Movies you've just watched

[EmperorIng]

Speaking of comic books, movies, and entertainment, I finally saw Raimi's Darkman last night for the first time.

What a thrill! Best comic book movie I've seen in a long time. All the macabre horror, weirdness, and silliness of a Sam Raimi movie, with a great performance from Liam Neeson of all people to pull it off (admittedly, he's better when he is crazy wacky Darkman* than boring guy-with-his-skin-still-attached). I remember liking Raimi's Spiderman movies quite a bit as "Raimi" films, but they are positively watered down compared to the REAL Raimi comic-book movie!

Makes me feel like the genre is missing something these days... oh yeah, I know what! The "human touch."

no one can argue Ash vs Evil Dead wasn't an absolute love letter to the fans.)

I watched all of Season 1 and about half of season 2 (really need to finish it), and while I think sometimes it went a little too far in "flanderization," I can't deny it was a labor of love. I remember thinking to myself, while watching the mortuary scene in S2 where Ash is sucked into a zombies asshole by a possessed intestinal track 1) "I have never seen anything, let alone so gross and disgusting, on TV before" and 2) "truly this must be the logical next step to take for Evil Dead... maybe!"

Great stuff; I'll need to finish S2 in preparation for the new season.

*Darkman's one-liners and comedic timing must have been a fortunate side-effect of having all his skin melt

[BrianC]

Speaking of comic books, movies, and entertainment, I finally saw Raimi's Darkman last night for the first time.

What a thrill! Best comic book movie I've seen in a long time. All the macabre horror, weirdness, and silliness of a Sam Raimi movie, with a great performance from Liam Neeson of all people to pull it off (admittedly, he's better when he is crazy wacky Darkman* than boring guy-with-his-skin-still-attached). I remember liking Raimi's Spiderman movies quite a bit as "Raimi" films, but they are positively watered down compared to the REAL Raimi comic-book movie!

I still need to watch that. I got the early bluray of it for a dollar.

[Vexorg]

DodgeBall: ***

Another Unapologetically vulgar and unapologetically dumb Ben Stiller movie in the vein of Zoolander. Vince Vaughn leads the cliched team of misfits that enters a Dodgeball tournament to save their gym from Ben Stiller's cartoonishly evil meathead character trying to run them out of business. The result is a rather thorough deconstruction of the sports movie genre that could probably only be made stupider than it already is by adding Will Ferrell to the cast. It makes for a decent hour and a half of mindless entertainment though, and reviewed surprisingly well (70% on Rotten Tomatoes) and did pretty well in the box office $167.7m on a $20m budget.)

[boagman]

DodgeBall: ***

Another Unapologetically vulgar and unapologetically dumb Ben Stiller movie in the vein of Zoolander. Vince Vaughn leads the cliched team of misfits that enters a Dodgeball tournament to save their gym from Ben Stiller's cartoonishly evil meathead character trying to run them out of business. The result is a rather thorough deconstruction of the sports movie genre that could probably only be made stupider than it already is by adding Will Ferrell to the cast. It makes for a decent hour and a half of mindless entertainment though, and reviewed surprisingly well (70% on Rotten Tomatoes) and did pretty well in the box office $167.7m on a $20m budget.)

So that's three stars out of...how many, exactly?

[BryanM]

1) "I have never seen anything, let alone so gross and disgusting, on TV before" and 2) "truly this must be the logical next step to take for Evil Dead... maybe!"

Heh, there was a rift between the showrunners on that scene where one of them thought it went too far.

Season 2 has some really great episodes toward the back end, a bit of a shame it ended on an anti-climax after raising expectations all the way through the freaking stratosphere.

[boagman]

I just want to take a moment to say that I think you guys can really be too rough on Ridley Scott. How many major, terrific movies do you really expect one guy to make in a lifetime? Are you as critical in the same way as, say, Spielberg? I don't think that you are, and man: can that guy produce some duds as well.

[Xyga]

This is 2018, Internet Era, one person's mistake, one thing's flaw?: it's forever shit.

