|
Speaking of Street Fighter, I'm glad that movie exists, because by all accounts it was good for Raul Julia's health. The director's job was to make sure Raul took his pills, and to try to stop Van Damme from taking other pills.
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 16:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 22:58 |
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:Speaking of Street Fighter, I'm glad that movie exists, because by all accounts it was good for Raul Julia's health. The director's job was to make sure Raul took his pills, and to try to stop Van Damme from taking other pills. Here’s a must-read account of just that, which I can not recommend highly enough. To say that production was... troubled... is a massive understatement. And absolutely fascinating to read about.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 16:13
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:On one hand, it's fine that Ed Harris isn't really all that villainous, to the point where he goes out of his way to avoid killing anyone for most of the movie. I think he's more interesting than other action movie bad guys; he doesn't really want the money, he's just sick of politicians starting stupid, pointless wars and getting his men killed. At the same time, the two psycho officers who kill him and David Morse and hijack the plot aren't very interesting as bad guys. I agree with this and, in retrospect, it might have been better to have them kill Ed Harris just slightly earlier in the movie so Tony Todd could be the big bad for a bit before he gets that epic death from Nicholas Cage (or just not have Harris die til the end). You could have had a reverse situation where Todd, the villain, is trying to escape (from The Rock) with his money while Connery and Cage are actively hunting his dudes down to get some piece of information/access to the rockets or whatever. Since the movie does go a little off the rails towards the end when supposedly Todd just wants to immediately get the cash and leave and they kill Ed Harris over that and then they.....just hang around the rockets spinning their wheels trying to get Cage/Connery ? They sort of wrote themselves into a corner with that because they had characters who talk a big game about how they couldn't care less about the missiles or Harris' troops and are only there for the money but just sort of hang around for a while instead of bailing. Fart City posted:There’s a very interesting concept in the first movie that never gets capitalized on, and it’s that Channing Tatum starts as a regular-degular army soldier, and is happy to be so until his caravan is attacked in the desert by laser firing space ships. Like there’s this implication that this whole secret arms race with future tech has been happening behind the scenes of “real” warfare in Afghanistan and Iraq and so forth. It’s a really fertile bit of worldbuilding that ultimately comes to nothing. It really is weird that they'd have SO MUCH material to work with from the comics and cartoon and barely use any of it beyond the characters but then not actually do anything with the new stuff they made for the movie. Doesn't the first movie even have some special super power giving suit like Crysis or something but then they dropped it? Like even Barbarella, while abbreviated, pretty much follows the same story as the comic it's based on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 16:28
|
|
|
The Long Kiss Goodnight is something special. It had me from the scene where a one-eyed man holds carolers at gunpoint to break into Geena Davis’ house, he blows a hole in her wall, she tosses her kid through the hole into the treehouse, and then finally takes the guy down with a lemon meringue pie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 16:33
|
|
|
The Rock had a huge number of uncredited writers and script-polishers, as well as having Bay's fairly obvious fingerprints all over the minor characters, and was IIRC Don Simpson's last hands-on project before his OD. So it's amazing it works at all, never mind as well as it does. (Mind you, Simpson was obsessive about story in a way that Bruckheimer never was - in early drafts Ed Harris's character was a straight-up villain holding the city hostage purely for money, and it was Simpson who gave him a more sympathetic motivation.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 23:06
|
|
|
Payndz posted:The Rock had a huge number of uncredited writers and script-polishers, as well as having Bay's fairly obvious fingerprints all over the minor characters, and was IIRC Don Simpson's last hands-on project before his OD. So it's amazing it works at all, never mind as well as it does. Off the top of my head, I believe they threw Aaron Sorkin and Robert Towne at that loving thing, which somehow both increased and decreased its chances of working. The Rock is this wild aberration of a movie, and I'm long overdue for a rewatch. DivisionPost fucked around with this message at 23:27 on Feb 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 23:24
|
|
|
Took me a second to realize you were talking about the movie The Rock and not the actor, The Rock.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 23:54
|
|
|
How many writers had their hands on Last Action Hero? It’s my go-to when I think about an action movie with a ton of writers. It rules though, and you can tell Shane Black’s fingerprints are all over it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 00:32
|
|
|
"do you want to be a farmer? here's a couple of achers" is all time top tier Arnie one-liner and it slides right by most people
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 00:38
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:"do you want to be a farmer? here's a couple of achers" is all time top tier Arnie one-liner and it slides right by most people My personal favorite is “I ICED him, to CONE a phrase.”
