Last Movie You Watched? 6.0

In synch with the above, we just saw LW4 for the first time in about a decade. I've never had the problems with it that most have (then again, I'm no fan of the original), and that remained true this time out. Best bit is the ridiculous Pesci and Chris Rock consumer bitch routine, which always makes me laugh. Still, doubt I'll give this another go till I'm way past retirement age.

For me it's...

LETHAL WEAPON 1/2
LETHAL WEAPON 4
LETHAL WEAPON 3

I keep switching between 1 and 2 for the top spot, then it's 4 then 3. I put 3 last because Stuart Wilson was weaksauce as a villain. I like that in 4, Riggs' age is starting to catch up and the perfect adversary for that kind of story is Jet Li being a faster martial artist than Riggs was in his prime. Plus I dig the freeway chase.

As for the pop soda analogy, I guess you could say 4 is a well carbonated soda but in room temperature.

2's the pick of the 'Lethals' for me ... to echo a point Tux made earlier, the Looney Tunes music playing when the WB logo appears at the start seems more than appropriate.

The Town - pretty damn good, I thought. Great cast bringing what could have been a fairly standard crime thriller to vivid life.

LIVE AND LET DIE (1973, dir. Guy Hamilton)

There's some good stuff here (I love the voodoo elements, and LIVE AND LET DIE, for the most part, has a great cast), but the LIVE AND LET DIE just goes and on and on and on, leaping from one filler, none-too-interesting set-piece to the next. There's no narrative propulsion. Hamilton's listless direction doesn't help.

Ran an ALIEN marathon with my cousin, who hadn't actually seen them before, or at least all the way through. Theatrical cut of ALIEN and ALIENS, and the Assembly Cut of ALIEN 3. Didn't watch ALIEN: RESURRECTION cause we ran out of time, plus the first three work nicely without it anyway I think. Still, I would have liked to watch A:R with him for kicks.

So I had a realization watching the first three on blu-ray for the first time: I actually like all three equally now. They just work for me, I have a hard time finding anything that really bothers me about them. Maybe some nitpicks, but nothing earth shattering. Any problems I have would only be associated with the so called "Director's Cut" of ALIEN (just a really awkward alternate cut), the Special Edition of ALIENS (completely unnecessary fat added) and the theatrical cut of Alien 3 (too much good stuff cut out, and the chestburst ending ruins the whole point of Ripley's choice). I like what all three bring to the table and each succeeding film feels like the next logical step IMO. Only difference I would say is that while it shows off the best of Scott and Cameron's work, Fincher obviously went onto do great and better things. I still like what he brought to the table, or at least as much as he could. Would have been nice if he took up that offer to make his own final cut, but I can understand how that whole experience with FOX hurt him too much to come back.

Anyway, I'm just rambling. I don't know what to say other than that I really like all three flicks. Even the totally inconsequential RESURRECTION has its charms, for better or worse.

The problem for me with ALIEN 3 is the lousy script. Must have been dictated to a typist by a guy with Tourettes.

I think pretty much all of the creative calls on ALIEN 3 were wrong, starting with letting Weaver dictate so much and deciding this was about Ripley and not the universe she happens to inhabit. This is probably when Hill & Giler should have just taken a buy-out, since they stopped being forces for creative good in the series. The Vincent Ward stuff was weird enough, but I think it all got worse after that, which is saying somethin'.

Narrowing the focus to Ripley in a modest environ with one creature sounds like it should have intensified things, and echo the first one, but since the environment is visually blah and dramatically ... how should I say, maybe compromised? ... it just doesn't hold, the criminals and the spirituality don't seem integrated, which makes sense given the earlier scripts and how you go from monks to rapists and hitmen.

I think an expansion of the ALIEN universe would have been very much the direction to go, something that would have kept Ripley as A focus in the story, but not at the expense of everything else that could be done. Like a lot of people during that period, I came up with an ALIEN 3 in the long gap post-ALIENS, one that involved backtracking the spacejockeys, and started to tread (lightly) on TREK territory, with a question of whether or not humans should do a genocide number on them (do them before they succeed in doing us with these things), and also addressing whether they were even to blame for the xenomorphs. I had a Ripley story in there where she was very subtly being conned by what seemed like the only good guy in the Company, while Hicks continues to see things realistically and waiting for her to come back to her senses. You could have seen more of the interactions and crossover interests between military and W/Y while also getting some actual science fiction exploration aspect in (the very thing that fails so badly in PROMETHEUS, but it would have been better back then, since Lindelof was probably still in high school.)

