last movie you watched

Chat talk and light discussion

Moderators: Moderator5, Moderator3, FECC-Moderator, Site Mechanic

Post Reply

User avatar

ForeverElvis
Posts: 4919
Registered for: 20 years 11 months
Has thanked: 619 times
Been thanked: 2661 times

last movie you watched

#1828297

Post by ForeverElvis »

keninlincs wrote:Last night i revisited Tod Browning's "Dracula"from 1931 with Bela Lugosi, had not seen it for many years,still looks good 90 years after it was made.
I’ve been watching a few 80’s and 90’s Kurt Russell films the last few days. I revisited “Breakdown” (1997) the other day. This still holds up as a solid little thriller involving a cross country trip and a kidnapping. I think it is one of Russell’s best performances. JT Walsh is also excellent.

Image


In contrast I tried to sit through 1989’s “Tango & Cash” tonight. My goodness what crap used to pass for entertainment. I remember liking this when I saw it in Cinemas 32 years ago.....what the hell drug I was on I don’t know.

A poor man’s Lethal Weapon. The writing is terrible. It goes from one bad pun to another. This isn’t dialogue it’s a succession of sound bites they could use in the trailer.

The plot is simple - bad guys frame cop duo that is causing them most trouble. Cops break out of prison, get help from a very young Teri Hatcher and ...........

This is where I fell asleep. I never fall asleep watching a film. But, this campy drivel for simpletons couldn’t hold my attention.

I can NOT recommend this any stronger.

Image

The other night I watched, with Russell again, “Soldier” (1998). I hadn’t seen this. A standard, tired SciFi about a super soldier thrown away by the military to a garbage planet. He eventually has to defend the settlement there from extinction by those that tossed him aside. But not before we are bored with scenes of the Soldier trying to fit in with the settlers. Real mundane dialogue and narrative structure here. Unimaginative direction - Blade Runner this isn’t, the final confrontation plays out a bit like Predator with Schwarzenegger. There are much better movies in Russell’s filmography. Russell has 104 words of dialogue in total.

Image

Russell has been a very solid actor since 1962 and has grown into character roles in recent years. With over 100 films to his credit I look forward to what might be next.

For me - “Big Trouble In Little China”


Always Elvis
Anthony

User avatar

ForeverElvis
Posts: 4919
Registered for: 20 years 11 months
Has thanked: 619 times
Been thanked: 2661 times

Re: last movie you watched

#1828343

Post by ForeverElvis »

Greystoke wrote:I'm hoping Arrow has a UHD release of Big Trouble in Little China to come, although I'm sure The Thing will be on UHD sooner rather than later. It's 30 years old in 2022, whilst there is a new 4K master, which was supervised by John Carpenter and was used for Arrow’s Blu-ray release, which looks incredible, incidentally.
Interestingly, in 1982 “The Thing” got lousy reviews and poor box office. I remember being surprised that the theatre was empty when I went it’s first week.

I really liked the film then and now.


Always Elvis
Anthony

User avatar

pmp
Posts: 8668
Registered for: 4 years 10 months
Has thanked: 1359 times
Been thanked: 8011 times

Re: last movie you watched

#1828348

Post by pmp »

Tonight I saw Amityville: The Awakening, which is one of the dullest, most ridiculous, and not to mention tasteless films I have seen for some considerable time. Quite how Jennifer Jason Leigh and Thomas Mann (at the height of his film career) got involved in such cobblers is a complete mystery - much more mysterious than the film.

Leigh, her two daughters and her brain-dead son move into the infamous house and odd things start happening. That's roughly it. Using the ill son as the centre of the events is reminiscent of A Haunting in Connecticut, but that looks like a masterpiece compared to this. The movie looks like it might get vaguely interesting for all of about five minutes in a meta type of way when the earlier films are talked about and the friends of one of the daughters bring the dvd over to the house to watch, but then it all gets silly as you realise that somehow the daughter has never heard of the films, the house or the case, which seems a little unlikely.

According to Wikipedia, the release of the film was pushed back 6 times over the course of three years, and had reshoots some two years after it was originally meant to be released - and we thought Death on the Nile had problems.


Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.

Image

User avatar

pmp
Posts: 8668
Registered for: 4 years 10 months
Has thanked: 1359 times
Been thanked: 8011 times

Re: last movie you watched

#1828356

Post by pmp »

Greystoke wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 12:05 am
pmp wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 12:02 am
Tonight I saw Amityville: The Awakening, which is one of the dullest, most ridiculous, and not to mention tasteless films I have seen for some considerable time. Quite how Jennifer Jason Leigh and Thomas Mann (at the height of his film career) got involved in such cobblers is a complete mystery - much more mysterious than the film.

Leigh, her two daughters and her brain-dead son move into the infamous house and odd things start happening. That's roughly it. Using the ill son as the centre of the events is reminiscent of A Haunting in Connecticut, but that looks like a masterpiece compared to this. The movie looks like it might get vaguely interesting for all of about five minutes in a meta type of way when the earlier films are talked about and the friends of one of the daughters bring the dvd over to the house to watch, but then it all gets silly as you realise that somehow the daughter has never heard of the films, the house or the case, which seems a little unlikely.

