I guess Natural Born Killers could also count... I mean, he wrote the original screenplay for it.
sure it does. Its the only one I've never seen, and my stoopid library doesn't have a copy.
If you ever get the chance, do see it.
It's an acid trip of a movie, it hits you hard. Very fun, if you've got the humour for it.
Unlike no other movie, I've seen so far.
Woody/Downey Jr/Lee Jones are great on this one.
(Pre drug arrest phase for Downey, case you were wondering)
Aiming to finally watch Fight Club today.
I know, I know.
It was on the list for the longest time and I'm sorry as this isn't a "film to watch" thread.
Aiming to finally watch Fight Club today.
I know, I know.
It was on the list for the longest time and I'm sorry as this isn't a "film to watch" thread.
in this case I think you have to tell us before you watch it, because "The First Rule Of Fight Club" would seem to preclude doing reviews after you've watched it.
Aiming to finally watch Fight Club today.
I know, I know.
It was on the list for the longest time and I'm sorry as this isn't a "film to watch" thread.
in this case I think you have to tell us before you watch it, because "The First Rule Of Fight Club" would seem to preclude doing reviews after you've watched it.
So does the second rule and so on and so forth... )
A Quiet Place. Somewhere up there Alfred Hitchcock is smiling. This is a deeply suspenseful and often downright frightening film, one that makes probably the best use of its soundtrack since Hitch's own The Birds. See it!
Having just come back from that city, I decided to watch this (it was either that or The Quiller Memorandum, though I settled on this despite the latter having a John Barry score). So 60s, so cool. Michael Caine as Harry Palmer, dealing with double- and triple-crosses around the Berlin Wall. It's probably the best of the Palmer series though Billion-Dollar Brain is my favourite. Many of the Bond cast and crew worked on this.
Having just come back from that city, I decided to watch this (it was either that or The Quiller Memorandum, though I settled on this despite the latter having a John Barry score). So 60s, so cool. Michael Caine as Harry Palmer, dealing with double- and triple-crosses around the Berlin Wall. It's probably the best of the Palmer series though Billion-Dollar Brain is my favourite. Many of the Bond cast and crew worked on this.
I saw a movie I hadn't even heard of before today, but one I should've been aware of.
The Bank Job (2008), starring sideburn-clad Statham in a film based out of true events.
While the story, characters and writing are world class (new English expressions are always welcome in my book and part of the joy in watching British crime films), direction leaves something to be desired. I don't know if it's the editing or the set up but it's just going through the motions with not much build up. On moments where there shoulda been tension, it's not played off that well, actors not to blame on that.
They made the smutty 70s look good though, to my father's discomfort with him not liking the 70s (his childhood decade) at all, from the clothes to the cars, I found the lot of it a quite enjoyable experience and I think that this slightly lesser known film will give you a blast out of its story and execution.
What more can I say? It's Saturday night material, you won't regret seeing it.
The music is perhaps the main reason- Richard Rodney Bennett's score is unworldy and unforgettable. Ken Russell's direction lifts the film above the 60s spy-film norm with many memorable images, and the cast (esp Francoise Dorleac and Ed Begley) live their parts. Len Deighton's plot is terrific, and though the novel does a better job of explaining exactly what's going on I enjoyed the way it approaches the scenario from an unusual angle.
If you're a fan of the MCU, this is a very satisfying conclusion of everything so far. It juggles a moth cast of big names and popular characters, and manages to give them all something memorable to do. The fact that a film on this scale has been made is astonishing, and the fact it is such a high standard is even better. Easily the second best MCU film, after Guardians of the Galaxy 2.
huh, cant really believe they're wrapping up that franchise. Must be hundreds of thousands of people employed fulltime cranking them out three films per year. The economy would crash if DisneyMarvel ever said "...and all the little superheroes lived happily ever after"
Don't spoil the story yet, but I gather its more like Downey and the other original set of leads are getting a chance to retire, and Dr Strange and other newer characters are going to be the next generation?
I'm a bit wary of Infinity War. I didn't like Civil War, way too many characters to keep track of, several of them I kept getting mixed up ... it felt much like the bigbudget toy commercial these films are sometimes accused of being. And this new one should be twice as many characters in one film.