Other thing on 3 is that I'm never big on sequels that seem hellbent on invalidating their predecessor or at the very least doubling back over them to run over what good has come out of them -- TREK 3 comes to mind, not just for repudiating the needs of the many, but for wholesale recycling of sequences from TWOK with only minor alterations, executed poorly, plus plotting stupidity that transcends any awfulness that had preceded it in those features. I do feel ALIEN 3 is a 'welcome to the funeral' number with everything decent or surviving from #2 being crossed off as they go along. I have never seen the director's cut, and while I imagine it couldn't help but be better, is that enough to merit a rewatch?

Oh yeah, reason I went into this thread ... CHARLY.

Man, it is WAY better than I expected. Pretty okay first half, followed by the usual second-half-of-act2-going-flat-with-love-story thing, but act 3 is fantastic. Surprisingly good vfx work, too -- sparse, but appropriate and credible.

At one point I turned to my wife and said words to the effect, 'this just jumped into THE PRISONER meets PARALLAX VIEW in terms of feel' and (to my astonishment) she said she knew just what I meant. It had just the right amount of 1968ishness to it as well, and a way of putting that in context (with just a handful of dialog) that really blew me away.

Ravi Shankar did the score, which kind of reminds me at times of a non-electronic version of Goldsmith's PETER PROUD. Not sure if that helped the film or not.

Had no idea at all that Robertson had this kind of talent. I'd equate the subtle changes in this performance with something Lemmon might have achieved in the late 70s/early80s, a la MISSING, but with a much wider range.

Pierrot le fou

Faulkner got mentioned!
On first viewing, I am not impressed by all the political and pop cultural questions the film addresses, or the grotesque style in which the whole thing is done, but some of the music is really fine here.
Only one or two more viewings could make me become more inclined to it (potentially, at least). But they won't be in the near future.

trevanian wrote:

I have never seen the director's cut, and while I imagine it couldn't help but be better, is that enough to merit a rewatch?

I say yes, check out the assembly cut. Whether the film strikes your fancy or not, I think the assembly cut is worth a go.

Harmsway wrote:

LIVE AND LET DIE (1973, dir. Guy Hamilton)

There's some good stuff here (I love the voodoo elements, and LIVE AND LET DIE, for the most part, has a great cast), but the LIVE AND LET DIE just goes and on and on and on, leaping from one filler, none-too-interesting set-piece to the next. There's no narrative propulsion. Hamilton's listless direction doesn't help.

LALD is the Bond film that strikes me as being the most like QOS. Lots of action sequences joined together by some pretty flimsy story elements. But LALD has a lot more color. Pardon how I put that.

I had no problem with the story shifting more towards Ripley and I was always okay with killing off Newt and Hicks because it complimented the downbeat tone of the film and put Ripley in a vulnerable place (I am not really sure how they'd fit in this setting). Before seeing the Assembly Cut I always liked the theatrical version to an extent, I admired it more than liking it. It was definitely the Assembly Cut that really boosted my appreciation for the flick and where Fincher was trying to take it. It's obvious the script was stitched together from other other ideas. With the troubled background behind the flick it probably shouldn't have worked but somehow Fincher managed to weave it all together that I never find myself put off. The Assembly Cut just flows really well for me, especially now that the blu-ray got some proper ADR work which helped a lot.

Makeshift Python wrote:

I had no problem with the story shifting more towards Ripley and I was always okay with killing off Newt and Hicks because it complimented the downbeat tone of the film and put Ripley in a vulnerable place (I am not really sure how they'd fit in this setting). Before seeing the Assembly Cut I always liked the theatrical version to an extent, I admired it more than liking it. It was definitely the Assembly Cut that really boosted my appreciation for the flick and where Fincher was trying to take it. It's obvious the script was stitched together from other other ideas. With the troubled background behind the flick it probably shouldn't have worked but somehow Fincher managed to weave it all together that I never find myself put off. The Assembly Cut just flows really well for me, especially now that the blu-ray got some proper ADR work which helped a lot.

