LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited April 2009
"Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home"
Because of my renewed appreciation of the tender sensibilities of others, my "all spoiler" policy will remain in play. If you don't want your day utterly ruined, watch the film (released in 1986!) before reading the following...
...This is it---the "Save The Whales" Star Trek movie, the biggest box office winner of the franchise---and Loeff Jr and Loeff III had no idea about the whales prior to seeing the film. Watching the Treks again, with my boys, has been like enjoying them for the first time B-)
With Nimoy's second film as a director, clearly the cast and producers were settling into a distinct 'rhythm' with this one---and they weren't the least bit hesitant to set most of the piece in the 'current' (1986) era...or throw a healthy dose of 'self-aware' (IMO near self-parody) humour into the mix. Regardless, it was a huge hit with fans, and even viewed through these cynical eyes it's easy to see why. Appearances by Jane Wyatt and Mark Lenard (as Spock's parents), from TOS, reaffirm the cozy fanboy comfort zone provided here: The film is just fun...and the cast all fit into their roles as if they were comfortable slippers. Was there ever any doubt that Admiral Kirk and his crew would save the day? Hardly...
My sons' biggest complaint: that the visuals/metaphors used for the time travel sequence---i.e., the changing faces in the mist, the figure falling through the clouds, the bubbles and the still pond water with reeds of grass---didn't really make much sense. I told them that the filmmakers probably hadn't had any other ideas as to how to describe the indescribable...
Nevertheless, highly recommended---especially for actual fans of the show/films
Still...this film clearly paved the way for the next one---ST5:TFF, arguably the AVTAK of the franchise |) ---so there was clearly a price to be paid for this level of trans-genre/audience success...
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Moonraker, last lot in three sections. Pleasantly enjoyable, however a few smarty pants comments by Sir Rog: "heartbroken Mr Drax!" Can see why Craig's tenure is a long overdue antidote for some.
NSNA: Special Edition. First bit of rejigged and rescored bootleg, quite good this time round once you get past the fact that it's a bit from The Man With Golden Gun playing at Shrublands.
Third film from Dario Argento, and the final of his so called "animal trilogy". This progressive-rock-jazz gialli centers around Roberto, a handsome young percussionist.
A mysterious stranger, (sunglasses and trenchcoat), is constantly tailing Rob after his band's studio sessions. After he finally confronts the man in an empty theater, shockingly he accidentally kills him. (this happens to me all the time)
Unfortunately there's a witness in the balcony with a high speed camera, who makes his life miserable by leaving sordid photos in places most likely to be noticed by Roberto or his hip friends.
One of Argento's more difficult to obtain. It's a solid entry with some definitive DA cinematography. I particularly liked the innovative POV camera angles on the band member's instruments.
Not as good as Deep Red, but then few are.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited May 2009
I'm about six hours from participating in the (early!) kickoff to the Summer Film Season...X-Men Origins: Wolverine---with a necessary detour for pizza and beer beforehand. Looking forward to seeing what they've come up with.
Review to follow -{
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I'm about six hours from participating in the (early!) kickoff to the Summer Film Season...X-Men Origins: Wolverine---with a necessary detour for pizza and beer beforehand. Looking forward to seeing what they've come up with.
Review to follow -{
Whoa! Does this mean the Star Trek film festival has been interrupted? I was looking forward to reading what you and the boys thought about ST V and ST VI, with appropriate...
Spoiler Tags
...of course. :v
I hope to check out Wolverine myself with the brother on Saturday.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Not to worry! We'll get both remaining TOS cast films in prior to the new one, with reviews and
spoiler tags
included...
I'm really curous about how my boys will react to ST:V...
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
You already ruined ST IV for me Loeff. I had no idea they were voyaging home. You really should think about placing the titles themselves in spoiler tags!
Just kidding of course. I've seen part IV so many times my love for Catherine Hicks knows no bounds.
I'm curious about the Wolverine flick myself so looking foward to your review.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited May 2009
"X-Men Origins: Wolverine"
Adamantium, anyone? The opening salvo of the Summer Film Season has been fired...and Weapon X is the projectile. I wouldn't be at all surprised if...
...this one ends up being one of the big winners. Wolverine gives us the back story on (Jim?) Logan, who was apparently born in the late 1830s, and lived a very eventful life---several lifetime's worth---before he ever met Charles Xavier, or laid eyes on a certain school outside Westchester, New York...
Much of this backstory, effectively conveyed along with the titles, shows Logan and his brother (?!), Victor Creed, fighting alongside each other in the Civil War, WWI, WWII and Vietnam...and then they meet William Stryker, a shadowy military man who forms a team of superhumans, many of whom will be at least slightly familiar to those who read certain Marvel titles
The bottom line is that we are given a Hollywood take on the origin of Weapon X, and it jives enough with the graphic novel to satisfy me...but then again, nobody agrees about such things, :v and many comic book purists will be annoyed (at least) or even outraged (in some cases) by the abundant liberties taken with various characters and their long-established history on the illustrated page...but ultimately it all knits in fairly well with the X-Men Trilogy that preceded it on the big screen (which took abundant liberties of its own). Actually, Wolverine raises questions about Logan and Sabretooth in the first X-Men film...a bit of an errant story thread, there...
The action is fantastic, the set-pieces thrilling, and the performances exactly what they needed to be. Hugh Jackman and Liev Schreiber are outstanding. The actress who plays Logan's love interest is heartbreakingly appealing, in a very real, girl-next-door sense. Ryan Reynolds (whom I've always hoped would be DC's Flash) is good as a barely-recognizable Deadpool.
I'd heard some concerns about what they did with Gambit...but frankly my principal complaint is that there wasn't more of him in the story. Remi LaBeau (sp?)should have had different hair, but I thought he was pretty f-ing cool B-) I hope he shows up again in a future X film...