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 00:42
|
|
|
That is also very good
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 00:44
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:"do you want to be a farmer? here's a couple of achers" is all time top tier Arnie one-liner and it slides right by most people One of my personal favourites, certainly. You're right it's overlooked, like the scene in The Man With the Golden Gun where Roger Moore informs an illegal weapons manufacturer that he has a gun trained on his testicles and quips, "So speak now, or forever hold your piece."
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 00:47
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:I agree with this and, in retrospect, it might have been better to have them kill Ed Harris just slightly earlier in the movie so Tony Todd could be the big bad for a bit before he gets that epic death from Nicholas Cage (or just not have Harris die til the end). You could have had a reverse situation where Todd, the villain, is trying to escape (from The Rock) with his money while Connery and Cage are actively hunting his dudes down to get some piece of information/access to the rockets or whatever. Since the movie does go a little off the rails towards the end when supposedly Todd just wants to immediately get the cash and leave and they kill Ed Harris over that and then they.....just hang around the rockets spinning their wheels trying to get Cage/Connery ? They sort of wrote themselves into a corner with that because they had characters who talk a big game about how they couldn't care less about the missiles or Harris' troops and are only there for the money but just sort of hang around for a while instead of bailing. They spend at least two scenes setting up the 'gotta go fast' suits, then use them for a long, elaborate, pretty good chase scene that they spoiled in the trailer, then forget about them. DivisionPost posted:Off the top of my head, I believe they threw Aaron Sorkin and Robert Towne at that loving thing, which somehow both increased and decreased its chances of working. The Rock is this wild aberration of a movie, and I'm long overdue for a rewatch. The dive is one the most impressive scenes that Bay has shot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 00:56
|
|
|
Not really an action movie but I mentioned it a while ago in this thread: Guy Ritchie's Revolver. I tried watching it but just couldn't get into it. I just wasn't feeling it. I might go back to it in the future but right now, it just isn't for me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 00:18
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Not really an action movie but I mentioned it a while ago in this thread: Guy Ritchie's Revolver. I tried watching it but just couldn't get into it. I just wasn't feeling it. I might go back to it in the future but right now, it just isn't for me. Wasn't that the 'what if Kabala was a gangster movie' one?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 00:28
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:Wasn't that the 'what if Kabala was a gangster movie' one? I honestly couldn't tell. As I said, it's a movie I will need to revisit at a later date.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 00:46
|
|
|
Yaws posted:Are the Fast and Furious movies worth watching? I saw the first one in like 2002 and hated it but everyone is constantly singing the praises of the series. Bit back but here are my views: The first one is now a dated if charming movie; you could almost call it a period piece now. It's also a reskin of Point Break but the chemistry between Vin Diesel and Paul Walker is great. Scalewise the big crime here is stealing DVD players to make some extra money so they can tune their cars. The second one is, its pure cheese. I can't call it a good movie honestly; but you do get to see Paul Walker and Tyrese Gibson ham it up. Its worth watching after you've seen the rest I guess. Scalewise they amp it up, Paul and Tyrese team up with cops to stop a drug dealer. Also Ludacris's character is a mechanic. The third one is divisive, a lot of people LOVE it. (I'm one of them) and a lot of people think its a super tryhard "so cool" movie. I don't disagree with that statement tbh. It features a new cast with a cameo from Vin Diesel later on. It got retrofitted to take place between 6 and 7 timeline wise. Oh and there is a character called Han Seoul-Oh Scalewise it's the kids getting in over their head picking a fight with a dude related to a yakuza member, the biggest crime the main characters actually commit is selling (stolen) goods. The fourth one is honestly just setting up the pieces to change the franchise to it's modern form. It has some very noticable CGi; worse than 1 and even 3 i'd say and the movie is carried hard by Walker and Diesel. It isn't bad, it needed to be made for the storylines to meet up again but in the end it's the only one I never rewatch. Scalewise Diesel and Walker work for a drug cartel/help the FBI. Fast Five is the best one, it's amazing. It's where the franchise admitted it was always pulp and stopped pretending to be actually deep. You are now watching a superhero movie with the superpower of driving cars really good. If you watch one of them, watch this one. This one is where the Rock makes his debut; and where all the characters from 1 to 4 teamup. Scalewise they rob a druglord of all his money and wreck half of Rio in their escape. Fast 6 is pretty good, its very fun. it just isnt as good as Fast5. Its just a fun watch; good character moments. VinDiesel defying physics harder than before; Ludacris and Tyrese being goofy. Good stuff Scalewise our heroes help interpol/The Rock to clear their name. Wreck half of London and literally fight a team of their evil twins. Furious 7 is great, it has probably the most impressive setpiece in all the movies. I think they did a good job adapting to the death of Paul Walker but meanwhile you can also tell he brought something to the movies that only he could. His character gets a happy ending and literally drives off into the sunset.  