Controversial opinions about other movies

1404143454658

Comments

  • Posts: 14,831
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I don't think AVATAR sucked but I find it neither original nor belonging anywhere but in a theme park. The story is thin and more predictable than how my intestines will respond to large quantities of spicy food. The film is visually in-cre-di-ble, but so is a light show at Disney World.

    Regarding women, yes, agreed, Cameron knows how to write for them and direct them.

    I think that's the fairest and most accurate assessment of the movie.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,957
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Another controversial opinion: take away the music of Ennio Morricone and The Untouchable is little more than a well cast mediocre movie.

    That really is rubbish I'm afraid! :)
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,034
    First he comes for Cameron, now he comes for De Palma! If you have anything negative to say about Michael Mann, you might just break my heart @Ludovico ;)
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,473
    peter wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    @Creasy47 ... The older I get, the more T1 stands out. Such a simple concept executed beautifuly... Pretty low budget but Cameron squeezed every single penny to make a taut (horror)thriller. It never fails to make me anxious...

    I'll always love T2 for being unapologetically kick ass.

    Absolutely; it's so simple yet so effective. I wouldn't ever want it remade in full but I wish any new sequels or remakes in the series would tackle this approach, a sort of "less is more" attitude instead of full-blown CGI and spectacle all the time.

    @Creasy47 … I’m wondering if Terminator was a concept that lightning in a bottle happened not once, but twice; and now it can no longer strike at all?

    The first film is so beautifully executed. It’s a nightmare of a story that’s as relentless as the robot-assassin; T2 went in a completely different direction; big and wild and unapologetic; a feast for the eyes.

    But without Cameron, is it possible to continue this story? Is it worthy to expand as a film series? I’m not so sure…. The first two are so remarkable, anyone taking on the sequels not named Cameron, was always going to have an uphill battle. But the sequels just failed to capture my attention. Is this a story worth “plundering “?

    It certainly seems that way anymore, at least without Cameron behind the camera. I don't think I've thoroughly enjoyed any installment post-Judgment Day.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,957
    Terminator is a brilliant one-film idea (what if a robot came from the future to kill the mother of its enemy), and to push it to a second film and make it so good was a masterstroke; but there's just nothing left in the concept to squeeze out now.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited May 2022 Posts: 8,034
    A lot if it is simply to do with advances in technology and society as whole as well. Time-travel is of course an enduring concept but the almost primal way Cameron presented the machines in the first two films is increasingly difficult to capture as we become more advanced as a society. Everything is slick now. The sequels became transfixed on giving us more advanced and complicated antagonists, often to their detriment.Genisys, in fairness, tried to tap into the whole social media thing which was neat enough on paper (it's just the execution which was poor).

    Simply put, the first two films were ironically very of their time.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 2022 Posts: 14,957
    Funnily enough, the Terminator might have a lot to answer for as it rather trivialises what a lot of people actually are worried about with AI: that it will someday, maybe not that far off, become more intelligent than us and we can't predict what conclusions it will reach. It sounds silly because of the films, but if you look into General AI and superintelligence, it's a genuine concern.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,548
    First he comes for Cameron, now he comes for De Palma! If you have anything negative to say about Michael Mann, you might just break my heart @Ludovico ;)

    And mine. Mann is my guy.
  • Posts: 6,816
    Ludovico wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    AVATAR is my least favorite of Cameron’s, but the IMAX 3D presentation was one of the most immersive theatrical experiences I ever had and I think that alone made it worthy of a nomination. I don’t think any film has come close to that since, especially in terms of 3D presentation. That’s why it was popular. I don’t think anyone except maybe Cameron himself ever claimed it’s one of the best stories ever told in cinema. Cinema is more than just telling story, it’s also about audiovisual factor. That’s why David Lynch’s films are so impressive.

    Yes I think the question of whether Cameron is overrated comes down to what you think he's rated for. As a showman who gives the audience what they want and a huge bang for their buck, I can't see how he's overrated at all.

    Cameron is very good at what he does, but I still don't think Titanic and Avatar deserved the praise they received at the time, except for technical achievements.

    Another controversial opinion: take away the music of Ennio Morricone and The Untouchable is little more than a well cast mediocre movie.
    And here's a last one: while Kevin Costner is a perfect cast for average, somewhat bland good guys and everymen, he's a terrible casting choice for larger than life heroes. He works as Eliot Ness, albeit he's very different from the historical one, because he plays him as a conscientious civil servant. I will always say that he was catastrophic as an unheroic and un English Robin Hood.

    The Untouchables hasnt aged well, but I recommend seeing 'Open Range' a really excellent western, where Costber is paired with Robert Duvall, and Kevin directs superbly!
  • slide_99slide_99 USA
    Posts: 652
    I prefer Tom Cruise as a dramatic actor over an action star and I wish he'd go back to more serious and challenging roles.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,113
    slide_99 wrote: »
    I prefer Tom Cruise as a dramatic actor over an action star and I wish he'd go back to more serious and challenging roles.