I've got to say that we all enjoyed this one quite a bit. Loeff III, who's just discovering the X books, thought that there was enough source material for it to work. Loeff Jr mentioned that he really didn't need to see Hugh Jackman's ass...*
A nice (if not totally unexpected) cameo, late in the third act, is satisfying---if made slightly awkward by some uncomfortably obvious CGI de-ageing...
I've probably got more to say about this one, as I continue to digest, but...on a five star scale, I'd give it a solid 3.5 Reliable, Marvel-style popcorn fun...
*An opinion not shared by many females, both here and elsewhere, I'd wager...!
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Allow me to give you some more hope HB: my brother and I saw the film today and we both enjoyed it a lot.
Much like X-Men 3, X-Men Origins: Wolverine avoids the moral and social ambiguities of the first two mutant movies in favor of a high-octane action movie with some pretty cool characters and some memorable set-pieces. The actors are quite solid for the most part and though the size of the roles varies from mutant to mutant, they all have their moment in the spotlight. In particular, Liev Scheiber is excellent as Victor Creed, Taylor Kitsch makes for a very likable Gambit even if he sometimes seems to drop the cajun accent, and Ryan Reynolds seemed born to play the wisecracking Deadpool.
There are a few missteps and plot holes along the way but the character interactions and pacing make up for any shortcomings in the plot.
The critics have been unfairly maligning this movie because it simply dares to try to be entertaining without bashing some message over your head.
As for the fanboys, well if you're one of the unfortunate sheep who only thinks that Bryan Singer can make a good mutant movie and pine for lines like "Have you tried not being a mutant?" then there isn't much that will sway you. Some have harped on being disappointed by the ending but since this is a prequel to the prior mutant movies, it really has to end the way that it does. Others have complained that the other mutants should have had even larger roles; last time I checked, the movie was called "Wolverine", not "Another Bunch of Mutants" and the film lives up to the title as the titular mutant is quite a force and does a lot. Hugh Jackman now inhabits the character like a second skin and is completely believable as the feral mutant.
If you're looking for a fun and entertaining summer action film and can get past the fact that this probably isn't 100% faithful to the comic material, then you'll have a good time. I'm really looking forward to seeing it again and eventually adding it to my BluRay collection.
BTW, if anyone does see the movie, don't leave until after all the credits have rolled. As is often the case with these Marvel movies, there is a bonus scene after the credits. I've read that this movie actually has several different bonus scenes attached to different prints.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
The reviews have been scaring me, but you've given me some hope for Wolverine, Loeffs. I'll try to see it when I get some time.
I've been surprised by people's reactions, when I was at work today, that I'd seen the film and liked it. The common sentiment: "I was afraid it was gonna suck." I don't know whether or not this is due to a few poor reviews, or some other source of advance negative buzz ?:) ---I hadn't read any reviews at all, and my knowledge of the film itself was pretty much limited to what I'd seen in the trailers---but, as I said, my boys and I had fun, and it's a great companion piece to the X-Trilogy. I wonder if they're planning other 'X-Men Origins' films...
It's always interesting to see how people's perceptions can be shaped beforehand---both for good and ill; I'm reminded specifically of the two weeks between the time QoS was released in the UK, and finally in the U.S. I had become pretty much convinced that Bond #22 was going to lay the biggest egg of any Bond film since the Eighties...I was happy to be mistaken in my expectations ;%
I guess that's why the marketing guys make the big bucks...
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
FelixLeiter ♀Staffordshire or a pubPosts: 1,286MI6 Agent
Oliver!
It's Bank Holiday weekend - what did i expect?!
It was that and far too many Carry On films i caught bits of. they all just kinda merged into one...
Relax darling, I'm on top of the situation -{
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited May 2009
"Star Trek V: The Final Frontier"
In my opinion, the AVTAK of the entire Star Trek theatrical run---and that includes Insurrection
Not that all the blame should be laid at the Shat-Man's door; it isn't his directorial technique that sinks this film nearly as much as it is the script---and of course the fact that he (along with producer Harve Bennett) approved it I've always had the distinct impression that Shatner was a bit miffed that Nimoy got the director's chair (twice)...and so I've always imagined that he pretty much insisted on having his turn. The problem is, Nimoy's actually a good director, and coaxed solid performances out of this cast in both films he directed. Shatner...not so much. In Final Frontier, the actors often don't seem comfortable in their deliveries, and that is a directorial issue.
My discomfort level here is very similar indeed to my discomfort with the Bonds when they got self-consciously 'cute.' Here, we are forced to watch and hear our beloved characters do fan-dances, hit their heads on bulkheads, etc., as well as trade dialogue that even had my 11 and 13 year-old sons scratching their heads. It arguably worked in 'Save The Whales,' but IMO that was Nimoy's hand on the throttle. Here, it just comes off as a song played out of tune.
Another problem is the concept. The notion of traveling to the center of the galaxy---and crossing the impressively-named 'Great Barrier'---is exciting enough, but the notion that the Enterprise is off to encounter 'God' comes with a great deal of disappointment virtually built-in. Here, 'God' turns out to be just another super-powerful alien entity (like Trelane, or John De Lancie's 'Q' character from TNG) looking for a lift |)
Still, it's not all bad. Lawrence Luckinbill is charismatic and magnetic as Sybok, Spock's emotion-embracing half-brother, and his technique for forcing the characters to confront their inner pain leads to a couple of good scenes. The moment where Kirk tells him, "I don't want my pain taken away. I need my pain!" is a good moment in the film. And of course the chemistry of these performers counterbalances many of the piece's shortcomings...but in the end, sadly, the minuses outweigh the plusses.
