 News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Search | Register |
Log in |
|
|
It would be impossible to take it off the list, but I have always considered EOS his most underrated film (but then I am a JG Ballard fan too).
I notice we haven't even touched on the great schlock horror flicks of that time; Amityville, NightMare on Elm Street, etc. PS. when I was a kid, I got to mess around the Blue Velvet set because it was being made locally. The ear prop was really cool to touch. dennis hopper what he was on when he was performing as frank booth? That has to be one of the evilest performances ever.
he gave. He nailed that character dead on with that jive talk that was sort of Jazzy and Honky Tonk at the same time.
The #5 slot on my list was Short Circuit 1 or 2, either one. BTW, it's based on simple zaniness, not actual quality. Just good simple mindless fun!
just finished watching this and although it has some nice bits, it didnt really work for me. In the Mood For Love was a much superior film.
The heavy stylish touches on display here severely distract from the actual film and on the whole this actually seems like a lot of random footage was shot and then spliced together to make a movie. Top 5 Best of the 80s
1. Shinning 2. Full Metal Jacket 3. Salvador 4. Elephant Man 5. Rainman Top 5 'Fun' 80s movies 1. Ferris Bueller's Day Off 2. Big 3. Say Anything (how can you make lists without giving props to someone who wrote for the magazine that is most famous for writing useless lists) 4. Revenge of the Nerds 5. Indiana Jones & the Last Crusade (my favorite of them all) just saw this 1996 french film with Vincent Cassel and the extremely hot Monica Bellucci, I think there's a recent american remake called Wicker Park. Anyway, it's an outstanding film with a clever plot and effortless direction. And I wonder if the remake will keep the same ending given the Hollywood Way of upbeat conclusions.
First a disclaimer - I am a massive fan of the LotR theatrical versions. Easily my favourite films of all time, and they will most likely remain that way.
Also, I can seperate my enjoyment of the films completely from that of the books (which I have read once, when very young, so my memory of them isn't that great). Thus, I judge these films on their own merits, and not on how accurately they duplicate the text of the book. ======== MASSIVE SPOILERS ========= That said, I was a bit dissapointed with the EE cut of RotK. I felt that the new additions were a real mixed bag; most of them I'd rate as mediocre, with a couple of outstanding moments, and a couple of downright bloody awful moments. First of all, the downright bloody awful: Gimli's antics during the drinking game, and the similar stupid crap he did at the beginning of the extended Paths of the Dead sequence. The PotD additions were uniformly shite in fact - the avalanche of skulls was just bizarre and the arrival of the Corsairs was equally rubbish. It also killed the surprise of the Dead Army revealing themselves later at the Pelennor. Another scene I hated was when Denethor was giving Faramir a bollocking for letting Frodo go, and then we get a stupidly cheesy bit where he looks over Faramir's shoulder and sees a ghostly vision of Boromir. I felt that John Noble's acting in this scene was a bit shoddy as well; perhaps they only did a couple of takes of this one. Another bit I hated was the alternate take of the Gandalf-Merry "Deep breath before the plunge" scene. WTF was up with Gandalf's coughing fit? I mean WTF!? The outstanding bits: The one single great moment that stuck out in my mind was at the aftermath of the Pelennor battle, when Eomer finds his sister's seemingly lifeless body. Karl Urban's performance here along with the cinematography amounted to one of the most emotionally powerful moments of the film. Combine this with the following sequence in the Houses of Healing, and then the subsequent re-edited scene where Pippin finds Merry on the battlefield (this time at night!) and you have a moment which really, really had no right to be cut from the theatrical version. (I guess you could argue that to make the Eomer-Eowyn scene work you had to show the HoH bit as well, so that the audience knows she's not actually dead after all, and that this would slow the film down too much at this point. It's worth it though, IMO). The mediocre: Well, as for the rest of it, I can pretty much take it or leave it. Saruman's scene was a pretty good scene in it's own right, but I don't think the theatrical version suffered from it's absence. If anything, Saruman's fate should have been dealt with at the end of TTT, but I'm not sure how exactly. Or maybe the Smeagol-Deagol prologue should have been left out entirely from the theatrical version (it was originally intended to slot into the TTT Dead Marshes scene) - this would have freed up some time for the inclusion of the Saruman scene in the TE. Similarly, the Gandalf-Witch King confrontation was a cool scene, but it felt a little tacked on. Gothmog's death was pretty cool, and gave closure to a major bad guy, and although the build up to it was a little comical, with him groaning and lurching towards Eowyn, I'd probably have liked to have seen it in the TE. Aragorn confronting Sauron in the Palantir before the march on the Black Gates felt a little off IMO, and I'm glad it was cut. I could go on really, giving a breakdown of all the new bits, and how I felt about them, but, meh. The odd new battle shot here and there was cool, especially the smaller battering rams stuff before Grond. The extended Grond bit felt a bit silly though. Just for the record, I feel similarly towards the EEs for the other two films. I can quite happily take them or leave them; the theatrical editions will always be the definitive version of LotR for me. to Willy Wonka?
