough. By not really delivering what it promises it feels very authentically B movie to me, as they are forever disappointing by not matching up to expectations. It's a very flawed movie, and probably Tarantino's weakest, but the good outweighs the bad by some distance. It's a good looking film, probably his best visually. If it had been made by a no name director I think it would still be a notable and well remembered cult film, as its ideas and unusual two part structure are impressive and distinctive. The film stock damage wasn't very extreme and I noticed that it was completely absent from the end chase. It suggests that Tarantino didn't hold his nerve with the grindhouse concept and have the conviction to go all the way without compromise when it came to his final showcase sequence. A couple of characters (the sheriff, the female doctor) and the hospital location from Planet Terror make an appearance in Death Proof.

7 out of 10 stars



Inglourious Basterds (2009)
Although flawed it's really good. I was very entertained by it. I watched it after seeing the Sergio Leone movies to which I think this film (and the Kill Bill films) owe some stylistic debts. It's unhurried and lets scenes linger for unusually long periods of time. The opening scene is twenty minutes and, according to a Tarantino interview on the disc, the basement bar scene is half an hour long. The film could do with being tightened up here and there (the King Kong guessing game adds nothing that isn't already in the scene) but by and large each sequence earns its length by being interesting. Although artistically smaller than many Leone movies, I thought this is better than any of his films. A very unusual movie, and all the better for it.

9 out of 10 stars


[ANOTHER DETOUR

Machete (2010)
A superior B movie that was funny and entertaining. The last twenty minutes went on too long and was a little bit too silly.

7 out of 10 stars]

< Message edited by Platter -- 27/9/2012 10:41:02 PM >

(in reply to Dr Lenera)
Post #: 14435
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 27/9/2012 9:43:48 PM   
Platter

 

Posts: 81
Joined: 14/8/2010
Also watched these films you might be interested in.


Avengers Assemble (2012)
It worked well enough. I didn't think it was great or anything, but it was quite good. The use of The Hulk as a secondary character was good. The final battle in New York looked very similar to the end of Transformers 3. The action scenes were okay if a little underwhelming. The opening action sequence in particular was uninvolving and below average.

7 out of 10 stars



Galaxy Quest (1999)
It's a funny movie. The first fifteen minutes are rather painful rather than funny to watch as it trades on the comedy of embarrassment. Normally I don't expect much from the plot in a comedy, but this is so well made (it looks like a proper movie, with high quality special effects and production design) that the simplicity of the plot does slightly disappoint. It's a really good mainstream comedy on a geeky subject.

8 out of 10 stars




Robocop 2 (1990)
This was surprisingly good. I hadn't seen it in something like a decade, and its reputation was pretty poor. I really enjoyed it and thought it was a worthy sequel to the original. It's much more comic book like and the action is emphasised over the satire. The extended battle between the two androids was a bit overlong. A very strong action movie. Good fun.

8 out of 10 stars






Jaws (1975)
Wonderfully directed movie. Everything is pretty much pitch perfect. The way it's been made gives it a nice hint of documentary atmosphere. I can't think of anything to moan about. The sharks looks okay and only becomes weak when out of the water, and even then it's not that bad. One of the greatest movies ever made.

10 out of 10 stars





Field of Dreams (1989)
One of the strangest movies ever made. It just works and packs an emotional punch. Also it's often very funny. It shouldn't work, or at least be drowning in sentimental guff, but somehow it does. It's not sentimental as that is unearned emotion, this film actual earns its emotions legitimately without trickery. A great movie.

10 out of 10 stars




Citizen Kane (1941)
I was pleasantly surprised by how enjoyable this was. I was expecting a stodgy, worthy bore of a movie. It's light footed and entertaining. It took until midway through the opening news reel for me to stop wanting to switch it off. The next hour and a half is very good. It holds up very well today, and I can only assume it must have been a lot more advanced than everything else around at the time. I can't claim to understand every word of the dialogue but I trusted they knew what they were talking about. The acting wasn't too mannered, the old age make up not too bad, and the camera work and editing not too stiff. The special effects are also very good (a lot of the sets weren't really there). Sadly the last half hour was inferior to the start. The film crunched down a gear and became a little boring from the opera section onwards. The stuff with the reviews was all great, but the actual opera sequences went on too long and the disintegration of his second marriage wasn't very good. Overall a good movie.

7 out of 10 stars

NOTE: I've removed my Goodfellas and Casino reviews as I'm going to post them later along with some Coppola movies I watched.

Also please note that I didn't watch all these movies in the last five days.

< Message edited by Platter -- 27/9/2012 9:57:13 PM >

(in reply to Platter)
Post #: 14436
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 28/9/2012 6:37:21 PM   
evil bill


Posts: 6560
Joined: 19/7/2006
From: mordor/ uk
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nexus Wookie

Ah finally! thanks for that mate. I remember reading it a little while ago but couldn't locate it. A really excellent review and I agree with your points. I must say I enjoyed it - it does sag a little in the middle, but I loved the final third and the begining. The ending was brilliant! I was totally aghast at Edgar R. Burroughs (sniggers) seeming folly, but Carter was there to save his bacon! I didn't see that coming!

God I have to say that the Princess Dejah (Lynn Collins) was absolutely hot! I knew I saw her somewhere else before, then I remember Wolverine! (her role in that tripe was underwritten), but in John Carter she was perfect. Eh hold on - Taylor Kitcsh also appears in Wolverine! maybe they should have given a role to Hugh Jackman to complete the set!

A few qualm's I had was that Mars did not look too red enough! It looks like some random desert on earth (with some CGI vista's of course). Also I felt Dominic West's baddie was un-menacing, basically it felt like the same role he played in Zack Snyder's 300 albeit with less hair. We also did not get to know too much about the Mark Strong led Thetan's.

I thought the CGI was good - not great. Doug Chiang's design work for the ships were stunning though.

And I absolutely loved Carter's alien/ dog buddie!


Overall, an enjoyable sci-fi, action/ romance fare.

Nice to see that this film though no classic is getting some fans,so let's keep spreading the word"Princess Dejah (Lynn Collins) was absolutely hot!"Yes indeed!!!
A lot of the ship design for me was nicked from Star Wars: Revenge Of The Jedi,along with the use of the Desert as a main backdrop.But still i did love the story and like you the ending was just perfect,i thinki read somewhere Disney where hoping this would become a franchise??but i can't see that happening now.

_____________________________

"You listen to me now,i will find you and i will kill you!"

(in reply to Nexus Wookie)
Post #: 14437
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 28/9/2012 6:45:41 PM   
evil bill


Posts: 6560
Joined: 19/7/2006
From: mordor/ uk
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dr Lenera



Except for the underwater scenes, Joe Alves does a pretty weak job of director, with awkward transitions and uneven pacing, and it isn't surprising that he didn't direct another film. John Williams turned down the job of scoring Jaws 3 so Alan Parker [not the film director] was hired to compose a score that would incorporate Williams's famous shark theme. He does a reasonable job and provides an especially exciting action cue for the climax, but at times the music seems too upbeat for the material and rather 'TV movie-ish'. Despite falling short in some areas, I think that Jaws 3 is different enough to the first two films to stand on its own two feet and is certainly a lot of fun.



ORDER OF SERIES IN TERMS OF QUALITY

1/ Jaws Rating: 9.5/10

2/ Jaws 2 Rating: 7.5/10

3/ Jaws 3 Rating: 6/10



Now we do disagree on this,as i was one of the fools that paid good money to see this piece of trash at the cinema.Having recently watched it on TV i still can't give it more than a 2/10
 
And as for Revenge it's pure and utter rubbish,i can't even give it a 1 for it's a total loss a big O out of ten.Great Poster though.

_____________________________

"You listen to me now,i will find you and i will kill you!"

(in reply to Dr Lenera)
Post #: 14438
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 28/9/2012 7:11:15 PM   
evil bill


Posts: 6560
Joined: 19/7/2006
From: mordor/ uk
quote:

ORIGINAL: Platter

Quentin Tarantino.


[DETOUR

The Killing (1956)
Very fast paced for its day, and still remains quick and fleet footed by modern standards. It's hard to imagine a swiftly paced Kubrick movie since he became a big fan of bloated, overlong, slow pacing in his later movies. The heist itself is surprisingly clever and sensible. It's not just a smash and grab. Visually there are a lot of good bits of camera work (the use of foreground objects in the apartments was stylish). A very strong movie with an excellent script, good actors and a powerful director. The ending was painful to watch as you know he's going to be caught. The last shot was too abrupt as we don't get to see his final reaction to being arrested. Some of the violent parts (usually to do with guns) were poorly filmed, but that might be because of censorship. The jigsaw timeline structure is still fresh and startling today. The film really hasn't dated that much with many elements still feeling very modern. An impressive movie.

9 out of 10 stars
Excellent write up there and like the way it leads to the next film,as i think Tarantino based his film on Kubricks template for a real crime thriller tostick in the mind long after it's viewed.
DETOUR ENDS]



Reservoir Dogs (1991)
It's a good movie, and its a classic, but it's not perfect. It's very hard to see why this was banned by the BBFC as the violence is minor and infrequent, and the torture scene is far from long and gratuitous.

7 out of 10 stars
More an 8/10 for me,only one gripe,it was never banned by the BBFC


Pulp Fiction (1994)
Pulp Fiction could be told in a linear way. It would lose some resonance and jokes but it wouldn't hurt the movie (I'm not suggesting I would prefer it that way, I'm just observing that it isn't essential). It's a borderline great movie in my own opinion. It just needs to be trimmed back a bit. With better pacing I would happily give it 10 out of 10.