Loeff Jr, as the shuttlecraft landed on the 'God Planet,' said uneasily: "Dad, this is a strange movie." Yep.
But I reassured them that the next one, featuring the return of Khan director Nicholas Meyer, is a much better flick, and a fitting swan song for the greatest Enterprise crew of them all B-)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
In spite of all its problems, one thing that I think ST V gets very right is the relationship between the three main characters (Kirk, Spock & McCoy). If you can get past the cringe moments (and there are a lot of them) and very weak effects (shame on Paramount for nickel and diming this movie really badly) you are treated to some good moments that really expand the characters. I thought the scene where McCoy confronts his inner pain to be extremely moving (DeForest Kelley handled it quite nicely) and the scenes of Spock and Sybock show us a new facet to our favorite half-Vulcan. Sybock is also a very interesting antagonist (I hesitate to call him a villain) and I for one was quite moved by Luckinbill's performance, that last moment he and Spock share together, and his final fate. So, much like AVTAK, the whole may be less than the some of its parts but there are still good moments for fans of classic Trek to latch onto.
It is the worst film of the series? Personally, I don't think so. Dramawise, it feels much more organic than the horribly contrived Insurrection, who'se overall plot and central conflict really don't stand up to even moderate scrutiny. I also think its superior to Nemesis; Final Frontier at least tries to tackle an interesting sci-fi concept (the notion of trying to find God), takes our characters to some new places inside themselves, and really forces them to bare their souls, whereas Nemesis was nothing more than an obvious, shameless ripoff of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. I also find it to be vastly superior to the turgid Generations, with its maudlin ruminations on death and aging (another weak attempt to swipe material from Khan) hokey technobabble McGuffin of "The Nexus", awkwardly unbalanced mix of drama and humor and shameless schlock stunt moments involving...
the destruction of the Enterprise and the needless death of Kirk.
RogueAgentSpeeding in the Tumbler...Posts: 3,676MI6 Agent
Allow me to give you some more hope HB: my brother and I saw the film today and we both enjoyed it a lot.
Much like X-Men 3, X-Men Origins: Wolverine avoids the moral and social ambiguities of the first two mutant movies in favor of a high-octane action movie with some pretty cool characters and some memorable set-pieces. The actors are quite solid for the most part and though the size of the roles varies from mutant to mutant, they all have their moment in the spotlight. In particular, Liev Scheiber is excellent as Victor Creed, Taylor Kitsch makes for a very likable Gambit even if he sometimes seems to drop the cajun accent, and Ryan Reynolds seemed born to play the wisecracking Deadpool.
There are a few missteps and plot holes along the way but the character interactions and pacing make up for any shortcomings in the plot.
The critics have been unfairly maligning this movie because it simply dares to try to be entertaining without bashing some message over your head.
As for the fanboys, well if you're one of the unfortunate sheep who only thinks that Bryan Singer can make a good mutant movie and pine for lines like "Have you tried not being a mutant?" then there isn't much that will sway you. Some have harped on being disappointed by the ending but since this is a prequel to the prior mutant movies, it really has to end the way that it does. Others have complained that the other mutants should have had even larger roles; last time I checked, the movie was called "Wolverine", not "Another Bunch of Mutants" and the film lives up to the title as the titular mutant is quite a force and does a lot. Hugh Jackman now inhabits the character like a second skin and is completely believable as the feral mutant.
If you're looking for a fun and entertaining summer action film and can get past the fact that this probably isn't 100% faithful to the comic material, then you'll have a good time. I'm really looking forward to seeing it again and eventually adding it to my BluRay collection.
BTW, if anyone does see the movie, don't leave until after all the credits have rolled. As is often the case with these Marvel movies, there is a bonus scene after the credits. I've read that this movie actually has several different bonus scenes attached to different prints.
Well, Tony I am glad that you and Spec enjoyed the film. My son and I viewed it Sunday and while it was a mixed bag for me, my son's criticisms were far more unforgiving. He was generally disappointed with the end result after going into it with such high hopes (his mounted anticipation for nearly a year with this) for obvious reasons.
He hated how the Deadpool character was handled and I can't say that I blame him.
We both agreed that Gambit was only Gambit in name only doing things that weren't faithful to the character like dropping the Cajun accent midway through and other spoilerish things.
It was okay once I tried seperating comic Logan from movie Logan and I digested it at face value; the first hour's pacing kept me into it and by the time it got to Logan meeting up with John Wraith, it was sort of downhill from there.
There were a few WTF moments like this one that stands out for me so glaringly:
Wolverine blocking the power of the Cyclops' optic blasts with his claws in a Superman 2 Lester kind of way
Too unforgivable for us both and I remember shaking my head in disgust. That just wouldn't happen.
Sad thing is, Wolverine will make its money back handily despite being an okay action film where Watchmen will end up being this generation's Dune and probably just break even financially.
I'm kind of on the fence whether or not I'll get the dvd but to be honest, I don't own the other 3 on video either; I like X-Men in the comics but the movie versions aren't really that desirable enough for me to snatch off of the shelf like other comic titles. Some characters move you more than others I guess...I'd love to see Marvel get back the rights just to see what they could do with them.
My grade for it: 6.5/10 stars
My kid's: 4/20 stars )
I think that had Fox handled Deadpool and Gambit better he would've been happier...and so would the Sisters. )
Mrs. Man Face: "You wouldn't hit a lady? Would you?"
