Sign In

DominicCobb

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
16-Aug-2011
Last activity
14-Nov-2018
Posts
10462

Post History

Post
#1254636
Topic
Last movie seen
Time

SilverWook said:

DominicCobb said:

I do not understand how team Carpenter in any way thought Tom Atkins was a good fit for hot romantic lead opposite a twentysomething (in both that and The Fog).

Because Carpenter goes against the grain and doesn’t cast actors the way studio heads think he should? Who else would have cast Kurt Russell as Snake Plissken? (Or Elvis for that matter.) He was still thought of as that wacky teenager from Disney comedies at the time.
I think the casting of The Fog remake speaks for itself. 😉

There’s going against what the studios would do, and then there’s going against what any reasonable person would do.

Post
#1254456
Topic
Last movie seen
Time

Guy and Madeline on a Park Bench (2009) - A slight but enjoyable slice of early Chazelle operating mostly in a documentary style quite different than what I’m used to from him. Nothing special, but good. B-

First Man (2018) - Interestingly returns to the verite style of Chazelle’s first feature, to great effect. More than anything, this is a study of a great yet inscrutable man’s psychology, and thusly the film takes on a seemingly inscrutable approach to it’s own storytelling. We get what are truly something like glimpses of human moments, here and there throughout Armstrong’s life. Small things, but powerful; and all of them of course mixed in with some of the most intense and nerve wracking flight sequences ever put on film. The result is a fusion that feels equal parts chaotic and orderly, intense and quiet. A unique blend that, for me, works perfectly. Most biopics seem content with artificially and superficially touching on big melodramatic scenes to try to make you emotional. First Man actually wants you to come to experience such moments naturally. Mission accomplished. A

Child’s Play (1988) - An amusing twist on the slasher formula. Silly, but seems to be fully aware of that fact. B

Friday the 13th Part III (1982) - Despite finally giving Jason his mask and a few good kills, this falls squarely into the trashy cliched slasher category. Gotta love those 3D motivated shots (especially ridiculous when not viewed in 3D). C-

Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter (1984) - Certainly a cut above III though for me that’s not saying much. Characters are a bit more interesting here and that’s really all you can say. C

Halloween III: Season of the Witch (1982) - Besides some questionable elements (including one of the worst romances I have ever seen on film), this is a delightfully twisted and unsettling tale. Wouldn’t call it one of the best ever horror films by any means, but it has a couple sequences that I’d put pretty high up there. B-

Island of Lost Souls (1932) - A film that seems to be quite ahead of its time in a few respects, with a fantastic performance from Charles Laughton (picking up the slack from the film’s ostensible lead, Richard Arlen). B+

Apostle (2018) - A solid new entry in the “guy gets trapped in island cult and things do not exactly go well” canon. If you’re looking something brutal and harrowing, this is it. B

Christine (1983) - A kooky fun picture about a relationship that becomes obsessive and then violent. Of course, that relationship is with a car. B-

Cabin in the Woods (2012) - For the longest time I thought there was a twist in this that was spoiled to me, but turns out the movie adds its unique, meta layers pretty early on. Better comedy than horror. B

Bad Times at the El Royale (2018) - I’m always down for a good slow burn thriller, but sometimes I feel like filmmakers can forget that the slowness is not just for the sake of it. Other than that, this is a very decent suspense pic. B

Black Christmas (1974) - Speaking of suspense pics, this might be one of the best I’ve seen in recent memory. Takes the Hitchcockian school of thought on tension-filled dramatic irony to incredibly - almost suffocatingly - anxious lengths. A-

The Fog (1980) - Up there with the best films that know how to create an intense and immense, overbearing atmosphere. There’s some exposition that cuts the suspense, and the climax has some missed opportunities, but that doesn’t stop this from being some classic horror storytelling. B+

Eyes Without a Face - A horrific film with a surprising streak of dark humor. Makes for a very interesting and highly watchable mix, even as we occasionally witness faces being surgically removed. B+

Halloween (2018) - A sequel that understands what truly makes it’s central villain menacing, and doesn’t take its female protagonists for granted. As one might suspect from Green and McBride, there’s a good dose of humor, but for the most part this is a dark and unrelenting picture that also somehow never stops being anything but completely entertaining. B+

Halloween II (1981) - I’d seen most of this before and didn’t think too poorly of it, though seeing it in full now after a much better direct sequel really puts in perspective how generic and uninspired this is in comparison to its predecessor. C

Son of Frankenstein (1939) - Easily one of the better classic Universal horror sequels I’ve seen, taking a lazy premise and making the best of it (with a winking meta joke that’d fit right in with modern blockbuster franchises). But then it falls apart at the end. Still fun. B

The Curse of Frankenstein (1957) - A different take on the scientist and the monster, much more focused on the former, which is great, but makes the parts with the latter feel like a bit of an afterthought. Come for Cushing, stay for Cushing too I guess. B-

Curse of the Mummy’s Tomb (1964) - A pretty stupid movie where literally nothing of note happens for the entire first half (seriously, even the opening of the tomb isn’t shown and instead saved for a flashback much later on). If not for a good deal of visual panache, this would be a complete disaster. C-

Bohemian Rhapsody (2018) - If I didn’t love Queen, I’d probably hate this movie. As is, the musical sequences inject enough life into this incredibly basic and surface level picture to make me more or less enjoy it. Though I still think Rami Malek is miscast as Mercury, it’s a great performance, but the real scene stealer here is the music itself, which thankfully gets a lot of play time and lets me forget about the plodding nature of the rest of the film. C+

Post
#1252610
Topic
Most Baffling Complaint of a Star Wars Movie
Time

snooker said:

[Ben Kenobi said:]

I don’t seem to remember ever owning a droid. Very interesting.