According to Wikipedia, the release of the film was pushed back 6 times over the course of three years, and had reshoots some two years after it was originally meant to be released - and we thought Death on the Nile had problems.
I think it's on Prime and passed me by on release. I'll have a look.
nooooooooo! don't do it!


Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.

Image

User avatar

pmp
Posts: 8668
Registered for: 4 years 10 months
Has thanked: 1359 times
Been thanked: 8011 times

Re: last movie you watched

#1828367

Post by pmp »

On new releases:

Sometimes I get a bit mystified by the Warner releases on the Archive label. While I have no trouble with The Tender Trap coming our way, what on earth is Athena doing getting a release when there are dozens, nay hundreds, of more worthy films! What a very strange choice.

Referring back to Unconquered, I would imagine that the Kino release would be a relatively bare bones affair. Their releases of the last few years have been frequent, to say the least, but not as packed with extras (or even a great transfer) as they used to be. That said, I need to pick up their A Man Called Adam.

Apparently The Oscar got to blu ray a month or so ago. Has anyone seen it? Worth a look?

There is a 4k version of The Good, The Bad and the Ugly coming out in the States on April 27. AS for Blu Rays, interested to see Cast a Dark Shadow getting a blu release in the US this month. This is a fine thriller starring Dirk Bogarde and Margaret Lockwood, and well worth a look.

June is a key date for silent fans, with a silent Dietrich appearing, The Woman One Longs For, which is better than the novelty a silent Dietrich might appear to be. Kino are also releasing a large batch of Mae West movies in June. I shall skip those, but am over the moon to see Poison by Todd Haynes getting a blu ray release.

July sees Kino issuing The Web (1947), Alias Nick Beal and Larceny. There's also the 1929 Thunderbolt from them, the Gilded Lily and The Plainsman.

Over in the UK, Criterion are releasing The Night of the Hunter and Merrily We Go To Hell. Waterloo is also being released, and Network is releasing The Devil Ship Pirates and The Playboy of the Western World.


Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.

Image

User avatar

pmp
Posts: 8668
Registered for: 4 years 10 months
Has thanked: 1359 times
Been thanked: 8011 times

Re: last movie you watched

#1828386

Post by pmp »

Greystoke wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 3:01 am
pmp wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 2:37 am
On new releases:

Sometimes I get a bit mystified by the Warner releases on the Archive label. While I have no trouble with The Tender Trap coming our way, what on earth is Athena doing getting a release when there are dozens, nay hundreds, of more worthy films! What a very strange choice.

Referring back to Unconquered, I would imagine that the Kino release would be a relatively bare bones affair. Their releases of the last few years have been frequent, to say the least, but not as packed with extras (or even a great transfer) as they used to be. That said, I need to pick up their A Man Called Adam.

Apparently The Oscar got to blu ray a month or so ago. Has anyone seen it? Worth a look?

There is a 4k version of The Good, The Bad and the Ugly coming out in the States on April 27. AS for Blu Rays, interested to see Cast a Dark Shadow getting a blu release in the US this month. This is a fine thriller starring Dirk Bogarde and Margaret Lockwood, and well worth a look.

June is a key date for silent fans, with a silent Dietrich appearing, The Woman One Longs For, which is better than the novelty a silent Dietrich might appear to be. Kino are also releasing a large batch of Mae West movies in June. I shall skip those, but am over the moon to see Poison by Todd Haynes getting a blu ray release.

July sees Kino issuing The Web (1947), Alias Nick Beal and Larceny. There's also the 1929 Thunderbolt from them, the Gilded Lily and The Plainsman.

Over in the UK, Criterion are releasing The Night of the Hunter and Merrily We Go To Hell. Waterloo is also being released, and Network is releasing The Devil Ship Pirates and The Playboy of the Western World.
There's usually one title on any given Warner Archive slate that's a bit dubious, but there are a number of factors at play, no doubt. It's Criterion that have grown more inconsistent, in my opinion -- and with no move to 4K yet. Even with titles that seemed possible - even likely - for a transition to this format, especially the Wong Kar-Wai box set. But they're also treading familiar ground in a lot of ways. Although I do see Flowers of Shanghai coming to Blu-ray which is great news. And Merrily We Go to Hell is a great release.

I am slightly wary of certain Arrow titles, given how quickly some releases are now turning up on UHD. Oldboy and The Bird With the Crystal Plumage, for example. Night of the Hunter has already been released by Arrow, so it would need to be a major upgrade for me to double-dip on the Criterion release. But this is where a UHD option would make sense.

The Oscar is quite poor, in my opinion. I don't think it's nearly as sharp or funny as it aspires to be -- and it certainly isn't well-acted or directed. It isn't a film I'm likely to buy on Blu-ray. In fact, I'm surprised it hasn't turned up on YouTube, given its pedigree and how disposable it is.