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice isUNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
Sorry to hear you and your son were let down Rogue. So as to not hijack this thread, I posted my reply and some more thoughts on Wolverine over in the 20 Greatest Comic Book Movie threads.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited May 2009
"Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country"
This one is more like it---the return of Khan director Nicholas Meyer, a better story...and a genuine emotional hook that can't be improved upon B-)
Here we have the final voyage of the Federation Starship Enterprise under the command of Captain James Tiberius Kirk...and this one comes with the trappings of an old fashioned-type murder mystery, undisguised allegories to both the fall of the Soviet Union and the disposition of the Palestinians, undeniably anachronistic nods to the 20th Century (and earlier!), political conspiracy...and Iman, :x who plays a devious shapeshifter---and the final alien whom the 'old school' Kirk makes out with on the big screen
The whole backstory of Kirk vs the Klingons is an excellent foundation for the story told, as David Warner's Klingon Chancellor empathizes with Kirk, as he tell him that a peace between the two cultures "Will be toughest on us" (the older generation). Kim "Sex In The City" Cattrall gives a solid performance as the Vulcan conspirator; her mind-meld scene with Nimoy features some excellent business from both actors. Christopher Plummer, who in this film quotes Shakespeare like Khan quoted Melville in STII (only more often), is a scene-chewingly classic villain. The late, great DeForest Kelley has one of the best lines here: "I'd give real money if he'd shut up." )
Of course, there is much of the same self-consciousness here, and a curious clinging to paper charts, translation books, and much of the same nautical references so effectively exploited in STII. It's often quite a bit too cute for its own good. The boys and I didn't care. Loeff Jr and Loeff III appreciated the significance of the final scene, and the way in which this fantastic Original Cast essentially autographs their swan song just prior to the credits.
But their old man was the only one with a tear in his eye ;% It gets me every time.
B-)
Highly recommended, for fans who know a good time when they see it.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited May 2009
Well...I've received a request that I stop using the spoiler brackets on old films. Not sure what to do, here. Can I be trusted not to reveal the identity of Kaiser Sose? |) Hmm.
Meanwhile, just to be safe, I'll keep it in place for the (relatively) newer ones.
"Righteous Kill"
A police drama/thriller starring Al Pacino and Robert De Niro, co-starring the very hot Carla Gugino :x , John Leguizamo, Donnie Wahlberg and Brian Dennehy. So obviously there was some acting talent on the set for this shoot. Directed by John Avnet.
Very good performances from everyone here, which should come as no surprise. Righteous Kill is a mostly routine cop story about a series of murders, at the scene of which is left a notecard with bad poetry.
What distinguishes this one from more garden variety murder mysteries is the script, which features a nifty bit of misdirection---set up in the first reel---which pays off in Act 3. Now, arguably, it isn't the biggest surprise plot twist you'll see this year, but it is a solid story well told...and it's a real treat to see these two particular leads share 80% of their scenes with one another.
My brother likened the three scenes shared by De Niro and Pacino, in Michael Mann's Heat, to "King Kong vs Godzilla" B-) In this one, the energy is spread out over the entire piece, and IMNO their relationship---detectives who've been partners for 30 years---is the foundation of the picture. Wahlberg and Leguizamo play another pair of homicide cops who begin to suspect that a cop is the killer. Brian Dennehy plays the essential authority figure. Carla Gugino's turn as a slightly kinky forensic specialist is a nice bonus
Running time, not including end credits, is a nice and tidy 91 minutes. There's no fresh ground broken here, but the parts on this machine are well-oiled, and IMRO work well. Four out of five stars.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
?:) But Loeffs, little or none of that stuff is a real spoiler... it's generic plot synopsis.
I know---I really don't do spoilers, except in very rare one or two-line instances. That's the irony of this whole exercise, really...
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Well...I've received a request that I stop using the spoiler brackets on old films. Not sure what to do, here. Can I be trusted not to reveal the identity of Kaiser Sose? |) Hmm.
Meanwhile, just to be safe, I'll keep it in place for the (relatively) newer ones.
Allow me to "out" myself as the person who made the request to Loeff. Not surprisingly, I support dropping the spoiler brackets unless there are real spoilers being discussed. This thread is one of the real fun ones on the site, with great insight and humor from the likes of Loeff, Nap, Drake, TonyDP, Rogue, etc. Putting spoilers on everything just saps a bit of the enjoyment out of it, especially (as Nap points out) there really are no spoilers being discussed.
I fear that Loeffs is yanking Dan Same's chain... ) Although I must say I find it amusing that DS hasn't seen all the Star Trek films yet, next he'll be telling us he hasn't caught the end of Goldfinger yet, he just likes what he's seen so far...
Edit: I'm heading home for the weekend soon DS, so hurry up with your riposte!
Edit 2: Nope, he's scarpered! "No witty comeback?" as Alec T would say?
I fear that Loeffs is yanking Dan Same's chain... ) Although I must say I find it amusing that DS hasn't seen all the Star Trek films yet,
Just for the record, I haven't seen any of the Star Trek films, nor any of the television shows. I have to say, I just don't get the fascination, but each to their own. Party on Garth!
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Just for the record, I haven't seen any of the Star Trek films, nor any of the television shows. I have to say, I just don't get the fascination, but each to their own. Party on Garth!
Well...I'd say the new film is a great time to jump aboard Barry! Unless you have a general gripe against sci-fi/adventure, I think you stand an excellent chance of being entertained B-) In fact, I'd be most curious to hear your opinion---unencumbered, as it would be, by any decades-long fanboy baggage...
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Just for the record, I haven't seen any of the Star Trek films, nor any of the television shows. I have to say, I just don't get the fascination, but each to their own. Party on Garth!
YOU ARE NOT OF THE BODY!!!!! )
Actually Barry, I can understand your point of view and even - gasp! - agree with it to a certain extent. The movies featuring the original cast are probably most precious to those who grew up on the old show (like me). And even a hardcore Trek fan like myself can't get behind the later films featuring the cast from The Next Generation as those films are by and large weak, self-indulgent affairs that are probably embarrassing for a non fan to sit thru.
