Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
Movies
Byrne Robotics > Movies << Prev Page of 362 Next >>
Topic: What disc did you have in last (and what did you think)? Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Petter Myhr Ness
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2009
Location: Norway
Posts: 2476
Posted: 10 March 2017 at 5:39am | IP Logged | 1 post reply

THE NOVEMBER MAN (2014)

I like Pierce Brosnan, but I never really bought him as Bond. Strange, because here he's more Bond-like than he was playing Bond...
Back to Top profile | search
 
Brian Rhodes
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2485
Posted: 10 March 2017 at 8:41am | IP Logged | 2 post reply

SPACEBALLS (1987)

Basically Mel Brooks for kids.

Never thought of it that way, but, yeah. Pretty much.

Has its moments, though. Just realized re-watching it a couple of weeks ago that the "We ain't found shit!" guy is Tim Russ.


Back to Top profile | search | email
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 106143
Posted: 10 March 2017 at 10:19am | IP Logged | 3 post reply

...Mel Brooks for kids.

Not very bright kids.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Shaun Barry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 December 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 4777
Posted: 10 March 2017 at 10:00pm | IP Logged | 4 post reply


More juvenile comedy... this time a double-feature of:

AUSTIN POWERS: INTERNATIONAL MAN OF MYSTERY (1997)
and
AUSTIN POWERS: THE SPY WHO SHAGGED ME (1999)


All the rage back in the late-'90s, and I recall enjoying Part 2 more than the original... today, both are equally (almost shockingly) lousy.

Aside from being achingly unfunny, both suffer from having no real solid story or characters to hang the '60s spy-parody approach off of.  It's all smutty little bits & goofs, strung together with no real wit, insufferable mugging (or "playing to the cheap seats"), and lackluster direction.

Haven't aged well at all, no need to ever revisit again.  And no, I won't be bothering with another round of GOLDMEMBER, a movie I thought was lousy the first time I saw it!

(Though I'm just going to admit upfront that the presence of Elizabeth Hurley and Heather Graham did help take the sting out a bit.  But only just a little.)





Edited by Shaun Barry on 10 March 2017 at 10:02pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 106143
Posted: 11 March 2017 at 6:34am | IP Logged | 5 post reply

More juvenile comedy... this time a double-feature of:

AUSTIN POWERS: INTERNATIONAL MAN OF MYSTERY (1997)

and

AUSTIN POWERS: THE SPY WHO SHAGGED ME (1999)

I think you mean infantile!!

Back to Top profile | search
 
Shaun Barry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 December 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 4777
Posted: 11 March 2017 at 3:34pm | IP Logged | 6 post reply


(I'd agree with that.  Hard to believe grown adults made these films.  Or thought they were funny!)



Back to Top profile | search
 
Shaun Barry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 December 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 4777
Posted: 12 March 2017 at 8:10pm | IP Logged | 7 post reply


Sam Raimi's EVIL DEAD II (1987)

Nonsensical rubbish... but a total hoot, and probably the quintessential Sam Raimi movie.

Not the least bit scary, really, but a laugh-out-loud slapstick horror comedy.



Back to Top profile | search
 
Shaun Barry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 December 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 4777
Posted: 14 March 2017 at 2:15pm | IP Logged | 8 post reply


Followed by:

James Cagney in YANKEE DOODLE DANDY (1942)

An alternately gleeful and teary viewing experience.  Even given its story embellishments, it's 1940's Hollywood moviemaking gold.



Back to Top profile | search
 
Shaun Barry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 December 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 4777
Posted: 14 March 2017 at 5:54pm | IP Logged | 9 post reply


And then:

THE LAST STARFIGHTER (1984)

An odd, not-entirely-successful mix of STAR WARS and TRON, by way of Frank Capra... but if you were 12-years old in 1984, you probably ate this one right up.  

I know I sure did!  Still holds-up as a fun revisit, every so often.



Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 106143
Posted: 14 March 2017 at 7:16pm | IP Logged | 10 post reply

I was 34 in 1984, and I "ate up" THE LAST STARFIGHTER.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Shaun Barry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 December 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 4777
Posted: 14 March 2017 at 8:04pm | IP Logged | 11 post reply


(Yay!  Great to hear!)