8 out of 10 stars
Well maybe a 9 for this,though i feel the pacing is perfect.



Jackie Brown (1997)
It's a sedate movie with no overwhelming desire to dazzle with cool moments and so it comes across as more mature and thoughtful work. It's a minor movie, but it was quite good. Nothing about it was particularly memorable and if it was made by a no name director it's doubtful if it would be well remembered.

7 out of 10 stars
Totaly agree


Kill Bill Volume 1 (2003)
More than his other movies this feels like a drawer full of cool ideas being stitched together with so-so cohesiveness. Also the fancy timeline structure feels particularly unnecessary with this one as it doesn't really add anything comically or dramatically to the film. The film is good.

7 out of 10 stars
I wish they never agreed to split this in two.



Kill Bill Volume 2 (2004)
The ending is fairly anti-climactic as it basically turns into a not very interesting talk-a-thon in the last forty or so minutes. And why does the film have two sets of end credits? Although not a great film, it is good.

7 out of 10 stars
Good way to end the two but i watch them as one.

[DETOUR STARTS

Sin City (2005)
Robert Rodriguez is very talented at his many jobs, apart from one of the more important ones. His script writing is usually very juvenile, silly and generally bad. With Sin City there are no obvious signs that he wrote anything new for it, so for once his talents are put to good use on a script that was worth filming. The visuals are innovative and often stunning. The hardboiled dialogue is funny and the pace is super fast as whole relationships or scenes are played out in only a few choice lines. A stunning movie.

9 out of 10 stars

This is anoying i agree again


Planet Terror - Full length Non-Grindhouse Version (2007)
I can remember the Rose McGowan character with no problem, but I had completely one hundred percent blanked out the real lead actor, Freddy Rodríguez, from my memory.

8 out of 10 stars
Same here again.
DETOUR ENDS]



Death Proof - Full length Non-Grindhouse Version (2007)
It suggests that Tarantino didn't hold his nerve with the grindhouse concept and have the conviction to go all the way without compromise when it came to his final showcase sequence. A couple of characters (the sheriff, the female doctor) and the hospital location from Planet Terror make an appearance in Death Proof.

7 out of 10 stars
Now i liked this just as much as Planet Terror so it's a 8/10.


Inglourious Basterds (2009)
. Although artistically smaller than many Leone movies, I thought this is better than any of his films. A very unusual movie, and all the better for it.

9 out of 10 stars
NOOOOOO! he's no where near Leone,as much as i enjoy his films,though as you know he is heavly infulanced by the Italian master.


[ANOTHER DETOUR

Machete (2010)
A superior B movie that was funny and entertaining. The last twenty minutes went on too long and was a little bit too silly.

7 out of 10 stars]
It's silly over the top Grindhouse fun,a real 70's/80's throw back but with modren gore effects.

Well on the whole i agree with your scores and thoughts on these great films,soi've added a few thoughts to your list to save time.
quote:


Avengers Assemble (2012)
It worked well enough. I didn't think it was great or anything, but it was quite good. The use of The Hulk as a secondary character was good. The final battle in New York looked very similar to the end of Transformers 3. The action scenes were okay if a little underwhelming. The opening action sequence in particular was uninvolving and below average.

7 out of 10 stars
Now this was a real suprise to me but i loved this film and gave it the extra point.


Galaxy Quest (1999)
It's a funny movie. The first fifteen minutes are rather painful rather than funny to watch as it trades on the comedy of embarrassment. Normally I don't expect much from the plot in a comedy, but this is so well made (it looks like a proper movie, with high quality special effects and production design) that the simplicity of the plot does slightly disappoint. It's a really good mainstream comedy on a geeky subject.

8 out of 10 stars
NOOOO!! it's utter crap



Robocop 2 (1990)
This was surprisingly good. I hadn't seen it in something like a decade, and its reputation was pretty poor. I really enjoyed it and thought it was a worthy sequel to the original. It's much more comic book like and the action is emphasised over the satire. The extended battle between the two androids was a bit overlong. A very strong action movie. Good fun.

8 out of 10 stars

No where near as good as the orginal so7/10 but yeah it was fun




Jaws (1975)
Wonderfully directed movie. Everything is pretty much pitch perfect. The way it's been made gives it a nice hint of documentary atmosphere. I can't think of anything to moan about. The sharks looks okay and only becomes weak when out of the water, and even then it's not that bad. One of the greatest movies ever made.

10 out of 10 stars
YES INDEED  a true classic.





Field of Dreams (1989)
One of the strangest movies ever made. It just works and packs an emotional punch. Also it's often very funny. It shouldn't work, or at least be drowning in sentimental guff, but somehow it does. It's not sentimental as that is unearned emotion, this film actual earns its emotions legitimately without trickery. A great movie.

10 out of 10 stars

Maybe an 8/10 but stilla fine film well directed and acted with one hell of a script.


Citizen Kane (1941)
I was pleasantly surprised by how enjoyable this was. I was expecting a stodgy, worthy bore of a movie. It's light footed and entertaining. It took until midway through the opening news reel for me to stop wanting to switch it off. The next hour and a half is very good. It holds up very well today, and I can only assume it must have been a lot more advanced than everything else around at the time.
7 out of 10 stars


Like you i warmed to this classic but could never rate it any higher than this.

_____________________________

"You listen to me now,i will find you and i will kill you!"

(in reply to Platter)
Post #: 14439
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies? - 29/9/2012 9:45:55 AM   
Platter

 

Posts: 81
Joined: 14/8/2010
1992-1995

Reservoir Dogs
This film was submitted to the BBFC for a video release certificate in 1992 (it had previously been submitted for theatrical distribution, was passed uncut and shown widely in cinemas). Though the film was never formally refused a video certificate, one was not actually granted until 1995. Because of the BBFC's statutory powers under the Video Recordings Act 1984, the delay amounted to a de facto ban during this period, during which a second theatrical release took place in 1994. It has been alleged that the delay was due to political pressure applied to the BBFC's controversial director, James Ferman, resulting at least in part from the controversy over so-called video nasties that was precipitated by the murder of James Bulger in 1993.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_banned_in_the_United_Kingdom

(in reply to Explosion in the Sky)
Post #: 14440
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 29/9/2012 10:05:34 AM   
Platter

 

Posts: 81
Joined: 14/8/2010
The Godfather (1972)
A masterpiece that deserves its reputation as one of the greatest films ever made. Just such a perfectly realised movie. I was surprised at how easy it was to understand what was happening and who was who.

10 out of 10 stars




The Conversation (1974)
I didn't mind it when I first saw it. On my last viewing, which might have been the second, I hated how achingly slow it was and I really, really disliked it overall. I remember struggling to finish it. I think I swore that if I ever wanted to watch it again I was to just not bother as it's rubbish. Thankfully I ignored myself as I found the movie to be fairly interesting in a low key kind of way. The pace is rather slow but it's compelling enough to keep you going. After about fifty minutes, round about midway through the party in Caul's workspace, it starts to drag. The second half really could do with picking it up and getting on with it. The end is too little too late. It's a film that is more simple and insubstantial than it would like to present itself as being. It's a decent movie though I can't big it up beyond that.

6 out of 10 stars



The Godfather Part 2 (1974)
It was good. Not great and not a patch on the first movie, but good. It wasn't exactly a thrilling adventure and it was too murky and tangled as a story. A bit of extra exposition to clarity what is happening wouldn't have gone a miss. Michael's motivations were often hard to see, but that might be the point. It was always interesting. I think it's a movie that is easier to admire for its ambitions than to love as entertainment. The young Don Vito flashbacks were fine but I'm not convinced it was really essential that we know the details of his story so it sometimes felt like bloat.

7 out of 10 stars




Apocalypse Now (1979)
A significant and important movie but not exactly great entertainment. It held my attention better than I expected and I didn't struggle to keep going. The first fifty minutes, up to the end of the Captain Kilgore sequence, were the strongest and most enjoyable. Also most of the iconic moments are in that area. Then it becomes disjointed with some episodes being more interesting than others. The sense of aimless drifting isn't strong, but it's there in the background. I watched the Brando stuff without resorting to fast forwarding. His section begins okay. After about ten minutes (probably after he says that Willard is an "errand boy sent by grocery clerks") it becomes pretty boring. The forward moment completely stops and it then enters a turgid, boring section that is in zero rush to go anywhere or do anything. The violent climax is too little too late. The actual ending itself doesn't justify such a long journey and such an overextended compound sequence in front of it. The end could really do with losing ten or so minutes. The film is a 7 out of 10, but I'm taking one point off for the tiresome compound section. A good movie, but its greatness is more for its troubled production than for its merits as a movie to be entertained by.

I think I have a pretty decent solution to the famously fumbled climax. The compound sequence up to Brando delivering that great line about Willard being an, “errand boy sent by grocery clerks”, is all okay. It’s from there that it loses all momentum and becomes boring. What they should have done is cut from that line to Willard back on the boat getting ready to kill Kurtz. All they needed to do is put in a Michael Herr scripted voice over that basically says, “He either didn’t fear me, or didn’t care that I intended to kill him. So he let me go. I was free to roam his man made hell or leave. And I wasn't leaving without finishing my mission”. Then the film just goes straight into Willard creeping into the compound and killing Kurtz. This way the film loses about ten or fifteen minutes of needless waffle. I think it would result in a much better, more watchable ending that doesn’t test your patience half as much.