This however segways perfectly into the last film I saw...JJ Abrams' reimagining and reboot of Star Trek. Much like Batman Begins, this film serves to introduce the Trek mythos to a new audience by picking the story up at the very beginning, showing us the first adventure of James T. Kirk and his intrepid crew. Using the ever-popular time travel motif as a starting point, we are given a story that shows us where these characters came from, how they grew up and came to be together.
I'll post more extensive comments in the Star Trek 2.0 thread but suffice it to say I enjoyed myself a lot. I was very apprehensive of new actors taking on these iconic roles and a storyline that basically wipes the slate clean so that new, fresh stories can be told. But the actors are all uniformly likable and very solid, the story engaging (if not always completely plausible) and the action suitably epic. The film has a fresher, hipper attitude with a quicker pace that should make it accessible to non-Trekkers. Gone is all the technobabble and self-indulgence of the last few movies and TV shows. At the same time, the writers really nail the characters so that even old timers should smile when they see and hear some familiar lines and mannerisms.
I had a lot of fun with this one and look forward to adding it to my BluRay Collection as well as seeing more adventures with this cast.
If you're sitting on the fence about this one or apprehensive about jumping in to the Trek universe, I'd strongly urge you to give this movie a shot. It really lays things out nicely for the newcomer and doesn't require any past familiarity with the shows and movies other than maybe a general knowledge of who Kirk and Spock are. It's also the first thing with "Star Trek" in the title in a very long time that I'm not embarrassed to say I like.
Live Long and Prosper!
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
B-)
Seems to be the consensus...I'm hearing things on radio talk shows, etc., that are nearly uniformly praising of the new film. Pretty soon we're going to need a couple of 'Grumpy Gusses' for counter-balance
Less than five hours away for me
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
"Star Trek"
B-)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Mike Leigh slice-of-life film set in Camden, London. The protagonist, Poppy, is the happy go lucky character of the title, we see her swanning about on a bike, all very Richard Lester 1960s-style. She's a bit like Catherine Tate's 'What AM I like?!?' persona, finding her own antics very funny and so on. But the film rubbed me up the wrong way from the start, because the surly strangers she encounters were so exaggeratedly unfriendly, I felt it a bit contrived to get us on her side and feel sorry for her.
Grumpily I imagined a Hostel type scenario for her, but then again if she was dangling from a meat hook, her tender white skin prodded by a sharp instrument in a spooky basement, she's probably go "Ooh, hello Mr Sythe! I guess you're annoyed I haven't used you to cut the lawn lately! I must say, this is different to your Holiday Inn experience!"
What's more, her bigoted driving instructer is a white, working class bloke who's a Christian extremist and conspiracy theorist - the sort of nutter who ticks all the boxes, the kind you can ridicule with impunity these days. It was all to easy, he was such a stereotype. When Poppy goes all wise and asks, "Are you an only child, Scott?" or "Were you bullied at school, Scott?" it's as if we're meant to applaud her intuition, when in fact that's a very crass thing to say to someone. Heaven knows what working- class champion and only child Julie Burchill would make of it!
Leigh has form when it comes to patronising the working classes, in a way I felt this was true to form. Excellent acting by the lead, though it was admiration mixed with some ambivalence when I realised from the bonus features that she - and most of them - are far posher than the people they portray. Overall I thought this was a bit lefty Guardian for me, not what I want for a movie though I'm not against the newspaper.
Gran Torino - I enjoyed the film. I'm not really up to scratch on my Eastwood, having only seen a couple of his films but I felt that his presence in this film was fantastic. In fact, if he was removed there would really be nothing worth watching. Very much his own film.
Amazing coincidence, NP--I saw Happy-Go-Lucky just two days ago. Unlike you, though, I really enjoyed it. I'll admit I'm biased: I'm a huge fan of Mike Leigh and his improvisational style, and the acting blew me away. Actually, I felt the characters were all treated with compassion and understanding, so Poppy wasn't just a cheerful flake and Scott wasn't entirely a two-dimensional conspiracist loon. Ah well, to each his own!
Comments
Because of my renewed appreciation of the tender sensibilities of others, my "all spoiler" policy will remain in play. If you don't want your day utterly ruined, watch the film (released in 1986!) before reading the following...
With Nimoy's second film as a director, clearly the cast and producers were settling into a distinct 'rhythm' with this one---and they weren't the least bit hesitant to set most of the piece in the 'current' (1986) era...or throw a healthy dose of 'self-aware' (IMO near self-parody) humour into the mix. Regardless, it was a huge hit with fans, and even viewed through these cynical eyes it's easy to see why. Appearances by Jane Wyatt and Mark Lenard (as Spock's parents), from TOS, reaffirm the cozy fanboy comfort zone provided here: The film is just fun...and the cast all fit into their roles as if they were comfortable slippers. Was there ever any doubt that Admiral Kirk and his crew would save the day? Hardly...
My sons' biggest complaint: that the visuals/metaphors used for the time travel sequence---i.e., the changing faces in the mist, the figure falling through the clouds, the bubbles and the still pond water with reeds of grass---didn't really make much sense. I told them that the filmmakers probably hadn't had any other ideas as to how to describe the indescribable...
Nevertheless, highly recommended---especially for actual fans of the show/films
Still...this film clearly paved the way for the next one---ST5:TFF, arguably the AVTAK of the franchise
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
NSNA: Special Edition. First bit of rejigged and rescored bootleg, quite good this time round once you get past the fact that it's a bit from The Man With Golden Gun playing at Shrublands.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Third film from Dario Argento, and the final of his so called "animal trilogy". This progressive-rock-jazz gialli centers around Roberto, a handsome young percussionist.