I am very eager to see The Good the Bad and the Ugly on UHD, though. This film has had several Blu-ray releases over the years, but this is promising.
I shall avoid The Oscar in that case. I have to admit that, once we get into May, there aren't as many things of interest to me heading our way. I think the Karloff set is now put back to May, and I shall certainly pick up the BFI Piccadilly, but probably a couple of lean months otherwise. Which is no bad thing!


Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.

Image

User avatar

ForeverElvis
Posts: 4919
Registered for: 20 years 11 months
Has thanked: 619 times
Been thanked: 2661 times

Re: last movie you watched

#1828390

Post by ForeverElvis »

Greystoke wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 12:03 am
ForeverElvis wrote:
Tue Apr 06, 2021 11:17 pm
Greystoke wrote:I'm hoping Arrow has a UHD release of Big Trouble in Little China to come, although I'm sure The Thing will be on UHD sooner rather than later. It's 30 years old in 2022, whilst there is a new 4K master, which was supervised by John Carpenter and was used for Arrow’s Blu-ray release, which looks incredible, incidentally.
Interestingly, in 1982 “The Thing” got lousy reviews and poor box office. I remember being surprised that the theatre was empty when I went it’s first week.

I really liked the film then and now.
Reviews and box office returns often say absolutely nothing about how good a film is, and are rarely indicative of how any film may endure. As I've said before -- who is saying what, and why, is important to consider. And whilst even the most astute of film journalists can get it wrong, time and place can be a determining factor, too. Which has a bearing on how well audiences will accept a film. This being further to my point about the pitfalls of test screenings.

Take this review of Evil Dead. Not only does the writer fail to understand the film, she doesn't understand its audience, yet it's tarred with a typically provocative headline, as was common in reviews of horror films at the time. The same was true of The Thing and even Big Trouble in Little China, in fact.


Image
Reviews and box office are not an indicator of a film being good or not, agree. That's why I found it interesting at the time that it performed so poorly and had average to poor reviews. The Thing had a BO Gross of $19.6 million, finishing behind Kenny Rogers in Six Pack at #42 for the year.

In the pre-internet world some critics could make or break a film, getting a thumbs down from Siskel and
Ebert could really hurt your film.

Siskel and Ebert
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2ezQuxOZhA

https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-thing-1982
The Thing
Roger Ebert January 01, 1982

"The Thing" is a great barf-bag movie, all right, but is it any good? I found it disappointing, for two reasons: the superficial characterizations and the implausible behavior of the scientists on that icy outpost. Characters have never been Carpenter's strong point; he says he likes his movies to create emotions in his audiences, and I guess he'd rather see us jump six inches than get involved in the personalities of his characters. This time, though, despite some roughed-out typecasting and a few reliable stereotypes (the drunk, the psycho, the hero), he has populated his ice station with people whose primary purpose in life is to get jumped on from behind. The few scenes that develop characterizations are overwhelmed by the scenes in which the men are just setups for an attack by the Thing.
Advertisement

That leads us to the second problem, plausibility. We know that the Thing likes to wait until a character is alone, and then pounce, digest, and imitate him--by the time you see Doc again, is he still Doc, or is he the Thing? Well, the obvious defense against this problem is a watertight buddy system, but, time and time again, Carpenter allows his characters to wander off alone and come back with silly grins on their faces, until we've lost count of who may have been infected, and who hasn't. That takes the fun away.

"The Thing" is basically, then, just a geek show, a gross-out movie in which teenagers can dare one another to watch the screen. There's nothing wrong with that; I like being scared and I was scared by many scenes in "The Thing." But it seems clear that Carpenter made his choice early on to concentrate on the special effects and the technology and to allow the story and people to become secondary. Because this material has been done before, and better, especially in the original "The Thing" and in "Alien," there's no need to see this version unless you are interested in what the Thing might look like while starting from anonymous greasy organs extruding giant crab legs and transmuting itself into a dog. Amazingly, I'll bet that thousands, if not millions, of moviegoers are interested in seeing just that.


Always Elvis
Anthony

User avatar

keninlincs
Posts: 14414
Registered for: 15 years 8 months
Location: East Coast
Mood:
Has thanked: 2368 times
Been thanked: 3221 times
Age: 59

Re: last movie you watched

#1828416

Post by keninlincs »

Greystoke wrote:
Tue Apr 06, 2021 2:54 pm
keninlincs wrote:
Tue Apr 06, 2021 12:11 pm
Last night i revisited Tod Browning's "Dracula"from 1931 with Bela Lugosi, had not seen it for many years,still looks good 90 years after it was made.
Image
I think it looks fantastic on Blu-ray, too, Ken.
yes the bluray was what i watched,its a fantastic print.


-instagram kenh1964

User avatar

keninlincs
Posts: 14414
Registered for: 15 years 8 months
Location: East Coast
Mood:
Has thanked: 2368 times
Been thanked: 3221 times
Age: 59

Re: last movie you watched

#1828418

Post by keninlincs »

dd.jpg
last night ,carrying on with the vampire film i watched "Dracula's daughter"from 1936 starring Gloria Holden,another decent early Universal horror.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.


