The Movie Thread

stugatz

Pelican

Anyone seen this? It's directed by Terry Gilliam - it came out a few years after Monty Python and the Holy Grail, and he really hadn't been established as a competent film director yet. It's often mislabeled as a sequel to Holy Grail (it does reuse a lot of the costumes).

Stretching out Lewis Carroll's poem Jabberwocky into a feature film I don't think was the best idea - the monster is the main driving feature of the plot, but only takes up a little of the story. There are a ton of go-nowhere filler scenes. The humor is also an odd shift - Holy Grail was laugh-out-loud funny throughout, this was more silly and absurd than funny. A few scenes were really brilliant, though.

I might just not like Terry Gilliam all that much. (Some directors I just don't like - Robert Altman being the main one I keep complaining about.) I wasn't too crazy about Time Bandits or Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. Brazil and 12 Monkeys were good, but I thought they were overrated. I'm only interested in watching Tideland out of sheer morbid curiosity - the script to that one looks like he filmed it on a dare.
 

stugatz

Pelican
I watched Jabberwocky all the way through a long time ago and couldn't get into it. Liked Time Bandits when it was released. Brazil is excellent. 12 Monkeys is a little too hyper, but has its good points.
I’ve heard good things about Fisher King and Adventures of Baron Munchausen (with the latter, mostly how it was an acclaimed box office bomb).
 

Papaya

Peacock
Gold Member
"On my signal, unleash hell."

"What we do in life echoes an eternity."

"Are you not entertained?"

It's pure melodrama. The script is very good compared to what, Lethal Weapon 3?

Go watch a movie like Point Break, Speed, or hell even Con Air. There's at least an air of silliness and humor to those. Gladiator is morose and dull.
Gladiator was good but not great and definitely overrated. Not Ridley Scott's best ... (BLADERUNNER 1982 IMO)
 

Cr33pin

Peacock
Gold Member
As far as the zombie genre goes this is one of my favs. The zombies are not just mindless flesh eaters, they still have a human element to them. The atmosphere and casting is perfect for establishing the tone of the movie. I know its a remake and I think its as well done as a remake can be.
 
Last edited:

stugatz

Pelican
Gladiator was good but not great and definitely overrated. Not Ridley Scott's best ... (BLADERUNNER 1982 IMO)
I must have something wrong with me. I consistently find Blade Runner very overrated, and actually don't see why the various cuts are so talked about (there's really not a whole lot of difference between them). Impressive world building and special effects, great atmosphere.

It seems that it did have a mixed reception when it came out, which makes me feel a little better (Leonard Maltin gave it a 1 1/2 out of 4 and hasn't changed it. He since has with other movies he got backlash against, mainly Alien - which he originally gave a 2 out of 4 and basically said it was an unpleasant monster movie.)

I actually liked the sequel slightly better. Not by much. I thought Blade Runner 2049 was very well done, but underrated and overlooked. Comparatively, I thought Blade Runner was very well done, but overrated and talked about too much. So they're about even.
 

Maddox

Sparrow
I must have something wrong with me. I consistently find Blade Runner very overrated, and actually don't see why the various cuts are so talked about (there's really not a whole lot of difference between them). Impressive world building and special effects, great atmosphere.

It seems that it did have a mixed reception when it came out, which makes me feel a little better (Leonard Maltin gave it a 1 1/2 out of 4 and hasn't changed it. He since has with other movies he got backlash against, mainly Alien - which he originally gave a 2 out of 4 and basically said it was an unpleasant monster movie.)

I actually liked the sequel slightly better. Not by much. I thought Blade Runner 2049 was very well done, but underrated and overlooked. Comparatively, I thought Blade Runner was very well done, but overrated and talked about too much. So they're about even.

The original Blade Runner is for cerebral types who don't need action in every scene of the sci-fi films they watch. It has a good premise, a great plot, it's thought-provoking, and has the star appeal of Harrison Ford (even when he's phoning in the narration because he didn't think the film needed it. In fact, it just came off as a world-weary attitude which seemed congruent with his character.)
 