:)



Back to Top profile | search
 
Joe Hollon
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 13106
Posted: 15 March 2017 at 3:49am | IP Logged | 12 post reply

GHOSTBUSTERS (2016)- I heard mixed reviews and went in
thinking "It's probably an ok, fun movie...people are
just being hard on it because it's Ghostbusters." Nope.
One of the worst movies I've ever sat all the way
through. It's not funny. There's nothing
interesting/entertaining about it. Terrible all the way
through. I can't believe this movie got made. Why
wouldn't someone have stopped during production and
said, "Wait guys, if we're going to do Ghostbusters we
need to make this good"?
Back to Top profile | search | www | email
 
Joe Hollon
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 13106
Posted: 15 March 2017 at 3:50am | IP Logged | 13 post reply

Big fan of THE LAST STARFIGHTER when I was a kid.
Haven't seen it in 25 years probably...
Back to Top profile | search | www | email
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 106143
Posted: 15 March 2017 at 7:45am | IP Logged | 14 post reply

GHOSTBUSTERS (2016)- I heard mixed reviews and went in thinking "It's probably an ok, fun movie...people are just being hard on it because it's Ghostbusters." Nope. One of the worst movies I've ever sat all the way through. It's not funny. There's nothing interesting/entertaining about it. Terrible all the way through. I can't believe this movie got made. Why wouldn't someone have stopped during production and said, "Wait guys, if we're going to do Ghostbusters we need to make this good"?

There are two schools of thought on this. I am on one side, and you're wrong.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Shaun Barry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 December 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 4777
Posted: 15 March 2017 at 10:18am | IP Logged | 15 post reply


The 2016 version, to me, is inoffensive, for the most part.  Not really funny*, not really scary, follows most of the same story beats as the original, but not a bad film, either.  Just disappointing.

All three of my kids love it, so I can't really knock it too badly, either.

(* I think I laughed out loud exactly once in the theater, and that was at the "Who's the flying beefcake?" line.)



Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 106143
Posted: 15 March 2017 at 10:53am | IP Logged | 16 post reply

I was disappointed with the original GHOSTBUSTERS. Everybody at Marvel was raving about it, but for me it felt kind of flat and contrived. And the whole last act wasn't really about GHOST busting at all.

And what, exactly, was Slimer a ghost of?

Back to Top profile | search
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 13406
Posted: 15 March 2017 at 11:30am | IP Logged | 17 post reply

I was disappointed with the original GHOSTBUSTERS. Everybody at Marvel was raving about it, but for me it felt kind of flat and contrived. And the whole last act wasn't really about GHOST busting at all.
++++++++

Personally, I love GHOSTBUSTERS. Maybe it's a generational thing. I've tried to examine beloved films from my childhood with a more critical eye as an adult. GHOSTBUSTERS still holds up, for me. There's a cleverness to its structure, in that it's a going-into-business story, with events escalating from a library haunting to a city-wide paranormal event. Both of these factors lend a good deal of verisimilitude to the proceedings, because it's a gradual escalation, rather than having a hundred-foot marshmallow man walking around ten minutes into the movie.

I also rather like the fact that what starts out as a ho-hum sort of ghost-busting/ghost janitor business escalates into a full-on demigod-busting, which is something the characters aren't really prepared for.

The sort of sarcastiic, dry-humored, working-class, fly-by-night attitude of the characters s is what gives the movie a lot of its humor and charm, for me. Most of the time, they have no idea what they're doing, and just sort of make it up as they go.

One of the other things I love about the film is that, while it was designed with a certain amount of internal logic, it still doesn't take itself too seriously. The supernatural elements are treated as rather straightforward horror, while the humor comes from the characters and their reactions to the supernatural.


+++++++++

And what, exactly, was Slimer a ghost of?

++++++++


John Belushi, sort of. Since Belushi was the original choice for Venkman, Slimer was conceived as a sort of tribute to the slobby characters Belushi was known for, in films like ANIMAL HOUSE.