    I agree, same with Robert Downey Jr.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    slide_99 wrote: »
    I prefer Tom Cruise as a dramatic actor over an action star and I wish he'd go back to more serious and challenging roles.

    For most of his career that’s what he was originally known for. His films from the 80s and 90s are far more interesting and varied than when he settled into becoming an action star in the 2000s. But also understandable because he hasn’t had a non-action film as a hit for a very long time too. His brief stint as head of United Artists making dramatic movies like LIONS FOR LAMBS and VALKYRIE didn’t work out so well.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited May 2022 Posts: 8,034
    mtm wrote: »
    Funnily enough, the Terminator might have a lot to answer for as it rather trivialises what a lot of people actually are worried about with AI: that it will someday, maybe not that far off, become more intelligent than us and we can't predict what conclusions it will reach. It sounds silly because of the films, but if you look into General AI and superintelligence, it's a genuine concern.

    Oh that's fair enough; I'm thinking more of its depiction in motion picture terms. I should have been more clear on that, admittedly.
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    First he comes for Cameron, now he comes for De Palma! If you have anything negative to say about Michael Mann, you might just break my heart @Ludovico ;)

    And mine. Mann is my guy.

    I always knew you had good taste, @DarthDimi
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,957
    slide_99 wrote: »
    I prefer Tom Cruise as a dramatic actor over an action star and I wish he'd go back to more serious and challenging roles.

    For most of his career that’s what he was originally known for. His films from the 80s and 90s are far more interesting and varied than when he settled into becoming an action star in the 2000s. But also understandable because he hasn’t had a non-action film as a hit for a very long time too. His brief stint as head of United Artists making dramatic movies like LIONS FOR LAMBS and VALKYRIE didn’t work out so well.

    I've never made it through Valkyrie, and I've tried a few times. It should be right up my street, and it's not actually bad; but it just never holds my attention.
  • Posts: 14,831
    First he comes for Cameron, now he comes for De Palma! If you have anything negative to say about Michael Mann, you might just break my heart @Ludovico ;)

    I love a lot of de Palma, I never get bored of Carlito's Way for instance. And I even like The Untouchable. Bit I'd like it far less without Morricone.
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Another controversial opinion: take away the music of Ennio Morricone and The Untouchable is little more than a well cast mediocre movie.

    That really is rubbish I'm afraid! :)

    Nah, Morricone truly lifts the film.
    slide_99 wrote: »
    I prefer Tom Cruise as a dramatic actor over an action star and I wish he'd go back to more serious and challenging roles.

    Me too, but from what I understand Eyes Wide Shut (which I love) put him off the more challenging roles. I'd still say it was his greatest role (here's another controversial opinion). I guess it's easier playing heroes than vulnerable, somewhat pathetic men who are haunted with fears and desires and torn between temerity and cowardice.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 2022 Posts: 14,957
    Ludovico wrote: »
    First he comes for Cameron, now he comes for De Palma! If you have anything negative to say about Michael Mann, you might just break my heart @Ludovico ;)

    I love a lot of de Palma, I never get bored of Carlito's Way for instance. And I even like The Untouchable. Bit I'd like it far less without Morricone.
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Another controversial opinion: take away the music of Ennio Morricone and The Untouchable is little more than a well cast mediocre movie.

    That really is rubbish I'm afraid! :)

    Nah, Morricone truly lifts the film.

    He does, as does every great score, but that doesn't make the film nothing without him. It's a tremendously enjoyable film.

  • Posts: 14,831
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    First he comes for Cameron, now he comes for De Palma! If you have anything negative to say about Michael Mann, you might just break my heart @Ludovico ;)

    I love a lot of de Palma, I never get bored of Carlito's Way for instance. And I even like The Untouchable. Bit I'd like it far less without Morricone.
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Another controversial opinion: take away the music of Ennio Morricone and The Untouchable is little more than a well cast mediocre movie.

    That really is rubbish I'm afraid! :)

    Nah, Morricone truly lifts the film.

    He does, as does every great score, but that doesn't make the film nothing without him. It's a tremendously enjoyable film.

    It is enjoyable, but overall I don't think it's really outstanding, as a gangster flick or a pseudo historical one. It has a great score and a great casting.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 2022 Posts: 14,957
    Ludovico wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    First he comes for Cameron, now he comes for De Palma! If you have anything negative to say about Michael Mann, you might just break my heart @Ludovico ;)

    I love a lot of de Palma, I never get bored of Carlito's Way for instance. And I even like The Untouchable. Bit I'd like it far less without Morricone.
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Another controversial opinion: take away the music of Ennio Morricone and The Untouchable is little more than a well cast mediocre movie.

    That really is rubbish I'm afraid! :)

    Nah, Morricone truly lifts the film.

    He does, as does every great score, but that doesn't make the film nothing without him. It's a tremendously enjoyable film.