Papaya

Peacock
Gold Member
Ultimately great films are great story telling. What makes a great story is a compelling narrative for the human character(s) that the viewer can connect with on some level. We especially like a hero when we feel like we could be him

Film "genres" are really nothing more than a the "container" that story happens to be told in. Westerns, period pieces (19th century, 1820;s, American 60's etc), are all just packaging

Sci Fi is an extremely difficult genre to execute because its easy for a filmmaker get lazy or stupid or un creative and rely on the visuals. More often than not sci fi is cheesy and the ones that are not are rare indeed

The brilliance of Blade Runner is that while the "container" world is visually striking (especially considering its 1982) and a prominent aspect of the film it is not dominant.

But visuals are nothing without the human story


The dominant aspect of Blade Runner is its multi layered themes of God, life, humanity, rationalization, "truth" and humanity's struggle with those themes as ultimately frail and flawed creatures but also capable of great things.

One example is Deckards struggles with his own conscience as he "retires" replicants. Even the language is a weapon against his humanity as "retire" is an euphemism for murder and "replicant" a dehumanized term for a clone.

Is a clone or genetically engineered man made person even "human"? How can they be if God didnt make them?

Cloning...We can...but should we?

Would you not if you could clone your child if they had a terminal disease that could be cured by harvesting the clone's organs?

These are hard questions if asked honestly

Is it then ok to kill this man made creation Roy Baty out of rationalized necessity (Fear) for the greater good? If your own life depends on it is it ok? ..."You know the score pal. If youre not cop youre little people"

The very definition of human life and the dangers of humans playing with the power of God is at the forefront of Blade Runner. Thats a heavy load for an everyman with no special powers (just his innate god given human instincts are his power) to grapple with.

Add to that a very real hardwired moral need to protect the innocent that leads to loving the "replicant" Rachel that he's supposed to kill. How can he love her yet still kill the other female replicants ( Zhora then Pris, )

BladeRunner is a sublime efficient (every character is a precise complementary component within a complex thematic web) execution of great story telling.


Ultimately his love for Rachel is Deckards redemption.

Even greater then is Roy Baty's redemption in the waning seconds of life when his appreciation of life is strong enough to overwhelm his baser instincts and the visceral satisfaction of revenge and spare Deckard.

Would any of these characters be forgiven their flaws if real ?

Only God knows.

But Blade Runner asks the questions beautifully
 
Last edited:

DeWoken

Robin
^ Thanks for sharing your thoughts, @Papaya. Not surprisingly, I fall into the Blade Runner fan category. I do remember watching it at about 15 years old and thinking it was kind of boring, though. It grew on me over the years. Most of the time, like you say, things have to come together just right to create a masterpiece.

I think the replicant thing resonates with how modern man feels broken, adrift and incomplete. I was listening to the analysis of the movie Drive (2011) by... [that guy who was in the spreadsheet dropped in this thread a while back?] and he was saying something similar about the characters in Drive.

I was looking at some Mary Sean Young (Rachel) videos on YT. I remember that she was pretty based politically a while ago, going on podcasts. I'm not sure the terminology she used, "the elites", I guess.

Looking at Ridley Scott's wiki I realize there is a lot to watch if I want to, but I have to resist the temptation of falling into gluttony (cinema gluttony!). I did watch his TV series where he once again engages with the subject of androids "Raised By Wolves" (he only directs the first two episodes, and produces). It was pretty interesting, not bad for TV. Religion plays a strong role in the plot. There are disturbing horror elements.


Also, I watched the first season of The Handmaid's Tale. I think I might just read the synopses for the next seasons though.
 

Got this for my dad for a belated Father's Day gift. It's one of his favorites & we watched it tonight.

I've seen it before & like it enough, but I can't separate it from, well, you know.

What a great movie, pure testosterone entertainment.
 

Cr33pin

Peacock
Gold Member
Meh.... seems like a "muh female power" reboot of the classic slasher movie. I dont have a problem with strong female leads when it makes sense and it done right. The most obvious example that comes to mind is Sarah Conner in Terminator 2. However this movie has a grandma and two aunts trying come across as "badass women" who are going to take out Michael Myers. These menopausal women have no training or story arch that leads me to believe they are up for the task.


tenor.gif
 
Last edited:

stugatz

Pelican
I've heard the Halloween 2018 film was good - although maybe I missed any commentary talking about whether that one had some SJW overtones.

Halloween is a strange series. 1 & 2 have their own plot arc, 3 is unrelated to the rest of them, 1, 4, 5, & 6 have their own plot arc that ignores Halloween 2, H20 and Resurrection have an alternate continuity from #2 (I think?), and this recent 2018 installment ignores all of the sequels that came after the original Halloween.