Scalewise they now help a black-ops commander steal a spy system that can hack into every camera, get into a fight with a warlord and the movie ends on VinDiesel and Jason Staham hitting eachother with maces. The 8th movie is a mixed bag; you can really tell the lack of Paul Walker. It doesn't help that there is a new character that is an obvious attempt as filling the "witty dudes that likes tuners" role. I liked it a lot better on my second watch and I wouldn't call it bad or anything, but its the weakest of the legit good ones I'd say. TheRock and Staham are great together and I am 100% onboard for thespinoff. Scalewise They are now dealing with a rogue semi-spy trying to get her own nuclear submarine.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 02:35
|
|
|
The 3rd F&F movie (Tokyo Drift) is more of a racing movie imo, I liked the mountain pass race, but the villain was more intent on ramming the good guy out of the road than outright winning. (I mean, this ain't Initial D)
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 03:57
|
|
|
Every Wednesday the blockbuster near my house had movies to rent really cheap so I'd grab some action flicks with my friends and loads of junk food, drat good memories  I think we watched almost every Arnold movie in a few months. It's about time to do a re-watch, any streaming service (or best place to buy digital cheap) for these old movies? I'm finding Netflix and Amazon Prime severely lacking
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 07:05
|
|
|
Zedd posted:Furious 7 is great, it has probably the most impressive setpiece in all the movies. Are you referring to the Caucasus chase? That is crazy impressive. It also comprises nearly a quarter of the film's length.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 07:12
|
|
|
It's being reported that David Leitch is in talks to direct the Rock centered F&F spin off.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 03:56
|
|
|
muscles like this! posted:It's being reported that David Leitch is in talks to direct the Rock centered F&F spin off. holy goddamn gently caress, I'm actually interested now Statham dragged F8 down a lot (more because of his writing than his acting) but if they've got David Leitch on board I'm in
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 05:31
|
|
|
muscles like this! posted:It's being reported that David Leitch is in talks to direct the Rock centered F&F spin off. Wasn't getting one driver killed enough?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 05:48
|
|
|
Did anyone see Free Fire from last year or the year before and, if so, how is it? It passed me by but its description makes it sound like something that was written to appeal to me specifically.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 11:08
|
|
|
Yeah, and I thought so too but ended up liking it less than I expected. It's been a while since I watched it and I remember almost falling asleep at points so this isn't very precise critique or anything. I just didn't like any of the characters and the firefight which I think entirely takes place in one warehouse just gets tedious after a while. It was all shot reverse shot but with guns, with none of the cool of a John Woo or Michael Mann movie so by the end I just couldn't care less.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 11:25
|
|
|
I was excited for Free Fire because I like the cast and Ben Wheatley’s an interesting filmmaker, but I heard mixed-to-bad things about it, and haven’t checked it out yet. But Ben Wheatley’s next movie is going to be a mixture of Doom and 50’s sci-fi/horror, according to him, and I’m hype as hell for that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 14:57
|
|
|
I'll provide a counterpoint, I really liked Free Fire a lot. Solid performances, the situation is really intense, and the violence is no joke. But the movie itself is definitely a black comedy, so it's a pretty unique mix that isn't really comparable to anything else. Copley in particular is fantastic in it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 15:02