-instagram kenh1964

User avatar

keninlincs
Posts: 14414
Registered for: 15 years 8 months
Location: East Coast
Mood:
Has thanked: 2368 times
Been thanked: 3221 times
Age: 59

Re: last movie you watched

#1828419

Post by keninlincs »

ForeverElvis wrote:
Tue Apr 06, 2021 2:59 pm
keninlincs wrote:Last night i revisited Tod Browning's "Dracula"from 1931 with Bela Lugosi, had not seen it for many years,still looks good 90 years after it was made.
I’ve been watching a few 80’s and 90’s Kurt Russell films the last few days. I revisited “Breakdown” (1997) the other day. This still holds up as a solid little thriller involving a cross country trip and a kidnapping. I think it is one of Russell’s best performances. JT Walsh is also excellent.

Image


In contrast I tried to sit through 1989’s “Tango & Cash” tonight. My goodness what crap used to pass for entertainment. I remember liking this when I saw it in Cinemas 32 years ago.....what the hell drug I was on I don’t know.

A poor man’s Lethal Weapon. The writing is terrible. It goes from one bad pun to another. This isn’t dialogue it’s a succession of sound bites they could use in the trailer.

The plot is simple - bad guys frame cop duo that is causing them most trouble. Cops break out of prison, get help from a very young Teri Hatcher and ...........

This is where I fell asleep. I never fall asleep watching a film. But, this campy drivel for simpletons couldn’t hold my attention.

I can NOT recommend this any stronger.

Image

The other night I watched, with Russell again, “Soldier” (1998). I hadn’t seen this. A standard, tired SciFi about a super soldier thrown away by the military to a garbage planet. He eventually has to defend the settlement there from extinction by those that tossed him aside. But not before we are bored with scenes of the Soldier trying to fit in with the settlers. Real mundane dialogue and narrative structure here. Unimaginative direction - Blade Runner this isn’t, the final confrontation plays out a bit like Predator with Schwarzenegger. There are much better movies in Russell’s filmography. Russell has 104 words of dialogue in total.

Image

Russell has been a very solid actor since 1962 and has grown into character roles in recent years. With over 100 films to his credit I look forward to what might be next.

For me - “Big Trouble In Little China”
i quite enjoyed Tango and Cash for what it was ,a comedy so i guess im an imbecile.but i have been called worse so no biggie.


-instagram kenh1964

User avatar

pmp
Posts: 8668
Registered for: 4 years 10 months
Has thanked: 1359 times
Been thanked: 8011 times

Re: last movie you watched

#1828523

Post by pmp »

keninlincs wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 10:48 am
Imagelast night ,carrying on with the vampire film i watched "Dracula's daughter"from 1936 starring Gloria Holden,another decent early Universal horror.
I think it's actually a better film than Dracula itself, and far less stagey.

Tonight I watched The Naked City, with Barry Fitzgerald and Don Taylor, which I enjoyed very much. I didn't realise the latter went on to a successful directing career that included the second Omen film, but mostly he was directing TV shows and movies. The Naked City is really excellent, crossing the boundaries between drama-documentary and film noir, and filmed on the streets of New York. The blu ray from Arrow is also very good apart from a few scratches here and there on the print.


Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.

Image

User avatar

pmp
Posts: 8668
Registered for: 4 years 10 months
Has thanked: 1359 times
Been thanked: 8011 times

Re: last movie you watched

#1828551

Post by pmp »

Greystoke wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 2:47 am
pmp wrote:
Thu Apr 08, 2021 1:12 am
keninlincs wrote:
Wed Apr 07, 2021 10:48 am
Imagelast night ,carrying on with the vampire film i watched "Dracula's daughter"from 1936 starring Gloria Holden,another decent early Universal horror.
I think it's actually a better film than Dracula itself, and far less stagey.

Tonight I watched The Naked City, with Barry Fitzgerald and Don Taylor, which I enjoyed very much. I didn't realise the latter went on to a successful directing career that included the second Omen film, but mostly he was directing TV shows and movies. The Naked City is really excellent, crossing the boundaries between drama-documentary and film noir, and filmed on the streets of New York. The blu ray from Arrow is also very good apart from a few scratches here and there on the print.
The Naked City is very good, indeed. I'm eager to see what the new 4K restoration looks like. This was an easy double-dip for me.

I certainly agree with you regarding Dracula’s Daughter, although the earlier film compensates for a want of better style and more creative direction, with an eerie atmosphere.

Tonight, I watched The Norliss Tapes, a 1973 television movie which is told via flashback and narrated from a tape left by a journalist who was exploring the occult. He goes missing in the first act, after telling his publisher that he can't finish a book debunking the supernatural, because of what he found.

