slikmar

17 hours ago, Pariah said:

 

That would be a great movie to see on the big screen. To be honest, there are a lot of old movies, many of them black and white, that I'd love to see on the big screen. Maltese Falcon being chief among them.

I would recommend checking out Fathom Events. Thanks to them, I have seen some of Miyazaki's anime on big screen, Casablanca. They run a lot of old movies back on big screens in events.

17 hours ago, Cygnia said:

When you give plans to someone for a moat but accidentally mismark the dimensions from inches to yards apparently.

went and saw Angel has Fallen, which is exactly the movie you think it is. Figured out the villains within 5 minutes of them being on screen, including motivation. But to be fair, Butler's character figured them out pretty quickly too.

What I wanted to mention was, they apparently did a remake of Midway (one of the greatest war movies ever), so my question is WHY?. Just rerelease the original.

I wonder if they have decided to do Sersi for no other reason then to jump in before DC uses her as a WW villain.

15 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

If these guys don't work, maybe they'll try the Knights of Wundagore and the High Evolutionary next.  This latest wave of Marvel stuff feels almost like a bet.  Who can get a billion dollars with the most obscure and z list character?

Funny you should say that, as they are talking about Rocket's creator appearing and being the big bad in the next GOG movie, and the hint is its the High Evolutionary.

I wouldn't have minded seeing them develop a series based on Aunt May's home for wayward super teens. In the Ultimate universe, there was a point where she had Spidey, Gwen (as Carnage), Kitty, Iceman (mind drawing a blank, I know there were a couple others), might have had Torch there too as there were problems in FF.

I have said to people in RL that I believe Disney + to be the only one of the streaming channels I would consider paying for. not only for the MCU stuff, but also the Star Wars stuff. Hate them as the megacorp they are, but truth is, Disney (and through the ability to let their child studios (Marvel, Pixar, illumination, etc) do their thing) know how to do entertainment and movies.

I would point out, does this mean Sony in the next 2 movies don't get to mention Tony Stark, Shield, Fury, Happy (Spidey's go to guy and May's new boy toy), etc.? Think how much they will have to retcon if you can't use that stuff, not to mention that the Battle of New York and the tech from that played a central part of the first movie and Stark played a big part o the second one. Also, do they still get to mention the Snap? I assume this goes both ways, or they are paying Disney a bunch of royalties anyway.

I understand this is about money, but given that the 2 spider-man movies have been Sony's biggest money makers, maybe they should learn something Fox never did and ended up with them returning FF and X-Men to Disney, that Feige and Marvel MIGHT know what they are doing with these characters and what made people like them in the comics and what to bring to the big screen. I am super disappointed, as I saw something about how the reveal of Peter as Spidey at the end of far from home could be a way to introduce Jen Walters, or even use Matt Murdoch, as he will need a lawyer who knows supers. This is VERY disappointing and I actually hope it gets straightened out.

How many times have we said, the worst Marvel film (sort of like Pixar - what do they have in common?) are better then 2/3 of the stuff that comes out of the other studios. And I would say better then 90% of the other studios super movies (the exceptions, to me being the first 2 Raime Spidermen, first X-Men, and maybe one or two of the other X-men, also Wonder Woman and Aquaman if counting the other comic line).

so was Grease 2

The expired coupon is a very Joker joke.

I am thinking this suggests villain for GOTG 3 is High Evolutionary.

https://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/guardians-galaxy-vol-3s-villain-reportedly-revealed?utm_source=zergnet.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_4371174

It was very early on, like first 12 issues mentioned it when he and Flash were going to have a boxing match and he was trying to figure out how to NOT splatter Flash all over the place. he tried just flicking his wrist and sent Flash flying out of the ring.

IIRC, they also suggested that with Doc Ock, his arms, which usually were supporting him, would flex back with the punch, thereby removing the force from the blow.

I am really curious to see who they cast for it. If I were them, I would try an Asian actor. Prior to Aquaman, I would have said Mamoa (and Dwayne Johnson before that) would have been excellent, but, as well as they did with Aquaman, i think you need to try to steer away from that type. Go with someone who is decidedly less anglo looking. emphasize the pointed ears and cast someone who is more a swimmers body (long and lean).

23 hours ago, Hermit said:

Ok. Here's one...

Speed Racer  (2008, 40% on RT)

I think folks saw the name Wachowski  attached to it and figured it would be some uber serious Matrix movie but with the IP layered on thin like make up. Instead, it was true to the source material, kid friendly, and fun. A visual treat , not just with bright lights, but scene swaps that harkened to the old japanimation (IIIRC).

 

And with elements of the classic hero's journey. In the end, Speed Racer's innocence is tested, but he makes it through with his integrity intact thanks to support from friends and family and a never say die attitude.

 

Racer X  was played beautifully by Matthew Fox and I swear the guy screamed superhero material in all the right ways.

 

And the state of ninja quality decay is mentioned in movie!

 

I'm going to say this... this movie achieved what it was trying to, it stayed close to the source material, and it looked great doing it. It is a GOOD movie!