Maybe it helps that the assembly cut is the first version of the film that I ever saw. Hell, I've only seen the theatrical cut once, and that was several years ago out of curiosity. I tried to watch it on the Blu-ray, but I've been spoiled by the AC.

ALIEN 3 takes the turn that it takes, and I guess if it's a turn the viewer doesn't like (and most people don't seem to like it), then they're probably not going to like the film. Not that I'd fault anyone for not liking it on it's own merits. It is flawed. I think it needed more menace from the alien for one. But I like the course this film sets a lot more than where ALIENS went. It feels a lot more in line with the first film.

I said a few weeks ago that what I wouldn't want to see is "TRUE LIES in space" starring Ripley, Hicks, and Newt. I wouldn't want another movie with Hicks and Newt. Ugh, especially Newt.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

LALD is the Bond film that strikes me as being the most like QOS. Lots of action sequences joined together by some pretty flimsy story elements. But LALD has a lot more color. Pardon how I put that.

Really? I think QoS is more about gray tones in character, whereas L&LD is pretty black & white (Pardon how I put that.) But yeah, both do have a ton of setpieces that don't really advance the story (kinda TND-like in that regard.)

trevanian wrote:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

LALD is the Bond film that strikes me as being the most like QOS. Lots of action sequences joined together by some pretty flimsy story elements. But LALD has a lot more color. Pardon how I put that.

Really? I think QoS is more about gray tones in character, whereas L&LD is pretty black & white (Pardon how I put that.) But yeah, both do have a ton of setpieces that don't really advance the story (kinda TND-like in that regard.)

I just meant in terms of the.... uhh... structure of how the film is put together. Basically setpieces with a threadbare plot. And both films are sorta a long chase. Maybe not so much LALD.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Makeshift Python wrote:

I had no problem with the story shifting more towards Ripley and I was always okay with killing off Newt and Hicks because it complimented the downbeat tone of the film and put Ripley in a vulnerable place (I am not really sure how they'd fit in this setting). Before seeing the Assembly Cut I always liked the theatrical version to an extent, I admired it more than liking it. It was definitely the Assembly Cut that really boosted my appreciation for the flick and where Fincher was trying to take it. It's obvious the script was stitched together from other other ideas. With the troubled background behind the flick it probably shouldn't have worked but somehow Fincher managed to weave it all together that I never find myself put off. The Assembly Cut just flows really well for me, especially now that the blu-ray got some proper ADR work which helped a lot.

Maybe it helps that the assembly cut is the first version of the film that I ever saw. Hell, I've only seen the theatrical cut once, and that was several years ago out of curiosity. I tried to watch it on the Blu-ray, but I've been spoiled by the AC.

ALIEN 3 takes the turn that it takes, and I guess if it's a turn the viewer doesn't like (and most people don't seem to like it), then they're probably not going to like the film. Not that I'd fault anyone for not liking it on it's own merits. It is flawed. I think it needed more menace from the alien for one. But I like the course this film sets a lot more than where ALIENS went. It feels a lot more in line with the first film.

I said a few weeks ago that what I wouldn't want to see is "TRUE LIES in space" starring Ripley, Hicks, and Newt. I wouldn't want another movie with Hicks and Newt. Ugh, especially Newt.

Yeah, I tried watching the theatrical cut but with so much cut out I found it pretty hard to get through it. It now feels awkward after having gotten used to the AC. Like when the film cuts straight to Brian Glover's "this is rumor control, here are the facts" which completely skips Dillon's sermon and the introduction on who this group is and what they're all about. And you lose those great establishing shots of the facility and the visual storytelling of Clemons being as much of an outsider as Ripley when he's walking alone on the beach, away from the inmates.

Makeshift Python wrote:

Ran an ALIEN marathon with my cousin, who hadn't actually seen them before, or at least all the way through. Theatrical cut of ALIEN and ALIENS, and the Assembly Cut of ALIEN 3. Didn't watch ALIEN: RESURRECTION cause we ran out of time, plus the first three work nicely without it anyway I think. Still, I would have liked to watch A:R with him for kicks.