It's very similar to Kolchak, in fact. With Dan Curtis directing and in familiar territory, although some subtlety is amiss. And a better sense of ambiguity early in the film. It's brief, but engaging enough. With Roy Thinnes and Angie Dickson heading a cast that includes Michele Carey and Claude Akins playing, unsurprisingly, a cop.

It's in watchable quality on YouTube, and worth spending 71 minutes with.

..
I might take a look at that!


Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.

Image

User avatar

ForeverElvis
Posts: 4919
Registered for: 20 years 11 months
Has thanked: 619 times
Been thanked: 2661 times

Re: last movie you watched

#1828641

Post by ForeverElvis »

I took advantage of Kinos recent sale and ordered these four, shipped, yesterday:

Duel in the Sun
Image
Always a favorite of mine, should look fantastic on BluRay.

The Big Country
Image
A excellent film with a wealth of extras

The Nude Bomb
Image
I love Get Smart, this was a bad film but Don Adams was still great as Agent 86. This release is loaded with extras.

S.O.S Titanic
Image
This release has two versions of the film. I’m a long-time Titanic nut.


Always Elvis
Anthony

User avatar

pmp
Posts: 8668
Registered for: 4 years 10 months
Has thanked: 1359 times
Been thanked: 8011 times

Re: last movie you watched

#1828694

Post by pmp »

Tonight I saw The Lost World, starring Claude Rains, Michael Rennie etc. In all honesty, it's not particularly good. Quite why it was set in the then-present of 1960 is a mystery, as it just makes the entire idea of a lost world extremely unlikely, especially it was as easy to get to as the film suggests. The special effects - lizards with make-up and accessories made out to be giant dinosaurs - doesn't work, and Claude Rains is pretty awful - and it's not very often you get to say that. There is also a great deal of sloppiness here. Jill St John keeps screaming at the dinosaurs and yet doesn't open her mouth to do so, clearly much dialogue was added post-production and people's mouths are clearly not saying what we are hearing, and Ray Stricklyn's shirt gets torn, and then untorn, and then torn again. Add into the fact that, even for 1960, this seems pretty sexist and racist, and you have something of a clunker. The blu ray from 101 looks good, though, although perhaps it should be in ROOM 101 instead. Ok, it's not that bad if you're six.

That said, at least I made it all the way through, which is more than can be said for The Visit, which I started watching tonight, and quickly realised that I might through something at the TV if I kept watching a 12 year old rapping while visiting his creepy grandparents. No, Sir-ee.


Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.

Image

User avatar

pmp
Posts: 8668
Registered for: 4 years 10 months
Has thanked: 1359 times
Been thanked: 8011 times

Re: last movie you watched

#1828709

Post by pmp »

Greystoke wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 2:38 am
pmp wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 1:41 am
Tonight I saw The Lost World, starring Claude Rains, Michael Rennie etc. In all honesty, it's not particularly good. Quite why it was set in the then-present of 1960 is a mystery, as it just makes the entire idea of a lost world extremely unlikely, especially it was as easy to get to as the film suggests. The special effects - lizards with make-up and accessories made out to be giant dinosaurs - doesn't work, and Claude Rains is pretty awful - and it's not very often you get to say that. There is also a great deal of sloppiness here. Jill St John keeps screaming at the dinosaurs and yet doesn't open her mouth to do so, clearly much dialogue was added post-production and people's mouths are clearly not saying what we are hearing, and Ray Stricklyn's shirt gets torn, and then untorn, and then torn again. Add into the fact that, even for 1960, this seems pretty sexist and racist, and you have something of a clunker. The blu ray from 101 looks good, though, although perhaps it should be in ROOM 101 instead. Ok, it's not that bad if you're six.

That said, at least I made it all the way through, which is more than can be said for The Visit, which I started watching tonight, and quickly realised that I might through something at the TV if I kept watching a 12 year old rapping while visiting his creepy grandparents. No, Sir-ee.
Coincidentally, I almost watched that particular version of The Lost World a few days ago, and was thinking of buying the Blu-ray. Although it was the BBC adaptation, with Bob Hoskins, that I was looking to watch again. I had this on a nice DVD release in the early-2000s, but I don't know what I've done with it.

I thought The Visit was very poor, though. I saw it on release and haven't watched it a second time -- one night with Nana and Pop Pops was enough. It might still be Shyamalan’s worst film. Which is no mean feat. It done fantastic business all the same.

Tonight I watched The Horror at 37,000 Feet, which isn't far removed from Horror Express, albeit with an ancient evil taking hold of a plane, as opposed to a train. It was made for television and it shows in the standards all round, despite a worthwhile premise in the remnants of a cursed abbey being transported on a plane.

Chuck Connors is the pilot, with William Shatner playing a defrocked and self-loathing priest, complete with customary gasps, glances, and pauses as he speaks. Will Hutchins, showing how much better he was in Clambake, is an actor whose career is now in Italian westerns, whilst Buddy Ebsen is just loud.