Whereas Black Panther focussed exclusively on that one character, and as a result was a proper story.
I think Infinity War is different to Civil War with its characters. Civil War definitely has everyone as a main character, wheras in Infinity War, Thanos is the main character. The entire film is basically split across three character groups, but this is basically one big group of characters doing a main thing, and two smaller groups of characters doing minor - but equally important - things. Plus, it would be a bit of a struggle if you're not up to date with the MCU, because it's definitely a film you need to know stuff about before going in to it.
I've watched them all, and most of them in sequence over the last year or so.
But still, its got to the point where there's so many characters, there's now quite a few supporting characters who have never been properly defined. Especially when they're rarely in costume like they're supposed to be. In the comics, even though all the faces are drawn the same, at least we have the costumes to tell them apart!
...but if you're warning newbies this might not be the ideal entry level Marvel film, maybe that's a good thing. Cuz I had to wait almost a month before it was safe to watch Black Panther, me not liking crowded noisy theatres and all.
It's worth mentioning then that nearly everyone is in their costumes for the entire runtime. The entire film takes place over a relatively short period of time, so once Spider-Man and Iron Man, for example, get their costumes on just minutes after they first appear, they stay in them for the entire length of the film.
well that'll certainly help! and I think we can all recognise Downey and the tiny little kid who now plays Peter Parker.
I like what you say about Thanos being the main character.
I read a big fat trade paperback last year, with all of Jim Starlin's original Thanos stories from the 70s, mostly from his classic runs in Captain Marvel and Warlock.
Thanos is a very interesting bad guy, he's got his reasons for his obsessions.
In the comics at least, he literally has a crush on Death, who is personifed as a beautiful woman, and wishes to deliver The Universe to her as proof of his love.
Not at all relatable from a human perspective, but as cosmic scale villains go he's got his own weird rationale. I think a good movie could be made focussing just on him as a character, with the Avengers et al as mere background characters.
But don't spoil the story any further, thanks!
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 26,562Chief of Staff
I watched The Death of Stalin by Armando Iannucci last night. Great film, great cast, great writing...and all scarily true highly recommended -{
If you're a fan of the MCU, this is a very satisfying conclusion of everything so far. It juggles a moth cast of big names and popular characters, and manages to give them all something memorable to do. The fact that a film on this scale has been made is astonishing, and the fact it is such a high standard is even better. Easily the second best MCU film, after Guardians of the Galaxy 2.
I can't help thinking of all the good, interesting movies that could have been made from what this movie cost.. Perhaps as many as twenty movies like "Sicario", "The Death of Stalin" and "Room". I go see superhero movies now and again, but I'm tired of movie stars in silly costumes running in front of a green screen. I'm tired of those movies flooding the cinemas and how much money that's being spent on them.
Saw American Assassin, 2017, a film I originally gave a miss due to mediocre reviews.
Unlike most other American spy films like the latest Bourne, I actually got a kick out of this one.
The locations, acting and for the most part script isn't that bad.
Editing does leave something to be desired though.
Should note, I never watched the trailer and watched it a "blind" man. For that, this film may be better to me because of that so take it all with a grain of salt.
I tried to see Death of Stalin in my local theatre last week, when it was a rainy day, but it was already gone. I'm sure Infinity War will still be playing there for months. and I bet when I finally see ...Stalin I will like it better (Steve Buscemi and Michael Palin in a film made by the guy who created Veep? I like it already).
Thing is, a film like Infinity War employs tens of thousands of people, all those little names that take fifteen minutes to scroll by in the closing credits. And that's a good thing. The city of Toronto has a big film industry, mostly doing location work and postproduction for mainstream Hollywood productions. That means art school grads have a chance to afford rent in an expensive city alongside corporate lawyers. And goes someway to replacing lost jobs in he rustbelt and resource sectors.
Its the Entertainment-Industrial Complex. And I agree the budgets could cure world famine, but employing tens of thousands of people is actually similar. It's all kind of weird, how much money changes hands over pure fantasy.