6 out of 10 stars



The Godfather Part 3 (1990) [Note that this was the first time I've seen this film]
The first half hour was so-so, but it eventually picked up and I thought it was almost the equal to Part 2. It seemed of a piece with the others and didn't feel like a big drop off in quality. The only problem was that Michael is legit so a guy not ordering murders is a lot less dramatic than someone who is. The plot wasn't thrilling but I didn't consider Part 2 to be a thrill ride of simple pleasures so I wasn't bothered. It was a 7 out of 10. And then the opera ending happened. What a disaster. It was wildly overlong and badly staged with banal murders that had to be explained by a contrived voice over so that we understood who the targets were. And it was so poorly edited with no sense of multiple things happening at once like at the end of the other two films. This woeful ending dragged a good movie down to merely average as it renders all that went before it rather pointless. Did the Garcia storyline really come to much of a conclusion for example? I think I understood the plot for the most part, just a shame it wasn't very interesting. Sofia Coppola is much criticised but I thought she was alright. She was a flat actress and a bit too American but she wasn't anywhere near as awful as I was expecting. The opera ending is as bad as the famously botched climax to Apocalypse Now. Michael's death scene is terrible, as it's both rushed and his old age make up is very poor. Without the resonance of the previous films it's very doubtful if it would have been any good as a stand alone film. I would imagine it would be a lowly 2 or 3 out of 10 in that case.

5 out of 10 stars



Hearts of Darkness: The Making of Apocalypse Now (1991)
It focuses only on the principle photography. As soon as the shoot ends it has a title card that says "Two and a half years later" and then cuts to the premiere. I can't escape the feeling that by not covering the unusually long editing period, and not interviewing Walter Murch, that the doc is only a partial success as it's missing some of the story. It's interesting stuff but it's not exactly thrilling. It was okay with it only dragging in the last twenty or so minutes. Well worth watching.

6 out of 10 stars



Goodfellas (1990)
I can see why we thought it was a masterpiece, and it remains so on my first viewing of it in about five or so years. Great movie but I don't love it anymore. Maybe I'm too familiar with it. I just didn't feel it was THAT amazing. As immaculately made and brilliantly directed and acted as it was, I didn't feel any great connection to what was happening on the screen. I was strangely removed and only half interested in what was happening. It's a great movie, but maybe a smidge overrated. Otherwise there is nothing to complain about.

9 out of 10 stars



Casino (1995)
It's a good movie. The sprawling quality of it kind of hides that the main story isn't that interesting in and of itself. Without all the running the casino details etc the relationships between the three characters would be rather mundane. For me a big problem, and I know this is based on real life, is that I can't understand why the two men would have touched that woman with a bargepole. She was trouble right from the start, and it was obvious they could only ever get their fingers burnt with her. Also technically the film shows some signs of crude, almost rushed filmmaking with occasional awkward edits etc.

8 out of 10 stars

(in reply to evil bill)
Post #: 14441
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 1/10/2012 9:10:10 PM   
Dr Lenera

 

Posts: 3447
Joined: 19/10/2005
Always enjoy reading your reviews Platter. I personally think Tarantino has gone more and more downhill and hated his last two films. Interesting theory about Apocalypse Now, you could be right with your idea about the cilmax, it's a great film until the final quarter.

_____________________________

check out more of my reviews on http://horrorcultfilms.co.uk/

(in reply to Platter)
Post #: 14442
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 2/10/2012 3:38:29 PM   
Nexus Wookie


Posts: 2247
Joined: 24/9/2011
From: the Godcity
quote:

ORIGINAL: evil bill

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nexus Wookie

Ah finally! thanks for that mate. I remember reading it a little while ago but couldn't locate it. A really excellent review and I agree with your points. I must say I enjoyed it - it does sag a little in the middle, but I loved the final third and the begining. The ending was brilliant! I was totally aghast at Edgar R. Burroughs (sniggers) seeming folly, but Carter was there to save his bacon! I didn't see that coming!

God I have to say that the Princess Dejah (Lynn Collins) was absolutely hot! I knew I saw her somewhere else before, then I remember Wolverine! (her role in that tripe was underwritten), but in John Carter she was perfect. Eh hold on - Taylor Kitcsh also appears in Wolverine! maybe they should have given a role to Hugh Jackman to complete the set!

A few qualm's I had was that Mars did not look too red enough! It looks like some random desert on earth (with some CGI vista's of course). Also I felt Dominic West's baddie was un-menacing, basically it felt like the same role he played in Zack Snyder's 300 albeit with less hair. We also did not get to know too much about the Mark Strong led Thetan's.

I thought the CGI was good - not great. Doug Chiang's design work for the ships were stunning though.

And I absolutely loved Carter's alien/ dog buddie!


Overall, an enjoyable sci-fi, action/ romance fare.

Nice to see that this film though no classic is getting some fans,so let's keep spreading the word"Princess Dejah (Lynn Collins) was absolutely hot!"Yes indeed!!!
A lot of the ship design for me was nicked from Star Wars: Revenge Of The Jedi,along with the use of the Desert as a main backdrop.But still i did love the story and like you the ending was just perfect,i thinki read somewhere Disney where hoping this would become a franchise??but i can't see that happening now.


Which is an absolute shame if you ask me. Same goes for the Dredd film, I heard it hasn't done too good State side, which obviously means getting a sequel greenlit will be near impossible.

But on the plus side, at least we have a solid film, and in the case of John Carter, we get Lynn Collins in that steaming get up - its like my childhood Princess Leia crush all over again!

I could watch her all day long...........sorry, was drifting off back there!

< Message edited by Nexus Wookie -- 2/10/2012 3:57:25 PM >

_____________________________

My blog: http://nexuswookie.wordpress.com/

(in reply to evil bill)
Post #: 14443
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 3/10/2012 10:53:13 AM   
losthighway


Posts: 3166
Joined: 25/1/2006
From: Manchesterford
 Saw LOOPER yesterday. You like em short and sharp so here goes...

Well it drags a bit at times, JGLs make up looks odd throughout - i think it's his contact lenses and the fact he clearly looks like someone you recognise but it's not him (if that makes sense!?) and it has a terribly contrived ending which could set up a potential sequel. It's worth a watch but I can't say I agree with all the praise and 5 stars heaped upon it.

Overall: 3.5/5

_____________________________

The secret to becoming a star is knowing how to behave like one.

(in reply to Nexus Wookie)
Post #: 14444
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 3/10/2012 8:30:46 PM   
evil bill


Posts: 6560
Joined: 19/7/2006
From: mordor/ uk
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dr Lenera

Always enjoy reading your reviews Platter. I personally think Tarantino has gone more and more downhill and hated his last two films. Interesting theory about Apocalypse Now, you could be right with your idea about the cilmax, it's a great film until the final quarter.

Now for me Apocalypse Now is a 10/10 film and i liked both endings,IE the orginal cut as seen in the cinema and the Delux cut released on DVD some time ago,i'll have to dig out my old review of this one,i promised DJ a long time ago to do on this thread.Now Prometheus for me one of the best Sci/Fi films in many a year is on it's way to me on Blu Ray from Play.Com,though it's the 2D version as i'm not a fan of 3D like yourself doc.

_____________________________

"You listen to me now,i will find you and i will kill you!"

(in reply to Dr Lenera)
Post #: 14445
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 3/10/2012 8:40:04 PM   
evil bill


Posts: 6560
Joined: 19/7/2006
From: mordor/ uk
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nexus Wookie

quote:

ORIGINAL: evil bill
Nice to see that this film though no classic is getting some fans,so let's keep spreading the word"Princess Dejah (Lynn Collins) was absolutely hot!"Yes indeed!!!
Disney where hoping this would become a franchise??but i can't see that happening now.


Which is an absolute shame if you ask me. Same goes for the Dredd film, I heard it hasn't done too good State side, which obviously means getting a sequel greenlit will be near impossible.

But on the plus side, at least we have a solid film, and in the case of John Carter, we get Lynn Collins in that steaming get up - its like my childhood Princess Leia crush all over again!

I could watch her all day long...........sorry, was drifting off back there!

Yeah ihope the Dredd film franchise gets off the ground,but it's box office in the US may be it's death nail.
quote:

losthighway

Saw LOOPER yesterday. You like em short and sharp so here goes...

Well it drags a bit at times, JGLs make up looks odd throughout - i think it's his contact lenses and the fact he clearly looks like someone you recognise but it's not him (if that makes sense!?) and it has a terribly contrived ending which could set up a potential sequel. It's worth a watch but I can't say I agree with all the praise and 5 stars heaped upon it.

Overall: 3.5/5


Now this is getting scary,as i watched LOOPER at the local flicks yesterday(Crazy Tuesday) and felt it was a let down,i expecting so much more,it's a 7/10 film for me IE 3.5/5,noe that is scary.
I'll get round to a review at some point,but i've been more than a bit busy this week.

_____________________________

"You listen to me now,i will find you and i will kill you!"

(in reply to Nexus Wookie)
Post #: 14446
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 3/10/2012 9:19:31 PM   
Dr Lenera

 

Posts: 3447
Joined: 19/10/2005
Was having trouble shrinking my pics today, sorry!!





Just on the outskirts of a town in Middle Europe, a family is attacked and killed by a werewolf with only the young daughter escaping with her life, though the monster is set alight by flames and returns to his human form before dying. 25 years later, the town is being terrorised by a similar beast. Young Daniel and Eva are in love, but have to meet in secret because she is rich and he is poor. A team of skilled werewolf hunters arrives and makes plans to trap and kill the monster, and Daniel decides to join them…..