We don’t see him ever owning a droid though. He only ever uses R4 with his (Jedi) starfighter, and that’s a “work” vehicle so I wouldn’t say he owns that either. R4 would be like him having a work phone. You wouldn’t say you “owned” that.

Post
#1252441
Topic
The Boba Fett movie
Time

It’s funny because years ago when they first announced that they were going to do one Star Wars movie each year (with the rumors being Solo, Fett, and Yoda spin-offs), everybody got mad and said that wasn’t a good idea. Now we’re at the point where they’ve finally accepted as much. I tend to think we’ll still see these spin-offs pop up at some point, though probably on the Disney streaming service rather than in theaters.

Post
#1252063
Topic
Would Lucasfilm have made new SW films with or without Disney?
Time

OutboundFlight said:

None of this speculation makes any sense. Kennedy wouldn’t have taken over LFL if she wasn’t allowed to make films. >By the time Lucas dies, she’ll probably be retiring herself. Not to mention, Lucas was planning on gearing up >production on more SW films before he sold the franchise, so there’s no reason they’d have to wait until after his >death (what?). Plus, the sequels have, in fact, used many elements of Lucas’s treatments.

Lucas changed his mind while writing the new scripts. He said, “If I’d held onto the company I could have done it, and then it would have been done. Of course a lot of fans would have hated it, just like they did Phantom Menace and everything but at least the whole story from beginning to end would be told.”

The key word for me is could. At some point, he decided it wasn’t a good idea. In retrospect he might be annoyed that Disney changed a significant portion of the saga, but if Disney hadn’t created a sequel trilogy I imagine he would let the saga stay at a clearly defined rise and fall of Anakin. But once Disney came along he knew the ST was inevitable and gave the discarded scripts anyway.

“At some point, he decided it wasn’t a good idea” is him deciding he didn’t want to be the one to make them, which is why he sold the company.

Post
#1251990
Topic
Would Lucasfilm have made new SW films with or without Disney?
Time

OutboundFlight said:

Anakin Starkiller said:

But we’re assuming that he still hands over his control of Lucasfilm to Kathleen Kennedy.

I don’t think that would ever happen. Lucas sold Lucasfilm for the money. I think he’d hold onto his creation as a long as possible, unless Kennedy hands him a couple billion dollars.

But for the sake of the argument we will say she gets it and receives George’s blessing. I think she would more or less follow George’s wishes until his death. It’d a lot harder to blame a large corporation like Disney, but very easy to pick on one person. People do it with Kennedy already, but in this timeline she truly would be responsible for everything that happens.

A couple years after George’s death, she might announce a sequel trilogy but I don’t think she’d use his scripts. While we don’t know much about them, that everyone who read them didn’t use anything just proves to me their poor quality. So she’d hire new directors. A certain Star Trek director would’ve loved to make a star wars film would happily sign off even if at a slightly lower salary than one with Disney. And… not much would change. Although the sequels would probably be three years apart without an spinoffs.

None of this speculation makes any sense. Kennedy wouldn’t have taken over LFL if she wasn’t allowed to make films. By the time Lucas dies, she’ll probably be retiring herself. Not to mention, Lucas was planning on gearing up production on more SW films before he sold the franchise, so there’s no reason they’d have to wait until after his death (what?). Plus, the sequels have, in fact, used many elements of Lucas’s treatments.

Post
#1251988
Topic
Would Lucasfilm have made new SW films with or without Disney?
Time

Anakin Starkiller said:

all I can say is I think I would much rather have what we got than that “microbiotic” world…https://www.flickeringmyth.com/2018/06/george-lucas-says-fans-would-have-hated-his-star-wars-sequel-trilogy/

I assume they’d have the creativity of the Prequels, which would be a marked improvement over the Sequels we got in at least that regard.

Thanks, I needed a laugh.

From what I understand Solo was being developed by Lawrence Kasdan even before the Disney buyout, and Lucas had at one point planned to write/direct Episode VII himself.

Add to that Rogue One being in development before the buyout.

Yeah I couldn’t remember when I posted if RO was in development before or after.

Post
#1251845
Topic
Would Lucasfilm have made new SW films with or without Disney?
Time

Anakin Starkiller said:

Say Lucas had handed over his company to Kathleen Kennedy, but without selling it to Disney. Would things still have played out roughly the same? Are Disney basically just funding them (and forcing to release Solo in May)? Or would there actually be a significant difference? Maybe the sequel trilogy but no spinoffs?