Whereas indie/auteur type films are starving artist stuff. You know David Lynch had to take a paper route when he made Eraserhead?
Yeah, good stuff. Some say that she had her kit off for much of the film and doesn't get any funny lines, but this does have a female perspective on the action format that is invaluable so it still functions as a 'feminist' breakthrough movie. You really get the sense here that war and conflict is silly and unnecessary and to do with mankind being led astray. To have the first 15 mins where you don't actually see any men is highly unusual, and assists that narrative, along with having a woman director.
Admittedly, the origin thing is oddly different to the sci-fi origins of most superheroes. A woman with Scandinavian colouring giving birth to an Israeli! Preposterous.
I didn't see the appeal of Gal Gadot as WW when first announced but I do now. You can't just have a rerun of the 70s WW, though I suppose I miss the spinning magical twirl. The whole colour tone is toned down for this, none of that garish superhero cape stuff. She's very good, and I guess the humour of the fish out of water thing might have been done for Thor, too.
Unfortunately having her intrude on the end stages of WW1 does make one think, okay, where was she in WW2 then? Did she hop back to her Amazalean island and not get an exit visa that time round?
A very neat unexpected plot development near the end, and a good ensemble cast.
I'm still a bit bemused with the whole Marvel thing though, in terms of who is in it and so on. I've seen Iron Man I, Superman, Wonder Woman, what else is there and in what order? It gets a bit beyond me, it's like catching up on your homework.
Actually, looking at the imdb reviews, perhaps unsurprisingly some are arguing that WW is a Zionist whose late intervention in the Great War helps Israel to carve up the Middle East at the expense of the Turks! I suppose that had to happen at some point! If the message board was still on, you'd get some saying that WW couldn't have done much in WW2* because the Holocaust never happened!
that was so concisely explained Gymkata!
I woulda started with Action Comics #1, and the audience would have quickly all walked out of the room.
Usually I would be opposed to already giganormous media companies all merging into one, but I do look forward to MarvelDisney getting a chance to make a proper film of the Fantastic Four.
There's a 94 page long comic book movie thread, that hasn't been touched in the last two years. Maybe worth bumping?
Wow, thanks Gymkata, I was hoping someone would chip in, but on cursory reading I'm still a bit confused. Is that why they did a reboot of Spiderman, because it got owned by someone else and they wanted to give it another go on their terms?
A shame Wonder Woman doesn't get to meet Iron Man, sparks would fly!
It's mental because of course is there any rhyme or reason to it? Some superheroes are v far fetched because they are alien, eg Superman or Wonder Woman, created out of clay. Others are more grounded such as Batman, who is a rich bloke in a suit, or maybe Spidey, as they are humans ill affected by some sci-fi misadventure.
Then you get the sex issue... I mean, can an alien really cop off with a human? Isn't that a kind of bestiality? I suppose if Disney can get hold of it it's not matte, what with Donkey getting it on with a Dragon! Sometimes it's better these heroes only exist in a kid's world. But you see, sex and romance is an integral part of grown-up action movies and so on, it's hard to skirt around.
Anyway, I thought it was hard enough to explain NSNA and the rights to that...
Then you get the sex issue... I mean, can an alien really cop off with a human?
there was a famous essay by science fiction writer Larry Niven, called Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex , which proved in disgusting detail why Lois Lane would never survive a night with Superman.
Lets just say, the taboo of interspecies romance is the least of the problems with that situation.
You're probably right about the reasons for the latest Spider-Man reboot. Specifically, they wanted to make the character part of the Avengers universe, and the previous films had existed independently with no mention of other superheroes.
The difference between DC and Marvel isn't really that confusing. They have been competing publishing companies since the birth of the comic book in the late 30s. They have sued each other a few times over the decades, and are very possessive about the legal status of their character trademarks.
Being lazy I guess, but which superhero film should I watch next?
Notorious
This fine Hitchcock film stars Cary Grant and Ingrid Bergman, and has an important role for Claude Rains as a German hiding out with his less suave Nazi gang in South America. The film is set in the year it's released - 1946.
