|
There seems to be a consensus that the last true 80s action movie was Under Siege 2, which came out in July 1995. But what about Sudden Death? That came out in December 1995, five months later, and seems 80s enough to me. Anyway, I love that movie. Despite being possibly the most blatant Die Hard-clone of them all, too, it's really entertaining all the way through. I appreciate how they took advantage of the entire arena, like they actually shot on location, including the roof, instead of just building sets on a sound stage. There's action scenes in the kitchen, the basement, the locker room and even the game itself, so it never gets boring, even if it's almost two hours long, which usually would be too long for a movie like this.
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2024 22:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 10:59 |
|
|
dokmo posted:Sudden Death rules. WRT too late for the 80s action movies, my vote is for Soldier, the Kurt Russell movie from 1998. It really belongs in the previous decade. Your post made me go and watch Soldier for the first time, and I think you may be on to something. I mean, it's mostly a very 90s movie, aesthetically at least, but final act was about as 80s as it gets. Kurt Russell's character is loading up his fully automatic weapons one by one, and then looks at the camera and goes "I'm going to kill them all.", followed by him emerging from the shadows and stabbing bad guys, and emerging from water, blasting a machine gun. Then again I wonder if by 1998 stuff like this was already considered a deliberate action movies of the past. Oh well, I enjoyed the movie. I'm a total Kurt Russell-fanboy, and I really liked the art design. Reminded me of the early Command & Conquer-games. I noticed that Death Wish 2, 3, and 4 are up on Prime here in Finland. Are those movies worth my time? I'm not necessarily looking for technically spectacular action set pieces, but rather something that makes me feel like a little kid running around in the backyard with my friends. For example, I watched Missing in Action last weekend and fully enjoyed it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2024 21:26
|
|
|
Watched Cyborg last night, and boy was it great! The first couple of scenes feel kind of sloppy and rushed, albeit with awesome costume design and great, scenery chewing performances, especially from the actor who plays the main bad guy. But then it starts to get into Van Damme's character's backstory, and, like, I know it's not the most profound story in the history of cinema, but I found it compelling, and I really liked how they wanted to inject a human story into a movie that, at first glance, appears to be little more than a schlocky action romp. And, once that's been established, we're treated to some frickin' awesome action scenes, and absolutely killer camerawork. According to Wikipedia, the whole reason the movie exists is because Cannon needed to make some money real quick in order to recover financially after spending $2 million on He-man and Spider-man movies that were both cancelled. Like, I can't imagine Albert Pyun feeling too appreciated when told to just make some movie really quick, as cheaply as possible. But the movie is just great! So much better than it ever needed to be! And the budget is less than $500,000! Come on! Pyun must be a genius.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2024 21:06
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:follow it up with Nemesis if you have not seen it I have seen it, and I really liked it. I wasn't a fan of how complicated the plot was. There was just too much exposition, which is strange since Cyborg really had a good understanding of show, don't tell, at least with regards to Gibb's backstory. But yeah, the action was really insane and well done. The movie definitely gets the award for most shots fired in one movie. And overall it had so much personality and atmosphere that I couldn't help but really love it. Thanks for the recommendation, though. I was about to ask if the sequels are worth watching, but I guess not.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2024 21:49
|
|
|
Tried to watch Verhoeven's Flesh + Blood. Emphasis on tried. I had to switch it off halfway through. Graphic, extended rape scenes, or any rape scenes at all, really, aren't my thing. I mean, Death Wish II had a horrible rape scene (which I had to fast forward through), but at least it's followed by the main character of the film spending the rest of the movie hunting the perpetrators down. Here, the main character of the movie IS the rapist, and the scene in question is followed by the victim falling in love with her abuser, and the rapist being portrayed as this lovable swashbuckling adventurer type. Probably Verhoeven was trying to make a commentary about the medieval times or something, and it's not like I think that he thinks that rape is cool. I also know he likes to be shocking and controversial, but man, I find it pretty much impossible to justify anything like THAT in any movie. Maybe it got better in the second half, but I'm not even interested in finding out. Shame, because obviously Robocop, Total Recall and Starship Troopers are among the best action movies ever made. This one felt like it was made by a completely different guy. So anyway, I also watched the Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974). Yeah, I know it's not really an action movie per se, but I just want to mention it here because I enjoyed it so much. Loved the soundtrack and the performances, as well as the gentle silliness of Walter Matthau's character. It also takes the cake for the best final shot of any movie I've ever seen.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2024 17:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 10:59 |
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:Flesh + Blood is good but it's definitely extremely confrontational, extremely graphic, not for everyone, and not really an action movie. It's much closer to Benedetta than anything else he's made I think. I'm glad you enjoyed it. I'd be interested in hearing what you think Verhoeven was trying to say with it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2024 18:06
|
|