Andrew Forbes wrote:Steve T Power wrote:So we're in agreement? Machete sucked.
I'm so mad at myself for not buying The Town instead.
You should be. That was awesome.
Andrew Forbes wrote:Steve T Power wrote:So we're in agreement? Machete sucked.
I'm so mad at myself for not buying The Town instead.
molly1216 wrote:azul017 wrote:Stargate Atlantis s1 - Bought it for around $10. Watched the first disc so far, and am really enjoying the series. It's nothing overly original or daring, but it's enjoyable nonetheless.
Season one is pretty poor compared to later seasons..so you have lots to look forward to.
HGervais wrote:Steve T Power wrote:So we're in agreement? Machete sucked.
Not from me. I thought it was a blast. It was an exploitation movie through & through. Trash of the highest order.
Andrew Forbes wrote:HGervais wrote:Steve T Power wrote:So we're in agreement? Machete sucked.
Not from me. I thought it was a blast. It was an exploitation movie through & through. Trash of the highest order.
But it wasn't! It should have been trash, but Rodriguez used it as a killjoy soapbox. And if you're going to do trash, take the exploitation content and period texture and merge them with effective film-making. There was no flow to the action. It may as well have been completely disconnected images of blood splatter interspersed with still photos of the actors. I'm all for violent, unrepentant garbage, but Rodriguez mixed precisely the wrong elements: poor craftsmanship and shallow moral lessons delivered straight, loud and repeatedly. That's not what makes trashy movies fun, and a couple of juvenile jokes don't tip the balance enough in the right direction.
HGervais wrote:1st off, there are plenty of examples of exploitation movies being intensely political affairs and that Machete wore its political leaning so out in the open was something that really appealed to me. 2nd, I thought for the most part performances were pitch perfect for the movie they were in. Andrew, you really need to go back and watch more of those grindhouse movies from the classic period because lapses in pacing, wooden performances and completely disconnected splatter sums up most of the output of those kinds of movies. The greatest complimant I can pay Machete is I can easily imagine sitting down to watch it on a triple bill at a grindhouse movie theater in the early 70s. I think the movie is trash of the highest order.
Steve T Power wrote:I'll hold out hope for Hobo with a Shotgun, and that has 100% more Rutger Hauer!
Andrew Forbes wrote:HGervais wrote:1st off, there are plenty of examples of exploitation movies being intensely political affairs and that Machete wore its political leaning so out in the open was something that really appealed to me. 2nd, I thought for the most part performances were pitch perfect for the movie they were in. Andrew, you really need to go back and watch more of those grindhouse movies from the classic period because lapses in pacing, wooden performances and completely disconnected splatter sums up most of the output of those kinds of movies. The greatest complimant I can pay Machete is I can easily imagine sitting down to watch it on a triple bill at a grindhouse movie theater in the early 70s. I think the movie is trash of the highest order.
There's politically charged and there's political sermonizing. Machete is the latter. And as for the 2nd point, why would you replicate those qualities? Do people really love old exploitation flicks for their slogging pace and poor craft, or do they love them for the excessive violence, sex and sleazy atmosphere? Do you honestly believe that the movie would have been worse if Rodriguez had tightened it up, staged the action with more fluidity and cut back on Michelle Rodriguez and Jessica Alba reading pro-amnesty talking points as dialogue? You'd still have the outrageous plot, the explicit violence, the nudity, the worn film-stock and outsized performances.
Steve T Power wrote:I'm curious as to how much of Machete's success or failure actually rests on Rodriguez. Didn't I read somewhere that he really only "hands on" directed the faux trailer and set the foundations for Ethan Maniquis?
Dan Mancini wrote:Despite being aware of the show since the Tom Baker days and having had a few friends that were really into it, I've only now watched a complete episode of Doctor Who (I'd seen bits and pieces of various Doctors here there over the years, but I'd never actually watched an episode). I streamed the first couple episodes of Christopher Eccleston's run. I'm not totally sold, but I'll continue on through this series and see if it gets its hooks in me.
Steve T Power wrote:Before sleeping... The doctor recommends Ambien, or Star Trek: The Next Generation.
Andrew Forbes wrote:Rob Roy. Literate, spectacular, tense and emotional. Aside from some wobbly accents and the occasional aggravating character decision, this was worth waiting years to see.
Future Man wrote:Andrew Forbes wrote:Rob Roy. Literate, spectacular, tense and emotional. Aside from some wobbly accents and the occasional aggravating character decision, this was worth waiting years to see.
You forgot to mention the greatest swordfight ever committed to film (at least in color).
