joefavs

Thunderball - 2 stars. This movie has some stunning visuals going for it (there’s nothing quite like Technicolor in the tropics), but little else. Domino may not be as pathetic as Tatiana was, but after Pussy Galore I’d like to expect more from a Bond girl. Fiona was cool, but I feel like she could have been more fleshed out. Same goes for Largo. Really, I’d probably have been more into these characters if I didn’t have Goldfinger in recent memory to compare it to. Anyway, the pacing drags in places, and the limitations of underwater photography in the 1960s prevent the action scenes from ever developing any real tension. Still, it’s marvelous eye candy.

LuckyGungan2001 said:

7.5 out of ten equals mostly pretty lame?

Well, if you convert it to a percentage it’s 75%, which is a C if you then convert that to letter grades.

This is the image I’m using. My actual desktop is currently a mess, so I don’t care to screenshot it.

Came across the Rushmore soundtrack on vinyl at the record store today and purchased the shit out of it as fast as I could. So in answer to the thread’s question, the entirety of the Rushmore soundtrack.

Between Amazon Prime and the free movies section of Xfinity On Demand, I suddenly find myself with access to about half of the James Bond films. It’s been years since I’ve seen any besides the Daniel Craig ones, so I’ve decided to revisit as many as I can before they’re eventually taken away. So far I’ve watched . . .

From Russia With Love - 3 1/2 stars. This is basically the platonic ideal of an early Bond film. Pacing is better than I remembered, gadgets are neat but not over the top, locations are varied, villains are cool, supporting characters are charming, and the art direction is stylish as all hell. The only things that bothered me were the rather lame characterization of Tatiana Romanova and the weirdly sinister implied lesbianism of Colonel Klebb. I know it’s just values dissonance between a 1963 film and my 2016 sensibilities, but understanding that doesn’t make it any less cringe-y. Still, the good far outweighs the bad, and I’m comfortable saying this is one of the very best in the franchise.

Goldfinger - 3 stars. Maybe 3 1/2, but I do think it’s a tiny bit below FRWL. The good: greatest theme song of all time. Some of the most iconic imagery of the whole series (golden body, crotch laser, etc.). A kickass Bond girl in Pussy Galore who succeeds as a character in all the areas Tatiana Romanova failed. That Aston Martin. The bad (or rather, the “meh”): the pacing’s a little wonky; the whole back half of the movie where Bond is Goldfinger’s captive is very stop-and-go. It also doesn’t quite scratch that “globe-spanning adventure” itch the way the previous film did. The Switzerland stuff is very nice, but once we get to Kentucky things get kind of drab. I did like the Fort Knox interiors though.

I’m going to try to go in release order, skipping those that aren’t available. Sadly, Dr. No isn’t currently available so I was unable to begin at the beginning, but the rest of the Connery films are up, along with On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, so I’ll at least be able to get up to the start of the Roger Moore era without any more omissions.

And oh yeah, I’m using a Roger Ebert-style four-star system now.

Battlefront 2 was just announced for 2017, and will evidently include ST-era content:

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/star-wars-battlefront-2-confirmed-features-content/1100-6439682/

What does Chrome have to do with anything?

Bah, I’m an 89er.

I know opinions here vary wildly about JJ’s Trek films, but personally I thought they had the right idea as far as casting goes. None of the crew are actually doing impressions of the original characters (except Karl Urban), but most of them nail the vibe. That’s what I want from a Star Wars recasting, because even if whoever they got was absolutely dead on I’d never be fooled. They ought not try to disguise the fact that they have a new actor, because that’s never going to work.

Can someone quickly direct me to the part where the idea that they’re waiting until next year’s 40th anniversary is closer to make a statement was debunked? Until then, “It’s been four years” carries no weight at all for me.

Good, I’m so god damned tired of everything going back to the Sith.

I watched Mad Max: Fury Road again with a friend who still hadn’t seen it. Still bitchin’.

I also decided this afternoon that it might be time to reassess Moonrise Kingdom, so I watched that. Wes Anderson is one of my favorite directors and I’ve seen everything else he’s done countless times, but for some reason I never had any desire to watch MK again after the first time in the theater. Seeing it again, I’m now totally solid in my conviction that it’s the worst Wes Anderson film. That’s not to say I think it’s a bad movie; there’s plenty in it worth liking, but it’s just not on the level of the others.

