logo Sign In

Last movie seen — Page 351

Author
Time

darthrush said:

suspiciouscoffee said:

darthrush said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

I don’t like Superman: The Movie either.

Pushing aside all my issues with Clark’s characterization, I still hate everything pertaining to Luthor, Otis, and that dumbass ending.

It’s baffling that it’s a 4 stars on RogerEbert.com. Man of Steel is leaps and bounds ahead of the first superman.

If you don’t like the first Donner Superman, that’s fine. But saying Man of Steel is better? 'Em is fighting words!

Man of steel is deeper, better acted, better characterization (surprisingly enough) all IMO

No, no, no, no.

The original may be dated in ways but it has heart and depth that has and will last through the ages. MOS is absolute s***. Just beyond comprehension of bad. As bad and actually worse than the brain dead Superman Returns.

Mankiewicz’s wit and sense are all over the original and why I love the film so damn much. (Not to mention his extended cameo in the Planet).
“Otisburg?” is IMO one of the great lines btw.

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time

Yeah, at least Donner had respect for some version of the character (that seemingly being Silver/Bronze Age). Snyder seems to hate all versions of Superman through the years to the point where he is hell bent on ruining Superman for everyone as we stand helpless to do anything about it.

.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

suspiciouscoffee said:

Yeah, at least Donner had respect for some version of the character (that seemingly being Silver/Bronze Age). Snyder seems to hate all versions of Superman through the years to the point where he is hell bent on ruining Superman for everyone as we stand helpless to do anything about it.

That doesn’t sound quite true. From the outside looking in, I’d say he definitely loves Frank Miller’s version of Superman – that is, Frank Miller’s awful, awful, awful caricature of Superman.

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

Diamonds Are Forever - I love it!

Welcome to the club sir. 99% of people don’t understand us, but if at first you don’t succeed Mr. Kidd…

The Mankiewicz trilogy has never been fully appreciated and I don’t know if it ever will sadly.
For example, The internet decided long ago Moonraker was terrible (despite many bloggers never seeing it before hammering away at it) and Craig was a godsend (despite the films being rubbish and the character being fully bastardized) so what do they know?

In terms of the debate that rages here and other places: no. To change the character in such a dramatic fashion loses that character and their traits. Do another story that is your own and make your own decisions. Fleming created Bond for specific reasons and the films created their own version to suit cinema with varying degrees over time. But the character is the same. What they do now is off he deep end in terms of losing thre character so they might honestly give in to all this off base furor that has been raised.

And I get so tired of the psychoanalysis people do. 007 was created in the 50’s and has frequent sexual adventures yes. It was a combination of wish fulfillment and adventure writing yes. The idea goes all the way back to St. George and the dragon and winning the affections of the damsel in distress. But it does not make him a sexist or misogynist or a dinosaur despite what M said in Goldeneye which itself was too full of swipes at Bond to placate those in the 90’s who thought he couldn’t come back in the post Cold War landscape.

What people are actually criticizing is how the films frequently utilized cinematic shorthand or made Bond a ladykiller in ways reminiscent of classical adventure heroes onscreen. Fleming’s creation is far more human and his characterizations of women are truly grand. This is where I think the films failed: in that not making the female characters as strong as they were in the books it makes them seem more like appendages and rather useless and also serves to make Bond seem like what the analysts have claimed.

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time

Got some LDs recently that I plan to watch through.

Under Siege

A Steven Segal picture that doesn’t suck. A surprisingly good movie in spite of being a Die Hard ripoff in every single way. Not perfect but really held up by the direction and the villains being completely over the top.
2.5 balls out of 4.

The Fugitive
Great to revisit a time where the big blockbusters could take a hit older property and not only adapt it well but create a cohesive and complete storyline out of it. This is a movie about performance and story; where everything is tied into a whole and allows the audience to become actively involved while not being treated as if they are stupid. What a breath of fresh air it was to watch this again after all these years. I just wish the mystery aspect was played up a bit more.
3.5 balls out of 4.

