Member Secret Executioner Posted July 25, 2015 Member Share Posted July 25, 2015 The Jungle Book (1967) An adaptation of Kipling's Mowgli stories really, and a very loose one at that (Disney had clearly wanted to steer away from the source material as he deemed it too dark). But it's a really fun and enjoyable movie nonetheless, with catchy songs ("The Bare Necessities", "Trust In Me"), enjoyable characters (Baloo and Kaa are great of course, but I also like King Louie and the Beatles vultures - these were supposed to be caricatures of The Beatles as Disney had planned to have the band voice these characters, only for them to refuse) and a really intense climatic fight with the very imposing villain Shere Khan the tiger. I had this one on VHS (I think I first watched it at my granda's house) and while I don't remember watching it that much (clearly not as much as other Disney movies, which was most of what I watched as a kid - that and the Asterix animated movies must have been like over 90% of the stuff I watched back then), I still had memories of it (it's a very memorable film I must say) and I was quite surprised with how different from the source material it is when I read the original Kipling stories - speaking of which I must say that while I still find the film very enjoyable and well made, I prefer the original Mowgli story arc from Kipling over the adaptation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Secret Executioner Posted July 26, 2015 Member Share Posted July 26, 2015 The Many Adventures Of Winnie The Pooh (1977) A Disney animated movie based on the A. A. Milne books and characters. The movie doesn't follow much of a story or anything, as though it was a bunch of stories spliced together - which it is, it's really three shorts (Winnie The Pooh And The Tree Honey (1966), Winnie The Pooh And The Blustery Day (1968) and Winnie The Pooh And Tigger Too (1974)) edited together to form a new full-length feature. The animation and designs are very nice, the characters are enjoyable and funny (though Pooh gets a bit annoying in the Tree Honey segment, and I'm not a big Rabbit fan) and the songs are catchy - my favorite is the song Tigger sings everytime he appears on screen: The wonderful thing about tiggers Is tiggers are wonderful things Their tops are made out of rubber Their bottoms are made out of springs They're bouncy, trouncy, flouncy, pouncy, fun, fun, fun, fun, fun Oh but the most wonderful thing about tiggers is I'm the only one IIIII'm the only one. It never gets old. On a sidenote, there's a recurring meta-joke with the character called Gopher who keeps saying he's "not in the book". While it may mean (given the circumstances in which he says it and the fact he gives Owl a card) he's not in the phonebook, it's also a reference to the fact this character is not from the A.A. Milne's books. He appears essentially in the Tree Honey segment as a replacement for Piglet, who ended being used in the later shorts. He eventually makes a cameo in the Blustery Day segment though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member paimeifist Posted August 4, 2015 Member Share Posted August 4, 2015 Not a movie, but I have been revisiting Dragon Ball Z.. So much DBZ.... Funny how my views on spme characters and parts of the series has changed so much since I last watched it a few years ago. Man, I love Dragon Ball Z.. Always and forever, lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator KUNG FU BOB Posted August 5, 2015 Administrator Share Posted August 5, 2015 Man, some great stuff everybody has been seeing! I want to comment on a lot f them, but I'm being called for dinner. Gotta quickly say- Secret Executioner, I'm so envious you got to see the Dir's Cut of ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA! Just saw SPY (2015). We needed some laughs after a crazy weekend, and it definitely provided them. Jason Statham steals the film, and is absolutely hilarious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member ShaOW!linDude Posted August 5, 2015 Member Share Posted August 5, 2015 I just saw A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum on Wednesday since my local library was having a free screening of it. Hilarious movie! I really like how the characters interact and how everything comes full-circle at the end. Nice music too. There are also some memorable quotes: "Just wait in there! Wait, wait, wait! That's what virgins are supposed to do best!" Been ages since I've seen that. Loved Zero Mostel, and it has the last appearance on Buster Keaton on film. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member teako170 Posted August 5, 2015 Member Share Posted August 5, 2015 Die Hard 2 (1990) Re-watched other evening. First time in 10/15? years. Needed a no-brainer flick, so popped that in and just relaxed. Doctor Zhivago (1965) A few weeks back, I revisited this after Omar Sharif had passed. Classic Lean. Seen last night: Alfrded Hitchcock's Topaz (1969). What did you think of Torn Curtain (1966)? Always enjoyed this later Hitch film. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Hei Meigui Posted August 6, 2015 Member Share Posted August 6, 2015 Last non martial arts movie I watched at the theatre was Avengers Age of Ultron. I had been on a Marvel kick for the last few years but I've switched to MA's Shaw Brother films. I'll probably go to see Ant Man though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Secret Executioner Posted August 6, 2015 Member Share Posted August 6, 2015 Gotta quickly say- Secret Executioner, I'm so envious you got to see the Dir's Cut of ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA! In a fresh theater by a very hot day, you enjoy the fact it's over 4 hours with a 10 minute intermission even more. I wasn't sure, but I somehow thought you were a fan of this film - glad to see I remembered well. What did you think of Torn Curtain (1966)? Always enjoyed this later Hitch film. I have it (on the set I have Topaz on), but haven't watched it yet. Been hesitating between the two before going for Topaz though. I'll let you know when I check it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Secret Executioner Posted August 6, 2015 Member Share Posted August 6, 2015 Lucky Luke: La Ballad Des Daltons (1978) (couldn't find an English title) An original animated movie based on the comic book series Lucky Luke created by René Goscinny (who also co-created Asterix with Albert Uderzo) and Morris that deals with a cowboy named Lucky Luke who fights villains and helps justice and the law prevail in the wild west - the series often includes references to people and events that really existed/happened, such as the (original) Dalton brothers (I precise original cause only one storyline featuring the Dalton gang had Bob, Grat, Bill and Emmett, the 4 dying in the end and being replaced later on - because the characters were very popular with the readers - by another set of 4 brothers who are said to be their (fictional) cousins named Joe, William, Jack and Averell), Jesse James (portrayed as a Robin Hood fanatic, though a note in the end of the volume explains about the real-life character), or the Civil War. In the movie, the Daltons are in jail (breaking rocks as part of the usual exaggeratedly long sentence criminals get in the series) when a lawyer comes and tells them their uncle (and thus father of the originals ?) Henry Dalton has died and that they are now the heirs of a big fortune. However, in order to inherit the fortune they must kill the 12 jurors and the judge who sentenced Uncle Henry to be hanged - with Lucky Luke (the only honest man Henry ever knew in his life) serving as a witness to testify that the deceased's wishes have been respected. The Daltons break out (or rather blow out) of jail and soon go on their mission after getting Lucky Luke to do his part of the deal. I said original because the movie is not based on a storyline from the comics, much like The Twelves Tasks Of Asterix, another Studio Idefix produced animated movie based on a René Goscinny-related series. And I couldn't help but compare the two, notably because they are from the same company, have René Goscinny involved and also because they follow a similar pattern with a bunch of tasks to be performed (Asterix and Obelix must succeed in twelve tasks Caesar demanded the Gauls to perform so that he can see if they are mere mortals or gods, the Daltons must kill the jury and the judge who sentenced their uncle). The backgrounds and some sound effects are also very similar (talking of the texture and designs of the backgrounds, cause the 1800s Wild West and 50 BC Gaul have little in common). But while the Asterix movie is really funny and well-written, with each of the twelve tasks being crazier and more creative than the previous, the Lucky Luke movie is more hit and miss. The movie has a guy narrating (in song) and this gets annoying quite fast, the movie feels rushed at points and drags at others (there's a drug-induced dream/musical sequence that goes on forever) and the logic is sometimes very questionnable (but we're in a world where a guy can shoot fast with deadly precision using pistols that were actually very poor in the precision department). However, the designs are nice, there's still a lot of funny stuff (did I mention Lucky Luke's regular sidekick Rin Tin Clan, the stupidest but also nicest dog in the West ? Well, he's in this and I loved his portrayal here, he's hilarious - constantly going after "prison thieves" since he got blown out of the prison with the Daltons in their escape and believe the prison has been stolen - and I love his voice here, I find it very fitting) and the jurors are rather well done, though you get typical characters from the comic book series (the jurors are a Chinese laundryman, a jail warden, a Native American witch doctor, an alcoholic quack doctor who wanders from town to town selling his "medicine", a gold digger, a gambler turn clergyman (!), a train driver and a morbid undertaker accompanied by a vulture) with designs sometimes seen for other people in the comics. As a fan of the series I enjoyed this okay, and I guess people into westerns, parodies and/or animated films could dig this one too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Tosh Posted August 6, 2015 Member Share Posted August 6, 2015 Couple I've seen lately(I'm excluding any Samurai/ninja stuff or anything else that belongs in the Japanese section) - The Fountain - It looks like this is either a love it/hate it movie from reading peoples reviews online after watching it, I'm in the "love it" crowd, a really uncomfortably hard, yet fascinating look at how a man deals with his wife's sickness/death. Three stories intertwined, a modern scientist looking for a cure, a conquistador searching for the tree of life, an astronaut hurling through space towards an unknown star. Hugh Jackman is fantastic in this. City of God - A brutal look at the slums of Brazil through a couple decades, they actually pulled kids out from the neighborhood instead of hiring actors, great movie, been wanting to watch this one for years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member teako170 Posted August 6, 2015 Member Share Posted August 6, 2015 Two good flicks dude. We re-watched "The Fountain" this past year. Second viewing was more enjoyable. Only watched "City of God" once some years back but was impressed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Tosh Posted August 6, 2015 Member Share Posted August 6, 2015 Yeah both of those movies were on the radar for sometime, have some older obscure stuff to dig up next. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator KUNG FU BOB Posted August 7, 2015 Administrator Share Posted August 7, 2015 Couple I've seen lately(I'm excluding any Samurai/ninja stuff or anything else that belongs in the Japanese section) - The Fountain City of God Two good flicks dude. We re-watched "The Fountain" this past year. Second viewing was more enjoyable. Only watched "City of God" once some years back but was impressed. I feel guilty- I've owned both since they were released, but I've yet to watch either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Lady Jin Szu-Yi Posted August 7, 2015 Member Share Posted August 7, 2015 The Fountain is interesting on a few levels, it's a very somber, heavy film. Visually amazing but it's too sad for me. Once was enough. and now for something completely different... Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1974) Look you stupid bastard it's still funny as hell... it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Secret Executioner Posted August 7, 2015 Member Share Posted August 7, 2015 Hadn't heard of that Fountain film Tosh's mentionned, so I looked it up on IMDb. From the reviews, the apparent strangeness of it seems right up my alley. Will definitely check it out, sounds like a very interesting one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member teako170 Posted August 16, 2015 Member Share Posted August 16, 2015 Currently delving into this. Just listened to the audio commentary the other night on the theatrical print in glorious 2.35:1 (finally, the original aspect ratio!) The first (and only) time I watched the Redux version, I wasn't overly impressed. Seemed the extra footage took away from Coppola's original vision by making Sheen's character more likable (or human). I will explore it again but first I want to check out the HOD docu. I had it on VHS but don't think the disc is remastered. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Secret Executioner Posted August 16, 2015 Member Share Posted August 16, 2015 Recently picked up this one on DVD, and I got the Redux version (I've seen copies of this before and I don't think I've seen other versions). However it's a much more barebone release with one disc, the movie is in English and French (there's also French subs), no extras whatsoever and I'm not sure it's in 2.35:1. I'm glad I picked it up though cause it's a film I've always been curious about and I guess it should belong in the war cinema collection I'm building. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member teako170 Posted August 16, 2015 Member Share Posted August 16, 2015 Recently picked up this one on DVD, and I got the Redux version (I've seen copies of this before and I don't think I've seen other versions). However it's a much more barebone release with one disc, the movie is in English and French (there's also French subs), no extras whatsoever and I'm not sure it's in 2.35:1. I'm glad I picked it up though cause it's a film I've always been curious about and I guess it should belong in the war cinema collection I'm building. Back around 2001, when the Redux came out, I was in a chat over at Zoetrope and the guy told me that Vittorio Storaro's true vision was 2.01:1 and that a 2.35:1 would never be released. It was very vexing as the trailer on the disc I had at the time was 2.35 but the movie was only 2.01. I believe the 2010 BR release was the first time the 2.35 print was used. Here's more on that from Zoetrope site regarding the Redux release: Question: Why is the aspect ratio of the Apocalypse Now Redux DVD not the 2.35:1 ratio of the cinematic release? Answer: (by Kim Aubry, Producer of Apocalypse Now Redux) In fact, the transfer of Apocalypse Now Redux (from film elements to High Definition digital videotape) was made with an aspect ratio of 2.0:1. This is consistent with the 1998 transfer of the original film Apocalypse Now done for DVD. The aspect ratio 2.0:1 was chosen by the cinematographer, Vittorio Storaro, who supervised every aspect of this film transfer. Storaro believes that for the purpose of TV transfer, it is better to crop (slightly) the extreme left/right edges of the originally photographed frame and allow for a taller picture on both conventional and 16:9 TV monitors, because the video presentation will have more vertical resolution and detail and will be more impactful. An orthodox 2.35:1 or 2.4:1 transfer would in some ways be a more accurate reflection of the framing seen in most cinemas, but the picture would be using only approximately 50% of the available scanning lines of the NTSC and PAL systems and hence have very limited vertical resolution. Storaro believes that since he himself composed these shots when the film was made and since he carefully made fine adjustments to the framing as needed in the transfer, the 2.0:1 transfer is the best possible compromise in adapting the very wide film picture to the very "square" TV. Mr Coppola and I agree with Storaro's views and accepted his decision. You are right to wonder about the discrepancy between the theatrical trailer and the feature itself. But the feature is not 1.85:1, it is 2.0:1. The transfer of the trailer was not supervised by Storaro, and was done using the conventional theatrical aspect of 2.35:1. It doesn't bother us, as this is considered a DVD "extra." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member kokuryuha Posted August 16, 2015 Member Share Posted August 16, 2015 I recently watched one night stand starring wesley snipes and natasha kinski and Mask(director's cut) starring Cher and Eric Stoltz. For anyone not familiar with those and haven't seen them I recommend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member AlbertV Posted September 27, 2015 Member Share Posted September 27, 2015 Last night, watched Lukas Moodysson's We Are the Best! revolving around three teenage girls in 1980's Stockholm who form a punk rock band, even when two of them don't know how to play. https://worldfilmgeek.wordpress.com/2015/09/26/review-we-are-the-best-2013/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Michael L. Posted September 27, 2015 Member Share Posted September 27, 2015 I just finished watching Attack Of The Killer Shrews with James Best (Roscoe P Coltrane in the original Dukes Of Hazzard) because it was on Halloween Harvey's Festival of Fear on Retro TV. I had never seen Halloween Harvey before (although I have seen AotKS several times) and am always excited to find a new "creature feature" hosted show in my area. We did not have a show with a horror movie host in St. Louis when I was a kid, so I am always excited to see the options that keep appearing thanks to the digital substations. I have become a big Svengoolie fan the last year or two... we also have Off Beat Cinema, which I honestly can't stand. I was just writing on my blog earlier today how much I missed Commander USA's Groovie Movies... Anyone else watch that back in the day? I think the first time I saw Inframan was on Commander USA! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member legendarycurry Posted September 27, 2015 Member Share Posted September 27, 2015 (edited) Saw a free screenning of Ricki And The Flash a while back. I did not like it, but, at least the tickets were free. Edited October 1, 2015 by legendarycurry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member masterofoneinchpunch Posted September 29, 2015 Member Share Posted September 29, 2015 (edited) In Old California (1942: William C. McGann) It is fun seeing John Wayne performances during his Republic days. He would experiment more with his roles and would not always be as stoic as he later became (though great directors like John Ford could always tweak his roles.) While the film is basic, Wayne’s character is not. He is more Gregory Peck in The Big Country than a stereotypical Wayne role. He does seem to be having fun (though later he was not happy with the results of it from what I read – I like the character, I just though the director could have done more with it) with it as Tom Craig a mild-mannered Boston pharmacist coming to Sacramento during the Sutter Fort gold rush days (1847). Wayne’s dad was a pharmacist and he patterned some of this character from him. The budget is high (for Republic) and looks good. The movie has a problem with the love triangle though by making a big mistake and under developing the Ellen Sanford (Helen Parrish) love interest whom Tom Craig likes, though Binnie Barnes (who likes Tom Craig) as Lacey Miller is decent enough as the show girl with money ambitions with the boyfriend Britt Dawson (Albert Dekker) who pretty much owns the town and does not like interlopers from Boston. I think all the Republic and Universal westerns of this time have to have at least one mass shootout, one massive bar fight and one big one-on-one confrontation. This movie came after The Spoilers though the one-on-one scene with Wayne and Dekker (and their stunt doubles) is nowhere near as good as the one in The Spoilers with Randolph Scott. The stuntmen take some nice falls, but it is sometimes hard to tell who is supposed to be who when all you are seeing is the stuntmen. For fans of John Wayne and/or 1940s westerns but probably not anyone else. Small spoiler: The “hanging” scene just aggravated me. Wayne’s character was just too docile, the mob was just too stupid and it came off pretty bad. The deux ex machina exit of it was also aggravating. The Spoilers (1942: Ray Enright) A nice Alaskan western with a story that has been done at least four times before and one time after. This is the most famous version though. The strength is the acting from the three main stars: Marlene Dietrich, Randolph Scott and John Wayne (surprise John Wayne is third billed and was paid less than those two), the cinematography and the solid direction from Ray Enright (director of one of my favorite underrated westerns Coroner Creek.) The Spoilers was nominated for Academy Award Best Art Direction-Interior Decoration, Black-and-White. It is an interesting contrast to watch the budget for this Universal film versus the much cheaper Republic pictures John Wayne was in at that time. The three main stars would star together again later than year in Pittsburgh. The plot is decent, but one may wonder why it was remade so