From what I understand Solo was being developed by Lawrence Kasdan even before the Disney buyout, and Lucas had at one point planned to write/direct Episode VII himself. So it’s possible that in terms of the kinds of films we’re seeing (sequels, spin-offs) things would be the same, but other things would be quite different I’m sure (who’s making the films, when they’re being released, etc.).

Post
#1251743
Topic
<em>Solo: A Star Wars Story</em> — Official Review and Opinions Thread — <strong>SPOILERS</strong>
Time

I think the blu-ray looks gorgeous, but Young obviously took an approach with the cinematography that won’t please everyone. One of the times I saw it in the theaters the projection was indeed shit. Projection problems are pretty common and not exclusive to this film, but the nature of how this was shot led to projection problems being far more obvious and frustrating than for most films.

Post
#1251142
Topic
If you need to B*tch about something... this is the place
Time

Jay said:

DominicCobb said:

Jay said:

DominicCobb said:

Jay said:

DominicCobb said:

dahmage said:

Jay said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

This past year has seen this forum turn to ass.

Off Topic has been ass for years.

The rest of the forum is fine.

Different strokes and all.

so then maybe leave off topic alone… just saying.

Hard to argue things weren’t more enjoyable here when off topic was unmoderated and we were allowed to have silly fun threads without fear of an admin locking them for seemingly no reason other than he can’t handle some joking criticism.

Unmoderated Off Topic was a caustic shithole that turned new members away.

You guys lived and breathed it for so long that you didn’t see it.

Right, moderated off topic is now incredibly inviting to new members.

The only “new member” who’s had difficulty recently is Collipso, and it should be obvious why.

You can point the finger at me all you want; it doesn’t erase the fact that for years you guys ran Off Topic like it was your private club and membership was based on your approval. That ended a while back and some of you have been salty ever since.

I actually wasn’t much of a frequent poster in off topic until around the time it became moderated, but when I was new here I always appreciated the goofiness that populated the section. So you lumping me in with this nefarious “you guys” generalization is not just condescending, but inaccurate. Not to mention most of the “hazing” you’re talking about was limited to the myspleen thread, which you locked anyway. But you’re free to make up whatever you like to justify your reasoning, it’s your site of course.

I’m not making things up. The overall behavior in Off Topic when it was unmoderated was poor. Your characterization of that behavior being limited to a few threads is inaccurate.

If you didn’t actively participate in that behavior, you have my apologies. I don’t have a running catalog in my brain of every post by every member.

As respectfully as I can say so, I don’t have a problem with the fact that you don’t have a perfect memory of the forum, but perhaps the generalizing demonizations is the exact kind of attitude that you could try to move beyond if you really do want this place to seem welcoming and to avoid more public flame out “fuck you Jay” posts.

And I think I’ll just leave it at that and back out of this discussion from here on.

Post
#1250918
Topic
If you need to B*tch about something... this is the place
Time

Jay said:

DominicCobb said:

Jay said:

DominicCobb said:

dahmage said:

Jay said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

This past year has seen this forum turn to ass.

Off Topic has been ass for years.

The rest of the forum is fine.

Different strokes and all.

so then maybe leave off topic alone… just saying.

Hard to argue things weren’t more enjoyable here when off topic was unmoderated and we were allowed to have silly fun threads without fear of an admin locking them for seemingly no reason other than he can’t handle some joking criticism.

Unmoderated Off Topic was a caustic shithole that turned new members away.

You guys lived and breathed it for so long that you didn’t see it.

Right, moderated off topic is now incredibly inviting to new members.

The only “new member” who’s had difficulty recently is Collipso, and it should be obvious why.

You can point the finger at me all you want; it doesn’t erase the fact that for years you guys ran Off Topic like it was your private club and membership was based on your approval. That ended a while back and some of you have been salty ever since.

I actually wasn’t much of a frequent poster in off topic until around the time it became moderated, but when I was new here I always appreciated the goofiness that populated the section. So you lumping me in with this nefarious “you guys” generalization is not just condescending, but inaccurate. Not to mention most of the “hazing” you’re talking about was limited to the myspleen thread, which you locked anyway. But you’re free to make up whatever you like to justify your reasoning, it’s your site of course.

Post
#1250891
Topic
If you need to B*tch about something... this is the place
Time

Jay said:

DominicCobb said:

dahmage said:

Jay said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

This past year has seen this forum turn to ass.

Off Topic has been ass for years.

The rest of the forum is fine.

Different strokes and all.

so then maybe leave off topic alone… just saying.

Hard to argue things weren’t more enjoyable here when off topic was unmoderated and we were allowed to have silly fun threads without fear of an admin locking them for seemingly no reason other than he can’t handle some joking criticism.

Unmoderated Off Topic was a caustic shithole that turned new members away.

You guys lived and breathed it for so long that you didn’t see it.

Right, moderated off topic is now incredibly inviting to new members.