Depp looks like a, uhm, errr, how to put this And Depp sounds like a 16-yr old goth schoolgirl brat - especially when he goes "eww!"
But if there's anyone that can make this film worthwhile, it's Depp :) he is obviously having fun making the flick.
I can't wait to see Keith Richards as his poppa in Pirates of the Caribean 2. but I thought the other two EE's were much better than the theatrical cuts. They just flowed a lot smoother. TTT in particular benefited a lot from the EE.
is an absolute gun, if Willy wonka sucks, there's a veru good chance it wont be because of him.
Directed by
Pier Paolo Pasolini Wow... just... wow... I don't really know what to say about this movie. It made my uncomfortable, it cleared out half of the theatre during the 3rd act. I don't think I can recommend anyone except the extremely curious go watch this film. Not that it is a bad movie, it's VERY true to the original text (by Marquis De Sade) except for it being set in WW2 italy. the Basic story premise is 4 friends ( 2 brothers) of powerful status in society round up 16 youths (including their own daughters, whom they marry off to each other), boys and girls, who are taken away to their villa. Then over the course of 2 hours they act out any and all perversions that they feel like. It starts with sex, and quickly turns into something else. Apparently this is all social commentary on fascism and anti consumerism by Pasolini... I can't really say. In an ironic twist however Pasolini himself was murdered 1 week after the release of this film by a Male prostitute which he frequented. The film was also banned in the UK for over 25 years, and probably in alot of other places. This is a hard movie to watch, so bring a date. Why do I keep hearing about this? Is it being re-released in cinemas or something? Anyway, shit-eating and eyeball-slitting isn't really my cup of cha, if you know what I mean, so I'll probably give this one a miss.
Pope set out to watch a movie centred on one taboo I picked a movie centred on another: canibalism. Ravenous isn't a Texas Chainsaw style slasher and is more entertaining for it. The music is good and is downright innapropriate at times which serves to add the the discomfort while watching some scenes. Also, I would recommend you don't watch this film if you're a little hungry. I did and I ended up feeling a little guilty over it.
Anyways, good movie. finally got around to seeing the enitre thing. First impression is that it wasnt as good as the previous EE's. FOTR:EE smoothed out the flow of the theatrical and the film was better for it. TTT:EE was the best one because I thought the theatrical cut was severely lacking and the EE fixed it up.
This one adds a few good scenes, but a lot of it seems like fluff (in a movie that already contained quite a few moments of cheese in between a lot of greatness). I would have added only the extended fight scenes, saruman's scene, the extended scene in the dead city (I liked the skull fall), the gandalf-witch king confrontation, the mouth of sauron scene and the aragorn-palantir scene. The rest didnt add much. The House of healing scene was ok, but was as poor in establishing the eowyn-faramir scenario as the theatrical was. Still, I'm glad i watched it and maybe it works better on repeat viewings. The last 15 minutes were a letdown and the overall script could have been better but its a well made and reasonably well acted film. Stylish action and cinematography.
7.5/10 So you saw Saw you say?
It was a shakey cam. The funney thing is that the colour shift the process causes was apropriate to the film. All I can say is that the amount of time left in the film was proportional to how much sense it was making. In a good suspence movie you don't know the ending before it happens, but when it does happen you feel like you could have seen it comming. No body could have seen the ending of Saw comming. I bet the writer didn't see it comming either. He probably got fucked up on cocaine, went on a writing binge, and when he came to was shocked at the ending he had written and submitted. Clunky, muddled film from Orson Welles. Maybe the hour that was cut out by studio execs could have redeemed this but in its current form, it is a bit of a stinker. Welles is miscast and the film seems to change tone every 5 minutes for no real reason.
The only reason to see this through was Rita Hayworth. I know whe was a WWII pinup etc but I hadnt seen her apart from in photos. What a stunner! Every time she's on screen, it's hard to take you eyes off her. Pity about the film though.
|
|
| You must be logged in to post in this thread. |
|
| Website copyright © 2002-2024 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors. |