A mysterious stranger, (sunglasses and trenchcoat), is constantly tailing Rob after his band's studio sessions. After he finally confronts the man in an empty theater, shockingly he accidentally kills him. (this happens to me all the time)
Unfortunately there's a witness in the balcony with a high speed camera, who makes his life miserable by leaving sordid photos in places most likely to be noticed by Roberto or his hip friends.
One of Argento's more difficult to obtain. It's a solid entry with some definitive DA cinematography. I particularly liked the innovative POV camera angles on the band member's instruments.
Not as good as Deep Red, but then few are.
Review to follow -{
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Whoa! Does this mean the Star Trek film festival has been interrupted? I was looking forward to reading what you and the boys thought about ST V and ST VI, with appropriate...
I hope to check out Wolverine myself with the brother on Saturday.
I'm really curous about how my boys will react to ST:V...
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Just kidding of course. I've seen part IV so many times my love for Catherine Hicks knows no bounds.
I'm curious about the Wolverine flick myself so looking foward to your review.
Adamantium, anyone? The opening salvo of the Summer Film Season has been fired...and Weapon X is the projectile. I wouldn't be at all surprised if...
Much of this backstory, effectively conveyed along with the titles, shows Logan and his brother (?!), Victor Creed, fighting alongside each other in the Civil War, WWI, WWII and Vietnam...and then they meet William Stryker, a shadowy military man who forms a team of superhumans, many of whom will be at least slightly familiar to those who read certain Marvel titles
The bottom line is that we are given a Hollywood take on the origin of Weapon X, and it jives enough with the graphic novel to satisfy me...but then again, nobody agrees about such things, :v and many comic book purists will be annoyed (at least) or even outraged (in some cases) by the abundant liberties taken with various characters and their long-established history on the illustrated page...but ultimately it all knits in fairly well with the X-Men Trilogy that preceded it on the big screen (which took abundant liberties of its own). Actually, Wolverine raises questions about Logan and Sabretooth in the first X-Men film...a bit of an errant story thread, there...
The action is fantastic, the set-pieces thrilling, and the performances exactly what they needed to be. Hugh Jackman and Liev Schreiber are outstanding. The actress who plays Logan's love interest is heartbreakingly appealing, in a very real, girl-next-door sense. Ryan Reynolds (whom I've always hoped would be DC's Flash) is good as a barely-recognizable Deadpool.
I'd heard some concerns about what they did with Gambit...but frankly my principal complaint is that there wasn't more of him in the story. Remi LaBeau (sp?)should have had different hair, but I thought he was pretty f-ing cool B-) I hope he shows up again in a future X film...
I've got to say that we all enjoyed this one quite a bit. Loeff III, who's just discovering the X books, thought that there was enough source material for it to work. Loeff Jr mentioned that he really didn't need to see Hugh Jackman's ass...*
A nice (if not totally unexpected) cameo, late in the third act, is satisfying---if made slightly awkward by some uncomfortably obvious CGI de-ageing...
I've probably got more to say about this one, as I continue to digest, but...on a five star scale, I'd give it a solid 3.5
* An opinion not shared by many females, both here and elsewhere, I'd wager...!
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Much like X-Men 3, X-Men Origins: Wolverine avoids the moral and social ambiguities of the first two mutant movies in favor of a high-octane action movie with some pretty cool characters and some memorable set-pieces. The actors are quite solid for the most part and though the size of the roles varies from mutant to mutant, they all have their moment in the spotlight. In particular, Liev Scheiber is excellent as Victor Creed, Taylor Kitsch makes for a very likable Gambit even if he sometimes seems to drop the cajun accent, and Ryan Reynolds seemed born to play the wisecracking Deadpool.
There are a few missteps and plot holes along the way but the character interactions and pacing make up for any shortcomings in the plot.
The critics have been unfairly maligning this movie because it simply dares to try to be entertaining without bashing some message over your head.
As for the fanboys, well if you're one of the unfortunate sheep who only thinks that Bryan Singer can make a good mutant movie and pine for lines like "Have you tried not being a mutant?" then there isn't much that will sway you. Some have harped on being disappointed by the ending but since this is a prequel to the prior mutant movies, it really has to end the way that it does. Others have complained that the other mutants should have had even larger roles; last time I checked, the movie was called "Wolverine", not "Another Bunch of Mutants" and the film lives up to the title as the titular mutant is quite a force and does a lot. Hugh Jackman now inhabits the character like a second skin and is completely believable as the feral mutant.
If you're looking for a fun and entertaining summer action film and can get past the fact that this probably isn't 100% faithful to the comic material, then you'll have a good time. I'm really looking forward to seeing it again and eventually adding it to my BluRay collection.
BTW, if anyone does see the movie, don't leave until after all the credits have rolled. As is often the case with these Marvel movies, there is a bonus scene after the credits. I've read that this movie actually has several different bonus scenes attached to different prints.
I've been surprised by people's reactions, when I was at work today, that I'd seen the film and liked it. The common sentiment: "I was afraid it was gonna suck." I don't know whether or not this is due to a few poor reviews, or some other source of advance negative buzz ?:) ---I hadn't read any reviews at all, and my knowledge of the film itself was pretty much limited to what I'd seen in the trailers---but, as I said, my boys and I had fun, and it's a great companion piece to the X-Trilogy. I wonder if they're planning other 'X-Men Origins' films...
It's always interesting to see how people's perceptions can be shaped beforehand---both for good and ill; I'm reminded specifically of the two weeks between the time QoS was released in the UK, and finally in the U.S. I had become pretty much convinced that Bond #22 was going to lay the biggest egg of any Bond film since the Eighties...I was happy to be mistaken in my expectations ;%
I guess that's why the marketing guys make the big bucks...
