APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

New or old, regardless of format, we love talking about movies and the people who make them

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Steve T Power » Mon Apr 19, 2010 8:46 am

Bram Stoker's Dracula - the Coppola version. I love how Coppola tackled the book, which in its purest form is pretty much unfilmable. Great performances from Oldman, Hopkins, Ryder, and most of the support cast (Keanu notwithstanding), and one hell of a beautiful looking production. It's easily my personal favorite "vampire" flick.
As the ancient Tibetan philosophy states:"Don't start none... won't be none...".
User avatar
Steve T Power
Judge
 
Posts: 5351
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 3:08 pm
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland, CA

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby HGervais » Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:40 pm

Kick-Ass...go see it now.
"The most dementing of all modern sins: the inability to distinquish excellence from success."-David Hare
User avatar
HGervais
Judge
 
Posts: 4725
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:14 am
Location: Greater New Orleans

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:46 pm

Bram Stoker's Dracula - the Coppola version. I love how Coppola tackled the book, which in its purest form is pretty much unfilmable. Great performances from Oldman, Hopkins, Ryder, and most of the support cast (Keanu notwithstanding), and one hell of a beautiful looking production. It's easily my personal favorite "vampire" flick.


I thought he overdid it with the visual styles. This was suppose to be a love story but I didn't feel much love from it.
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby molly1216 » Tue Apr 20, 2010 6:54 am

Selk wrote:
Bram Stoker's Dracula - the Coppola version. I love how Coppola tackled the book, which in its purest form is pretty much unfilmable. Great performances from Oldman, Hopkins, Ryder, and most of the support cast (Keanu notwithstanding), and one hell of a beautiful looking production. It's easily my personal favorite "vampire" flick.

I thought he overdid it with the visual styles. This was suppose to be a love story but I didn't feel much love from it.

my favorite parts are when he uses special effects styles from 1890s i think that's charming.
"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?" - Douglas Adams
User avatar
molly1216
County Prosecutor
 
Posts: 3501
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2004 2:43 pm
Location: methuen, ma

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Dan Mancini » Tue Apr 20, 2010 7:19 am

molly1216 wrote:
Selk wrote:
Bram Stoker's Dracula - the Coppola version. I love how Coppola tackled the book, which in its purest form is pretty much unfilmable. Great performances from Oldman, Hopkins, Ryder, and most of the support cast (Keanu notwithstanding), and one hell of a beautiful looking production. It's easily my personal favorite "vampire" flick.

I thought he overdid it with the visual styles. This was suppose to be a love story but I didn't feel much love from it.

my favorite parts are when he uses special effects styles from 1890s i think that's charming.

Exactly. Nosferatu will probably always be my favorite vampire flick, but Coppola's version of Dracula is right up there (even though it completely falls apart in the third act). It's a gorgeous flick with great atmosphere. And, yes, the in-camera effects are the bomb.

Also, Monica Bellucci. Just sayin'.
User avatar
Dan Mancini
Chief Prosecutor
 
Posts: 4055
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 7:17 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Tue Apr 20, 2010 7:39 am

Also, Monica Bellucci. Just sayin'.


I like Monica Bellucci in anything . . . . . and sometimes nothing [giggity]
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Steve T Power » Tue Apr 20, 2010 10:36 am

Dan Mancini wrote:
molly1216 wrote:
Selk wrote:
Bram Stoker's Dracula - the Coppola version. I love how Coppola tackled the book, which in its purest form is pretty much unfilmable. Great performances from Oldman, Hopkins, Ryder, and most of the support cast (Keanu notwithstanding), and one hell of a beautiful looking production. It's easily my personal favorite "vampire" flick.

I thought he overdid it with the visual styles. This was suppose to be a love story but I didn't feel much love from it.

my favorite parts are when he uses special effects styles from 1890s i think that's charming.

Exactly. Nosferatu will probably always be my favorite vampire flick, but Coppola's version of Dracula is right up there (even though it completely falls apart in the third act). It's a gorgeous flick with great atmosphere. And, yes, the in-camera effects are the bomb.


I used to think that, but it played much better for me this time around. I just had a great time all around. I liked the ratcheted tension and the frantic pacing of the last bit.

Also, Monica Bellucci. Just sayin'.