More to the point, though, all of the ghosts in GHOSTBUSTERS were designed to be somewhat cartoony. So, Slimer is apparently the ghost of a person, and his spectral form is rather grotesque and bloated.


I have no interest whatsoever in the remake. It looks painfully unfunny, contrived, and wrongheaded on just about every level. And, yes, perhaps even an affront to a film I've loved for my entire life. So, there's my side, and you're wrong. Nyah-nyah!


The most unfortunate thing, of course, is that the film turned into a lightning rod for bitter arguments on gender politics. 

Back to Top profile | search | email
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 106143
Posted: 15 March 2017 at 1:14pm | IP Logged | 18 post reply

...working-class...

That phrase must mean something very different to you than it does to me!

Back to Top profile | search
 
Michael Penn
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 April 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 9541
Posted: 15 March 2017 at 1:45pm | IP Logged | 19 post reply

Winston and the secretary are the only working-class characters, if I recall correctly.

I like GHOSTBUSTERS for many its moments rather than the whole. Being a big fan of Bill Murray's work during that era helps!
Back to Top profile | search
 
Shaun Barry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 December 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 4777
Posted: 15 March 2017 at 2:07pm | IP Logged | 20 post reply


Aside from being not funny and not scary, I'll only add two more major concerns I had with the film:

-The villain stinks.  Never once did I feel like the gals were in any real jeopardy, because the villain was either portrayed as a weeny hotel busboy, or as the possessed Chris Hemsworth doofus-himbo.  No one to truly hiss at or root against!

-The female team really needed an equivalent Bill Murray/anti-authority figure, to really stick it to the male-chauvinist types in the film.  All four members & actresses came off as just too nice, meek, and/or cartoonish.  I would have substituted any one of them for a Sarah Silverman, Tina Fey or Kathryn Hahn type of actress or character.  Because of that missing element, I think the film overall just lacks any real comedic bite.





Edited by Shaun Barry on 15 March 2017 at 4:24pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 13406
Posted: 15 March 2017 at 2:25pm | IP Logged | 21 post reply

working-class...

That phrase must mean something very different to you than it does to me!

+++++++++

I was speaking more of tone than anything else.

Yes, the Ghostbusters themselves are well-educated scientists and whatnot, but their attitude and particular brand of "professionalism" come across as more than a little blue-collar: Eating Cheese-It's and drinking beer while interviewing clients, smoking cigarettes while in the field, disrespecting public officials, asking interviewees if they're menstruating, etc, etc.

Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Tim O'Neill
Byrne Robotics Security


Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 9186
Posted: 15 March 2017 at 4:43pm | IP Logged | 22 post reply



"The most unfortunate thing, of course, is that the film turned into a lightning rod for bitter arguments on gender politics. "


******

Why is this unfortunate to you?



Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 13406
Posted: 15 March 2017 at 5:18pm | IP Logged | 23 post reply

Why is this unfortunate to you?
++++++++

Because all of the controversy, aside from bringing out a lot of nastiness, also prevented a lot of people from looking objectively at the film. It tended to be a lot of "they ruined my childhood"-type rantings, or "people who don't like the film are anti-Feminist" rantings. 

In the press, the whole thing became about Feminists versus fanboy man-children who grew up in the 80s, rather than a critical examination of the film's pros and cons as a film. The gender politics tended to overshadow everything else.


Edited by Greg Kirkman on 15 March 2017 at 5:25pm
Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Mario Ribeiro
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 18 June 2016
Location: Brazil
Posts: 97
Posted: 15 March 2017 at 6:28pm | IP Logged | 24 post reply

THE BREAKING POINT.

It's depressing how even a minor 1950 movie is more mature than pretty much everything that Hollywood is giving us for the last ten years.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Shaun Barry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 December 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 4777
Posted: 15 March 2017 at 8:01pm | IP Logged | 25 post reply


WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT (2016)

Pretty much came & went last year, and it seems like a lot of critics were unmoved by it, but I think it's great... very dark, but very funny, and a natural progression (in terms of performance and material) for star Tina Fey.

Much, much better than I was expecting.





Edited by Shaun Barry on 15 March 2017 at 8:02pm
Back to Top profile | search
 

<< Prev Page of 362 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login