Grant is Bond really, in particular with his introduction but for all that it's really Bergman's film because she gets to open up while he is an enigma. Some of it resembles Bond and Tanya with regards to getting the Lector in FRWL. But later we are put in mind of OHMSS, in particular getting on to the villain's turf to get info, and the Irma Bunt character, played out far better here I must say.
It makes one wonder what Hitch might have made of OHMSS though he was not in his prime by the late 60s at all.
Grant looks like Bond - but this is 46 and of course would have been nearly 20s older when the real Bond films came around. Of course, had he starred in what was slated for the first Bond film at one point, Thunderball, it might well have resembled Never Say Never Again, as Grant looked like an greyer Connery by then.
Rains is great though as ever you don't really notice or care that he doesn't have a German accent, just as you didn't notice or care he wasn't quite French in Casablanca. Was his accent American in that James Stewart film Mr Smith Goes to Washington, where he played a senator? Probably not.
This film is similar in tone to Rebecca, a few years earlier and Hitch's breakthrough hit in America. It is rather racey for its time, in terms of what Bergman's character is meant to do.
Not quite sure why it's called Notorious. It's not obvious.
Not quite sure why it's called Notorious. It's not obvious.
my theory: she is is the one who is notorious. She is the daughter of a convicted Nazi, and nobody expects anything good of her.
So she drinks heavily with a house full of strangers, and flirts with the strange man she finds in her house when she wakes up still half-drunk. Self-destructive, because she does not want to be the person she was born to be. Five minutes into the film, we already assume her to be the type to lead a stranger straight to the bedroom, except that he turns out to be a spy proposing a secret mission.
Cary's job as spymaster is to cynically exploit her reputation and limited choices in life, sending her to South America to do exactly what respectable folks assume she is destined to do anyway: marry one of her father's Nazi collaborating friends.
btw I noticed a biography of Ingrid Bergman in the bookstore recently, and that was it's title: Notorious.
I would guess this is her second most famous role, after Casablanca. GasLight was another good one for her to show what she can do.
Being lazy I guess, but which superhero film should I watch next?
the original Superman with Christopher Reeve is better than anything that has come out in the last 20 years.
Otherwise you will have to let us know which ones you have seen, and which ones you have liked.
My tastes are skewed by knowing the source material, so I care about things that probably wont matter to you.
Comments
It's an acid trip of a movie, it hits you hard. Very fun, if you've got the humour for it.
Unlike no other movie, I've seen so far.
Woody/Downey Jr/Lee Jones are great on this one.
(Pre drug arrest phase for Downey, case you were wondering)
I know, I know.
It was on the list for the longest time and I'm sorry as this isn't a "film to watch" thread.
Having just come back from that city, I decided to watch this (it was either that or The Quiller Memorandum, though I settled on this despite the latter having a John Barry score). So 60s, so cool. Michael Caine as Harry Palmer, dealing with double- and triple-crosses around the Berlin Wall. It's probably the best of the Palmer series though Billion-Dollar Brain is my favourite. Many of the Bond cast and crew worked on this.
Why is Billion Dollar your favourite, Barbel?
Roger Moore 1927-2017
The Bank Job (2008), starring sideburn-clad Statham in a film based out of true events.
While the story, characters and writing are world class (new English expressions are always welcome in my book and part of the joy in watching British crime films), direction leaves something to be desired. I don't know if it's the editing or the set up but it's just going through the motions with not much build up. On moments where there shoulda been tension, it's not played off that well, actors not to blame on that.
They made the smutty 70s look good though, to my father's discomfort with him not liking the 70s (his childhood decade) at all, from the clothes to the cars, I found the lot of it a quite enjoyable experience and I think that this slightly lesser known film will give you a blast out of its story and execution.
What more can I say? It's Saturday night material, you won't regret seeing it.
The music is perhaps the main reason- Richard Rodney Bennett's score is unworldy and unforgettable. Ken Russell's direction lifts the film above the 60s spy-film norm with many memorable images, and the cast (esp Francoise Dorleac and Ed Begley) live their parts. Len Deighton's plot is terrific, and though the novel does a better job of explaining exactly what's going on I enjoyed the way it approaches the scenario from an unusual angle.