ROWR!
As the ancient Tibetan philosophy states:"Don't start none... won't be none...".
User avatar
Steve T Power
Judge
 
Posts: 5351
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 3:08 pm
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland, CA

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Wed Apr 21, 2010 4:13 am

ROWR!


You said it. How does a woman get that gorgeous?
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Steve T Power » Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:55 am

Speaking of gorgeous women...

watched Whiteout last night, prepared for the worst. Wound up having a great time with it. As a fan of both graphic novels, i knew what to expect going in, but i thought it was pretty cool how they combined both books and put a new twist on it. It's a great setting, and Kate did a fine job with the material (i certainly didn't picture her as Stetko at all beforehand). Beyond that, it's always nice to see Tom Skerrit working.

The blu-ray was also technically awesome.

EDIT: Nice to see Dominic Sena again, but the flashback scenes were pretty horribly handled.
As the ancient Tibetan philosophy states:"Don't start none... won't be none...".
User avatar
Steve T Power
Judge
 
Posts: 5351
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 3:08 pm
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland, CA

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Wed Apr 21, 2010 9:00 am

Tom Skerrit is great. He is one of those actors whose presence in a movie just makes it automatically cool. There are a few actors like that.
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Steve T Power » Wed Apr 21, 2010 9:50 am

Selk wrote:Tom Skerrit is great. He is one of those actors whose presence in a movie just makes it automatically cool. There are a few actors like that.


Bruce Greenwood comes to mind.
As the ancient Tibetan philosophy states:"Don't start none... won't be none...".
User avatar
Steve T Power
Judge
 
Posts: 5351
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 3:08 pm
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland, CA

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Wed Apr 21, 2010 9:54 am

Bruce Greenwood comes to mind.


Yeah, the first time I saw him was in The Sweet Hereafter.

I hated that he didn't get an Oscar nomination for Thirteen Days.
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby molly1216 » Wed Apr 21, 2010 10:57 am

Steve T Power wrote:I used to think that, but it played much better for me this time around. I just had a great time all around. I liked the ratcheted tension and the frantic pacing of the last bit.

which strangely coincides with the book's pacing..
IMHO - the 1st few chapters and the last few chapters of Dracula are better than the entire middle.
not much HAPPENS in the middle, the characters spend all their time documenting the few things that do occur and bringing each other up to speed. so by the time all the characters are on the same page, the book /film finally gets cracking. i'd say that the film follows the book a little too much.

I'd like to see someone film Saberhagen's The Dracula Tape where from D's POV and he's not actually the BAD guy. it was van Helsing stupidly pumping mis-matched blood into Lucy that killed her!
"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?" - Douglas Adams
User avatar
molly1216
County Prosecutor
 
Posts: 3501
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2004 2:43 pm
Location: methuen, ma

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Ash22 » Wed Apr 21, 2010 3:30 pm

Highlander:Director's Cut
Get Smart
Burn After Reading
" May I have ten-thousand marbles, please?" - Flounder, "Animal House"
Ash22
City Attorney
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 8:17 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Wed Apr 21, 2010 7:36 pm

Highlander: Director's Cut - Liked it.
Burn After Reading - Loved it.
Get Smart - Didn't see it.
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Gabriel Girard » Wed Apr 21, 2010 10:37 pm

Adventureland : I'm tired... just read Michael Rubino's review instead of my nocturnal ramblings. He says pretty much all I wanted to. He just forgot to note what a stereotype Lisa P. was - probably the most disappointing characterisation in the film; she could almost come from Clueless.
User avatar
Gabriel Girard
County Attorney
 
Posts: 2270
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:42 pm
Location: Montréal, Québec

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Dunnyman » Wed Apr 21, 2010 11:26 pm

molly1216 wrote:I'd like to see someone film Saberhagen's The Dracula Tape where from D's POV and he's not actually the BAD guy. it was van Helsing stupidly pumping mis-matched blood into Lucy that killed her!

One hell of a series of books, could make a hell of a series of movies...especially if they were to work the Holmes angle in...
"I ain't a boy, no I'm a man, and I believe in the Promised Land"
-Coming to the USA on January 20, 2009!
User avatar
Dunnyman
County Attorney
 
Posts: 1777
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 12:37 am
Location: Seattle

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Fri Apr 23, 2010 4:35 am

molly1216 wrote:I'd like to see someone film Saberhagen's The Dracula Tape where from D's POV and he's not actually the BAD guy. it was van Helsing stupidly pumping mis-matched blood into Lucy that killed her!


