DominicCobb

generalfrevious said:

You know the nuking the fridge scene in Crystal Skull? Same thing happened to Batman in the Dark Knight Rises. Characters surviving nuclear explosions without any nuclear fallout instantly takes me out of any movie.

 That was a fusion bomb in TDKR. No radiation.

Neglify said:

DominicCobb said:

And Then There Were None (1945) - I haven't posted my LMS in awhile, thought I'd pick it back up. Has anyone else seen this film? It is great. A

 Yes! I absolutely love that movie. Have you read the play?

I have not, I was unfamiliar with the story until the movie came on TCM a few days ago. Isn't there a book too? By Agatha Christie? I'll have to check them out.

Human eyes likely will only be able to detect a vague difference between 20K and 4K. 

The Brothers Bloom (2008) - I had forgotten this film existed. I watched it because it was written and directed by Rian Johnson. Let me tell you something, if you were thinking of watching this to get an idea of what he is like before he makes Episode VIII, don't. Stick to Brick, Looper, and his Breaking Bad episodes. While this movies has the hints and outlines of a great film, it most certainly is not one. Nothing actually works here. Everything has an air of smugness and a distinct trying-too-hard feeling. A disappointment. C+

darth_ender said:

ROTLA truck chase is definitely mine, followed by TOD on the bridge and TLC tank chase.

 Agreed again.

^That looks really good actually.

Tobar said:

What they're doing is trying too hard. TASM2 had inklings of being a much better movie but all of the reshoots they did to shove the Sinister Six down our throats turned it into a jumbled mess. It seems like Sony has taken to using a heavy hand on this franchise and it's turning out for the worst.

This. All the Sinister Six nonsense makes me angry. TASM1 was a good start and showed a lot of potential for future installments. Then Sony effed everything up. The whole situation is really disheartening, I can't image the schedule change is a move in the right direction.

What.

And Then There Were None (1945) - I haven't posted my LMS in awhile, thought I'd pick it back up. Has anyone else seen this film? It is great. A

doubleofive said:

Accent, maybe. Exact same voice? No.

 But... he's a clone.

But wait. If Boba was raised by Jango for the first eleven years of his life, wouldn't that give him the accent too?

I doubt Lucas cares about a final version anymore. He seems to have wiped his hands of anything Star Wars at this point. And I doubt Kennedy would feel any need to reach out to him. Decanonizing the SE is probably what every wants, though I don't think releasing the OOT on Blu-ray would send that message. Let's not forget the SE is already on Blu-ray. Releasing the OOT would seem like a supplemental release.

darth_ender said:

Just watched all four last week, so it pleases me to see this thread.  I agree in my ranking with DominicCobb, but I also agree with the OP in that all four are good films.  My least favorite is KOTCS, but I appreciate it for what it is.  It was meant to focus on the fascination with sci-fi during the 50s, with flying saucers and Area 51.  I'm okay with that.  I like its lighter tone, its humor, its self-deprecation.

And IMO, the Mummy films are moderately enjoyable, but don't even approach Indiana Jones in style or enjoyability.

 Completely agree with everything you said.

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. Last Crusade

3. Temple of Doom

4. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

Anyone who ranks any other way is just wrong, wrong, wrong.

Tobar said:

But he certainly fixed them when it came time to actually make the movie. Look at anything else Kurtzman and Orci have written: total shit movies. But the Abrams Trek films are for sure awesome fun times. One thing's certain: Abrams can direct an action film.

All of the plot holes and utter dreck that were in the scripts survive in those films. Abrams personal flair is all that saves them from collapsing in on themselves.

That's my point. Even if the script is bad at least Abrams will make the movie good.

I notice you're missing Snowpiercer. I saw that one a week or so ago and it is amazing.

Abrams was essentially a hired gun on the Trek films. On Star Wars, he was as well, but clearly he has more interest in the material and has taken it upon himself to do rewrites (of a Michael Arndt script with help from Lawrence Kasdan - not too shabby group of writers there, especially in comparison with Trek). On Trek he probably didn't feel it was worth the effort to fix the scripts in the writing room, or maybe he didn't know how (or maybe even he wasn't allowed to). But he certainly fixed them when it came time to actually make the movie. Look at anything else Kurtzman and Orci have written: total shit movies. But the Abrams Trek films are for sure awesome fun times. One thing's certain: Abrams can direct an action film.

By the way, I completely agree with bkev's post.

Abrams did say "what is that doing here?"

If this entire movie is full of McQuarrie designs I'm going to shit myself.

Am I the only one who doesn't mind the notion that Boba is a clone? Now of course I didn't care much for how it was handled in AOTC, but I think the idea is cool. Making him a clone doesn't make him more "human and relatable," it should actually do the opposite. I think the fact that the most bad ass bounty hunter in the galaxy is actually just a clone of some other guy is actually a really interesting and unconventional sort of concept for such a character.

Related note: I saw James Spader a few days ago in an ice cream place in my town.

Where did you get the 2019 date for Avengers 3? I thought that was going to come out in 2018.

Whoa man, don't have time to read your whole rant so I'm not going to respond to really any of it. You didn't like Iron Man 3. That's fine, nothing wrong with that, it had some issues, sure. I don't know where you get this idea that some people think it was one of the best films ever made. If there are people out there like that, they're stupid. But I still thought the film was enjoyable, and on the better end of the Marvel films. My opinion of course.

But I wasn't saying that you were wrong for disliking it, I was merely pointing out that it wasn't as by the numbers as you suggested. I don't know whether you really read what wrote or not, so here it is again: 

Iron Man 3 certainly had some conventional elements (the main villain and his plot) but I thought the humor and, most of course the twist, certainly kept it from being "one of the most by the numbers superhero movies." Also Tony Stark's usage of his Iron Man suit(s) in the climax was not typical for a superhero film.

Anyway, point is, there was no need for you to go on a rant about how predictable the plot was. I agree it was (for the most part) nothing special. My point was something completely different. 

imperialscum said:

http://news.moviefone.com/2014/04/25/william-friedkin-exorcist-curse-interview/

So this guy talks about 35mm that is idealised by so many fans around here. I completely agree with him.

Your argument is invalid because you referred to William Friedkin as "this guy." 

Iron Man 3 certainly had some conventional elements (the main villain and his plot) but I thought the humor and, most of course the twist, certainly kept it from being "one of the most by the numbers superhero movies." Also Tony Stark's usage of his Iron Man suit(s) in the climax was not typical for a superhero film.

OP is incorrect.