[blackoak]

I gained some new respect for Ridley Scott when I discovered The Duellists, his pre-Alien debut. Highly recommended late 70s "hidden gem" a la Sorceror.

I think his rebirth as a director of Hollywood blockbusters, plus the inevitable dimming of age, has made him increasingly irrelevant as a director. I mean, I like Gladiator well enough and all, but is there any signature of Ridley Scott's there as a director? Yeah he's competent, but we don't celebrate competence.

[Zen]

I gained some new respect for Ridley Scott when I discovered The Duellists, his pre-Alien debut. Highly recommended late 70s "hidden gem" a la Sorceror.

The first film by Scott that I saw. Still my favourite by him and still the film that I consider to be his best.
Posted this image here before. Worth re-posting perhaps;

[Zen]

I just want to take a moment to say that I think you guys can really be too rough on Ridley Scott. How many major, terrific movies do you really expect one guy to make in a lifetime? Are you as critical in the same way as, say, Spielberg? I don't think that you are, and man: can that guy produce some duds as well.

Different kettle of fish, altogether.
Spielberg is a giant block of cheese. Scott showed early artistic promise. We attack him because we love him.

[blackoak]

Yeah, I rank The Duellists right there with Alien. All the more surprising that it was his first film.

I think a big reason Scott gets criticized isn't just because he "fell from grace" as an artist, but that his early movies represented a sensitive, artistic path that genre film could have taken. He was a pre-nerd culture aesthete, and based on his generation, probably had a solid grounding in the great films of the prior 3 decades too. At the height of his inspiration I bet he would have made an awesome Lord of the Rings.

I've never read a biography on him. I wonder what caused him to turn away from genre stuff after Legend? Maybe he just got tired of it.

[blackoak]

On a different note--I recently finished watching the famed polish miniseries "Dekalog" by Kieslowski. I'd heard a lot about this beforehand, but it didn't sound all that interesting to me... I was quite wrong. Being loosely based around "the ten commandments" I wasn't sure how much I'd like it, but each story is really about a moral dilemma. Some of the best acting, directing, and music I've ever seen in a short-form drama. Can't recommend it enough.

Went and watch Kieslowski's Color Trilogy and The Double life of Veronique after that too, which I liked, but not as much.

[Zen]

I've never read a biography on him. I wonder what caused him to turn away from genre stuff after Legend? Maybe he just got tired of it.

This.
I think there is probably and interesting story there.

There is a contradiction with the man as a creator. One is struck at the gulf between his best and some of his, frankly, awful work.
Seeing him talk, particularly in a group, there is little doubt that he is quite a distance above the mean.
Maybe its just the usual death by commercialism.
Perhaps it is, as is invariably the case, a creative talent peaking at the start line. Either way, I think it is safe to say that the real Ridley Scott died a long time ago.

"Dekalog"

Noted.

[BIL]

Speaking of comic books, movies, and entertainment, I finally saw Raimi's Darkman last night for the first time.

What a thrill! Best comic book movie I've seen in a long time.

Impossible to overstate that last bit! Much like The Raid: Redemption exemplifies the true "videogame movie," this is a funnybook come to moving picture life. A cruel tale of heartbreak and mayhem, amplified to blistering pain-killing volume and played utterly straight by a manful lead and despicable villains.

JULAYYY

Spoiler

I wish I'd not sullied that GIF with the caption, but you have to understand, it was at the height of AG99's poe detector-destroying reign. ^_~

[Zen]

Cruel, melodramatic and raucously black-humoured, and best of all, played utterly straight by a manful lead and despicable villains.

Nail on the head.
I'm also glad to see the earlier, less studied and superior Liam Neeson get props for his portrayal.
Only thing that came close to this style of film was perhaps Spawn (1997) - Mark A.Z. Dippé?

it was at the height of AG99's poe detector-destroying reign. ^_~

Surreal entertainment for sure. The apex of which, for me at least, was your proffered advice on how he might afford a particular piece of hardware .