So I had a realization watching the first three on blu-ray for the first time: I actually like all three equally now. They just work for me, I have a hard time finding anything that really bothers me about them. Maybe some nitpicks, but nothing earth shattering. Any problems I have would only be associated with the so called "Director's Cut" of ALIEN (just a really awkward alternate cut), the Special Edition of ALIENS (completely unnecessary fat added) and the theatrical cut of Alien 3 (too much good stuff cut out, and the chestburst ending ruins the whole point of Ripley's choice). I like what all three bring to the table and each succeeding film feels like the next logical step IMO. Only difference I would say is that while it shows off the best of Scott and Cameron's work, Fincher obviously went onto do great and better things. I still like what he brought to the table, or at least as much as he could. Would have been nice if he took up that offer to make his own final cut, but I can understand how that whole experience with FOX hurt him too much to come back.

Anyway, I'm just rambling. I don't know what to say other than that I really like all three flicks. Even the totally inconsequential RESURRECTION has its charms, for better or worse.

Alternate cut of ALIEN is good for curious fans, but not necessary. I think the directors cut of ALIENS works; the one stand-out scene for me in that cut was where the sentry guns are running out of ammo and the aliens keep throwing themselves at them like cannon fodder. It always sends a chill up my spine; it's made all the more scary because you only hear the aliens screeching, you don't actually see them, which forces your mind to fill in the gaps.

The scene involving the settlers going out to the ship on Burke's orders also helps, because when I first saw the film it was the theatrical cut, and I wasn't quite sure who Burke had sent out to verify Ripley's allegations and bring back a sample. Having the scene put back in helped clarify some issues.

The alternate cut of Alien-3 is definitely the better of the cuts out there, but I still have problems with the film. It is just so relentlessly downbeat in a series that had, up to that point, not been perceived that way. Yes people died horribly in Alien and Aliens, but there was always hope. In Alien 3, Fincher (and the writers I suppose) simply trash everything that was good and decent from ALIENS; first by killing off Newt and Hicks, and then by replacing the cast with rapists, thieves and murderers. They took a potential cast of characters that the audience might care about and replaced them with a cast of characters no one was ever going to give a rat's ass for. On top of all that, with their hair cuts, their drab fashions, and their British accents, it was almost impossible to tell who was getting killed and who was still alive. And in this version Ripley is no longer interesting; she's merely killing time before what's inside of her kills her. To me the movie felt unrelentingly dark and depressing and I don't think audiences were ready for that from the Alien series. And then to have audiences leaving the theater disgusted that Ripley is now dead? It was like a major "F--- you!!" to the audience. I can understand why it failed at the box office; it left a bitter taste in a lot of people's mouths.

Alien-3 wasn't a badly acted or poorly directed movie; there were no amateurish lines of dialogue. This failure wasn't the same type of failure such as Alien Vs Predator or AvP-Requiem represents. No, it was a failure of choices. Good, talented people making all the wrong choices; making movies for the types of people they know (other film geeks and script writers) and not necessarily with the target audience in mind.

Just watched JOHN CARTER on blu-ray.


Decent film, but you've seen this movie before if you've seen DANCES WITH WOLVES, AVATAR, or THE LAST SAMURAI. Doesn't feel like Andrew Stanton really brought anything fresh to this film. Audiences are unlikely to connect with any of the characters, though there were a few moments of great action sequences that threatened to uplift the movie and make it more enjoyable, but even they ended up falling flat.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

I think the directors cut of ALIENS works; the one stand-out scene for me in that cut was where the sentry guns are running out of ammo and the aliens keep throwing themselves at them like cannon fodder. It always sends a chill up my spine; it's made all the more scary because you only hear the aliens screeching, you don't actually see them, which forces your mind to fill in the gaps.

I actually wasn't a fan of it. I thought it was a waste of time and I think it's much better that you don't know for sure when the aliens will show up until the power shuts down. It's better that they're more of a looming threat IMO, and I think turning them into cannon fodder in that manner really made them more into stupid animals running into bullets instead of smart creatures looking for other means of getting inside.