I suppose I should say right at the beginning of this review that I loved the 2010 version of The Wolfman, which probably puts me in the minority. To me it was a loving tribute to and remake of the 1941 Lon Chaney classic, had pleasing echoes of other werewolf pictures like Werewolf Of London, added some great gore, had some of the best lycanthrope rampages ever and looked absolutely fabulous. Only some ropey performances and CGI effects let it down. Despite all this, the film met with a bad reception from critics [who always seem ready to pounce on a film that has had production difficulties] and audiences stayed away. It therefore seems surprising that Universal have made a second werewolf film, albeit one that has gone straight to home viewing. I tend not to read other reviews before writing one of my own but I did quickly skim a few before reviewing Werewolf-The Beast Among Us. The response seems to be mostly mediocre, proof that either people just expect too much from some films or are going to give something a bad review before they have even seen it. The film attempts to be nothing more than a fun werewolf flick, and on that level succeeds quite adequately.

Yes, I thoroughly enjoyed Werewolf-The Beast Among Us, but then again, I’m partial to werewolf pictures, even bad ones like The Howling sequels, though I think I can certainly recognise a poor one when it comes along. This particular is certainly very flawed but should keep undemanding monster fans happy for an hour and a half. Now, despite Universal’s rumblings after the poor performance of The Wolfman that a spinoff or remake [no sorry, the word now is reboot isn’t it?!] was in the works, Werewolf-The Beast Among Us has nothing to do with the Benicio Del Toro movie, but is a totally separate story, albeit one that could very well be another adventure for the Hugh Jackman incarnation of Van Helsing. It even has a character who seems to be deliberately similar to him in looks and manner, though he doesn’t actually have a name. In fact, quite a few people in this film don’t have names, though some do. Laziness? Maybe, it’s hard to tell. I suppose it doesn’t matter too much, though there are certainly other problems with the script.

Still, after a nicely intense opening, Werewolf-The Beast Among Us, for its first two thirds at least, should be quite pleasing if you’re a fan of old-time horror. There’s a distinct Hammer feel here, with the town especially just like one you would expect to see Dracula’s castle looming above on a hill in the distance. The pacing is nice and relaxed, with time being given to establishing locale and character, though maybe a little too much time is spent on matters of the romantic sort, matters which don’t all really go anywhere [little is done with a love triangle, for instance]. There’s a reasonable amount of suspense building and the werewolf is only barely seen, though when his scenes commence, the rampage sequences have little of the atmosphere and tension of those in The Wolfman. There’s plenty of gore though, and not just from the werewolf either, with at least two exploding heads [hurrah!] and a nicely gruesome bit of business involving entrail removal, though the person having his guts removed is dead and overall I think a ‘15’ rating would have been adequate for this film, considering what some ‘15’s contain these days. The picture is not sadistic and generally the gore adds to the fun though some may say it jars with the old-fashioned feel.

There seems to be two main types of werewolf movies. One kind, the most popular type, has the werewolf as the main protagonist, a person who is usually sympathetic. The other kind treats the premise of lycanthropy as a mystery. Who is it who is turning into a monster at night? This film tries to have its cake and eat it, as for the first two thirds it’s a mystery, than it reveals who the werewolf is and changes somewhat. It’s an interesting structure, but sadly the film then tries to pack in too much and gets sillier and sillier, with a revelation about one certain character which I just laughed at. This wouldn’t matter so much if the film was done in a tongue-in-cheek way, but it’s not and the crazy twists and turns the plot takes seem out of place in a ‘serious’ film. There are some good ideas, but it all seems very rushed, as if they had to cut the script down to fit a certain running time. The film remains enjoyable though and I respect any movie that has the gall to kill off characters you don’t expect to die and also has some plot surprises in store.

Of course you end up seeing more and more of the werewolf and it’s the usual unconvincing CGI effort that is very similar too, and is not much of an improvement on, those things in An American Werewolf In Paris, though the facial design is rather striking. Sadly the film falls down on its transformation scenes too, which are so weak it’s a wonder they bothered. Actually, here’s a better idea; why not, if you don’t have the budget or ability for good CGI, do such stuff the old-fashioned way with dissolves? Watching a lot of the black and white Universal horrors recently, it confirmed my long-held beliefs that the older methods still often hold up, and that the obsession with doing everything on the computer is stifling creativity in special effects today. It was nice to see some model blood and guts mixed with the CGI carnage though, and overall the film looks and sounds fairly good. Director Louis Morneau has a nice knack of using tight editing without going over the top, and Michael Wandmacher’s score certainly makes the most of just being obviously done on a synthesiser, though he’s rather too fond of those obligatory aural stings.

The acting, which includes a clearly-slumming-it-but-having-fun Stephen Rea, is a very mixed bag that is not helped by a wider variety of accents than Robin Hood: Prince Of Thieves. It gives the film an almost surreal feel though I doubt that was intended. Werewolf-The Beast Among Us is probably one of those film you can pick apart and laugh at a great deal, but I enjoyed it more than some of the comparable cinema releases this year. It has good intentions and its slightly weird melding of the very old and the new creates an off-kilter effect which I found quite interesting. A shame it ends up falling apart a bit, though the allocation of an extra half an hour or so within which to tell its story would have helped matters considerably. Overall a sometimes daft but fun monster pic. I suppose you could take half a star or even a star off if you’re not a fan of werewolf films, but in the end all reviews are influenced a little by the writer’s taste aren’t they?

Rating: 6.5/10

Out on DVD/Blu Ray 14th Oct



_____________________________

check out more of my reviews on http://horrorcultfilms.co.uk/

(in reply to evil bill)
Post #: 14447
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 4/10/2012 11:57:49 AM   
Platter

 

Posts: 81
Joined: 14/8/2010
Natural Born Killers - Director's Cut (1994)

A weak film with a bad script and an even worse director. The ideas behind it are good but it was so poorly executed. Dramatically it's a lumpy, boring mess and stylistically it doesn't really work.

Oliver Stone has made a few visually ugly movies. Platoon looks awful for example. JFK on the other hand looks good. Natural Born Killers is just horrible looking. The idea of fast editing, dutch angled camerawork, extreme neon lighting, back projected scenery and constantly shifting film stock (colour, black and white, 8mm, 16mm, 35mm) is good. It's just that it's been executed with no style. There is a chunky TV over lit look to most of it and the framing is often bad. The staging of many scenes is awkward. Visually it looks a lot worse than it should.

Another innovation they had was the extensive use of early nineties music. It works okay, but they placed it so low in the mix that none of the songs have the visceral impact they should have. In the book Killer Instinct by producer Jane Hamsher she talks quite a bit about the music (most of which she appears to have sourced without any credit). A lot of effort went into getting the rights to S***list by L7 for the opening coffee shop scene. In the movie it's so low on the soundtrack that frankly anything a bit thrashy could have been used and it would have had the same effect.

I used to think the first half of them on the run was poor, but the second half in prison was okay. Frankly it's all a bit boring and flat. Only in the last half hour with the prison riot does it show a flicker of life, but even then it is only a small brief flicker.

It's a bad movie.

3 out of 10 stars

------------------------------------------------------

Book review: Killer Instinct by Jane Hamsher

It's a very entertaining book about the making of Natural Born Killers. Sadly having then re-watched the movie I can't help but feel it was a lot of effort for very little. The film is pretty bad.

You might expect it to be a bit cut off from the proper film making creative side as it's from the producer's point of view. She was always on set and was dealing with Oliver Stone all the time so it's not too far away from the actual making of the movie.

The stuff about music was very interesting. She appears to have been very important in finding music for Oliver Stone to consider (it turns out he knows next to nothing about music). She doesn't seem to get any credit for this outside of this book.

Interestingly she says she dislikes the soundtrack album. I bought the album on the cheap years ago and I hated it too. It wasn't full songs, but instead a heavily edited mix tape collage. Waiting For The Miracle by Leonard Cohen for example is a seven minute song, and yet it's less than four minutes on the CD. Also some pointless dialogue from the movie has been included. On a Tarantino soundtrack CD the dialogue works out of context as it's not plot specific stuff. In Natural Born Killers the dialogue was conventional plot driving stuff so it didn't work. Trent Reznor, and to a lesser extent Stone and the official music supervisor, were credited on the CD while her name was absent. I think she was right to be happy not to be associated with it.

There's a big section about a truck that turned up to be used as product placement. It's odd that after so many pages about it that she fails to mention that the establishing shot they filmed of it passing a petrol station was cut from the final movie.

It's a very good book. I recommend it. She digs up the bodies and names names. She is brutally honest and a lot of people do not end up looking good (Tarantino and another producer on Natural Born Killers are savaged).

I think a lot of people will dismiss her as someone with an axe to grind, and a bit of a credit thief or something. I thought she was very credible and it all sounds very plausible. I'm sure enough stupid stuff really happened that she didn't need to make anything up.

(in reply to Dr Lenera)
Post #: 14448
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 4/10/2012 1:02:44 PM   
Dr Lenera

 

Posts: 3447
Joined: 19/10/2005
I love Natural Born Killers, I think it's a stunning, pointed and brave piece of filmmaking! I must read that book though!

_____________________________

check out more of my reviews on http://horrorcultfilms.co.uk/

(in reply to Platter)
Post #: 14449
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 4/10/2012 1:05:38 PM   
Dr Lenera

 

Posts: 3447
Joined: 19/10/2005


Seeking a fresh start, newly divorced Sarah and her daughter Elissa find the house of their dreams in a small, upscale, rural town, even if it is opposite a house where a murder took place. Sarah sees a light in the house at night and the next day at a welcome party thrown by the neighbours she and Elissa learn what happened. Years earlier in the house a girl called Carrie-Ann murdered her parents in their beds and ran into the woods never to be seen again, though it was presumed she drowned in the nearby dam. Her brother Ryan now lives alone in the house, hated by his neighbours because his house drives down their property values. They want to purchase his house and demolish it, but Ryan won’t sell the house, partly because it contains a deadly secret…..