[BIL]

Only thing that came close to this style of film was perhaps Spawn (1997) - Mark A.Z. Dippé?

Been forever since I saw that one at release - for now, I'd say Verhoeven's Robocop and Starship Troopers are *somewhat* comparable. Of course, their similarly knowing use of ultraviolence and ultra-vengeance is inextricably tied to satire, opposite the innocent exhilaration of Darkman.

Surreal entertainment for sure. The apex of which, for me at least, was your proffered advice on how he might afford a particular piece of hardware .

Ah yes, the oldest game! My current sig line is tragically apropos to our embattled protagonist's quest for Ducktales in RGB.

[dan76]

I just want to take a moment to say that I think you guys can really be too rough on Ridley Scott. How many major, terrific movies do you really expect one guy to make in a lifetime? Are you as critical in the same way as, say, Spielberg? I don't think that you are, and man: can that guy produce some duds as well.

I had a bit of a rant on Spielberg in my original post about Scott, but deleted it. However, I will say this about him. For me, everything since ET has been mediocre as best. Look at his run up until ET, the only misstep was 1943. After ET he wants to be taken seriously as a filmmaker, so he does The Colour Purple... He gets some kids and becomes overly sentimental in everything he touches.

I don't like his films, but love Raiders, Jaws, ET, Duel, Close Encounters. All fantastic.

Also, after this much time it becomes evident that it's not so much theses directors, but the times and conditions these films were made in. Coppola, Scorsese, the whole lot of them did their best work in the 70's.

[Zen]

Spielberg is the beetus.

in the 70's

Now were sucking diesel!

[Vexorg]

DodgeBall: ***

Another Unapologetically vulgar and unapologetically dumb Ben Stiller movie in the vein of Zoolander. Vince Vaughn leads the cliched team of misfits that enters a Dodgeball tournament to save their gym from Ben Stiller's cartoonishly evil meathead character trying to run them out of business. The result is a rather thorough deconstruction of the sports movie genre that could probably only be made stupider than it already is by adding Will Ferrell to the cast. It makes for a decent hour and a half of mindless entertainment though, and reviewed surprisingly well (70% on Rotten Tomatoes) and did pretty well in the box office $167.7m on a $20m budget.)

So that's three stars out of...how many, exactly?

3 out of 5, which I would consider roughly average overall.

[Sinful]

I gained some new respect for Ridley Scott when I discovered The Duellists, his pre-Alien debut. Highly recommended late 70s "hidden gem" a la Sorceror.

I think his rebirth as a director of Hollywood blockbusters, plus the inevitable dimming of age, has made him increasingly irrelevant as a director. I mean, I like Gladiator well enough and all, but is there any signature of Ridley Scott's there as a director? Yeah he's competent, but we don't celebrate competence.

James Cameron on Ridley Scott (and I think Prometheus?);

"I don’t think it’s worked out terribly well. I think we’ve moved on beyond it. It’s like, okay, we’ve got it, we’ve got the whole Freudian biomechanoid meme. I’ve seen it in 100 horror films since. I think both of those films stand at a certain point in time, as a reference point. But is there any validity to doing another one now? I don’t know. Maybe. Let’s see, jury’s out. Let’s see what Ridley comes up with. Let me just add to that — and don’t cut this part off, please — I will stand in line for any Ridley Scott movie, even a not-so-great one, because he is such an artist, he’s such a filmmaker. I always learn from him. And what he does with going back to his own franchise would be fascinating."

Having recently seen the disaster that was Blade Runner 2049, I really missed Ridley Scott's visual talent when it comes to film making.

[FinalBaton]

BIL, you miss your main boy ag1999, admit it
I, for one, will forever remember when the kid seriously mused selling his ass to get a sony PVM

(dodgeball)
regarding big dumb comedies; I enjoy those every once in a while. I remember liking Anchorman. Zoolander, I liked less than Anchorman, but it was still alright. I need to watch Step Brothers. Any other good ones?