Acting aside, and less than keen direction, the writing is rather inept at times, but there are intriguing elements, and even a turn in which the passengers become akin to villagers with pitchforks. Basically, a bloated episode of The Twilight Zone.
The blu ray looks good, but The Lost World really comes over as a rip off of The Land Unknown from a few years earlier - which is also available on 101 Films blu ray, and considerably better than Lost World, which doesn't really know if it's a comedy or an adventure or a horror film. I really want to see the "new" restoration of the 1925 film, but it's a flicker alley effort and costs a small fortune.


Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.

Image

User avatar

keninlincs
Posts: 14414
Registered for: 15 years 8 months
Location: East Coast
Mood:
Has thanked: 2368 times
Been thanked: 3221 times
Age: 59

Re: last movie you watched

#1828768

Post by keninlincs »

Im continuing with the Universal monster cycle and last night i watched "Son of Dracula"with Lon Chaney as Count Alucard aka Count Dracula (not his son)set in Louisianna Lon is à bit wooden as the Count but still a decent enough film.
Next up was "Werewolf of london" starring Henry Hull as the titular werewolf i enjoyed this one as i cant recall seeing it before, and for a 1930s horror film it was quite good.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.


-instagram kenh1964

User avatar

pmp
Posts: 8668
Registered for: 4 years 10 months
Has thanked: 1359 times
Been thanked: 8011 times

Re: last movie you watched

#1828778

Post by pmp »

I have Return of the Vampire ready to watch tonight.


Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.

Image

User avatar

keninlincs
Posts: 14414
Registered for: 15 years 8 months
Location: East Coast
Mood:
Has thanked: 2368 times
Been thanked: 3221 times
Age: 59

Re: last movie you watched

#1828784

Post by keninlincs »

pmp wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 4:13 pm
I have Return of the Vampire ready to watch tonight.
I have that with me to watch too!


-instagram kenh1964

User avatar

pmp
Posts: 8668
Registered for: 4 years 10 months
Has thanked: 1359 times
Been thanked: 8011 times

Re: last movie you watched

#1828854

Post by pmp »

Greystoke wrote:
Fri Apr 09, 2021 10:17 pm
It's quite intriguing to see Netflix moving on an update of The 39 Steps, modernised, with Benedict Cumberbatch starring in what's touted as being a limited series. The story is certainly robust enough to work in a contemporary world, although Bourne does instantly come to mind.

https://deadline.com/2021/04/benedict-cumberbatch-netflix-the-39-steps-director-edward-berger-mark-l-smith-hitchcock-classic-1234731060/
Not him again! It does seem in TV-land that we latch on to an actor and then have it so they appear in everything under the sun. It was the same with John Thaw and David Jason, too. He's linked to a remake of Rogue Male, too.

I saw Return of the Vampire tonight (not on blu ray), and it was as good as I remembered. Despite the name change for the vampire, it works rather well as a sequel to Dracula, and the war setting adds enough originality to make it not just a repeat of what's gone before. Cry of the Werewolf was another good horror movie from Columbia during the same period, and both are far more serious than the Universal movies of the 1940s, which really did seem to go for a lighter approach and rehashing the same ideas.


Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.

Image

User avatar

keninlincs
Posts: 14414
Registered for: 15 years 8 months
Location: East Coast
Mood:
Has thanked: 2368 times
Been thanked: 3221 times
Age: 59

Re: last movie you watched

#1828907

Post by keninlincs »

Last night i watched Roger Moore in 2 of his outings as James Bond,first up was "The spy who loved me" this was followed up with "Moonraker " both still very enjoyable,althouh quite dated now.I was always a fan of the Bond films so nice to see them again,the blurays have a wealth of special features too.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.


-instagram kenh1964

User avatar

ForeverElvis
Posts: 4919
Registered for: 20 years 11 months
Has thanked: 619 times
Been thanked: 2661 times

Re: last movie you watched

#1828920

Post by ForeverElvis »

Greystoke wrote:
keninlincs wrote:
Sat Apr 10, 2021 12:41 pm
Last night i watched Roger Moore in 2 of his outings as James Bond,first up was "The spy who loved me" this was followed up with "Moonraker " both still very enjoyable,althouh quite dated now.I was always a fan of the Bond films so nice to see them again,the blurays have a wealth of special features too.
Image
Image
I'm almost due another run through all of the Bond films. The Spy Who Loved Me is a favourite of mine, too. I'm not so fond of Moonraker, but it has its moments. The Blu-rays are great.
I’ve been a Bond nut since seeing “You Only Live Twice” on TV in 1975, I was 11. “Spy” was my first 007 I saw in the theatre.

“Spy” is the best 007 film of the 1970’s, so much better than Moore’s first two outings; 1973’s “Live and Let Die” and 1974’s “The Man With the Golden Gun” - and Connery’s last, 1971’s “Diamonds Are Forever”.

When I was a kid you were either a Connery Bond fan or a Moore Bond fan, Connery was my preference even though I hadn’t seen “Dr No” or “From Russia With Love” at that juncture. When I was 14 I loved the spectacle of Moonraker on the big screen.

Around 20yrs old I had established my favorites 007 films; Connery in the first 4 films, Lazenby in “Secret Service, Moore in “Spy” and “For Your Eyes Only”. These haven’t changed much over the years, just with the addition of favorites from Dalton, Brosnan and Craig.

The other thing that hasn’t changed is my choice for the worst 007 film, “A View to a Kill” and the film that has plummeted the most down my ranking, “Moonraker”. What I enjoyed as a kid is far less enjoyable as an adult.

“Moonraker” is a really well made film that is everything Bond isn’t supposed to be. The best part is the first 20 minutes or so, up until Drax’s assistant is killed by the dogs in the forest. It gets sillier from there with the gondola drive in Venice, the double-take pigeon, Jaws’s girlfriend, the Close Encounters and Magnificent Seven score rip-offs. The final insult - Jaws becomes good.

John Barry’s score is very good.

The two most underrated films of the series, “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service” and “Licence to Kill”.


Always Elvis
Anthony

User avatar

ForeverElvis
Posts: 4919
Registered for: 20 years 11 months
Has thanked: 619 times
Been thanked: 2661 times

last movie you watched

#1828984

Post by ForeverElvis »

Greystoke wrote:
ForeverElvis wrote:
Sat Apr 10, 2021 2:06 pm
Greystoke wrote:
keninlincs wrote:
Sat Apr 10, 2021 12:41 pm
Last night i watched Roger Moore in 2 of his outings as James Bond,first up was "The spy who loved me" this was followed up with "Moonraker " both still very enjoyable,althouh quite dated now.I was always a fan of the Bond films so nice to see them again,the blurays have a wealth of special features too.
Image
Image
I'm almost due another run through all of the Bond films. The Spy Who Loved Me is a favourite of mine, too. I'm not so fond of Moonraker, but it has its moments. The Blu-rays are great.
I’ve been a Bond nut since seeing “You Only Live Twice” on TV in 1975, I was 11. “Spy” was my first 007 I saw in the theatre.

“Spy” is the best 007 film of the 1970’s, so much better than Moore’s first two outings; 1973’s “Live and Let Die” and 1974’s “The Man With the Golden Gun” - and Connery’s last, 1971’s “Diamonds Are Forever”.

When I was a kid you were either a Connery Bond fan or a Moore Bond fan, Connery was my preference even though I hadn’t seen “Dr No” or “From Russia With Love” at that juncture. When I was 14 I loved the spectacle of Moonraker on the big screen.

Around 20yrs old I had established my favorites 007 films; Connery in the first 4 films, Lazenby in “Secret Service, Moore in “Spy” and “For Your Eyes Only”. These haven’t changed much over the years, just with the addition of favorites from Dalton, Brosnan and Craig.

The other thing that hasn’t changed is my choice for the worst 007 film, “A View to a Kill” and the film that has plummeted the most down my ranking, “Moonraker”. What I enjoyed as a kid is far less enjoyable as an adult.

“Moonraker” is a really well made film that is everything Bond isn’t supposed to be. The best part is the first 20 minutes or so, up until Drax’s assistant is killed by the dogs in the forest. It gets sillier from there with the gondola drive in Venice, the double-take pigeon, Jaws’s girlfriend, the Close Encounters and Magnificent Seven score rip-offs. The final insult - Jaws becomes good.

John Barry’s score is very good.

The two most underrated films of the series, “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service” and “Licence to Kill”.
The problem with On Her Majesty’s Secret Service is the fact that George Lazenby wasn't an actor. He was badly miscast in what was actually one of the better written Bond films, other than a misjudged wink to the audience at the start of the film. Although, with Bond having become so successful and iconic with Connery, there was surely a lot of uncertainty about moving on. Including doubts about how or whether audiences would accept somebody new in the role.

It benefited from stellar production values and despite what Lazenby was lacking, he was well directed and so was the film. The action sequences are stellar. It's witty. And the ending is certainly bold. It's unfortunate that Connery decided to leave the role, with that what ultimately became Diamonds are Forever being compromised as a true sequel when Lazenby done the same.
OHMSS
Whoever took over the role from Connery at that time was in the terrible position of being compared to Connery at every turn. Even before the film came out Lazenby received a fair amount of bad press.

The marketing department didn’t appear to have a lot of faith in him, his name not appearing above the title on the film poster, just the characters’ name.

But Broccoli/Saltzman must have had faith, offering an extended deal to appear as 007. The only person who screwed that up was George himself, acting in part, on bad advice from his agent.

Watching now, Lazenby is wooden at times, but not in every scene. His eyes are expressionless, exposing his inexperience. He is fantastic in the physical scenes, doing a lot of his own fights, the fist-fight in the hotel is very memorable and rivals anything in the series.

I don’t see Lazenby as a problem, that’s a historical bandwagon. He is good at times, wooden in others. The filmmakers wisely populated the film with strong co-stars in Rigg and Savalas that could carry the film so Lazenby wouldn’t have to.