For more, see https://www.ajb007.co.uk/topic/46150/the-60s-bond-rivals-2-harry-palmer/
I love Gregory Peck. He is one of my most favourite actors of all time
Quincy Jones is just phenomenal.
If you're a fan of the MCU, this is a very satisfying conclusion of everything so far. It juggles a moth cast of big names and popular characters, and manages to give them all something memorable to do. The fact that a film on this scale has been made is astonishing, and the fact it is such a high standard is even better. Easily the second best MCU film, after Guardians of the Galaxy 2.
Don't spoil the story yet, but I gather its more like Downey and the other original set of leads are getting a chance to retire, and Dr Strange and other newer characters are going to be the next generation?
I'm a bit wary of Infinity War. I didn't like Civil War, way too many characters to keep track of, several of them I kept getting mixed up ... it felt much like the bigbudget toy commercial these films are sometimes accused of being. And this new one should be twice as many characters in one film.
Whereas Black Panther focussed exclusively on that one character, and as a result was a proper story.
But still, its got to the point where there's so many characters, there's now quite a few supporting characters who have never been properly defined. Especially when they're rarely in costume like they're supposed to be. In the comics, even though all the faces are drawn the same, at least we have the costumes to tell them apart!
...but if you're warning newbies this might not be the ideal entry level Marvel film, maybe that's a good thing. Cuz I had to wait almost a month before it was safe to watch Black Panther, me not liking crowded noisy theatres and all.
I like what you say about Thanos being the main character.
I read a big fat trade paperback last year, with all of Jim Starlin's original Thanos stories from the 70s, mostly from his classic runs in Captain Marvel and Warlock.
Thanos is a very interesting bad guy, he's got his reasons for his obsessions.
But don't spoil the story any further, thanks!
+1
I can't help thinking of all the good, interesting movies that could have been made from what this movie cost.. Perhaps as many as twenty movies like "Sicario", "The Death of Stalin" and "Room". I go see superhero movies now and again, but I'm tired of movie stars in silly costumes running in front of a green screen. I'm tired of those movies flooding the cinemas and how much money that's being spent on them.
Unlike most other American spy films like the latest Bourne, I actually got a kick out of this one.
The locations, acting and for the most part script isn't that bad.
Editing does leave something to be desired though.
Should note, I never watched the trailer and watched it a "blind" man. For that, this film may be better to me because of that so take it all with a grain of salt.
Thing is, a film like Infinity War employs tens of thousands of people, all those little names that take fifteen minutes to scroll by in the closing credits. And that's a good thing. The city of Toronto has a big film industry, mostly doing location work and postproduction for mainstream Hollywood productions. That means art school grads have a chance to afford rent in an expensive city alongside corporate lawyers. And goes someway to replacing lost jobs in he rustbelt and resource sectors.
Its the Entertainment-Industrial Complex. And I agree the budgets could cure world famine, but employing tens of thousands of people is actually similar. It's all kind of weird, how much money changes hands over pure fantasy.
Whereas indie/auteur type films are starving artist stuff. You know David Lynch had to take a paper route when he made Eraserhead?
Yeah, good stuff. Some say that she had her kit off for much of the film and doesn't get any funny lines, but this does have a female perspective on the action format that is invaluable so it still functions as a 'feminist' breakthrough movie. You really get the sense here that war and conflict is silly and unnecessary and to do with mankind being led astray. To have the first 15 mins where you don't actually see any men is highly unusual, and assists that narrative, along with having a woman director.
Admittedly, the origin thing is oddly different to the sci-fi origins of most superheroes. A woman with Scandinavian colouring giving birth to an Israeli! Preposterous.
I didn't see the appeal of Gal Gadot as WW when first announced but I do now. You can't just have a rerun of the 70s WW, though I suppose I miss the spinning magical twirl. The whole colour tone is toned down for this, none of that garish superhero cape stuff. She's very good, and I guess the humour of the fish out of water thing might have been done for Thor, too.