    It is enjoyable, but overall I don't think it's really outstanding, as a gangster flick or a pseudo historical one.

    No, you don't seem to think anything is outstanding :) It is a very good film, brilliantly directed, with several standout set pieces and a script full of fantastic, memorable and endlessly quotable Mamet dialogue.

    It has a wonderful score, but that's just part of the weird overabundance of talent it has, besides Oscar winning acting, superb direction, fantastic script, and even costumes by Armani! :)
  • Posts: 14,831
    There's a lot of films I find outstanding, crime films especially: the first two Godfathers, Chinatown, The French Connection, Carlito's Way, L.A. Confidential, Fargo, etc. It's a genre I love.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited May 2022 Posts: 8,025
    My understanding is that Tom Cruise felt snubbed over not securing a nomination for COLLATERAL, whereas Jamie Foxx got a nom for that film AND won leading actor for RAY in the same year.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,957
    Interesting. They're both very good in it.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,548
    Agreed. Cruise was pretty good in Collateral. I also liked his look in the film, what with the grey hair and all. And he played a baddie, which is rare for him. Then again, who wouldn't want to play the criminal in a Michael Mann film? De Niro's role in HEAT may be my very favourite of his.
  • Posts: 15,818
    Controversial opinion:

    I think Tom Cruise is great. One of my favorite actors in this day and age.
    A modern legend who never fails to command the screen.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,548
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Controversial opinion:

    I think Tom Cruise is great. One of my favorite actors in this day and age.
    A modern legend who never fails to command the screen.

    That's what I've been saying these past weeks. The man is crazy, but he is a modern "legend" in his own right. Doesn't mean he's the greatest thespian we have, but he certainly commands the screen almost always.
  • Posts: 15,818
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Controversial opinion:

    I think Tom Cruise is great. One of my favorite actors in this day and age.
    A modern legend who never fails to command the screen.

    That's what I've been saying these past weeks. The man is crazy, but he is a modern "legend" in his own right. Doesn't mean he's the greatest thespian we have, but he certainly commands the screen almost always.

    I didn't really become a fan for quite some time. When I saw films like EYES WIDE SHUT and MAGNOLIA I began to appreciate his talent.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,034
    My understanding is that Tom Cruise felt snubbed over not securing a nomination for COLLATERAL, whereas Jamie Foxx got a nom for that film AND won leading actor for RAY in the same year.

    And Cruise would be right, I feel. I love Collateral, it's one of my favourite films - but anytime I watch Foxx in it I can't help thinking how much better it would have been with a Denzel in the part. I actually feel that way about a lot of his performances.

    That being said, he definitely deserved the win for Ray. Still his best work.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,957
    My understanding is that Tom Cruise felt snubbed over not securing a nomination for COLLATERAL, whereas Jamie Foxx got a nom for that film AND won leading actor for RAY in the same year.

    And Cruise would be right, I feel. I love Collateral, it's one of my favourite films - but anytime I watch Foxx in it I can't help thinking how much better it would have been with a Denzel in the part. I actually feel that way about a lot of his performances.

    Aargh. That would have been so much better. I find Foxx a bit mannered sometimes; I can feel him acting. Cruise has a real power in that film, he's a machine.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,473
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Agreed. Cruise was pretty good in Collateral. I also liked his look in the film, what with the grey hair and all. And he played a baddie, which is rare for him. Then again, who wouldn't want to play the criminal in a Michael Mann film? De Niro's role in HEAT may be my very favourite of his.

    De Niro is always commanding on screen but he's especially fiery and terrifying in that one. The scene where he busts into the motel room to confront Charlene? Scary stuff.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,034
    mtm wrote: »
    My understanding is that Tom Cruise felt snubbed over not securing a nomination for COLLATERAL, whereas Jamie Foxx got a nom for that film AND won leading actor for RAY in the same year.

    And Cruise would be right, I feel. I love Collateral, it's one of my favourite films - but anytime I watch Foxx in it I can't help thinking how much better it would have been with a Denzel in the part. I actually feel that way about a lot of his performances.

    Aargh. That would have been so much better. I find Foxx a bit mannered sometimes; I can feel him acting. Cruise has a real power in that film, he's a machine.

    One of Cruise's underrated strengths is on display numerous times throughout Collateral: his ability to fly through difficult and snappy dialogue and make it seem incredibly natural. The first instance of it I can think of is obviously the final courtroom scene in A Few Good Men (made all the more impressive by who he was performing opposite), but the Rwanda conversation with Foxx in Mann's film is right up there amongst his best work. It's showreel stuff.

    The "I killed my father. Actually no, I'm just kidding" moment later in the film always cracks me up, too.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,691
    What I love about Tom is he never stops acting, never forgets his character. In a fight scene, he generally looks like a person in a fight: like he'd rather not be fighting, and and like he hopes he doesn't get his ass kicked. It's great.
Sign In or Register to comment.