Re : Ridley Scott. So weird that this guy made 2 masterpieces early on and then his output dropped significantly in quality after that, never to peak back up ever again. Some of my friends call him a fluke director. lol. Don't know what to think myself

[BIL]

BIL, you miss your main boy ag1999, admit it
I, for one, will forever remember when the kid seriously mused selling his ass to get a sony PVM

I wouldn't say I miss him, so much as I fondly recall him.

[FinalBaton]

I wouldn't say I miss him, so much as I fondly recall him.

I know I was kidding

And same

[BIL]

To elaborate - it's like a beloved show with just a few episodes, that you know in your heart peaked early and quit while it was ahead.

If he was genuine, I hope he stays safe and doesn't trash any more classrooms. If he was a troll / someone's alt, whoever was responsible gets my sincerest applause. Besides the impenetrable portrayal of teenage autism, his fanatical hardware obsession and burning contempt for casual gamers were a keen sendup of our forum's inherent demons. Don't be AG99, bros.

On that note, I still want to believe he was some kind of test engineered by bloodf himself to test our humanity in the face of a harmless yet relentless idiot.

[FinalBaton]

I think he had some mental illness, so I do hope he is safe, I don't wish any ill on him.

[EmperorIng]

Look at his run up until ET, the only misstep was 1943. After ET he wants to be taken seriously as a filmmaker, so he does The Colour Purple... He gets some kids and becomes overly sentimental in everything he touches.

I remember reading that Hitchcock said in the late 70s or something that he refused to meet with Spielberg and referred to him as "Oh, isn't he that boy who did the fish movie?", and I suspect Spielberg has had a chip on his shoulder ever since. I think he shouldn't have taken Hitchcock so seriously!

Also, after this much time it becomes evident that it's not so much theses directors, but the times and conditions these films were made in. Coppola, Scorsese, the whole lot of them did their best work in the 70's.

I've reflected on this quite a bit. The lack of a studio system allowed these guys do some great things that really didn't and couldn't translate into later decades with the change of environment and social context- though Scorsese still makes very fine movies, even if I am in the crusty "Taxi Driver is his best" camp.

Only thing that came close to this style of film was perhaps Spawn (1997) - Mark A.Z. Dippé?

Ha, does this count as a recommendation? Man, it has been ages since Spawn was in the cultural zeitgeist - a perfect thing for the Tarantino-inspired, blood-soaked, edginess of the decade.

It's somewhat a shame that Liam has been collecting checks reprising Taken for the last decade, since I like him a whole lot. I've heard that "Commuter" is at least supposed to be entertaining, but how many times can he make money by pulling it off?? It's weird watching him in something like Darkman where he is actually trying to convey emotions besides "grim burning anger that translates into violence."

[BryanM]

I think a big reason Scott gets criticized isn't just because he "fell from grace" as an artist

He is not an artist. He is a director. He directs artists.

We criticize him for trying to be a writer. He is a bad author.

Hideaki Anno can write an entire movie that's only intended for himself, that says to all of the fans "I hate your guts. You want me to entertain you? Go screw yourself. That's not how life works.", and that's ok because he's aware that's what he's doing, and it's never the only thing that he does.

Prometheus 3 can only ever be about what a sexy, naughty robot boy David is, while trying to obfuscate this fact with some philosophical fart sniffing and 3 minutes of a CGI monster impaling someone with their mouth penis.

James Cameron on Ridley Scott (and I think Prometheus?);

"I don’t think it’s worked out terribly well. I think we’ve moved on beyond it. It’s like, okay, we’ve got it, we’ve got the whole Freudian biomechanoid meme. I’ve seen it in 100 horror films since. I think both of those films stand at a certain point in time, as a reference point. But is there any validity to doing another one now? I don’t know. Maybe. Let’s see, jury’s out.

Jim however, can actually write things that a lot of people enjoy. Just like in that South Park episode, he raises the bar a centimeter off of the ground. Which I think is way more than anyone can expect from Hollywood as a whole.