Saberhagen wrote a book that I really liked. It was called "After the Fact", about a time traveler trying to prevent the Lincoln assassination. I'll have to check out "The Dracula Tape".
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby J.M. Vargas » Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:33 am

Carl Theodor Dreyer's THE PASSION OF JOAN OF ARC (1928) on TCM-HD for the first time. I had no idea coming in that it was re-enactment of just the final moments in the life of Joan of Arc. The short running time should have clued me in there wasn't enough time for a rousing epic based on the most famous exploits of the mythical figure behind the legend. But that's OK because Dreyer, in his then-infinite wisdom, finds enough drama and tension in the more human and fragile version of Joan in her final moments (all while using the archived transcripts of Joan's prosecution to lend the movie authenticity) to lift the experience above mere spectacle. Maria Falconetti looks and feels (through unflattering framing, no make-up and off-camera abuses from Dreyer) like a conflicted person with the weight of the world on her young shoulders, a single voice of decency in a den of hypocrites more interested in protecting their power and stature than understanding a non-dogmatic view of the world they're living in. The sets look stunning (for the handful of scenes Dreyer doesn't focus on the faces in front of them), the pace near-perfect (not a scene wasted), the acting top-notch (hard to believe Falconetti never made another movie) and the ending unforgettable. Yes, the "Voices of Light" musical accompaniment is not period-accurate but I didn't mind it and I felt it actually worked to the movie's advantage (YMMV). My first Carl Theodor Dreyer movie and it's a winnah! :)

David Lean's HOBSON'S CHOICE (1953) on Criterion DVD for the first time. It takes a skilled director like David Lean (whom I associate with 'cast of thousands' epics) to not only make a modest Victorian-age British comedy look great and deliver a typical larger-than-life lead performance from Charles Laughton, but somehow manages to spread the wealth around and make the supporting cast stand out from beneath Laughton's tall shadow. Brenda De Banzie is a firecracker delight as Maggie, eldest of Hobson's (Laughton) three daughters that is determined to show her domineering lush of a father/boss who's in control of her life. By teaming-up with idiot savant boot maker Willie Mossop (John Mills in a superb trickier-than-it-looks role) and playing by the patriarchal rules of Victorian society, Maggie encounters both financial and personal satisfaction (for herself and her sheepish sisters) while teaching the elder Hobson a thing or two about tradition vs. individualism. There's not a single surprise in this predictable tale (which at times feels like a Victorian "All In the Family" movie) but that's OK because we're having so much fun watching Lean pulling all the (invisible to us) levers that every little laugh, alcohol-induced misstep and small triumph (Willie's face and body after his honeymoon had me laughing out loud!) adds to a satasfying whole that's every bit as enjoyable as the individual components. Annoying soundtrack though, which would feel more suited for a "Little Rascals" two-reeler than this type of flick.

AIRPORT 1975 on HBO Signature HD. As a big fan of "The Incredible Hulk" TV series this movie holds a personal fascination for me since a lot of its airplane footage wound up spliced into the season 1 episode "747." Behind the footage though you will find the most soulless and cheap 'disaster movie' entry into a genre whose main attractions were (a) having as many recognizable faces as possible on the screen and (b) engaging the audience in a guessing game of which star would make it out alive. Unlike Irwin Allen (who booked the biggest names and fed the audience a steady supply of mayhem) Universal settles for one big star (Charlton Heston, long past his Moses and "Ben Hur" heyday), a has-been (Gloria Swanson playing herself... badly!), a flavor-of-the-moment name (Linda Blair) and a truckload of 'hey, it's that guy!' TV faces (Sid Caesar is particularly wretched and unfunny here) that are never in any real danger or peril. Worse, the body count is pitiful and the special effects are primitive even by '75 standards. The paint job on the airplane (which I assume is named Columbia to poach Universal's rival studio) probably cost more than the salary of Karen Black, whose cross-eyed stare directly into the camera the director inexplicably kept going back to. Even without the "Airplane!" comparisons dooming it beforehand, "Airport 1975" is the bottom heap of a genre that never rose high to begin with.