 

There, that's probably unpopular with some

 

 

21 hours ago, Ternaugh said:

A couple that I found:

 

Jurassic Park III (2001, RT: 49%/A: 36%): The third installment finally gave us the birdcages from the book, and it's worth it for just that, though it's great to see Alan Grant back, even if he does dream of talking velociraptors. I own it on Blu-ray and digital streaming.

 

Men in Black II (2002, RT: 39%/A: 45%): Decent sequel to the original MiB. I own it on Blu-ray and digital streaming.

 

Ones that I like, but are pre-2000:

Runaway (1984, RT: 44%/A: 32%): Gene Simmons chews the scenery as the bad guy.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979, RT/A: 42%): It's grown on me and is in my top 3 Star Trek movies. The score is one of the best ever.

The Shadow (1994, RT: 36%, A: 44%): Pulpy fun, and the music's good, too.

My friend and I both loved Speed Racer, though we still argue over whether there might have been some shenanigans in the desert race, lol.

Never saw JP3, but I did like all 4 other movies mentioned by Ternaugh.

3 hours ago, Spence said:

 

True, but I hope they don't go full idiot mode and break the pendulum by swinging too far.  I enjoy movies with strong female leads and strong male leads.  I just want them to make sense within the context of the movie. 

 

I've watched movie where the actors male or female were simply not believable in the role. More movies and TV shows with well cast female leads is good.  Plugging in female actors just to pander or check a block on a PC checklist will just lead to bad shows and careers.

 

 

This discussion makes me think of Legend of Baggar Vance. I enjoyed the movie but you could tell that every part with Charlize in it was added in (her character did not appear in the original book) and didn't quite fit with everything else.

23 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

This whole, "Valkyrie's the new king of Asgard, so she needs a queen" business was just a remark by Tessa Thompson to get a rise out of people. I think it's being blown out of proportion. Then again, Taika Waititi is helming the movie, and God only knows where he could choose to take it.

 

Mind you, I really liked Jaimie Alexander as Sif, and I thought her story was cut off far too soon, so I would appreciate seeing her back in some capacity. But with Tessa Thompson and Natalie Portman both playing the pseudo-barbaric warrior-woman motif, adding Alexander to the mix could be redundant overkill.

And not like this isn't the direction hollywood is taking as the pendulum of male dominated movies has been swinging over the last few years the other way.

3 hours ago, Spence said:

 

 

Completely understand both points.

 

But I still think they were spraying away their entire load early without thinking about the future.  Unless they have decided that Phase 4 is the end of Marvel movies, which I doubt.  They would have been better served to slowly advance the story lines.  As CRT noted, there will be actor swaps for the various roles making it just as easy to have used some of the older plot lines as jumping so far forward. 

 

And these are movies, where the audience expect bigger and better each movie, not smaller and similar.  So far the most interesting movies in Phase 4 to me are the prequels/stand-alone movies.    For me the Eternals are as much a yawn fest of an idea as the Inhumans.   Black Widow, Doctor Strange and Shang-Chi are the only titles that have me wanting to see them.  The rest of the titles evoke meh.  Mostly because the big bang Avengers movies Infinity War and Endgame were pretty much meh for me. 

 

I have to ask, 11 years, 20+ films, usually 3-4 a year, and, arguably even the worst better then half the stuff put out by other studios. How much longer did you want them to take?

on a slightly side note, when did July become horror movie month?

If Steve put back all the gems, then Vision should have gotten his back also, right? or are we saying that is the one Thanos destroyed when he destroyed the rest. Perhaps she goes to Strange to help restore Vision.

It would help if we knew the victim you used it on, then we could narrow it down. Honest, that's why we want to know, nothing to do with a reward or anything.

Wimps, they would have never made it in Hong Kong cinema with that attitude.

Man, he was pretty much great in everything. He was the Hitcher in the 80s remake. Roy, Ladyhawke etc. Really going to miss him.

16 minutes ago, megaplayboy said:

A black female 007 getting the Black Sidekick Treatment would be infinitely worse.  We know that Craig is ready to move on, so either Lynch takes over the franchise, or they recast James Bond and come up with some gobbledygook about how "James Bond" is now a perennial "cover ID" for the 007 agent.  

I have always considered it as a the cover name for the person using the 007 persona, at least in the movies, hence why they could cast different actors, though I realize that doesn't explain why Moore one had such a hardon to kill Blofield. Hmm, maybe James cover being blown, had to do plastic surgery. Of course, Plastic Surgery is one thing, undergoing gender reassignment with aditional skin pigment seems a bit much to maintain a cover. And I agree, killing her would be a horrid decision. Maybe Craig's character will become the new M. I really liked the idea they had to cast Elba in the part. Thought that would work great. Of course, I also thought Brosnan was going to be good, which he was, problem was, thanks to the idiots running Remington Steel, we got him 6 years and 3 movies to late.

Old Man and his Dog.

And yet, they are apparently making sure to still keep Black Lightnings universe seperate, as they dont appear to be involved in Crisis.

Loved the books and video games. HOPING do a good job with it.