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
It's Bank Holiday weekend - what did i expect?!
It was that and far too many Carry On films i caught bits of. they all just kinda merged into one...
Not that all the blame should be laid at the Shat-Man's door; it isn't his directorial technique that sinks this film nearly as much as it is the script---and of course the fact that he (along with producer Harve Bennett) approved it
My discomfort level here is very similar indeed to my discomfort with the Bonds when they got self-consciously 'cute.' Here, we are forced to watch and hear our beloved characters do fan-dances, hit their heads on bulkheads, etc., as well as trade dialogue that even had my 11 and 13 year-old sons scratching their heads. It arguably worked in 'Save The Whales,' but IMO that was Nimoy's hand on the throttle. Here, it just comes off as a song played out of tune.
Another problem is the concept. The notion of traveling to the center of the galaxy---and crossing the impressively-named 'Great Barrier'---is exciting enough, but the notion that the Enterprise is off to encounter 'God' comes with a great deal of disappointment virtually built-in. Here, 'God' turns out to be just another super-powerful alien entity (like Trelane, or John De Lancie's 'Q' character from TNG) looking for a lift
Still, it's not all bad. Lawrence Luckinbill is charismatic and magnetic as Sybok, Spock's emotion-embracing half-brother, and his technique for forcing the characters to confront their inner pain leads to a couple of good scenes. The moment where Kirk tells him, "I don't want my pain taken away. I need my pain!" is a good moment in the film. And of course the chemistry of these performers counterbalances many of the piece's shortcomings...but in the end, sadly, the minuses outweigh the plusses.
Loeff Jr, as the shuttlecraft landed on the 'God Planet,' said uneasily: "Dad, this is a strange movie." Yep.
But I reassured them that the next one, featuring the return of Khan director Nicholas Meyer, is a much better flick, and a fitting swan song for the greatest Enterprise crew of them all B-)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
It is the worst film of the series? Personally, I don't think so. Dramawise, it feels much more organic than the horribly contrived Insurrection, who'se overall plot and central conflict really don't stand up to even moderate scrutiny. I also think its superior to Nemesis; Final Frontier at least tries to tackle an interesting sci-fi concept (the notion of trying to find God), takes our characters to some new places inside themselves, and really forces them to bare their souls, whereas Nemesis was nothing more than an obvious, shameless ripoff of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. I also find it to be vastly superior to the turgid Generations, with its maudlin ruminations on death and aging (another weak attempt to swipe material from Khan) hokey technobabble McGuffin of "The Nexus", awkwardly unbalanced mix of drama and humor and shameless schlock stunt moments involving...
Well, Tony I am glad that you and Spec enjoyed the film. My son and I viewed it Sunday and while it was a mixed bag for me, my son's criticisms were far more unforgiving. He was generally disappointed with the end result after going into it with such high hopes (his mounted anticipation for nearly a year with this) for obvious reasons.
He hated how the Deadpool character was handled and I can't say that I blame him.
We both agreed that Gambit was only Gambit in name only doing things that weren't faithful to the character like dropping the Cajun accent midway through and other spoilerish things.
It was okay once I tried seperating comic Logan from movie Logan and I digested it at face value; the first hour's pacing kept me into it and by the time it got to Logan meeting up with John Wraith, it was sort of downhill from there.
There were a few WTF moments like this one that stands out for me so glaringly:
Too unforgivable for us both and I remember shaking my head in disgust. That just wouldn't happen.
Sad thing is, Wolverine will make its money back handily despite being an okay action film where Watchmen will end up being this generation's Dune and probably just break even financially.
I'm kind of on the fence whether or not I'll get the dvd but to be honest, I don't own the other 3 on video either; I like X-Men in the comics but the movie versions aren't really that desirable enough for me to snatch off of the shelf like other comic titles. Some characters move you more than others I guess...I'd love to see Marvel get back the rights just to see what they could do with them.
My grade for it: 6.5/10 stars
My kid's: 4/20 stars
I think that had Fox handled Deadpool and Gambit better he would've been happier...and so would the Sisters.
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice is UNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
Here we have the final voyage of the Federation Starship Enterprise under the command of Captain James Tiberius Kirk...and this one comes with the trappings of an old fashioned-type murder mystery, undisguised allegories to both the fall of the Soviet Union and the disposition of the Palestinians, undeniably anachronistic nods to the 20th Century (and earlier!), political conspiracy...and Iman, :x who plays a devious shapeshifter---and the final alien whom the 'old school' Kirk makes out with on the big screen
The whole backstory of Kirk vs the Klingons is an excellent foundation for the story told, as David Warner's Klingon Chancellor empathizes with Kirk, as he tell him that a peace between the two cultures "Will be toughest on us" (the older generation). Kim "Sex In The City" Cattrall gives a solid performance as the Vulcan conspirator; her mind-meld scene with Nimoy features some excellent business from both actors. Christopher Plummer, who in this film quotes Shakespeare like Khan quoted Melville in STII (only more often), is a scene-chewingly classic villain. The late, great DeForest Kelley has one of the best lines here: "I'd give real money if he'd shut up."
Of course, there is much of the same self-consciousness here, and a curious clinging to paper charts, translation books, and much of the same nautical references so effectively exploited in STII. It's often quite a bit too cute for its own good. The boys and I didn't care. Loeff Jr and Loeff III appreciated the significance of the final scene, and the way in which this fantastic Original Cast essentially autographs their swan song just prior to the credits.
But their old man was the only one with a tear in his eye ;% It gets me every time.
B-)
Highly recommended, for fans who know a good time when they see it.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Meanwhile, just to be safe, I'll keep it in place for the (relatively) newer ones.