AIRPORT '77 on HBO Signature HD for the first time. The only "Airport" movie that I hadn't seen turns out, in its own train wreck sort-of way, to be the most enjoyable of the bunch. After the cheapness and drama-free perils of "Airport 1975" the producers wisely put some real dough behind this production (Albert Whitlock's matte paintings during the flying sequences look cool and the plane miniature effects are OK), threw reality out the window with the 'terrorist/hijack' angle (which is promptly forgotten when the survival plot kicks in) and upped the star wattage. So what if Jimmy Stewart, Olivia de Havilland and Jack Lemmon are slumming it for a Hollywood paycheck? I'd rather spend time with these good actors (and quality supporting thesps like Darren McGavin, Joseph Cotten and Christopher Lee) in a bad movie than scenery-chewers like Chuck Heston and Gloria Swanson in a terrible movie. And God bless George Kennedy for being game and appearing on all the "Airport" movies even though the continuity of his Patroni character's career (which goes back to Arthur Hailey's original novel) makes no sense whatsoever. :D

CLASH OF THE TITANS (1981) on Blu-ray for the first time. First up, the high-def transfer of this Ray Harryhausen-produced flick is soft, lackluster and disappointing (especially compared to other Blu-rays of his movies like the stellar "20 Million Miles to Earth") so set your expectations low. That said, what a freakin' blast! Yes, it's a cheesy and low-budget affair with the barest of sets and background plates. But (a) the money was spent in the right places (casting of the Gods and special effects), (b) Harry Hamlin plays Perseus with the right amount of tongue-in-cheek boyish heroics (can't imagine Worthington pulling the same feat in the remake) and (c) the Harryhausen-animated effects are simply a joy to behold. The battle with Medusa made me feel like a little kid again since, somehow, Ray gave the monster a personality that came across through the labored stop-motion animation (now that's an artist!). Little by little though I'm losing my respect for Laurence Olivier as a great actor seeing how, like DeNiro in the past couple of decades, he began taking roles like Zeus (histrionically hypnotic) for the money rather than the craft. Whatever, a great BD rental.

Tim Blake Nelson's O (2001) on HBO-HD. Neat attempt at translating the Bard's "Othello" into the contemporary setting of a high school basketball team that kind-of falls apart when one steps away from it and realizes the personal stakes for everyone involved shouldn't cause them the ache and pain they're portraying (because they have to in order to follow the spirit of Shakespeare's tragedy). Nelson is clearly an actor's director (being an actor himself) so he gives his young cast plenty of opportunities to shine (the grown-ups don't come across as well, particularly Martin Sheen as a cliche basketball coach) but Mekhi Phifer makes for a rather colorless and bland lead. Josh Hartnett (showing acting range he rarely displayed afterwards), Julia Stiles, Rain Phoenix, Andrew Keegan and most of the young actors are good-enough to compensate for Phifer's weakness but "O" doesn't add up to the sum of its well-acted parts.

And, last not least, a live New York presentation of CINEMATIC TITANIC: DANGER AT TIKI ISLAND (2010/1968) at a sold out Nokia Theater in Times Square for the first time. Joel Hodgson and four of his friends (i.e. the "MST3K" guys that aren't doing Rifftrax) tear apart a really bad John Ashley-starring Filipino flick that's equal parts monster movie, exploitation feature (two words: virgin sacrifices) and 100% 'WTF were they thinking?' weirdness. Best of all is that 2,099 paying patrons and me (in the 2nd row with a perfect view of the stage) get to share the insanity and intimacy of seeing professional riffers at the top of their game live and without retakes. Seeing Joel crack an unscripted laugh at an improvised line from J. Elvis Weinstein (the original Tom Servo) or hearing Frank Coniff (TV's Frank, rechristened 'DVD's Frank' for the "CT" show) blow his line from the (pretend) shock of hearing Mary Jo Pehl use suggestive language were little nuggets of joy that no DVD presentation could capture. You know you're among "MST3K" loving friends when an entire audience begins laughing as one at the movie's idiocy without promptiong or a riff by the Titans. A great evening, especially when I got to shake these guy's hands afterwards despite not having anything for them to sign or their visible exhaustion. 8)
'You can't make chicken salad out of chicken s***'
User avatar
J.M. Vargas
County Prosecutor
 
Posts: 3122
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2004 6:23 am
Location: New York, NY

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby ccb » Fri Apr 23, 2010 2:37 pm

HGervais wrote:Kick-Ass...go see it now.
By all means yes!
When I find myself in times of trouble, I say 'boy, you gotta carry that weight.' I am he, you are he, you are me, we are all together, speaking words of wisdom. Come together, right now. Amen.
User avatar
ccb
City Prosecutor
 
Posts: 764
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 3:02 am
Location: sunny FL

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Sat Apr 24, 2010 8:39 am

HGervais wrote:Kick-Ass...go see it now.