Unfortunately having her intrude on the end stages of WW1 does make one think, okay, where was she in WW2 then? Did she hop back to her Amazalean island and not get an exit visa that time round?
A very neat unexpected plot development near the end, and a good ensemble cast.
I'm still a bit bemused with the whole Marvel thing though, in terms of who is in it and so on. I've seen Iron Man I, Superman, Wonder Woman, what else is there and in what order? It gets a bit beyond me, it's like catching up on your homework.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
*World War 2, not Wonder Woman: The Sequel
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I woulda started with Action Comics #1, and the audience would have quickly all walked out of the room.
Usually I would be opposed to already giganormous media companies all merging into one, but I do look forward to MarvelDisney getting a chance to make a proper film of the Fantastic Four.
There's a 94 page long comic book movie thread, that hasn't been touched in the last two years. Maybe worth bumping?
A shame Wonder Woman doesn't get to meet Iron Man, sparks would fly!
It's mental because of course is there any rhyme or reason to it? Some superheroes are v far fetched because they are alien, eg Superman or Wonder Woman, created out of clay. Others are more grounded such as Batman, who is a rich bloke in a suit, or maybe Spidey, as they are humans ill affected by some sci-fi misadventure.
Then you get the sex issue...
Anyway, I thought it was hard enough to explain NSNA and the rights to that...
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Lets just say, the taboo of interspecies romance is the least of the problems with that situation.
You're probably right about the reasons for the latest Spider-Man reboot. Specifically, they wanted to make the character part of the Avengers universe, and the previous films had existed independently with no mention of other superheroes.
The difference between DC and Marvel isn't really that confusing. They have been competing publishing companies since the birth of the comic book in the late 30s. They have sued each other a few times over the decades, and are very possessive about the legal status of their character trademarks.
Cabin in the woods, Nice twist on an old idea and The Thing, classic
John Carpenter -{
Notorious
This fine Hitchcock film stars Cary Grant and Ingrid Bergman, and has an important role for Claude Rains as a German hiding out with his less suave Nazi gang in South America. The film is set in the year it's released - 1946.
Grant is Bond really, in particular with his introduction but for all that it's really Bergman's film because she gets to open up while he is an enigma. Some of it resembles Bond and Tanya with regards to getting the Lector in FRWL. But later we are put in mind of OHMSS, in particular getting on to the villain's turf to get info, and the Irma Bunt character, played out far better here I must say.
It makes one wonder what Hitch might have made of OHMSS though he was not in his prime by the late 60s at all.
Grant looks like Bond - but this is 46 and of course would have been nearly 20s older when the real Bond films came around. Of course, had he starred in what was slated for the first Bond film at one point, Thunderball, it might well have resembled Never Say Never Again, as Grant looked like an greyer Connery by then.
Rains is great though as ever you don't really notice or care that he doesn't have a German accent, just as you didn't notice or care he wasn't quite French in Casablanca. Was his accent American in that James Stewart film Mr Smith Goes to Washington, where he played a senator? Probably not.
This film is similar in tone to Rebecca, a few years earlier and Hitch's breakthrough hit in America. It is rather racey for its time, in terms of what Bergman's character is meant to do.
Not quite sure why it's called Notorious. It's not obvious.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
So she drinks heavily with a house full of strangers, and flirts with the strange man she finds in her house when she wakes up still half-drunk. Self-destructive, because she does not want to be the person she was born to be. Five minutes into the film, we already assume her to be the type to lead a stranger straight to the bedroom, except that he turns out to be a spy proposing a secret mission.
Cary's job as spymaster is to cynically exploit her reputation and limited choices in life, sending her to South America to do exactly what respectable folks assume she is destined to do anyway: marry one of her father's Nazi collaborating friends.
btw I noticed a biography of Ingrid Bergman in the bookstore recently, and that was it's title: Notorious.
I would guess this is her second most famous role, after Casablanca. GasLight was another good one for her to show what she can do.
the original Superman with Christopher Reeve is better than anything that has come out in the last 20 years.
Otherwise you will have to let us know which ones you have seen, and which ones you have liked.
My tastes are skewed by knowing the source material, so I care about things that probably wont matter to you.