many times. It has the basic potential love triangle (funny enough Wayne was having an affair with Dietrich at the time), but also has the surprisingly bad guy role with Randolph Scott. I do not think I have seen a straight-up bad guy role from him before. I do think it was a mistake making him appear to be bad way too early. Because once this fact is known the film goes a bit too much on autopilot. The most famous aspect of the movie is the several minute fight scene between Scott and Wayne. It is quite good marred by two common issues with fisticuffs scenes during that time period. It should not have used some of the undercranking it did and sometimes the doubles are a bit too obvious. On IMDB it states that Scott broke Wayne’s nose, but I could not corroborate that with some of the books I have on Wayne (and looking this up online.) It also stated that Scott and Wayne did not get along (TCM link below), and this has been written at several places. Though they did work together again later that year. I’m a little suspect on some of this. I am reading Scott Eyman’s John Wayne: The Life and Legend book right now and while Wayne has stated a somewhat jealous statement “I never had a build-up by a major studio, like Cooper and Randolph Scott.” he did not seem to have an issue with Scott heading his production of Seven Men From Now. Of course, Eyman’s book, while quite huge, may be lacking in the information. TCM article: http://www.tcm.com/this-month/article/158612|91142/The-Spoilers.html Edited September 29, 2015 by masterofoneinchpunch 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member masterofoneinchpunch Posted October 2, 2015 Member Share Posted October 2, 2015 The Front Page (1974: Billy Wilder): This is based on the same source material as Howard Hawk’s His Girl Friday, which itself was a remake based on the Ben Hecht and Charles MacArthur play (I have not seen the 1931 version of The Front Page by Lewis Milestone.) I do prefer the Hawk’s version, though I have seen that movie several times and most recently a few weeks ago. Hawk’s changed the Hildy Johnson character into a woman (originally a man in the play and in the first movie) where here that character is back to being a man acted by Jack Lemmon with Walter Matthau in the Cary Grant role of Walter Burns the newspaper editor whose life is the paper. Most of the acting is quite good. Lemmon and Matthau work quite well together. The only casting choice which did not seem to work for me was Carol Burnett as Mollie Malloy. She just did not seem to work the dramatic scenes well. You get to see an earlier acting performance from Susan Sarandon. But so much of the film will be quite familiar to those who have seen His Girl Friday. The major differences, not counting the Hildy Johnson role, are cursing, words that could not have been used in the previous film, using a more effeminate character and a few plot changes like actually naming the city of Chicago and using the real newspapers that were mentioned in the play. Some of these changes were not necessarily good, especially the changes with the murderer Earl Williams. But the gist of the plot: newspaper person (Hildy) wanting to get married, gets seduced by boss (Walter) back into the newspaper profession while the escape of Earl Williams is the catalyst to make all of this happen. So while this is a fun film and has two great acting from the grumpy old couple, it does sometimes feel perfunctory when watching it. It too often feels like a lesser imitation of His Girl Friday which is not what I would expect from the director of Sunset Boulevard and Stalag 17. Billy Wilder on The Front Page by Roger Ebert (May 26, 1974): I was surprised I found this link. But a fun read on the film. I did not see a review from Ebert on the film though. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator KUNG FU BOB Posted October 2, 2015 Administrator Share Posted October 2, 2015 The Front Page (1974: Billy Wilder): So while this is a fun film and has two great acting from the grumpy old couple, it does sometimes feel perfunctory when watching it. It too often feels like a lesser imitation of His Girl Friday which is not what I would expect from the director of Sunset Boulevard and Stalag 17. Billy Wilder on The Front Page by Roger Ebert (May 26, 1974): I was surprised I found this link. But a fun read on the film. I did not see a review from Ebert on the film though. I keep meaning to see more of Wilder's films. My friend Brian has chastised me in the past for re-watching THE STREET FIGHTER for the umpteenth time when there are still Wilder films I haven't seen. Okay, lets lower the bar here... Last weekend my wife and I watched ZOMBEAVERS (2014)! She asked me to put something "scary" on, and I chose that as a joke, basically just to tease her as she hates all kinds of rodents. But to my surprise, it was so daffy that she said to leave it on, and we watched it. Plot: Chemical waste turns beavers into unstoppable, unkillable, carnivorous monsters that eat young people and rednecks while also spreading 'the problem'. Gratuitous nudity, fun with satirizing genre conventions, mostly ridiculous looking, and occasionally impressive special makeup FX (kudos to the filmmakers for using old-school techniques for the creatures instead of CGI), gore, some purposely laughable dialogue, and a couple of great cameos. For a very silly, low budget horror-comedy it's amusing enough. 5/10 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.