By all means yes!


By all means, no!
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Gabriel Girard » Sat Apr 24, 2010 8:45 am

Selk wrote:
HGervais wrote:Kick-Ass...go see it now.


By all means yes!


By all means, no!


I'm not sure but I think you didn't like it. Get over it, jeez.
User avatar
Gabriel Girard
County Attorney
 
Posts: 2270
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:42 pm
Location: Montréal, Québec

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Sat Apr 24, 2010 8:53 am

I sometimes find that I am at a loss for what comes out these days. Unlike when I was a teenager, I don't just walk into the latest "Friday Opening" anymore. I'd rather look for something new and original. Looking down the list of the films at my local GooglePlex, I sometimes find that this is becoming a chore. I live in a small town so most smaller films don't come here. I usually have to wait for the film to hit Netflix or drive to the other side of town to the one theater that is showing it. That was the problem I recently had with Greenberg. It was showing in a theater that was way across town and only showed at 10pm. That kinda sucks.
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Dunnyman » Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:16 am

After watching Indiana Jones & The Last Crusade, my best friend wanted to see other stuff like it, and the discussion led to to truly wretched King Solomon's Mines. Having suffered through it's awfulness once in the theater back then, I figured what the hell and picked it up el cheapo at Fry's to watch tonight. Sweet jiminy christmas, it was even worse than I remembered. One, there were few actors in 1985 less suited to play an action hero than Richard Chamberlin, but I'm damned if I can think of one. Two, Golan and Globus delivered a solid $13.26 worth of special effects, and it looks even worse now. Three, good lord, how did Sharon Stone continue to find work? Lame acting, lame script, incredibly phoney "fight" scenes, and obvious cap guns? Come to think of it, John Rhys-Davies should have been stripped of his SAG card for this. Just for kicks, we popped in Raiders right after so she could clearly see the difference between good film and pure crapola. Hell, Tales of The Gold Monkey was better than this...
"I ain't a boy, no I'm a man, and I believe in the Promised Land"
-Coming to the USA on January 20, 2009!
User avatar
Dunnyman
County Attorney
 
Posts: 1777
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 12:37 am
Location: Seattle

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Mon Apr 26, 2010 6:08 am

I have a Pavlovian response whenever I see the Golan-Globus logo clink together on screen - I immediately start looking for Chuck Norris.
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Steve T Power » Mon Apr 26, 2010 6:44 am

The Prophecy - Tracked this one down a little while back and finally broke it out last night, fearing the thing would have aged terribly, and the flick i found kind of kick-ass back in College would be a total dud. Well, the DVD was a godawful non anamorphic print with only a 2.0 soundtrack (even though the case lists a 5.1 sound mix). The image was soft and plagued with ghosting, blurring, digital noise, crawling, edge enhancement, and pretty much every other problem one could think of, but the flick actually held up pretty well! Viggo Mortensen is still one of the best on screen devils ever. Creepy bastard.
As the ancient Tibetan philosophy states:"Don't start none... won't be none...".
User avatar
Steve T Power
Judge
 
Posts: 5351
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 3:08 pm
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland, CA

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Andrew Forbes » Mon Apr 26, 2010 7:18 am

Dunnyman wrote:After watching Indiana Jones & The Last Crusade, my best friend wanted to see other stuff like it, and the discussion led to to truly wretched King Solomon's Mines.

Coincidentally, I watched the Kerr/Granger King Solomon's Mines on Friday. It was decent fun, although I really didn't enjoy watching the graphic (real) shooting of an elephant in the first minute.
Yesterday it was over to a friend's place for Avatar on Blu-ray. Sweet Quaritch's Glutes, that's a gorgeous picture!
Formerly chamucamel
User avatar
Andrew Forbes
County Prosecutor
 
Posts: 2615
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 9:43 am
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Dunnyman » Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:53 pm

Andrew Forbes wrote:
Dunnyman wrote:After watching Indiana Jones & The Last Crusade, my best friend wanted to see other stuff like it, and the discussion led to to truly wretched King Solomon's Mines.