Director Andrew Davis proved on these that he had a good knack for bringing materials into a cohesive action adventure narrative. Both have very good ProLogic mixes in the old school style and we’re both nominated for best sound at the Oscars.

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:

suspiciouscoffee said:

Yeah, at least Donner had respect for some version of the character (that seemingly being Silver/Bronze Age). Snyder seems to hate all versions of Superman through the years to the point where he is hell bent on ruining Superman for everyone as we stand helpless to do anything about it.

That doesn’t sound quite true. From the outside looking in, I’d say he definitely loves Frank Miller’s version of Superman – that is, Frank Miller’s awful, awful, awful caricature of Superman.

Frank Miller’s Superman is Mr. Rogers compared to Snyder’s Superman. Then again, my only knowledge of Miller’s Supes is TDKR Animated Direct-to-DVD movie, I never read the book.

.

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

Bingowings said:

Imagine being the only people in the Eiffel tower during the off season with snow up to the restaurant level… say that would make a fab post apocalyptic movie. As long as they don’t cast Tom Cruise or Will Smith.

Imagine being on top of the Eiffel tower with Grace Jones?!

could it be the whole world opening wide
A sacred why, a mystery gaping inside…

Author
Time

Sounds more like another variant of And Then There Were None. The 70’s version is IIRC on a snowy resort reached only by cable car.

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time

Live and Let Die (1973) - 7/10

My first foray into Moore territory, and I must say, it was quite an introduction. Fun action and beautiful locations punctuated by good characters and a charming performance by Roger Moore. It had flaws, but they weren’t many. Great song and villains too.

Not enough people read the EU.

Author
Time

captainsolo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Diamonds Are Forever - I love it!

Welcome to the club sir. 99% of people don’t understand us, but if at first you don’t succeed Mr. Kidd…

The Mankiewicz trilogy has never been fully appreciated and I don’t know if it ever will sadly.
For example, The internet decided long ago Moonraker was terrible (despite many bloggers never seeing it before hammering away at it) and Craig was a godsend (despite the films being rubbish and the character being fully bastardized) so what do they know?

In terms of the debate that rages here and other places: no. To change the character in such a dramatic fashion loses that character and their traits. Do another story that is your own and make your own decisions. Fleming created Bond for specific reasons and the films created their own version to suit cinema with varying degrees over time. But the character is the same. What they do now is off he deep end in terms of losing thre character so they might honestly give in to all this off base furor that has been raised.

And I get so tired of the psychoanalysis people do. 007 was created in the 50’s and has frequent sexual adventures yes. It was a combination of wish fulfillment and adventure writing yes. The idea goes all the way back to St. George and the dragon and winning the affections of the damsel in distress. But it does not make him a sexist or misogynist or a dinosaur despite what M said in Goldeneye which itself was too full of swipes at Bond to placate those in the 90’s who thought he couldn’t come back in the post Cold War landscape.

What people are actually criticizing is how the films frequently utilized cinematic shorthand or made Bond a ladykiller in ways reminiscent of classical adventure heroes onscreen. Fleming’s creation is far more human and his characterizations of women are truly grand. This is where I think the films failed: in that not making the female characters as strong as they were in the books it makes them seem more like appendages and rather useless and also serves to make Bond seem like what the analysts have claimed.

Why do you hate the Craig and Brosnan films? I really enjoyed most of them.

Not enough people read the EU.

Author
Time

The Loft (2015)

I always enjoy watching Karl Urban but the constant twists and turns and fake-outs and red herrings…ugh.

5/10 at best.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Captain America: Civil War … Very Cool
Krampus … Very Cool
X-Men: Apocalypse: Cool

Author
Time
 (Edited)

suspiciouscoffee said:

Yeah, at least Donner had respect for some version of the character (that seemingly being Silver/Bronze Age). Snyder seems to hate all versions of Superman through the years to the point where he is hell bent on ruining Superman for everyone as we stand helpless to do anything about it.