Re : Ridley Scott. So weird that this guy made 2 masterpieces early on and then his output dropped significantly in quality after that, never to peak back up ever again. Some of my friends call him a fluke director. lol. Don't know what to think myself

You know, whenever I watch a TV series I have never once thought "WOW, the director really directed the fuck out of that episode!" With how nearly every single episode has a different director, you'd see major differences - if it made a major difference.

But I can never tell. Guess I'm some philistine who can't grasp what all this "art" thing that directors do, is exactly.

At its core the problem stems from a bastardization of language, I think. In TV they have a much cleaner definition of what a "director" is - someone who directs resources to produce an episode. The showrunners are the people responsible for staffing, and making sure the staff produces an acceptable product. (If you don't like what The Simpsons has turned into, you have Al Jean to thank for that. Here is a quote from the man from The Simpsons Movie commentary: "If Homer is on a roof, he has to fall down.")

In movie land, it describes someone who can have an enormous spectrum of power. Scott in his early career, like most directors (like the poor fella who had to shoot Alien 3), had practically no power. Today, he's got almost total control over what he makes. These are two completely different jobs.

Paul Feig absolutely, in theory, could direct a decent to good Ghostbusters movie. As long as it was *really* produced by Ivan Reitman, with some writers who know what the fans want to see.

[FinalBaton]

You know, whenever I watch a TV series I have never once thought "WOW, the director really directed the fuck out of that episode!" With how nearly every single episode has a different director, you'd see major differences - if it made a major difference.

But I can never tell. Guess I'm some philistine who can't grasp what all this "art" thing that directors do, is exactly.

At its core the problem stems from a bastardization of language, I think. In TV they have a much cleaner definition of what a "director" is - someone who directs resources to produce an episode. The showrunners are the people responsible for staffing, and making sure the staff produces an acceptable product. (If you don't like what The Simpsons has turned into, you have Al Jean to thank for that. Here is a quote from the man from The Simpsons Movie commentary: "If Homer is on a roof, he has to fall down.")

In movie land, it describes someone who can have an enormous spectrum of power. Scott in his early career, like most directors (like the poor fella who had to shoot Alien 3), had practically no power. Today, he's got almost total control over what he makes. These are two completely different jobs.

Paul Feig absolutely, in theory, could direct a decent to good Ghostbusters movie. As long as it was *really* produced by Ivan Reitman, with some writers who know what the fans want to see.

A lot hinges on the director actually. He will tell the director of photography what kind of mood he is going for, and will have final decision on wheter each shot the d.o.p. comes with will be part of the film or not. (some director's are better at identifying wether a shot fits the mood he's trying to create or not. And some think of better visual moods to apply to story/dialogue than others).

Director will also tell actors what mood to strive for when delivering their lines, and has final say as to wether that performance is good enough for his standard or not. (some director's are better at directing and identifying interesting dialogues than other)

Finally, unless he's starving and had to take just any script that comes his way (which was not the case with Ridley Scott since he had 2 huge hits on his hands), a director can choose which script he will develop as a movie. So choosing a boring script is kind of on the director's fault, eh?

[Zen]

Ha, does this count as a recommendation?

Ummm . . .





Marrowbone (2017) - Sergio G. Sánchez

Anya Taylor-Joy and Mia Goth sharing screen time?
I am brazenly unashamed to admit that I went in anticipating some gratuitous "exploitation".
Denied!

A run of the mill, traditional ghost story. High production values. Clusterfuck ending.

Also; featuring Anya Taylor-Joy and Mia Goth.

[Sinful]

But I can never tell. Guess I'm some philistine who can't grasp what all this "art" thing that directors do, is exactly.

So you'd be fine with just over the shoulder shots from an amateur film maker?


Anyway, here's a nice video perfectly breaking down a director who knows what he's doing. It's titled; "Camera Angles and Movement: Sergio Leone, Tavern scene, Once Upon a Time in the West"
https://youtu.be/rHlkX8XTJRQ

Sergio Leone is the master of pure cinema.