House At The End Of The Street has been pretty much ‘sold’ as a horror film, something which I would say is not really accurate. There are horror elements, but it’s really more of a teen romance crossed with a thriller. Is it any good? Well, once you realise you’re not really watching the film you thought you were going to be watching, you may be entertained in spots, but overall it’s a rather humdrum, bland affair that seems to be constantly holding itself back from becoming too suspenseful or exciting or just plain good. It’s not really a bad movie; you may not totally regret watching it, but it just reeks of compromise and that admittedly overused term ‘dumbing down’. There is probably the potential for a really good dark thriller in the material, but it seems that most of the good stuff has just been ironed out in Hollywood’s obsessive quest to appeal to the teenagers.

We open with Carrie-Ann stabbing her parents to death, and it’s one of those scenes where the editing, the camerawork and even the colours go wild to try to compensate for the fact that we don’t get to see the actual stabbing. It works, kind of, and certainly begins the film well. For a short while it seems matters will continue to be good; how is it that a simple light on in a house can be so eerie? – but the film becomes less and less interesting very quickly with endless stuff involving Elissa trying to integrate herself at her new school, her growing friendship with Ryan and her mum’s unhappiness with the relationship. Ryan is of course a quiet, sensitive soul who is mis-understood even though he still plays cassettes [actually, so do I, so I shouldn’t use it as a criticism]. When Elissa and Ryan get down to ‘it’ with weedy ‘emo’ pop music in the background, it seems that the Twilight audience is the main target of this film and I really started to lose patience with it, though it does get better….kind of.

Now of course there are many good thrillers that depend on a good build-up, and there is nothing wrong with taking things slowly, but House At The End Of The Street, for much of the time, just seems to sit there, the tedium occasionally interrupted by a brief ‘interesting’ moment to remind is that this is supposed to be a thriller, though just when the film is getting good it goes back the way it was before. It is soon revealed to us very early on [so I’m not counting it as a spoiler!] but Carrie-Ann is actually alive and being looked after in the cellar by Ryan, who has to keep giving her drugs to prevent her homicidal impulses from taking over. There is a rather good sequence of her escaping from her cellar prison, looking all spooky and like an escapee from a Japanese ghost movie with her uncanny movements and black hair covering much of her face, but the film doesn’t capitalise on it for a while afterwards, and, as I walked out of the cinema I kept thinking of ways how the tension could have been heightened and the telling of the story improved. Not a good thing.

An accidental death half way through changes things a little and the story threatens to become interesting as Ryan is persecuted by all and sundry. Will he remain a misunderstood victim or does madness run in the family? The final third is lots of chasing around in a house of the kind you’ve seem a hundred times. The heroine trapped in a cellar, a cop calling in to investigate, some violence with knives and a hammer; we’ve seen it all before and nothing new is added. There are certainly a few tense moments but any brutality is cut away from. Graphic violence certainly is not essential in a film like this, but I think this particular one could have done with some to give it a much-needed edge. In fact, it seems hampered throughout by having to conform to a ‘PG-13’ rating, and before you ask, yes, I know it’s a ‘15’ over here but you don’t see anything that justifies that certificate. The only possible reason I can think of for that rating can be the subject of one of the ‘twists’.

Yes, this is one of Those films, and I actually didn’t guess the first twist but most viewers will probably be disappointed that it’s simply a variation on one that has been around for decades now, though I find it intriguing that filmmakers no longer seem bothered by the old rule ‘ the camera cannot lie’. Gone are the days when, for instance, Alfred Hitchcock is lambasted for inserting a flashback in Stage Fright which turns out to be inaccurate. This film also has a second twist right before the end credits and it does give the story a sadness that might hit some, but I was sure I had encountered it before in an 80’s slasher film and I was right. Overall the film seems to echo a certain old movie classic which I won’t mention but will become apparent to anyone who has seen it. Again, this is not automatically a bad thing, but this film just doesn’t put a decent-enough spin on its inspirations.

The camerawork is weird. Sometimes the camera is shaken about it in that stupid and irritating manner filmmakers seem to think is cool and edgy, but sometimes it moves around gracefully, giving the impression that there are two cinematographers. There’s one particularly good shot where we look in at Elissa through a window, go up the side of the house, over the roof and down the other side to see Carrie-Ann approaching the house. There are some decent performances in this film, with Jennifer Lawrence just as strong a presence as she was in The Hunger Games, and it’s always nice to see Elizabeth Shue; the woman is supposed to be 49 but she hardly seems to age! Sadly the most complex role in the movie, that of Ryan, isn’t made the most of by the person playing it, Max Thieriot. He’s just not up to it and is another major problem in a film that is full of them. I was left with a sour taste in my mouth after seeing House At The End Of The Street because it’s more interesting elements are almost callously simplified. For a start, it’s a shining example of the familiar situation when a group of ignorant, mean people are proven right by the way things work out. Could the film have been good with some more work on it? Possibly, but it would need so much work it would have to be almost a different movie. My advice would be to catch this on late night TV where it would sit quite comfortably.

Rating: 4.5/10


_____________________________

check out more of my reviews on http://horrorcultfilms.co.uk/

(in reply to Dr Lenera)
Post #: 14450
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 4/10/2012 7:35:28 PM   
paul.mccluskey


Posts: 4945
Joined: 15/4/2007
From: Port Glasgow, Scotland, UK
 Official trailer for Rob Zombie's The Lords of Salem. Looks trippy, can't wait for this. But will it be better than The Devil's Rejects?

_____________________________

My DVD Collection

Do not walk away in silence...

(in reply to Dr Lenera)
Post #: 14451
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 4/10/2012 8:02:02 PM   
evil bill


Posts: 6560
Joined: 19/7/2006
From: mordor/ uk
quote:

ORIGINAL: Platter

Natural Born Killers - Director's Cut (1994)

A weak film with a bad script and an even worse director. The ideas behind it are good but it was so poorly executed. Dramatically it's a lumpy, boring mess and stylistically it doesn't really work.

Oliver Stone has made a few visually ugly movies. Platoon looks awful for example. JFK on the other hand looks good. Natural Born Killers is just horrible looking. The idea of fast editing, dutch angled camerawork, extreme neon lighting, back projected scenery and constantly shifting film stock (colour, black and white, 8mm, 16mm, 35mm) is good. It's just that it's been executed with no style. There is a chunky TV over lit look to most of it and the framing is often bad. The staging of many scenes is awkward. Visually it looks a lot worse than it should.

Another innovation they had was the extensive use of early nineties music. It works okay, but they placed it so low in the mix that none of the songs have the visceral impact they should have. In the book Killer Instinct by producer Jane Hamsher she talks quite a bit about the music (most of which she appears to have sourced without any credit). A lot of effort went into getting the rights to S***list by L7 for the opening coffee shop scene. In the movie it's so low on the soundtrack that frankly anything a bit thrashy could have been used and it would have had the same effect.

I used to think the first half of them on the run was poor, but the second half in prison was okay. Frankly it's all a bit boring and flat. Only in the last half hour with the prison riot does it show a flicker of life, but even then it is only a small brief flicker.

It's a bad movie.

3 out of 10 stars


Now i totally disagree with you on this one,it is a must for any fan of Strange/Weird films,a real visual bombardment and Stone at his best.In fact i forked out twice for this brilliant film,and will be getting the Blu-Ray as this is my favorite Oliver Stone movie.But the Directors cut  is the UK cinema release,it runs for 118 minutes,which is the 4 minutes restored that the MPAA removed,so it got it's R rating,and the BBFC approved for an 18 cert release in the UK,but the first DVD release was the US cut version.Even this cut DVD was delayed it's release due to all the media hype surrounding the film just like on it's Cinema release,all bad press from the gutter press(the usual ones)but then who cares for the rag's that claim to speak for the people.The version i saw in Canada on it's release during a film festival in Montreal,was the full 122 minutes back in 1994,and had been given an 18cert by the Canadian Film board.Stone decided that the US MPAA would go mad if they saw this,so reduced it to 118,but they still felt it was to graphic,and cut four minutes.Anyway here's ye old review,which is the only way to react to such a negative review,though i think it's one movie that will always cause a reaction. 

NATURAL BORN KILLERS (1994)
The misadventures of Mickey and Mallory: outcasts,victims of traumatized childhoods,who become lovers and serial killers. They travel across Route 666 conducting psychedelic mass-slaughters not for money, not for revenge, just for kicks. Glorified by the media, the pair become legendary folk heroes; their story told by the single person they leave alive at the scene of each of their slaughters.

To me this is  colorful tragic comic and articulate satire on humankind,and on the  media, politics of the 90's??, and the fact that serial killers and mass murders seem to catch our imagination so much.Maybe it's that fact mankind seems to go headlong into self destruct,a dark inner desire we all have in one way or another,that attracts us to the dark side of what is human.There has been criticism on the high content of violence,and it still outrages many for it's view of a greed driven society,where the media pumps out brain-dead fodder to pander to the brain washed masses, All the characters are natural born killers in this movie, not only the ones doing the actual killing,but those that use it as a form of entertainment.Mickey and Mallory plus the rest are shown as predators with no morals, who will do anything to achieve their goals. The movie will take you flying, smash in your brains and blast your eyes with a visual overload,in fact it will feed all your senses to overload,and you will either love it or hate it.