These quotes sum up Snyder’s view of super heroes:

Zack Snyder said:

You could call it “high-brow” comics, but to me, that comic book was just pretty sexy! I had a buddy who tried getting me into “normal” comic books, but I was all like, “No one is having sex or killing each other. This isn’t really doing it for me.” I was a little broken, that way. So when Watchmen came along, I was, “This is more my scene.”

Everyone says that about [Christopher Nolan’s] Batman Begins. “Batman’s dark.” I’m like, okay, “No, Batman’s cool.” He gets to go to a Tibetan monastery and be trained by ninjas. Okay? I want to do that. But he doesn’t, like, get raped in prison. That could happen in my movie. If you want to talk about dark, that’s how that would go.

Why DC ever handed over the cinematic keys to him, I’ll never know.

Forum Moderator
Author
Time
 (Edited)

They could have given the film to Uwe Boll and it would have made as much. That all has to do with the subject matter, the director was not at all the draw for that film. And as they learned after the massive second weekend drop off, you do actually have to make a good movie to have any kind of staying power.

Forum Moderator
Author
Time

I think that’s a bit of chicken or egg. He’s made money before this one.

Author
Time

He didn’t even do Watchmen right, did he? Never watched it but I heard he took out all the stuff to think about and replaced it with SLO-MO-SEX VIOLENCE EXPLOSIONS WHOO

Also, Dan (Nite Owl II) going from insecure, sentimental guy just trying to help to hyper-confident borderline sadist.

Can anyone confirm? I don’t feel like watching a four hour movie.

.

Author
Time

Zack Snyder’s last two action films before Man of Steel were both serious under performers. Watchmen barely made a profit, with a $130 million production budget it managed to take in $185 million. Meanwhile, Sucker Punch with a production budget of $82 million, barely made $89 million which is gonna be a loss for the studio once you factor in whatever the promotional budget was.

He has a consistent track record of middling performance at the box office. Not the ideal candidate to hand your multi-billion dollar franchise to. Which Warner Brothers has finally learned as they’ve quietly moved him more toward a producer role while giving Ben Affleck more agency in his place.

Forum Moderator
Author
Time

You’re ignoring the significant (greater than domestic in fact) international box office. The site I linked has total box office performance and budget. He’s done fine.

Not defending him at all, just saying he made them money. In fact that’s the only reason I can think of to answer your question.

Author
Time

Actually the totals I gave included the worldwide box office.

The domestic totals minus the foreign box office break down to:

  • Watchmen - $107 million
  • Sucker Punch - $36 million

Which paints an even uglier picture, which I didn’t need to do when the combined gross of foreign and domestic for both was ugly enough.

Forum Moderator
Author
Time

Snyder is the Lucas of modern cinema. Except Snyder was NEVER good.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Tobar said:

Actually the totals I gave included the worldwide box office.

The domestic totals minus the foreign box office break down to:

  • Watchmen - $107 million
  • Sucker Punch - $36 million

Which paints an even uglier picture, which I didn’t need to do when the combined gross of foreign and domestic for both was ugly enough.

Sorry, I was thinking of 300, which made $460M on a $65M budget, and MoS, which made $668M on a $225M budget.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

TV’s Frink said:

Tobar said:

Actually the totals I gave included the worldwide box office.

The domestic totals minus the foreign box office break down to:

  • Watchmen - $107 million
  • Sucker Punch - $36 million

Which paints an even uglier picture, which I didn’t need to do when the combined gross of foreign and domestic for both was ugly enough.

Sorry, I was thinking of 300, which made $460M on a $65M budget, and MoS, which made $668M on a $225M budget.

MOS was a success but not a very big one (a film typically needs to make at least double its budget to break even). That’s why WB added Batman for the next one.

Author
Time

haha…

In Hollywood you’re only as good as your last film. 300 was Snyder’s only success up to that point. After that it was disappointment after disappointment. From that perspective, with Sucker Punch being the complete sucker punch that it was at the box office, he should never have landed MoS in the first place. But he obviously has friends in the right places.

Forum Moderator