"Righteous Kill"
A police drama/thriller starring Al Pacino and Robert De Niro, co-starring the very hot Carla Gugino :x , John Leguizamo, Donnie Wahlberg and Brian Dennehy. So obviously there was some acting talent on the set for this shoot. Directed by John Avnet.
What distinguishes this one from more garden variety murder mysteries is the script, which features a nifty bit of misdirection---set up in the first reel---which pays off in Act 3. Now, arguably, it isn't the biggest surprise plot twist you'll see this year, but it is a solid story well told...and it's a real treat to see these two particular leads share 80% of their scenes with one another.
My brother likened the three scenes shared by De Niro and Pacino, in Michael Mann's Heat, to "King Kong vs Godzilla" B-) In this one, the energy is spread out over the entire piece, and IMNO their relationship---detectives who've been partners for 30 years---is the foundation of the picture. Wahlberg and Leguizamo play another pair of homicide cops who begin to suspect that a cop is the killer. Brian Dennehy plays the essential authority figure. Carla Gugino's turn as a slightly kinky forensic specialist is a nice bonus
Running time, not including end credits, is a nice and tidy 91 minutes. There's no fresh ground broken here, but the parts on this machine are well-oiled, and IMRO work well. Four out of five stars.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I know---I really don't do spoilers, except in very rare one or two-line instances. That's the irony of this whole exercise, really...
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Kaiser Soze...
Edit: I'm heading home for the weekend soon DS, so hurry up with your riposte!
Edit 2: Nope, he's scarpered! "No witty comeback?" as Alec T would say?
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Just for the record, I haven't seen any of the Star Trek films, nor any of the television shows. I have to say, I just don't get the fascination, but each to their own. Party on Garth!
Well...I'd say the new film is a great time to jump aboard Barry! Unless you have a general gripe against sci-fi/adventure, I think you stand an excellent chance of being entertained B-) In fact, I'd be most curious to hear your opinion---unencumbered, as it would be, by any decades-long fanboy baggage...
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Actually Barry, I can understand your point of view and even - gasp! - agree with it to a certain extent. The movies featuring the original cast are probably most precious to those who grew up on the old show (like me). And even a hardcore Trek fan like myself can't get behind the later films featuring the cast from The Next Generation as those films are by and large weak, self-indulgent affairs that are probably embarrassing for a non fan to sit thru.
This however segways perfectly into the last film I saw...JJ Abrams' reimagining and reboot of Star Trek. Much like Batman Begins, this film serves to introduce the Trek mythos to a new audience by picking the story up at the very beginning, showing us the first adventure of James T. Kirk and his intrepid crew. Using the ever-popular time travel motif as a starting point, we are given a story that shows us where these characters came from, how they grew up and came to be together.
I'll post more extensive comments in the Star Trek 2.0 thread but suffice it to say I enjoyed myself a lot. I was very apprehensive of new actors taking on these iconic roles and a storyline that basically wipes the slate clean so that new, fresh stories can be told. But the actors are all uniformly likable and very solid, the story engaging (if not always completely plausible) and the action suitably epic. The film has a fresher, hipper attitude with a quicker pace that should make it accessible to non-Trekkers. Gone is all the technobabble and self-indulgence of the last few movies and TV shows. At the same time, the writers really nail the characters so that even old timers should smile when they see and hear some familiar lines and mannerisms.
I had a lot of fun with this one and look forward to adding it to my BluRay Collection as well as seeing more adventures with this cast.
If you're sitting on the fence about this one or apprehensive about jumping in to the Trek universe, I'd strongly urge you to give this movie a shot. It really lays things out nicely for the newcomer and doesn't require any past familiarity with the shows and movies other than maybe a general knowledge of who Kirk and Spock are. It's also the first thing with "Star Trek" in the title in a very long time that I'm not embarrassed to say I like.
Live Long and Prosper!
Seems to be the consensus...I'm hearing things on radio talk shows, etc., that are nearly uniformly praising of the new film. Pretty soon we're going to need a couple of 'Grumpy Gusses' for counter-balance
Less than five hours away for me
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
B-)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Mike Leigh slice-of-life film set in Camden, London. The protagonist, Poppy, is the happy go lucky character of the title, we see her swanning about on a bike, all very Richard Lester 1960s-style. She's a bit like Catherine Tate's 'What AM I like?!?' persona, finding her own antics very funny and so on. But the film rubbed me up the wrong way from the start, because the surly strangers she encounters were so exaggeratedly unfriendly, I felt it a bit contrived to get us on her side and feel sorry for her.
Grumpily I imagined a Hostel type scenario for her, but then again if she was dangling from a meat hook, her tender white skin prodded by a sharp instrument in a spooky basement, she's probably go "Ooh, hello Mr Sythe! I guess you're annoyed I haven't used you to cut the lawn lately! I must say, this is different to your Holiday Inn experience!"
What's more, her bigoted driving instructer is a white, working class bloke who's a Christian extremist and conspiracy theorist - the sort of nutter who ticks all the boxes, the kind you can ridicule with impunity these days. It was all to easy, he was such a stereotype. When Poppy goes all wise and asks, "Are you an only child, Scott?" or "Were you bullied at school, Scott?" it's as if we're meant to applaud her intuition, when in fact that's a very crass thing to say to someone. Heaven knows what working- class champion and only child Julie Burchill would make of it!
Leigh has form when it comes to patronising the working classes, in a way I felt this was true to form. Excellent acting by the lead, though it was admiration mixed with some ambivalence when I realised from the bonus features that she - and most of them - are far posher than the people they portray. Overall I thought this was a bit lefty Guardian for me, not what I want for a movie though I'm not against the newspaper.
Roger Moore 1927-2017