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:I'll provide a counterpoint, I really liked Free Fire a lot. Solid performances, the situation is really intense, and the violence is no joke. But the movie itself is definitely a black comedy, so it's a pretty unique mix that isn't really comparable to anything else. Copley in particular is fantastic in it. I'm not even sure I would call it an action film because as you said, it felt more like a black comedy (that obviously has a bunch of shooting in it). The movie is really more about negotiation, shifting alliances, and double-crosses than it is about presenting edge-of-your-seat gun choreography or stunts and so it's really more of a character piece. I did enjoy it but because I had the wrong idea about it going in I'm kinda glad I watched it on Netflix in hindsight. Originally I wanted to see it at TIFF but couldn't end up going.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 15:12
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:I'll provide a counterpoint, I really liked Free Fire a lot. Solid performances, the situation is really intense, and the violence is no joke. But the movie itself is definitely a black comedy, so it's a pretty unique mix that isn't really comparable to anything else. Copley in particular is fantastic in it. Would you compare it to a Shane Black movie?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 15:49
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Would you compare it to a Shane Black movie? Yea I'd say that's a fair comparison, but the humor has a bit of the Coens in it as well. Like, some of the characters are funny because of how deadly serious they are, but that's mixed with the ridiculousness of Copley's character.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 16:02
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Yea I'd say that's a fair comparison, but the humor has a bit of the Coens in it as well. Like, some of the characters are funny because of how deadly serious they are, but that's mixed with the ridiculousness of Copley's character. Well, I'm keen on Kiss Kiss Bang Bang and The Nice Guys and I enjoyed Frago and Raising Arizona and The Big Lebowski (it was actually a "Customers Also Bought" notification on Amazon that brought Free Fire to my attention  ).
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 16:11
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Did anyone see Free Fire from last year or the year before and, if so, how is it? It passed me by but its description makes it sound like something that was written to appeal to me specifically. I couldn't stand it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 16:54
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:Well, I'm keen on Kiss Kiss Bang Bang and The Nice Guys and I enjoyed Frago and Raising Arizona and The Big Lebowski (it was actually a "Customers Also Bought" notification on Amazon that brought Free Fire to my attention my favorite Cone Brothers movie, Frago
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 17:02
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:my favorite Cone Brothers movie, Frago Look, I got a new laptop and the keys are too close together. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 17:06
|
|
|
that typo just made me laugh like an idiot so I wanted to point it out before it got edited 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 17:08
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:that typo just made me laugh like an idiot so I wanted to point it out before it got edited Oh, I imagine that's to be their unauthorised sequel to Animal House recounting Neidermeyer's experiences in Nam.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 17:34
|
|
|
Is Air Force One more an action or thriller? I haven't seen it and if it's Die Hard on a plane I'll watch it tonight. I could care less if it's good or not, I only just realised it's flown under my radar
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 18:01
|
|
|
Penpal posted:Is Air Force One more an action or thriller? I haven't seen it and if it's Die Hard on a plane I'll watch it tonight. I could care less if it's good or not, I only just realised it's flown under my radar I'd say action. There's enough action there once Ford is loose on the plane and he's taking down the terrorists one by one. Plus Gary Oldman is 100% playing an action villain, not a thriller villain.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 18:10
|
|
|
I'd compare it to The Hunt for Red October or In the Line of Fire (the latter by the same director) which I'd say are both primarily thrillers with action components, but it's more of an action movie than either of them. It's actually probably most similar to Patriot Games and Clear and Present Danger (can I also say that I like the former a lot better than the latter of those and I'm always surprised that the latter is held in much higher esteem). It's kind of strange that John Malkovich was nominated for an Oscar for In the Line of Fire. It's not a bad performance at all but it's an odd movie to get Oscar attention. See also: The Fugitive; a very good movie, but an odd one for the Oscars. (Malkovich and Jones were nominated the same year, alongside Leonardo DiCaprio in What's Eating Gilbert Grape, Ralph Fiennes in Schindler's List and Pete Postlethwaite in In the Name of the Father and, from what I know of each of them, all seem like more "traditional" Academy movies.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 22:58 |
|
|
Malkovich I can understand because he basically carries that movie, Jones is good in The Fugitive but when you watch it today it's pretty hard to understand what blew people away about the performance.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 18:29
|
|