Coincidentally, I watched the Kerr/Granger King Solomon's Mines on Friday. It was decent fun, although I really didn't enjoy watching the graphic (real) shooting of an elephant in the first minute.

I'll look for that one, just the stars alone tell me it'll be better, regardless of budget and age. Now why isn't there (yet another) remake of this on the horizon? I'd think it'd be an easy sell.
"I ain't a boy, no I'm a man, and I believe in the Promised Land"
-Coming to the USA on January 20, 2009!
User avatar
Dunnyman
County Attorney
 
Posts: 1777
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 12:37 am
Location: Seattle

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Steve T Power » Mon Apr 26, 2010 7:35 pm

Falling Down - Why this flick isn't held in more prestigious regard totally baffles me. Just a powerhouse of a film that still crackles almost 20 years later (shit, now i feel old!) Some amazing performances from Douglas and Duvall, some great tension, and fantastic writing. It probably has one of the single best "final reels" i've seen. Just a great, criminally underrated flick that feels just as relevant in today's economic climate as it did in the post Gulf War recession. The blu-ray looked damn nice as well - but what the heck was up with that True HD STEREO mix???
As the ancient Tibetan philosophy states:"Don't start none... won't be none...".
User avatar
Steve T Power
Judge
 
Posts: 5351
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 3:08 pm
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland, CA

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Gabriel Girard » Mon Apr 26, 2010 8:44 pm

Sherlock Holmes (2009) - Loved it! I thought McAdams handled her part well and Mark Strong was born to play Lord Blackwood. Can't wait for a sequel.
User avatar
Gabriel Girard
County Attorney
 
Posts: 2270
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:42 pm
Location: Montréal, Québec

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Mon Apr 26, 2010 9:18 pm

Falling Down - Why this flick isn't held in more prestigious regard totally baffles me. Just a powerhouse of a film that still crackles almost 20 years later (shit, now i feel old!) Some amazing performances from Douglas and Duvall, some great tension, and fantastic writing. It probably has one of the single best "final reels" i've seen. Just a great, criminally underrated flick that feels just as relevant in today's economic climate as it did in the post Gulf War recession. The blu-ray looked damn nice as well - but what the heck was up with that True HD STEREO mix???


This one had to grow on me. When I saw it back in '93, I hated it. I saw the portrait of a pissy guy having a bad day. Since then, I've kind of grown fond of it. D-Fense represents the frustration of the American public over the irritations of the civilized world. It is a great portrait of the average man in the heated world of the early 90s. This one will be one of those "time capsule" films that 100 years from now will play a great commentary to how people lived in the last years of the 20th century.
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Andrew Forbes » Tue Apr 27, 2010 9:25 pm

Arabesque. Peck may be miscast in a Cary Grant role, but he's obviously having fun, and Donen goes nuts with visual tricks. Every bit as entertaining as it is meaningless.
Formerly chamucamel
User avatar
Andrew Forbes
County Prosecutor
 
Posts: 2615
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 9:43 am
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Dunnyman » Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:12 pm

HGervais wrote:Kick-Ass...go see it now.

What a GREAT flick! Funny, smart, and just begging for a sequel. The first Nicholas Cage movie that hasn't irritated me in ages. Plus, Chloe Moretz is going to be a big star...the kid oozes charisma.
"I ain't a boy, no I'm a man, and I believe in the Promised Land"
-Coming to the USA on January 20, 2009!
User avatar
Dunnyman
County Attorney
 
Posts: 1777
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 12:37 am
Location: Seattle

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:39 am

The first Nicholas Cage movie that hasn't irritated me in ages.


Really? Did you see The Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call - New Orleans? That was one of his best.

And personally, I was kind of alone in liking Knowing. It was a goofy film but I kind of liked it.
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Steve T Power » Wed Apr 28, 2010 7:07 am

Selk wrote:
The first Nicholas Cage movie that hasn't irritated me in ages.


Really? Did you see The Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call - New Orleans? That was one of his best.

And personally, I was kind of alone in liking Knowing. It was a goofy film but I kind of liked it.