Combining the brilliant early writing skills of Tarantino,(after all this is his script)with Oliver Stone's addiction to violence,and it's impact on society,in fact it's so much more.It's the way the media seems to love 'serial-killers',mainly the USA's media that turns psycho's into pop-icons,which is very evident in the cases of people such as Charles Manson,Ed Glien and Richard Ramirez.But this is also a fine very dark black comedy,in a way a 90's version of  Kubrick's 'Dr. Strangelove',except with out the Bomb,where like it,it turns the paranoia of a nation into satire,making those in power look fools.

Add to this the brilliant performance of Woody Harrelson as Mickey,a role in which i think he has never been better,and his side kick Juliette Lewis as Marlory.The two are super hot on screen,and this adds to the realism in what is a acid trip of a film.And let's not forget supporting cast Rodney Dangerfield as Mallorys perverted child abusing dad,this is one of the more disturbing twists in this film,yet filmed like a TV sitcom,it is also surreal.Then there's Robert Downey Jr the reporter who will stop at noting to get a story,again one of his finest moments too,as you really get to hate this guy more than the twisted killers.Another sick twisted shit is played by Tom Sizemore as Det Jack who too will stop at noting to be top dog,and cares little for those around him.Plus the quite brilliant Tommy Lee Jones who as the twisted corrupt prison warden,who makes you want to scream,and who just tears up the screen every time he appears.There's just so many fine actors in this movie,pulling out all the stops it's hard just to list just these few.

Then there's also the fantastic soundtrack mainly by NIN,that is a stand alone soundtrack,one you can listen to with out ever seeing the film.But with the film it is one of the most awesome soundtracks going,mixing Bob Dylan,Pasty Cline,Peter Gabriel,Dr Dire etc etc,and the whole mix works,with the mix of colours,and visual styles.This has some of the most eye popping graphics,mix of film stock,mix of video graphics,you will ever see in one movie.Stone is at his most experimental,his most controversial(voted the 8Th most controversial film ever),his darkest most surreal/bizarre,he has ever been.The whole film has sort of a psychedelic visual style, and utilizes constant cuts and constant change in colour scheme, often changing between powerful green, blue, red and even black/white.There's times you will see touches of masters like Dario Argento,with his use of colour,dark blues and bloody reds,and even that dream like effect only David Lynch seems to be able to do is all here too.This is just superb direction by a man  on a mission,out to show the dark side of American culture,and not afraid to push the.boundaries.This is the ultimate 90's movie that defines a decade,a must see mind-blowing, powerhouse of a Stone movie not to be missed. 10/10

< Message edited by evil bill -- 4/10/2012 8:18:19 PM >

_____________________________

"You listen to me now,i will find you and i will kill you!"

(in reply to Platter)
Post #: 14452
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 4/10/2012 8:15:12 PM   
evil bill


Posts: 6560
Joined: 19/7/2006
From: mordor/ uk
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dr Lenera

Was having trouble shrinking my pics today, sorry!!






The acting, which includes a clearly-slumming-it-but-having-fun Stephen Rea, is a very mixed bag that is not helped by a wider variety of accents than Robin Hood: Prince Of Thieves. It gives the film an almost surreal feel though I doubt that was intended. Werewolf-The Beast Among Us is probably one of those film you can pick apart and laugh at a great deal, but I enjoyed it more than some of the comparable cinema releases this year. It has good intentions and its slightly weird melding of the very old and the new creates an off-kilter effect which I found quite interesting. A shame it ends up falling apart a bit, though the allocation of an extra half an hour or so within which to tell its story would have helped matters considerably. Overall a sometimes daft but fun monster pic. I suppose you could take half a star or even a star off if you're not a fan of werewolf films, but in the end all reviews are influenced a little by the writer's taste aren't they?

Rating: 6.5/10

Out on DVD/Blu Ray 14th Oct



Of course all reviews are,but like you a good old fashioned Werewolf film will always get that extra star,for as you know i loved Wolfman 2008 as much as you,and as for the Howling,loved only the first.But i will try and get my hands on this it so much like a Niel Jordan take on the Werewolf tale,though his Company Of Wolves is it's own beast.
quote:


 

The camerawork is weird. Sometimes the camera is shaken about it in that stupid and irritating manner filmmakers seem to think is cool and edgy, but sometimes it moves around gracefully, giving the impression that there are two cinematographers. There’s one particularly good shot where we look in at Elissa through a window, go up the side of the house, over the roof and down the other side to see Carrie-Ann approaching the house. There are some decent performances in this film, with Jennifer Lawrence just as strong a presence as she was in The Hunger Games, and it’s always nice to see Elizabeth Shue; the woman is supposed to be 49 but she hardly seems to age! Sadly the most complex role in the movie, that of Ryan, isn’t made the most of by the person playing it, Max Thieriot. He’s just not up to it and is another major problem in a film that is full of them. I was left with a sour taste in my mouth after seeing House At The End Of The Street because it’s more interesting elements are almost callously simplified. For a start, it’s a shining example of the familiar situation when a group of ignorant, mean people are proven right by the way things work out. Could the film have been good with some more work on it? Possibly, but it would need so much work it would have to be almost a different movie. My advice would be to catch this on late night TV where it would sit quite comfortably.

Rating: 4.5/10


And that is where i intend to watch this,as my Daughter felt the same as you about this one,and has told me to wait so i will.You se i obey more than one woman in my life.


quote:

paul.mccluskey

Official trailer for Rob Zombie's The Lords of Salem. Looks trippy, can't wait for this. But will it be better than The Devil's Rejects?


At a guess i'd say yes it willbe as i think Robs skills as a director have improved over the past few films,and i did enjoy his take on the Halloween films 1and 2,but i think this just might be his best film yet???

_____________________________

"You listen to me now,i will find you and i will kill you!"

(in reply to Dr Lenera)
Post #: 14453
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 5/10/2012 9:19:53 PM   
Dr Lenera

 

Posts: 3447
Joined: 19/10/2005
I didn't think you were the type to obey any woman Bill

_____________________________

check out more of my reviews on http://horrorcultfilms.co.uk/

(in reply to evil bill)
Post #: 14454
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 5/10/2012 9:23:57 PM   
Dr Lenera

 

Posts: 3447
Joined: 19/10/2005
Now this film is not Wierd/Strange, but I know Bill for one is a fan of the first one, so I'll post;






Bryan Mills is performing a security mission in Istanbul. He is surprised to be met by his daughter Kim and his ex-wife Lenore at the hotel. He is unaware that the bad guys from the first movie are seeking revenge for the death of their brothers and sons at his very hands. He had to free his daughter from a human trafficking organisation by killing these men. Now they are prepared to ambush him in Istanbul by interrogating someone that knows him. While Bryan and Lenore leave Kim at the hotel, they are stalked by the evil Albanians and eventually captured. Bryan must communicate with his daughter over the phone to try and determine his own location, escape and then finish the villians once and for all…..

If you’ve been reading my reviews on this website for quite a while, you’ll be used to me moaning about some things that are prevalent in films at the moment and that I really disike, but there have been pleasures to balance the bad things out, and one of these is the re-emergence of Liam Neeson, an actor I’ve always enjoyed watching, as an aging action star. This was primarily done to a modest but very successful movie called Taken in 2008, where he tore through Paris trying to rescue his daughter from a human slavery ring, and, though his films since then have certainly entertained, it seems that fans really wanted him to reprise the role of Bryan Mills, the ex-CIA with a special set of skills who will stop at nothing to save members of his family from harm. I wasn’t too sure whether I wanted a sequel myself, even though for me the first film was probably the greatest guilty pleasure of its year, and word seems to already around that this second film is a poor effort [though the first picture got mostly poor reviews by uptight and sometimes overly politically correct critics]. In any case, it’s got the awesome Neeson in another city kicking arse, so how bad can it really be?

It certainly begins interestingly, with us being shown that Mills killed so many people in the first movie that a transport plane is needed to airlift their bodies home and a mass burial is required to dispose of them. Action movies really account for all the corpses left strewn around, though you may remember when the first Austin Powers film had a great gag in a related vein. After this Taken 2 proceeds in a similar manner to the first, with much mediocre dialogue between Mills, his wife Lenore and his daughter Grace, except that Mill’s protective urge has an unwelcome bit of creepiness when he bursts in on his daughter making out with her boyfriend. Sadly though it quickly becomes obvious that this movie just doesn’t have a decent director with the endless aerial shots [and yes, I like aerial shots, but not an absurd number of them]. For a while virtually every scene, even short, seems to open with a bloody aerial shot, as if everyone is being pursued by a fleet of helicopters. When the action kicks into gear though, the aerial shots start to mostly disappear, to be replaced by…..

Yes. You know it. Lots of quick cuts and close-ups where you can’t see what’s going on. I’ve whinged about this dreadful trend in modern action [and increasingly in horror] many times before so I’m going to sound like a broken record here, but honestly, what is the bloody point? There’s an early sequence where Mills is looking for Lenore, and after much rushing around enters a courtyard where a group of nasty henchmen surround him. The music adds the right feel and Neeson busts some decent moves, but you just see them, and what should be a decent martial arts brawl is simply a nuisance. A nice and lengthy car chase is reduced so much to a mass of one second close-ups of faces, one-second close-ups of parts of the vehicles and shaking the camera around that it’s just a blur, and not only were my eyes sore but I felt that I was on the verge of having a headache. It’s doesn’t make the scene more exciting, it just shows that Oliver Megaton is an especially incompetent film director, albeit one of many. Look at the first Taken; helmer Pierre Morel did employ this style, but only in a few short passages to enhance matters, which is how, for the most part, it should be used. I can only think of Michael Bay [ love him or hate him, he knows how to do his action], Paul Greengrass [well, up to Green Zone] and the late lamented Tony Scott who do this kind of thing well.