Quote :

The scene involving the settlers going out to the ship on Burke's orders also helps, because when I first saw the film it was the theatrical cut, and I wasn't quite sure who Burke had sent out to verify Ripley's allegations and bring back a sample. Having the scene put back in helped clarify some issues.

I find it more suspenseful that we don't see any of the colonists before the marines arrive and I like that the film in the theatrical cut is following Ripley's perspective so you only know and suspect as much as she does. When she finds out that it was Burke who gave the order you're just as enraged as she is rather than being one step ahead of her.

Quote :

The alternate cut of Alien-3 is definitely the better of the cuts out there, but I still have problems with the film. It is just so relentlessly downbeat in a series that had, up to that point, not been perceived that way. Yes people died horribly in Alien and Aliens, but there was always hope. In Alien 3, Fincher (and the writers I suppose) simply trash everything that was good and decent from ALIENS; first by killing off Newt and Hicks, and then by replacing the cast with rapists, thieves and murderers. They took a potential cast of characters that the audience might care about and replaced them with a cast of characters no one was ever going to give a rat's ass for. On top of all that, with their hair cuts, their drab fashions, and their British accents, it was almost impossible to tell who was getting killed and who was still alive. And in this version Ripley is no longer interesting; she's merely killing time before what's inside of her kills her. To me the movie felt unrelentingly dark and depressing and I don't think audiences were ready for that from the Alien series. And then to have audiences leaving the theater disgusted that Ripley is now dead? It was like a major "F--- you!!" to the audience. I can understand why it failed at the box office; it left a bitter taste in a lot of people's mouths.

We'll just have to agreed to disagree. I can totally understand how the downbeat nature of the flick and Ripley's death at the end might be hard to swallow for most people, especially since this is a franchise flick. But I really believe that this was the best possible way to go for a third entry and I love that it had the balls to really go for that. I think Ripley having the alien queen inside her is a stroke of genius, it's literally her nightmare come true as seen in ALIENS and I love how they follow it through with Ripley sacrificing herself to end it once and for all while extending a middle finger at The Company. As for replacing Hick and Newt with the cast in 3, I am totally fine with that because I honestly did not care too much about them and I find the cast in 3 to be a MAJOR improvement over the cast in ALIENS. Charles Dance as Clemons makes a much more interesting companion than Michael Biehn's one note soldier boy. I'm with Tux that I'm glad it never turned into TRUE LIES IN SPACE. The idea of having Ripley, Hicks and Newt become a family and fight aliens on Earth is incredibly boring to me.

The alternate cut of ALIEN... I wish I'd never watched it.

De Palmathon...

Greetings (1968)

Somewhat amusing, but it doesn't seem to come together for me. :|

Fucking awesome....

Mrs Aural Sects wrote:

Fucking awesome....

I had a feeling it would be. It was just a hunch. There's nothing else like it on the market right now, and it does look funny. I'll probably see it this week.

Yes I was considering this movie as well. The trailers looked funny and with plenty of young hotties, along with the bear.

Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb

I enjoyed it even more this time. It's so well thought-out in terms of story, dialogue, characters, black humour, acting nuances, it's quite an achievement. I am usually not partial to Sellers, but in his three roles here he is excellent and a joy to watch. The set design is extraordinary. Next time I will watch the English version again. Perhaps soon. Could well be my favourite Kubrick, but 2001 gives it a run. I also love Scott and several details I didn't keep in mind, so I cannot write about them. :) Hilarious film.

Thunderbolt and Lightfoot (1974)

Finally got to see it. Really enjoyed it.

Poseidon

long held off watching it but then if I watched Beyond the Poseidon Adventure three times I can this. Until I check out his other early work for Wolfgang Petersen it'll always be Das Boot. Poseidon is passable nonsense whose only highlight is in the capsizing and sinking sequences. Oh and Kurt Russell because it's Kurt Russell fulfilling the Gene Hackman role, sort of. Half expected with the death of the woman late on a reprise of Shelley Winters' death, "Why this woman! Why God!"
Heck, would've been alright to have Hackman as the captain and on the bridge. The film had some admittedly teneous links to the original in terms of Josh Lucas jogging around like Red Buttons and the swimming underwater/subsequent death scene...etc...
Compounding it is the kid who until this film I had only ever seen wail: "My name is James Tiberius Kirk!"