Future Man wrote:Armored Car Robbery
Solid 50s B movie goodness, but why can't movie cops of the era ever at least pause to check on their fallen partner before giving chase? Or at least call for the ambulance as soon as they reach the squad car instead of after the car chase?
hoytereden wrote:Future Man wrote:Armored Car Robbery
Solid 50s B movie goodness, but why can't movie cops of the era ever at least pause to check on their fallen partner before giving chase? Or at least call for the ambulance as soon as they reach the squad car instead of after the car chase?
Because, in the 50s, you were either dead or had a relalively minor "flesh wound." Obviously, with just a glance, their partners could tell. Wounds were so easy to diagnose in those days.
J.M. Vargas wrote:THE BOOGENS (1981) on TCM-HD for the first time. Decent early 80's creature feature about a monster sealed in a Colorado mine since 1912 that's been awakened by miners looking to re-open it. So naturally the creature(s) go through the tunnels into the basement of the home where some of the miners are staying and start picking them, their girlfriends and their dog (boo!) one at a time. Think "Valentine's Day" meets "The Descent" minus the psycho killer and feminist chicks (the only females in the flick fall into the 'slutty victim' and 'defenseless damsel in distress' cliches) with very little of the 'Boogens' seen until near the end. Then you realize you've seen too much of them and they weren't that scary to begin with. Not even the sight of Jon Lorner as the old man that knows about the 'Boogens' (but won't tell anybody until it's too late) can save this flick from a slow pace that gives very little payoff to anyone that isn't seduced by the classic early 80's look/feel.
molly1216 wrote:justified S1 oh mama. that's what i like.
molly1216 wrote:justified S1 oh mama. that's what i like.
HGervais wrote:molly1216 wrote:justified S1 oh mama. that's what i like.
I'm on the final disc of episodes now. I agree with you. There is nothing like it on TV. And it's right up there as the best adaptation of Leonard's work that we have ever seen. My favorite line thus far...and there are p l e n t y of great lines....Because I didn't order assholes with my whiskey.
Steve T Power wrote:I'll hold out hope for Hobo with a Shotgun, and that has 100% more Rutger Hauer!
mavrach wrote:Iron Man 2 finally. Mostly every plot point was laid out for me in the trailer, so there were zero suprises. I'll probably enjoy this a little more on additional viewings.
Steve T Power wrote:Forgot to mention a pair of Disney features i've caught in the last little while:
Tangled - Disney Animation's output is officially on par with the recent Pixar stuff in my book (Tangled and Bolt were both every bit as good in my mind as anything out of Pixar in recent years). Tangled had a heartfelt and engaging story backed by some great voice acting and jaw - dropping production design. It's the first time they've used CG exclusively for one of their "animated classics" line, and while the idea certainly disappointed me, the execution is spot on.
azul017 wrote:Steve T Power wrote:Forgot to mention a pair of Disney features i've caught in the last little while:
Tangled - Disney Animation's output is officially on par with the recent Pixar stuff in my book (Tangled and Bolt were both every bit as good in my mind as anything out of Pixar in recent years). Tangled had a heartfelt and engaging story backed by some great voice acting and jaw - dropping production design. It's the first time they've used CG exclusively for one of their "animated classics" line, and while the idea certainly disappointed me, the execution is spot on.
Tangled feels like a 2-D animated classic from Disney, just rendered with CGI animation. I think that's due to Glen Keane being an executive producer and animation supervisor. I honestly think Tangled would work just as well hand-drawn, but the CGI gives a lot of detail cel-painting and in-betweens couldn't get.
molly1216 wrote:azul017 wrote:Steve T Power wrote:Forgot to mention a pair of Disney features i've caught in the last little while:
Tangled - Disney Animation's output is officially on par with the recent Pixar stuff in my book (Tangled and Bolt were both every bit as good in my mind as anything out of Pixar in recent years). Tangled had a heartfelt and engaging story backed by some great voice acting and jaw - dropping production design. It's the first time they've used CG exclusively for one of their "animated classics" line, and while the idea certainly disappointed me, the execution is spot on.
Tangled feels like a 2-D animated classic from Disney, just rendered with CGI animation. I think that's due to Glen Keane being an executive producer and animation supervisor. I honestly think Tangled would work just as well hand-drawn, but the CGI gives a lot of detail cel-painting and in-betweens couldn't get.
considering Dreamworks' How to Train Your Dragon was every bit as good as a Pixar Film...shall we all go out on a limb and say Pixar has challenged everyone else to bring a better game? one can't assume that an animated film won't be Pixar good anymore.
Future Man wrote:Not of this Earth 1958
Not ashamed to say I loved it. Beverly Garland is such a great screen presence. So cool to see a filmmaker do so much with a low budget.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests