The Ultimate Movie Thread of Ultimate Destiny

AlphaPromethean said:
Well, as a British person it's very much like Doctor Who in that it's a cultural thing. Pretty much everyone knows and likes Bond. It's a staple of British pop-culture.

If I had to make a guess as to what the real reason is, I'd say it appeals to the male fantasy: Being a suave, charming gentleman that's also a top secret spy stopping a super-villain whilst using fun gadgets, fast cars and getting the girl all in one.

I can see why people would be turned off by it though.
Click to expand...

Sorry but I think it has nothing to do with it being a 'British thing'

The James bond films are really awful and are not at all a good representation of British film-making.

I know many people that agree with this - if anything I'd say people who aren't from the UK would probably enjoy the 007 series more than we do (same goes for Doctor Who actually)
 
I have a soft spot for old Bond movies, not so much for those action-packed new parts though. :look:
 
valcik said:
I have a soft spot for old Bond movies, not so much for those action-packed new parts though. :look:
Click to expand...

They are sooo lame... :D I love how they actually try to be realistic with the under-water dungeons with shark tanks and lazor-cannons and whatnot, different times I guess :V

There was one on tv lately, where theres a super-scary scene where he is in bed and a tarantula is crawling up his shoulder, and he is sweatting - profusely - with sheer terror, and I'm thinking what... he's a hyper-arachnophobe? Just brush the creature off and to the floor, it'll scurry away, what's the problem :D
He JUMPS out of bed, ninja-rolls across the floor - and timed with the music - he WHACKS - WHACK-WHACKS - the spider to death!

Poor spider! D:

But yeah, 1960s common knowledge about animals was probably not very impressive at all, if I had told the producers that squirrels could deliver venomous stings with their fluffy tail, that could very well have been the next scene :D

--

Just finished "127 hours", and it was good. I always liked minimalistic settings, because they typically delve much deeper into the issues they tackle

--

Oh, and pet peeve movie trope: "Grrr! That guy just finished killing 30 of my fellows in a single setting, but I bet I can take him! CONFIDENCE!"
 
Last edited:
I went to watch the Goosebumps movie with my Nephew last night.
For all intents and propouses it's a pretty crappy movie, full of cliches, telegraphed humor and it's basically a Jumanji rip off.......
BUT, it tickled my nostalgia bone, not afraid to admit that I read the Goosebumps books as a kid and watched the tv show, both were super crappy, but my inner child just giggled a bit and my nephew was having a good time with the movie so I couldn't help but enjoy myself watching some shlock....
 
George Romero got screwed because somebody forgot to put the copyright at the beginning of the film. Whoops, not like it turned out to be influential or anything.

Not too interested in DDD. Porn didn't get good until the 90s.
Let me tell you youngins too, we didn't have free, on-demand smut at the click of a button back then. It was arduous getting good filth. There was this back room in your local video store, it usually had like a beaded curtain you'd walk through. You avoided eye contact because you were never sure who you'd bump into - coach, girlfriend's dad, priest? or even worse, what section they were checking out and what kink they were into, you just don't want to know these things. It was excruciating, but you had to play it cool, peruse the shelves and do your due diligence like you were selecting tires for your car. Hmm, I'm looking for something with a Nikki Dial DP and an asian lesbian massage scene. You'd settle on something, inevitably and inexplicably Ron Jeremy was in it. Then you'd check out, putting it underneath an old Bruce Lee movie, like the girl at the counter wouldn't notice that Edward Penishands was smut. Porn back then were full length movies (lots of fast forwarding involved) with some feeble attempt at plots and actual soundtracks. Not you kids today though, oh no. Got it on your phones now. HD. 1080p. Of course, the NSA is cataloging your browser history to blackmail you later.

But I digress, not copyrighting NoTLD has to be one of the biggest blunders in movie history. That's OK though, George did allright for himself, and I rather like the Tom Savini remake myself.
 
Oh Cimmerian Nights, you capitalist! I still do remember Red Shoe Diaries series being smuggled around on VHS secretly at schools or offices, that was real deal here back then. It was just soft-erotic material, not explicit hardcore pr0n; that's how we lived here in Europoor. Color me green with envy.
 
valcik said:
Oh Cimmerian Nights, you capitalist! I still do remember Red Shoe Diaries series being smuggled around on VHS secretly at schools or offices, that was real deal here back then. It was just soft-erotic material, not explicit hardcore pr0n; that's how we lived here in Europoor. Color me green with envy.
Click to expand...
I've just had an epiphany, clearly if bluejeans and rock music helped hasten the collapse of the USSR then certainly what you've just mentioned probably did too. You just can't repress man's desire for smut.

Every time I see these violent protests in the ME where there's these massive swarms of pissed off frustrated dudes, exclusively dudes, never a woman to be found, angry, dusty, sweaty dudes burning shit in effigy. I think to myself, "there's no titty bars around there are there?".

Can we as a species not rally around the mollifying effect boobs have on us? If not I fear we are doomed.



Anyway, movies.
Currently watching The Hollow Crown - I guess technically this was a miniseries, and really impressed with Tom Hiddleston, he's great. Watching Shakespeare requires a lot of concentration to appreciate because the language is so intricate and lovely. It's easy to slip underwater and drown for me. I swear if I lose focus its like they're not even speaking the same language as I do - is this any more digestible for Limeys or is it too archaic for youse guys too?
 
Cimmerian Nights said:
Every time I see these violent protests in the ME where there's these massive swarms of pissed off frustrated dudes, exclusively dudes, never a woman to be found, angry, dusty, sweaty dudes burning shit in effigy. I think to myself, "there's no titty bars around there are there?".
Click to expand...
Heh. I ran across this video recently - one of the frustrated refugees flowing to EU is been complaining about his biggest problem:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xi0jJj7e8GE
I think this proved your point actually!
/off topic
 
The last Harry Potter movie is on tv, unless it's a "part 1 of 2" or some shit, which means I'll have to wait untill next weekend to see how this dumb-ass story ends.
But wow, it started off pretty rough. Last time I saw HP there was less sadistical torture-murder in it, the story sure "grew up", but it's an interesting trend if you think about it.

The books were written for a certain target audience, let's say 10-12, but the books took several years to write, meaning that target audience joins along.
By the time the story is ripe for a climactic ending, the target audience consists of much the same individuals - but their age is different! The ending now has to fit a bunch of 15-20 year olds

Edit, motherfucker it's a part 1 -.-
 
zegh8578 said:
The last Harry Potter movie is on tv, unless it's a "part 1 of 2" or some shit, which means I'll have to wait untill next weekend to see how this dumb-ass story ends.
But wow, it started off pretty rough. Last time I saw HP there was less sadistical torture-murder in it, the story sure "grew up", but it's an interesting trend if you think about it.

The books were written for a certain target audience, let's say 10-12, but the books took several years to write, meaning that target audience joins along.
By the time the story is ripe for a climactic ending, the target audience consists of much the same individuals - but their age is different! The ending now has to fit a bunch of 15-20 year olds

Edit, motherfucker it's a part 1 -.-
Click to expand...

Love the Harry Potter series, saw the earlier films as a child and the later ones as a teen, perfect.
 
Some adults enjoy them. I really couldn't tell you if it holds up without the Nostalgia as I read the books growing up and they were some of the first long books I read.

In general the setting is kind of flimsy and the premise is kind of generic but the narrative is pretty strong.
 
I regard Harry Potter books to be fine children books, at least the first few. The last two or three books struggle with the balance between children's and young adult books (or whatever you'd call them). As zegh points out, audience grows along with the main characters, and I feel that Rowling tried to cater to the audience in that way by introducing more adult themes - but she somewhat failed at that since some of those themes and motifs are clumsily and/or awkwardly dealt it. And yeah, they do get quite filmsy nearing the ending, which hurts them to an extent.
Still, they're mostly fine. I started reading them as a kid and I'm happy I did so.

As for reading them as an adult...dunno, there's a big nostalgia factor, sure. I guess they can be enjoyable if you're open-minded enough to read it with a child's mindset. It's the target audience, after all. There's better stuff to read at this point, if you ask me, but if one is really interested, they're okay books.


The movies are pretty shitty though. For me, they failed to capture the "magical feel" of the books. I think that the first two films are okay, but they're also the most faithful adaptations. It went downhill after that...different directors and stuff.
 
It's been a while since I've read them so I really can't say. I use to really love them but I'm biased since they're some of the first books I ever read. A lot of adults like them too but people in general aren't very critical when it comes to art, so I don't know what it's worth.

The setting is kind of generic but the story is pretty good. Just keep in mind that they're books for children, although that changes in the later ones.

The movies are okay but you really should read the book instead.
 
Sergeant Politeness said:
I watched Idiocracy recently and that movie was simply perfect.
Click to expand...

Idiocracy is hilarious!
Frito Pendejo, just the name makes me giggle...

--

Also, I meant no diss against Harry Potter up there ^, I know it's popular to rag on it for being a children's flick and whatnot, I'm not running to watch them, but when they're on TV I'll gladly give them a gander. I'm actually allready fondly familiar with the movie music

--

Rewatching one of my all time favorite movies (nostalgia is a huge factor here, I acknowledge fully) John Woo's magnum opus: Bullet in the head!
The overdramatic acting, the showers of FEELS in your face, the gratuitous slow motion memory-of-good-timez scenes, the repeated hammering in of who's good and who's bad, I don't care, I love this movie!
bulletinthehead90.jpg
 
Saw Under the Skin last week. Good stuff. Not a whole lot of narrative but lots of atmosphere. Apparently a lot of the scenes were filmed with non-actors and hidden camera's. Interesting approach that didn't feel overtly artsy but actually helped the film. The director leaves you assuming a lot of things, which I liked.

I also finally watched Dead Alive (or Braindead). I jumped on that train pretty late. It was glorious!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top