Of course it doesn’t help that Taken 2 has been cut to get a ‘12’ rating, and though the BBFC’s website says that only three brief moments had to be toned down, it looks like the film has been hacked to bits even before it reached the UK. It’s obvious that punches and kicks have been edited on the point of impact and sometimes it’s hard to even tell what has happened. Anyone with a musical ear will notice music edits, even one during a non-action scene. Between Megaton’s abysmal directing and the censor cuts, Taken 2 is seriously handicapped, not to mention that the edits were at the behest of the distributors to achieve the lower rating. I’m so tired of this obsession with the ‘PG-13’ and ’12A’ certificates, but what is even more depressing is that films of a higher rating seem to do less and less well these days. I don’t know what the answer is, and it’s certainly not within the remit of what should be a straight-forward review for me to propose one, but it’s a very sad state of affairs at the moment.

If you ignore the action, Taken 2 is quite good fun, honestly [says the critic who’s been mostly complaining about it so far]. What action you can see is mostly derivative [look out for Eraser’s car/train gag yet again] but Grace has a neat window-ledge bit aka The Bourne Identity which is quite exciting. The film is a lighter affair than the first one, the pace is even faster and the script, while it does have its silly bits, does score points for not just repeating events we’ve seen before. There’s one early section of the film when Mills is the one who is kidnapped, and it’s young Grace who has to come and save him. These scenes manage to be both clever and stupid at the same time; the way Mills learns the location of where he is being held is especially noteworthy, but it’s also incredibly dumb how the bad guys didn’t find Mills’ phone on him and he can use it to text Grace. I will say right now though that Neeson [who looks about 50, not 60] is as totally cool as ever, even when not given any memorable lines this time round. He’s totally, wonderfully, badass, yet lends the part a considerable dignity. There’s a nice little scene near the end between him and the main villain which I actually wish had been longer, as it reveals a weariness in Mills, and it’s interesting to see. I also couldn’t stop thinking, as with the first film, that if all CIA agents were as good as Mills we’d have no terrorists running free whatsoever after a few weeks.

The music for Taken 2 is by Nathaniel Méchaly, and it’s not really a bad effort, but is yet again another action score that uses Japanese taiko drums, or something sounding like them. In the last three months I have heard four scores employing them [The Dark Knight Rises, Total Recall, Looper and this]. What the hell is the obsession with these drums? What is the obsession with making every action score sound the same? All in all, Taken 2 is an okay film and it could have been a lot worse, but it does have many of the worst features of films at the moment, from incoherent action to cutting down to a lower rating to bleeding taiko drums to others I haven’t mentioned. And Megaton; well, as with The Red Siren and Columbiana, the film is watchable in spite of him, not because of it. This hack ruined one franchise with Transporter 3, and may have ruined another with this film, so what next? Bond? Oh no, hang on a minute, Marc Forster came close to already doing that….

Rating: 5.5/10

_____________________________

check out more of my reviews on http://horrorcultfilms.co.uk/

(in reply to Dr Lenera)
Post #: 14455
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 6/10/2012 4:33:49 PM   
losthighway


Posts: 3166
Joined: 25/1/2006
From: Manchesterford
 Well i saw NIGHTBREED: THE CABAL CUT and GRABBERS last night at the Grimm Up North horror festival.

First things first it has to be said that the Cabal Cut is clearly a labour of love and has taken 9 months of effort to get into it this current cut (the director who was in attendance would still like to add some more footage when/if it becomes available)... and I guess that is my main criticism with it. It's just too long! Running at 144mins the story is indeed Barker's vision so we get more of the love story, more Nightbreed monsters and the studio orchestrated slasher element has pretty much disappeared. We also get Decker speaking to his mask and yes he does die at the end. The added footage is interlaced with DVD quality and tbh it jars at times actually moving between the two in some scenes although it's nice to see the bits that were chopped out but again I fall back to my initial criticism... Perhaps some of these moments would have been better excised because ultimately they feel like deleted scenes and one of the scenes at the end is such poor quality that unless you've read the book you wouldn't realise one of the characters is holding a knife because the picture is so blurry. Also, can someone please confirm for me whether Boone's girlfriend dies at the end and he goes off into the night alone because I thought she did!? Also, the film suffers from very dodgy acting by Cronenberg and one of the other guy's playing one of the Nightbreed. This humour i'm sure was intentional but just seems a bit too cheesy tbh. It's also worth mentioning that this new cut - certainly the ending which is the same as the book - feels like a social comment on American bigotry and it's treatment of minority groups. Whether that was intentional i'm not sure but 22 years later, that is certainly how it comes across.

Overall, this is a film die-hard horror fans should definitely try and catch, if only for the completists amongst us. The director said the plan is to have a BR release in a year's time with the studio cut of Nightbreed and the Cabal Cut alongside each other plus a 2hr documentary... that's if Morgan Creek/C20th Fox release the footage for them to get better quality prints! He also told us Barker only gave him 4 points to change after viewing his cut of the film, so as I say this is clearly Barker's vision which is a good thing but at the same time, I can't help feeling the original version probably wasn't that great to start off with. It's certainly no Hellraiser! Overall: 3/5

Grabbers plays like Shaun of the Dead but with aliens from outer space. I'd say a good 70% is like a tourism advert for the Irish Tourist Board and the other 30% has some gentle Father Ted comedy alongside the odd bit of creature/gore/madness. It's OK and passed 90mins but tbh it's about on a par with most of the straight to DVD fare we get on a weekly basis these days. Overall: 3/5

...Oh and finally it was Barker's 60th birthday yesterday so the director of the Cabal Cut videotaped us all singing happy birthday to him on his iphone and then sent to it Clive!

< Message edited by losthighway -- 6/10/2012 4:38:36 PM >

_____________________________

The secret to becoming a star is knowing how to behave like one.

(in reply to Dr Lenera)
Post #: 14456
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 6/10/2012 8:53:06 PM   
UTB


Posts: 8972
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: evil bill

quote:

ORIGINAL: Platter

Natural Born Killers - Director's Cut (1994)

A weak film with a bad script and an even worse director. The ideas behind it are good but it was so poorly executed. Dramatically it's a lumpy, boring mess and stylistically it doesn't really work.

Oliver Stone has made a few visually ugly movies. Platoon looks awful for example. JFK on the other hand looks good. Natural Born Killers is just horrible looking. The idea of fast editing, dutch angled camerawork, extreme neon lighting, back projected scenery and constantly shifting film stock (colour, black and white, 8mm, 16mm, 35mm) is good. It's just that it's been executed with no style. There is a chunky TV over lit look to most of it and the framing is often bad. The staging of many scenes is awkward. Visually it looks a lot worse than it should.

Another innovation they had was the extensive use of early nineties music. It works okay, but they placed it so low in the mix that none of the songs have the visceral impact they should have. In the book Killer Instinct by producer Jane Hamsher she talks quite a bit about the music (most of which she appears to have sourced without any credit). A lot of effort went into getting the rights to S***list by L7 for the opening coffee shop scene. In the movie it's so low on the soundtrack that frankly anything a bit thrashy could have been used and it would have had the same effect.

I used to think the first half of them on the run was poor, but the second half in prison was okay. Frankly it's all a bit boring and flat. Only in the last half hour with the prison riot does it show a flicker of life, but even then it is only a small brief flicker.

It's a bad movie.

3 out of 10 stars


Now i totally disagree with you on this one,it is a must for any fan of Strange/Weird films,a real visual bombardment and Stone at his best.In fact i forked out twice for this brilliant film,and will be getting the Blu-Ray as this is my favorite Oliver Stone movie.But the Directors cut  is the UK cinema release,it runs for 118 minutes,which is the 4 minutes restored that the MPAA removed,so it got it's R rating,and the BBFC approved for an 18 cert release in the UK,but the first DVD release was the US cut version.Even this cut DVD was delayed it's release due to all the media hype surrounding the film just like on it's Cinema release,all bad press from the gutter press(the usual ones)but then who cares for the rag's that claim to speak for the people.The version i saw in Canada on it's release during a film festival in Montreal,was the full 122 minutes back in 1994,and had been given an 18cert by the Canadian Film board.Stone decided that the US MPAA would go mad if they saw this,so reduced it to 118,but they still felt it was to graphic,and cut four minutes.Anyway here's ye old review,which is the only way to react to such a negative review,though i think it's one movie that will always cause a reaction. 

NATURAL BORN KILLERS (1994)
The misadventures of Mickey and Mallory: outcasts,victims of traumatized childhoods,who become lovers and serial killers. They travel across Route 666 conducting psychedelic mass-slaughters not for money, not for revenge, just for kicks. Glorified by the media, the pair become legendary folk heroes; their story told by the single person they leave alive at the scene of each of their slaughters.

To me this is  colorful tragic comic and articulate satire on humankind,and on the  media, politics of the 90's??, and the fact that serial killers and mass murders seem to catch our imagination so much.Maybe it's that fact mankind seems to go headlong into self destruct,a dark inner desire we all have in one way or another,that attracts us to the dark side of what is human.There has been criticism on the high content of violence,and it still outrages many for it's view of a greed driven society,where the media pumps out brain-dead fodder to pander to the brain washed masses, All the characters are natural born killers in this movie, not only the ones doing the actual killing,but those that use it as a form of entertainment.Mickey and Mallory plus the rest are shown as predators with no morals, who will do anything to achieve their goals. The movie will take you flying, smash in your brains and blast your eyes with a visual overload,in fact it will feed all your senses to overload,and you will either love it or hate it.