SilverWook said:

And “youtube impressionist” ignores the fact Gruber played a younger version of Harrison Ford’s character in The Age Of Adeline, a feature film.

I’m willing to drop the “YouTube” part, but that performance was just as much an impression.

DominicCobb said:

Glad they didn’t just pick a lookalike to please the fanboys. Didn’t Harrison Ford say a while back (paraphrasing) that the new Han Solo needs to not be an impression?

That rules out Ingruber. He basically does Ford as a party trick. I’m happy they didn’t go that route, I had zero faith in his acting ability.

Didn’t Rogue One wrap up shooting months ago? This supposed cameo sounds more like ill-informed speculation than anything else.

Well now I’ve seen it anyway, you dick!

I’ve never seen the third one. Is it legitimately as bad as people make it sound, or is it just that it would have been better to leave it alone?

The only thing that sort of bugs me about Nien Nunb being in TFA is the implication that almost no one we’re familiar with has died offscreen in 30 years. I mean, combat pilots have historically had very short life expectancies in the real world, at least through WWII. It’s a minor enough issue for me that I can dismiss it with the MST3K mantra, though.

A full-blown second forum sounds like overkill, but a private Disqus channel might be a good idea. Sort of like how the regulars at The AV Club have AV Club After Dark (which I don’t think is actually truly private, but I had no idea it existed until I got an invite. Anyway, I’ve never set anything up on Disqus myself but I’m sure they have a private option).

What TFA’s detractors seem to refuse to take into account RE: originality is the fact that it was the seventh film in a franchise coming almost four decades after the original on the heels of three movies that were absolutely panned for not matching the vibe of the old ones (along with being terrible movies, but that’s neither here nor there). People wanted to go back to the spirit of the original. From the outset TFA’s mission was to bring the tone back into familiar territory and rebuild some of the bridges George burned in the prequel era, and the powers that be deemed recycling story elements to be the most effective way to achieve that. You can say that was the safe decision and that they could have taken more risks, but at the end of the day they had an incredibly entertaining movie that hit so many of the right notes for an amazing amount of people. Will I be pissed if VIII and IX follow suit and hew this close to the OT? Of course, I don’t think they can or should get away with this kind of thing more than once. But as far as the series up to TFA is concerned, I needed a course correction before a Great Leap Forward, and I’m happy to have got one.

Nien Nunb was all over that “Journey to The Force Awakens” book/comic push in the lead-up to the movie, so I just assumed that’s who he was.

The pedantry around the titles/episode numbers of the OT is exhausting.

I’ve stayed away from prequel edits for two reasons:

1. I don’t feel strongly enough about them as stories to sift through the many different options to find the ones that work best for me. I decided to experiment four or five months ago and watched HAL’s TPM, but I haven’t cared enough yet to watch the other two, partly because I know once I’ve seen all of those there’s four or five other versions I need to see to make an informed decision and I just find that daunting.

2. Most of the entertainment value I get from the prequels comes from their very badness. The only times they’re ever any fun to watch is when you’re with a room full of people making fun of them, and any edit that aims to salvage them as sincerely good films that isn’t a complete failure necessarily sacrifices much of that so-bad-it’s-good value.

LuckyGungan2001 said:

Is there anything good about Die Hard 4 and 5?

No, there is not.

Die Hard 4 was the last movie I ever saw at a drive-in, so I suppose I’ve got something that qualifies as a soft spot for it. Terrible movie though.

Anyway, Goodfellas for the umpteenth time. Top five of all time-level good.

Dek Rollins said:

Lord Haseo said:

You know your penis tingles when you rain the negativity in on people

My penis only tingles when I’m standing in front of a toilet…

Bummer.

Just came across this quotation from Claudia Gray about her new Leia-centric book Bloodline and couldn’t help but smile.

[Claudia Gray said:]
“[In interviews] she sort of laughs at her younger self for being so influenced by Peter Cushing,” noted the author. “But I thought: I’m gonna use that. So there’s an explanation in the book that she’s actually making fun of Tarkin. She’s mocking his accent in that moment. She remembers that’s what she was doing. So that moment has been explained. It’s no longer a problem.”

That’s been my headcanon for years. Nice to see it made official.