Then there are the Rob Zombie Halloween movies (no huge interest in seeing those).

Friday the 13th in comparison is total garbage, with no installments that I'd call good, but at least you knew what you were getting with those and it didn't try too hard.
 

stugatz

Pelican

Watched this one last night, it's about a former rockstar chef that tries to make it again in the industry after getting off of drugs. The acting is fine, and it's definitely overall watchable - the main issue I have is the way it looks at food, I completely disagree and think that this philosophy is everything wrong with the restaurant industry.

He has a longish monologue at the beginning of the film about how people who don't like Burger King are pretentious idiots, because they're writing off "peasant food" and don't want to be caught eating the food of the working class. He also asks "huh, why do people have to pay hundreds of dollars to eat at one of my places?" So he's a working man, got it. Then he spends the rest of the movie trying to get a third Michelin star, and his restaurant serves the most pretentious food possible while he talks about how "food is an intense form of expressing yourself, and I want to make food so good that it transcends that base desire to eat". Um, maybe pick a lane? Did two different writers write the character and hope that we wouldn't notice?

He also at one point berates a line cook for screwing up a piece of monkfish, and asks her to apologize to the burned piece of meat for dying in vain. Am I supposed to like this guy or something? Because if you're going to make the main character be a villain protagonist, he has to have something to offer me - be charming, have an interesting backstory, anything really. Tony Soprano is proof that can work. Halfway through the film, I began thinking that maybe this guy would have benefited all of his coworkers if he'd just overdosed.
 

DeWoken

Robin
@stugatz, sounds like Anthony Bourdain, no? "No Reservations".

I re-watched Dredd (2012) - great soundtrack! And I'm working my way through the pretty-cheesy but fun Resident Evil Movies with Mila Jovovich (not the latest one). I enjoy the video game feel to these movies, it's nostalgic.

I watched Sophia Copolla's later movies. They definitely take some adjusting to, with the very-understated, subtle style. I'd like to hear what the Guide to Kulchur guys think of her work.


 

stugatz

Pelican
I re-watched Dredd (2012) - great soundtrack! And I'm working my way through the pretty-cheesy but fun Resident Evil Movies with Mila Jovovich (not the latest one). I enjoy the video game feel to these movies, it's nostalgic.
Dredd's definitely better than Judge Dredd from 1995 (although Judge Dredd isn't unwatchable or anything, I usually like most Stallone movies).
 
I just finished 'Apocalypse: Caught in the Eye of the Storm.' It is the 2nd time I have watched it. It is low budget and the acting is B movie quality but is good for those seeking movies with Christian themes. The movie was sincerely made and the 2 main actors are good. I have not seen the other 3 movies in the series and plan to watch them soon. The shocking decline of several nations, the BLM riots, the hardcore pro-homosexuality movement, etc... makes this movie seem more valid then ever. All 3/4 of the movies are free to watch on youtube and the other is available on another video website.


 

renotime

Ostrich
Gold Member
I must have something wrong with me. I consistently find Blade Runner very overrated, and actually don't see why the various cuts are so talked about (there's really not a whole lot of difference between them). Impressive world building and special effects, great atmosphere.

It seems that it did have a mixed reception when it came out, which makes me feel a little better (Leonard Maltin gave it a 1 1/2 out of 4 and hasn't changed it. He since has with other movies he got backlash against, mainly Alien - which he originally gave a 2 out of 4 and basically said it was an unpleasant monster movie.)

I actually liked the sequel slightly better. Not by much. I thought Blade Runner 2049 was very well done, but underrated and overlooked. Comparatively, I thought Blade Runner was very well done, but overrated and talked about too much. So they're about even.


I liked the sequel better, too. But man, Rutger Hauer's death scene in Blade Runner was beautiful. He wrote that just sitting in his trailer. Showed to Ridley Scott and he went with it.

Leonard Maltin is a pretty terrible movie critic, in my opinion.

I finally watched Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia. Peckinpah said this was the one movie that he had full artistic control. I loved it, but it's not for everyone. It's pretty weird. And it's Peckinpah, so of course there's sudden bursts of violence.

When it first came out the critics hated it, except for Ebert. I think it's a masterpiece that is up there with the Wild Bunch.
 
Top