Combining the brilliant early writing skills of Tarantino,(after all this is his script)with Oliver Stone's addiction to violence,and it's impact on society,in fact it's so much more.It's the way the media seems to love 'serial-killers',mainly the USA's media that turns psycho's into pop-icons,which is very evident in the cases of people such as Charles Manson,Ed Glien and Richard Ramirez.But this is also a fine very dark black comedy,in a way a 90's version of  Kubrick's 'Dr. Strangelove',except with out the Bomb,where like it,it turns the paranoia of a nation into satire,making those in power look fools.

Add to this the brilliant performance of Woody Harrelson as Mickey,a role in which i think he has never been better,and his side kick Juliette Lewis as Marlory.The two are super hot on screen,and this adds to the realism in what is a acid trip of a film.And let's not forget supporting cast Rodney Dangerfield as Mallorys perverted child abusing dad,this is one of the more disturbing twists in this film,yet filmed like a TV sitcom,it is also surreal.Then there's Robert Downey Jr the reporter who will stop at noting to get a story,again one of his finest moments too,as you really get to hate this guy more than the twisted killers.Another sick twisted shit is played by Tom Sizemore as Det Jack who too will stop at noting to be top dog,and cares little for those around him.Plus the quite brilliant Tommy Lee Jones who as the twisted corrupt prison warden,who makes you want to scream,and who just tears up the screen every time he appears.There's just so many fine actors in this movie,pulling out all the stops it's hard just to list just these few.

Then there's also the fantastic soundtrack mainly by NIN,that is a stand alone soundtrack,one you can listen to with out ever seeing the film.But with the film it is one of the most awesome soundtracks going,mixing Bob Dylan,Pasty Cline,Peter Gabriel,Dr Dire etc etc,and the whole mix works,with the mix of colours,and visual styles.This has some of the most eye popping graphics,mix of film stock,mix of video graphics,you will ever see in one movie.Stone is at his most experimental,his most controversial(voted the 8Th most controversial film ever),his darkest most surreal/bizarre,he has ever been.The whole film has sort of a psychedelic visual style, and utilizes constant cuts and constant change in colour scheme, often changing between powerful green, blue, red and even black/white.There's times you will see touches of masters like Dario Argento,with his use of colour,dark blues and bloody reds,and even that dream like effect only David Lynch seems to be able to do is all here too.This is just superb direction by a man  on a mission,out to show the dark side of American culture,and not afraid to push the.boundaries.This is the ultimate 90's movie that defines a decade,a must see mind-blowing, powerhouse of a Stone movie not to be missed. 10/10


The delay for the DVD was due to it being released around the time of the Dunblane massacre, if I recall.

Great review though. I adore it. Its a visual assault on the senses with some superb, over the top performances and a brilliant soundtrack. Beep beep!

Also - is 'Dr Dire' a Freudian slip?

(in reply to evil bill)
Post #: 14457
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 7/10/2012 12:13:50 PM   
paul.mccluskey


Posts: 4945
Joined: 15/4/2007
From: Port Glasgow, Scotland, UK
 Has anyone seen Looper. Went to see it yesterday afternoon, and was blown away. Quite possibly the best Sci-Fi movie since The Matrix, such an original and perfectly executed idea. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is such a great actor, and Bruce Willis was excellent too. I was surprised seeing Jeff Daniels on screen, he hasn't been in anything major in a long time, and his performance here was brilliant.

_____________________________

My DVD Collection

Do not walk away in silence...

(in reply to UTB)
Post #: 14458
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 8/10/2012 12:37:30 AM   
Platter

 

Posts: 81
Joined: 14/8/2010
"Barker only gave him 4 points to change after viewing his cut of the film, so as I say this is clearly Barker's vision which is a good thing but at the same time, I can't help feeling the original version probably wasn't that great to start off with."

Last time I watched Nightbreed I thought it was incompetent. As in one of the worst directed movies I've ever seen. No matter how much tinkering they do with it, it will always be a massive dud.

--------------------------------------------------------------

True Romance (1993)
The first half hour is awful. Shockingly bad as the script is terrible. It was a massive struggle to power through it. Perhaps Tarantino has such a unique voice that no one else (or at least not Tony Scott) can direct his scripts. The dialogue was so awkward and fake that I felt embarrassed for the actors as they failed to bring those horribly mannered words to life. You can tell it was a very early script as it didn't even have the saving grace of having lots of memorable moments which Tarantino's writing is usually laced with. The complaints that his writing is superficial definitely applies to this film. I couldn't at all follow the motivations and thinking of the lead characters. How can they be so completely indifferent and complacent about so many life changing and violence events? They just shrug it off and go with the flow. I don't buy it. It came across to me as immature scriptwriting with inconsistent characters doing cool things with no attempt to keep things grounded and coherent. The Christopher Walken scene was good and the movie picked up a bit after that as the real plot kicks in from there. I didn't like the film but it stopped being incredibly awkward and starting to have some natural flow to it as there was now a solid story to follow. The end shoot out was quite good. I don't rate Tony Scott as a director, and he did nothing to impress me with this one (the fight with Gary Oldman was so badly filmed that I have no idea what Slater had grabbed hold of during their struggle). Overall I disliked the movie and hated the lead characters who were unrealistic, badly written idiots. A weak director, a bad script, crap characters and below average actors resulted in a bad film.

3 out of 10 stars




From Dusk Till Dawn (1996)
The first hour is a decent gangster movie. Nothing special or anything, but solid, entertaining and quite amusing. 6 out of 10 stuff. Then it turns into a vampire film. A very bad one. The last forty minutes are just rubbish. 3 out of 10 stuff. The vampires look poor, and are easy to kill to the extent that they are completely unthreatening or scary. The action is weakly staged and the whole section feels rather desperate and gimmicky (the penis gun?!). It's a shame as it would have been better to have just continued with it as a gangster movie. Harvey Keitel gives a strange, distracted, bored performance that is at odds with everyone else. The opening nine minute scene in the petrol station was really good and the best part of the whole film.

4 out of 10 stars



I think that's every significant Tarantino film now reviewed (his TV and acting career I don't care about). Only Four Rooms is missing, but I don't have access to it, and I don't care enough to track it down and spend money on it. Am I missing anything that he had a big hand in making?

----------------------------

Apt Pupil (1998)
Better than I remembered it to be as I was very disappointed with it the first time I watched it. The plot is basic, mostly uneventful and has no twists or unexpected developments. The characters were thin and sketchily realised. Somehow it sustains itself for its length and works well enough within its distinctly average and conventional range. This is not an ambitious avant garde or challenging movie. It was very nuts and bolts and crafted like every other mid-budget studio Hollywood movie. There is no edge to any of it. It's the type of two hander that should lend itself to big acting and florid writing. What we get is fine, decent acting and a script that isn't too plodding but plays it very safe and standard. It's a lot more average than it had to be. A decent movie.

6 out of 10 stars

< Message edited by Platter -- 8/10/2012 12:42:31 AM >

(in reply to paul.mccluskey)
Post #: 14459
RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? - 8/10/2012 8:00:43 PM   
evil bill


Posts: 6560
Joined: 19/7/2006
From: mordor/ uk
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dr Lenera

Now this film is not Wierd/Strange, but I know Bill for one is a fan of the first one, so I'll post;







The music for Taken 2 is by Nathaniel Méchaly, and it's not really a bad effort, but is yet again another action score that uses Japanese taiko drums, or something sounding like them. In the last three months I have heard four scores employing them [The Dark Knight Rises, Total Recall, Looper and this]. What the hell is the obsession with these drums? What is the obsession with making every action score sound the same? All in all, Taken 2 is an okay film and it could have been a lot worse, but it does have many of the worst features of films at the moment, from incoherent action to cutting down to a lower rating to bleeding taiko drums to others I haven't mentioned. And Megaton; well, as with The Red Siren and Columbiana, the film is watchable in spite of him, not because of it. This hack ruined one franchise with Transporter 3, and may have ruined another with this film, so what next? Bond? Oh no, hang on a minute, Marc Forster came close to already doing that….

Rating: 5.5/10

AHHHHHH!!!! 12A what the hell is going on with these film makers,they get a great film and tone it right down,like MAD MAX many moons ago with part three aimed at kids,IE Thunderdome.So here we have another example of a bad idea that an adult action film can be watered down to suit the kids,willthey never learn.What next a 12A Exorcist or A L I E N.
quote:


I didn't think you were the type to obey any woman Bill


Well she that must be obeyed wants to see Taken 2,because of Laim being one of her fav actors at the moment,but lucky for me so is Daniel Craig,so it's SKYFALL for us.I ve spent the weekend watching the Bond films on Sky's 007 channel,it's my true gulity pleasure.
On another note PROMETHEUS Blu Ray arivied on Saturday from  Play.Com,watched it that night,though it's the 2D version as i'm not a fan of 3D it's just to much a pain to watch,and adds very little to my enjoyment

_____________________________

"You listen to me now,i will find you and i will kill you!"

(in reply to Dr Lenera)
Post #: 14460
Page:   <<   < prev  480 481 [482] 483 484   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Favourite Films >> RE: WEIRD/STRANGE favorite movies fan base? Page: <<   < prev  480 481 [482] 483 484   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.219