The problem I’ve always had is the horrible dubbing of Lazenby with George Bakers voice when 007 is impersonating Sir Hillary Bray in a significant part of the film. Story-wise, totally unnecessary as Bray hadn’t met Blofeld or anyone from his clinic, only communicating by letter.

I saw OHMSS on a large theatre screen about 3 years ago. I saw details I’d never picked up on before, it was like watching it for the first time, a wonderful experience. Lazenby came across better than he does when seeing the film at home.

Financially, “Secret Service” was not a bomb. It finished ranked #11 with $9.1 million in rentals in North America in 1969-1970. But It was a setback for EON, taking in half of “You Only Live Twice”, which finished 7th with $18 million in rentals in North America in 1967. The series rebounded in 1971 when “Diamonds are Forever” finished 3rd with $19.7 million. Undoubtedly due to Connery’s return as 007 because, it wasn’t the better film.

It was a tumultuous time for Eon with three different Bond actors over three successive films, finally hitting their stride again with “Spy” in 1977.

If Lazenby had done “Diamonds Are Forever” the pre-title sequence and gimmick of plastic surgery for Blofeld might have resonated better. But these were gimmicks, the bond series before Craig were never story continuations. Each film was a separate mission in 007’s career that might have occurred before or after the last mission.


Always Elvis
Anthony

User avatar

keninlincs
Posts: 14414
Registered for: 15 years 8 months
Location: East Coast
Mood:
Has thanked: 2368 times
Been thanked: 3221 times
Age: 59

Re: last movie you watched

#1828997

Post by keninlincs »

For_Your_Eyes_Only_-_UK_cinema_poster.jpg
Tonight i have had a movie binge i watched Roger Moore in his next Bond outing after last nights "Spy who loved me" and "Moonraker" "For your eyes only"was a much better film than "Moonraker"i think with some nice action sequences and a decent story.

Next up was another Universal oldie "She wolf of London" about a girl who believes she has inherited lycanthropy because of the Allenby curse a decent short movie running at just under an hour starring June Lockhart and Don Porter
She-wolf-of-london-movie-poster-md.jpg
And finally i watched an Amicus film "They came from beyond space" a british scifi about some alien invaders from a dying world who take over some scientists bodies to help them in their quest to survive, i thought it would be a lot better than it was with Milton Subotsky and Max Rosenburg on board and directed by Freddie Francis,it should have been so much better than it was but i stuck with it till the end
738329247409.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.


-instagram kenh1964

User avatar

keninlincs
Posts: 14414
Registered for: 15 years 8 months
Location: East Coast
Mood:
Has thanked: 2368 times
Been thanked: 3221 times
Age: 59

Re: last movie you watched

#1828998

Post by keninlincs »

For_Your_Eyes_Only_-_UK_cinema_poster.jpg
Tonight i have had a movie binge i watched Roger Moore in his next Bond outing after last nights "Spy who loved me" and "Moonraker" "For your eyes only"was a much better film than "Moonraker"i think with some nice action sequences and a decent story.

Next up was another Universal oldie "She wolf of London" about a girl who believes she has inherited lycanthropy because of the Allenby curse a decent short movie running at just under an hour starring June Lockhart and Don Porter
She-wolf-of-london-movie-poster-md.jpg
And finally i watched an Amicus film "They came from beyond space" a british scifi about some alien invaders from a dying world who take over some scientists bodies to help them in their quest to survive, i thought it would be a lot better than it was with Milton Subotsky and Max Rosenburg on board and directed by Freddie Francis,it should have been so much better than it was but i stuck with it till the end
738329247409.jpg


-instagram kenh1964

User avatar

pmp
Posts: 8668
Registered for: 4 years 10 months
Has thanked: 1359 times
Been thanked: 8011 times

Re: last movie you watched

#1829004

Post by pmp »

keninlincs wrote:
Sun Apr 11, 2021 2:19 am
For_Your_Eyes_Only_-_UK_cinema_poster.jpgTonight i have had a movie binge i watched Roger Moore in his next Bond outing after last nights "Spy who loved me" and "Moonraker" "For your eyes only"was a much better film than "Moonraker"i think with some nice action sequences and a decent story.

Next up was another Universal oldie "She wolf of London" about a girl who believes she has inherited lycanthropy because of the Allenby curse a decent short movie running at just under an hour starring June Lockhart and Don Porter
She-wolf-of-london-movie-poster-md.jpg

And finally i watched an Amicus film "They came from beyond space" a british scifi about some alien invaders from a dying world who take over some scientists bodies to help them in their quest to survive, i thought it would be a lot better than it was with Milton Subotsky and Max Rosenburg on board and directed by Freddie Francis,it should have been so much better than it was but i stuck with it till the end
738329247409.jpg
She Wolf of London is one of my favourite Universal horrors, especially of the 1940s. It reminds me more of the 20th Century Fox horrors of the period, like the superb Undying Monster and Dr Renault's Secret. It also doesn't really go in the direction the title might suggest. A hidden gem, I think.


Accused of being "a nerd in his 20s." I wish.

Image
Post Reply