I was with it until the final act, when it careened off the rails... on fire... belching toxic fumes... into a lake... that was bottomless.
As the ancient Tibetan philosophy states:"Don't start none... won't be none...".
User avatar
Steve T Power
Judge
 
Posts: 5351
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 3:08 pm
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland, CA

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Gabriel Girard » Wed Apr 28, 2010 8:10 am

Up In The Air (2009) - That Reitman kid is on a roll! This takes a classic ''curmudgeon learns to live'' story and makes it both real and original. It never condescends to the audience and mostly avoids plot contrivances. Great script, Clooney has rarely been better and he's ably supported by the alwys excellent Farmiga and Anna Kendrick who is a revelation - even if she reminds me of Amy Adams in her mannerisms. Also a nice comment on today's megacorps and about the need for companiom=nship. Definitely one of last year's best.
User avatar
Gabriel Girard
County Attorney
 
Posts: 2270
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:42 pm
Location: Montréal, Québec

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby cdouglas » Wed Apr 28, 2010 8:17 am

Gabriel Girard wrote:Up In The Air (2009) - That Reitman kid is on a roll! This takes a classic ''curmudgeon learns to live'' story and makes it both real and original. It never condescends to the audience and mostly avoids plot contrivances. Great script, Clooney has rarely been better and he's ably supported by the alwys excellent Farmiga and Anna Kendrick who is a revelation - even if she reminds me of Amy Adams in her mannerisms. Also a nice comment on today's megacorps and about the need for companiom=nship. Definitely one of last year's best.


I loved this one, too. On a related note, I was amused to see Danny Trejo's take on the movie in an interview with the A.V. Club: "I just saw him (Clooney) at the première of Up In The Air. You know what? Actually a good movie. It’s a chick flick, but it’s a good movie. Don’t tell anybody I watched it."
cdouglas
Judge
 
Posts: 957
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 10:49 am

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:40 pm

I was with it until the final act, when it careened off the rails... on fire... belching toxic fumes... into a lake... that was bottomless.


Which one?
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Steve T Power » Wed Apr 28, 2010 3:36 pm

Selk wrote:
I was with it until the final act, when it careened off the rails... on fire... belching toxic fumes... into a lake... that was bottomless.


Which one?


Sorry, that would be Knowing.
As the ancient Tibetan philosophy states:"Don't start none... won't be none...".
User avatar
Steve T Power
Judge
 
Posts: 5351
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 3:08 pm
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland, CA

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Wed Apr 28, 2010 6:08 pm

I don't know, I liked Knowing. Strange but I liked it, even the ending.
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Steve T Power » Thu Apr 29, 2010 4:28 am

Selk wrote:I don't know, I liked Knowing. Strange but I liked it, even the ending.


Hey, that's fine with me. I liked Battlefield: Earth.
As the ancient Tibetan philosophy states:"Don't start none... won't be none...".
User avatar
Steve T Power
Judge
 
Posts: 5351
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 3:08 pm
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland, CA

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Thu Apr 29, 2010 5:07 am

Hey, that's fine with me. I liked Battlefield: Earth.


I know a lot of people that do just for the kitsch value. It is one of those movies that is so bad, it might be entertaining. For me, though, it is not entertaining. I just can't watch John Travolta prostituting himself. I mean, who came up with that make-up? He looks like Rastafarian werewolf. Ugh!
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby HGervais » Thu Apr 29, 2010 6:54 am

Selk wrote:
Hey, that's fine with me. I liked Battlefield: Earth.


I know a lot of people that do just for the kitsch value. It is one of those movies that is so bad, it might be entertaining. For me, though, it is not entertaining. I just can't watch John Travolta prostituting himself. I mean, who came up with that make-up? He looks like Rastafarian werewolf. Ugh!

That would be fine if Travolta were prostituting himself....which to be fair a lot of actors do, a job is a job....but he isn't. Travolta was heavily involved with Battlefield Earth through its entire production.
"The most dementing of all modern sins: the inability to distinquish excellence from success."-David Hare
User avatar
HGervais
Judge
 
Posts: 4725
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:14 am
Location: Greater New Orleans

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Steve T Power » Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:31 am

HGervais wrote:
Selk wrote:
Hey, that's fine with me. I liked Battlefield: Earth.


I know a lot of people that do just for the kitsch value. It is one of those movies that is so bad, it might be entertaining. For me, though, it is not entertaining. I just can't watch John Travolta prostituting himself. I mean, who came up with that make-up? He looks like Rastafarian werewolf. Ugh!

That would be fine if Travolta were prostituting himself....which to be fair a lot of actors do, a job is a job....but he isn't. Travolta was heavily involved with Battlefield Earth through its entire production.


I also dug The Postman.
As the ancient Tibetan philosophy states:"Don't start none... won't be none...".
User avatar
Steve T Power
Judge
 
Posts: 5351
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 3:08 pm
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland, CA

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:44 am

which to be fair a lot of actors do, a job is a job....but he isn't. Travolta was heavily involved with Battlefield Earth through its entire production.


So, what's the excuse for Wild Hogs and Old Dogs?

I also dug The Postman.


The good Italian Postman or the bad American Postman?
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby J.M. Vargas » Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:08 am

^^^ Let's leave politics out of this thread people, please! ;-) :D
'You can't make chicken salad out of chicken s***'
User avatar
J.M. Vargas
County Prosecutor
 
Posts: 3122
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2004 6:23 am
Location: New York, NY

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby HGervais » Thu Apr 29, 2010 11:12 am

Selk wrote:
which to be fair a lot of actors do, a job is a job....but he isn't. Travolta was heavily involved with Battlefield Earth through its entire production.


So, what's the excuse for Wild Hogs and Old Dogs?

I also dug The Postman.


The good Italian Postman or the bad American Postman?

This may come as a shock to you but in some instances things are not the same thing or alike. As a follower of the cult dedicated to L. Ron Hubbard, Battlefield Earth was something of a vanity project for Travolta and he was involved through out its entire production. That is quite different than the paycheck grab of those two later movies. Travolta is of course not alone in taking the money and running but like most leading actors he takes easy paychecks to help finance more personal, intimate or vanity style productions.
"The most dementing of all modern sins: the inability to distinquish excellence from success."-David Hare
User avatar
HGervais
Judge
 
Posts: 4725
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:14 am
Location: Greater New Orleans

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Thu Apr 29, 2010 11:42 am

I also dug The Postman.


The good Italian Postman or the bad American Postman?

This may come as a shock to you but in some instances things are not the same thing or alike. As a follower of the cult dedicated to L. Ron Hubbard, Battlefield Earth was something of a vanity project for Travolta and he was involved through out its entire production. That is quite different than the paycheck grab of those two later movies. Travolta is of course not alone in taking the money and running but like most leading actors he takes easy paychecks to help finance more personal, intimate or vanity style productions.


They're all crap no matter who was responsible.
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby HGervais » Thu Apr 29, 2010 12:25 pm

Selk wrote:
I also dug The Postman.


The good Italian Postman or the bad American Postman?

This may come as a shock to you but in some instances things are not the same thing or alike. As a follower of the cult dedicated to L. Ron Hubbard, Battlefield Earth was something of a vanity project for Travolta and he was involved through out its entire production. That is quite different than the paycheck grab of those two later movies. Travolta is of course not alone in taking the money and running but like most leading actors he takes easy paychecks to help finance more personal, intimate or vanity style productions.


They're all crap no matter who was responsible.

Man you really do twist on a dime and turn away from what you were initially arguing. To say that they are all crap may well be true but in the case of Battlefield Earth that wasn't what you were talking about. You were arguing that Travolta was just cashing a paycheck and prostituting himself & his talent. That was proven to be an inaccurate statement. I mean really, is it so hard to just say, "oh I didn't know that" and move on? I wasn't trying to rub anything in your face. I was just pointing out that in that particular case what you were saying was wrong.
"The most dementing of all modern sins: the inability to distinquish excellence from success."-David Hare
User avatar
HGervais
Judge
 
Posts: 4725
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:14 am
Location: Greater New Orleans

Re: APRIL'S (Watching Thread; Read It/Post Here You) FOOLS!

Postby Selk » Thu Apr 29, 2010 12:36 pm

Yes, but we're talking about junk movies. Despite the reasons behind them. Travolta funded Battlefield Earth for his own reasons but he should have known that, despite this, he was still making a bad movie. In terms of either Battlefield Earth or Old Dogs or Wild Hogs, he should know better. He made great films all through the 90s but now it seems like his taste has gone out the window. Whether he has good intentions or he is just cashing a paycheck, he needs to take account of the films he's putting out. He might be in danger of putting his reputation back where is was in the 80s.
"Movies are suppose to be big - If they're not big, they're television"
- Whoopi Goldberg
User avatar
Selk
City Attorney
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:32 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Movies

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests