Last Movie you Watched?

1517518520522523965

Comments

  • Posts: 19,339
    Oops I didn't know Russell Crowe was Dr J***** ....I think you've just described the whole film,and I haven't seen it yet !!
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,490
    @barryt007, they confirmed that long ago, I don't believe it's a spoiler. One or two other items in the review were, though, could've done without reading those.
  • Posts: 3,333
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Oops I didn't know Russell Crowe was Dr J***** ....I think you've just described the whole film,and I haven't seen it yet !!
    It's not a spoiler when the casting has him down as playing Dr Henry Jekyll, even mentions it in the trailer. On a serious note, the only why you can spoil this movie for yourself is if you've seen the original classics, then watch this travesty afterwards.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @barryt007, they confirmed that long ago, I don't believe it's a spoiler. One or two other items in the review were, though, could've done without reading those.

    Aaah ok...shows how observant I am - not hahaha !
    I wasn't planning on going to see it anyway,too many mixed reviews,mainly negative.
    It will be on SKY by November'ish,so I will catch it then .

  • 001001
    Posts: 1,575
    Speed (1994)
    Action packed fun.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Dennis Hopper is brilliant in that film .
  • Posts: 15,818
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    THE MUMMY (2017)

    the-final-trailer-for-tom-cruises-the-mummy-is-out-652x400-3-1495192901.jpg

    Crossovers. Endless debates have been held over whether they're a good thing or not. FREDDY VS JASON, ALIEN VS PREDATOR, ... And then Marvel came; and then DC; and suddenly multiple movies led to major "getting together" events, giving many fanboys and geeks a kind of pleasure only they understand. I should probably say "we", because I'm one of those fanboys and geeks.

    Few fanboys and geeks--and critics--are aware, however, that crossover events in films aren't a recent thing. They may never have been this successful before, but lest we forget, the Universal Studio's already squeezed out a few of those in the 1940s with films such as FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLFMAN, HOUSE OF DRACULA and HOUSE OF FRANKENSTEIN. Dracula, Frankenstein's monster and the Wolfman pulled a "Freddy versus Jason" nearly six decades earlier. Had Universal been truly ambitious, and audiences truly hungry for more, the Creature from the Black Lagoon, the Invisible Man, the Mummy, the Phantom Of The Opera, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and who knows which other symbol of Gothic horror might have been thrown in the mix too. A Universal Monster's Civil War ages before Iron Man and Captain America would duke it out? A Horror League of Transylvania? Who knows?

    But that proved a few steps too far. Even Hammer Horror, redoing Universal's monster runs in the 50s, 60s and 70s, kept all separate monster series precisely that: separate. With the current success of the multidimensional franchise projects, including everything from reboots, sequels, sidequels, prequels, crossovers, team-ups and whatnot, Universal most likely felt the time was right to try and deliver another Karloff-Lugosi-Chaney type of monster crossovers and bring the crossover back home so to speak.

    But when some of the more recent Dracula and Frankenstein films failed to spark audiences' interests, Universal realised that it wouldn't be a walk in the park. Hence, a clean starting-over was announced with Universal's DARK UNIVERSE brand which, according to Wiki, has a fairly ambitious line-up of movies already worked out until well into the 2020s.

    Where to start? THE MUMMY was chosen, perhaps for the best, since it would have probably been very tempting and therefore also very predictable to kick things off with Dracula or at the very least Frankenstein. But, again, given the lack of success of such films as DRACULA UNTOLD and the 2015 FRANKENSTEIN, an unexpected opener was probably a bolder yet also wiser move.

    But wait. Didn't Stephen Sommers do some Mummy films back in the 1990s and early 2000s? Yes he did, and with modest success too. I distinctly remember being very impressed with THE MUMMY RETURNS myself (and not so much with what came afterwards.) But those films were theme park rides, amusing and safe Sunday afternoon adventure flicks which, by all accounts, were as much in debt to the Indiana Jones films as they were to the Karloff or Cushing/Lee films of old.

    This new Mummy film is different, though at first I was unsure. It took me a few minutes to figure out if the film was going to turn left or right so to speak. Cruise at first felt like he was channelling Brendan Frasier and Sofia Boutella had some Patricia Velasguez going on. Then, however, the film turned dark fast and even more than that, started including little things from other iconic horror sources too (and of course I won't spoil those so don't ask.) Suddenly, Boutella became her own thing and in fact one of the hottest scary chicks ever seen on film. Marvellous CGI paves the way for a few awesome moments, but didn't overstay its welcome in the climax. Though never truly frightening, THE MUMMY remained a lot darker than Sommer's films and much more visually impressive too.

    Now, understand that I'm a fanboy; what that means is, I can easily overlook flaws in favour of the grander crossover event, which I desperately want to happen no matter what. I have little trouble making myself blind to some obvious errors. For example, THE MUMMY sometimes confusingly mixes predictable jokes with dark elements, achieving success in neither of these departments. I'm also still not sure if Cruise tried to be Frasier's character from Sommer's films or Ethan Hunt or both. The final scene, after the climax, made me cringe even. Anyone who's seen INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUISADE will understand why. On a bad day, I might actually accuse the film of not being quite as original as it wants to be.

    That said, THE MUMMY is very entertaining and I am intrigued to see what might happen next. Russell Crowe--and please don't look up his character's name if you don't want to be spoiled--feels like the Nick Fury of this film; I'm sure he'll be back for the sequels. And I'd love that too. I'd love for both Crowe to return and sequels to be made. I'm particularly interested in seeing what sort of Dracula they can give us in this DARK UNIVERSE.

    Overall, I'm a fan of this film, but please remember, I'm also a fanboy. And a geek. I'm therefore an apologist, and maybe far more forgiving than THE MUMMY deserves. So I'll be interested in hearing your comments. :)

    Very interesting post! I'm a huge fan of the Universal Horrors of the '30's and '40's along with the Hammers so I'm a bit unsure of how I feel about this new Dark Universe.
    2004's Van Helsing may have incorporated the classic characters, but strangely, The Monster Squad, I actually felt was more true in spirit and look to those films.

    Just based on the clips, I do think the new Mummy has a classic look. With the gray bandages, she looks pretty cool. I hope whatever they do with Bride of Frankenstein, the Frankenstein Monster, the Wolf Man, etc doesn't deviate too far from Jack Pierce's iconic images. Some tweaking would be fine though. Pierce modified the make ups from film to film.
    I really hope they don't make the Frankenstein Monster a comical green. It's a little known fact there was very little green in Pierce's greasepaint: mostly gray with blue/green highlights for black and white film. Now I'm being a real fanboy. Still I'm as passionate about these characters as I am about Bond.




  • Posts: 615
    The Face of Fu Manchu (1965), starring Christopher Lee, Nigel Green, Karin Dor and Tsai Chin.

    "The world shall hear from me again..."
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    cooperman2 wrote: »
    I'm afraid any film that features the slaughter of animals for entertainment is beyond despicable and for that reason i will never watch Apocalypse Now again. Simply saying Coppola is some kind of film making genius is no excuse. A self indulgent movie made by a bunch of people high on drugs.

    The purpose of the scene wasn't for entertainment, but to prove a point of symbolic sacrifice. I hope you also promise never to eat burgers or any form of meat again, knowing that the animal that gave you the opportunity was killed and exploited for cash money by a company who served it up to be shoved down your throat.

    I also hope you'll forever boycott Thunderball for the sharks that got hurt in the shooting and You Only Live Twice and Diamonds Are Forever for the trauma caused to the little kitties.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    cooperman2 wrote: »
    I'm afraid any film that features the slaughter of animals for entertainment is beyond despicable and for that reason i will never watch Apocalypse Now again. Simply saying Coppola is some kind of film making genius is no excuse. A self indulgent movie made by a bunch of people high on drugs.

    The purpose of the scene wasn't for entertainment, but to prove a point of symbolic sacrifice. I hope you also promise never to eat burgers or any form of meat again, knowing that the animal that gave you the opportunity was killed and exploited for cash money by a company who served it up to be shoved down your throat.

    I read the animal was going to be slaughtered anyway by the locals- the company just set up to film it. Still, I can't watch it again because of the scene... or Southern Comfort because of the pig... reality takes me out of fictional cinematic narrative. Just like real graphic sex in a mainstream movie. It becomes about the documentation...
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    chrisisall wrote: »
    cooperman2 wrote: »
    I'm afraid any film that features the slaughter of animals for entertainment is beyond despicable and for that reason i will never watch Apocalypse Now again. Simply saying Coppola is some kind of film making genius is no excuse. A self indulgent movie made by a bunch of people high on drugs.

    The purpose of the scene wasn't for entertainment, but to prove a point of symbolic sacrifice. I hope you also promise never to eat burgers or any form of meat again, knowing that the animal that gave you the opportunity was killed and exploited for cash money by a company who served it up to be shoved down your throat.

    I read the animal was going to be slaughtered anyway by the locals- the company just set up to film it. Still, I can't watch it again because of the scene... or Southern Comfort because of the pig... reality takes me out of fictional cinematic narrative. Just like real graphic sex in a mainstream movie. It becomes about the documentation...

    I don't get the puritan-like outrage over stuff like this, to be frank. The film is depicting a reality, and not in a way that is for the sake of itself, and to shock audiences. Coppola was playing with theme and symbolism, and knew what he was doing; it's never in his nature to do something just to do it. It's not the job of the film to portray a fictional world, but instead a slightly surreal take on our own reality. It's supposed to make you uncomfortable, as it actually happens all the time in "our world."

    Slaughter is a cornerstone of industry, and every time you have pork or meat, you support the practice of just what you see in the movies that you can't stand to watch. Perhaps it's easy to block out how you got that burger in front of you as you eat it in a diner, but it doesn't change the fact that an animal in full health and peak of life was killed to feed your face. I just see some hypocrisy there from some, unless they're playing the vegetarian card to try and save face.

    The sex thing doesn't bother me either, for similar reasons. I can't stand the backlash to the expression of sexuality in film, when violence is given free reign. Any sexual acts depicted are acts that, like the slaughter of animals, are a reality and are heavily practiced by various cultures. If we can take in images of people being blown away in a hail of bullets or getting hacked to pieces (which audiences of the day seem to love), then I think it's fair game to show simulations of oral sex and other parts of the sexual experience along with it. Some many complain about film approaching porn too closely, but you could say the same for movies' depiction of violence approaching too closely to snuff films, or footage of war where people are being killed in front of us. There comes a point where the reality of something depicted feels too real, and that upsets some people. But you can't allow it one way and not the other, where violence is glorious and sex is too much.
  • Posts: 12,271
    It is silly to me how often times violence gets a pass compared to sex in films. Does not really make sense to me.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    FoxRox wrote: »
    It is silly to me how often times violence gets a pass compared to sex in films. Does not really make sense to me.

    Like the outrage over the slight sight of Eva Green's beautiful breasts on a Sin City poster, when nobody made any mention of the intensely graphic murders that happen throughout the film? ;)
  • Posts: 12,271
    It just doesn't make sense. On another note it even reminds me of Kurtz's quote near the end of Apocalypse Now when he remarks cursing is seen as obscene while the violence isn't.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @FoxRox, absolutely. The line is one of my favorites in all of cinema:

    "We train young men to drop fire on people, but their commanders won't allow them to write "f@#$" on their airplanes because it's obscene!"

    In a way the film is commenting on the kind of people who justify the violence imposed on humans but draw the line at animal murder. Are the soldiers of war and animals of Vietnam not the same when it comes to their use as tools exploited by others for outside gain? If anything the death and barbarism that meets humans is even worse, as we are conscious beings that can sense death coming, and because he have a consciousness and free will that is overwritten by another, it's all the more upsetting and cruel. When cows get walked to slaughter, they're oblivious, but humans know exactly when their end is near. Not excusing either acts, just saying that we should be just as upset about human murder as animal death.

    Hence my comments about hypocrisy.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691

    Slaughter is a cornerstone of industry, and every time you have pork or meat, you support the practice of just what you see in the movies that you can't stand to watch. Perhaps it's easy to block out how you got that burger in front of you as you eat it in a diner, but it doesn't change the fact that an animal in full health and peak of life was killed to feed your face.

    As the girl in Jurassic Park said, I happen to be a vegetarian... ;)
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    chrisisall wrote: »

    Slaughter is a cornerstone of industry, and every time you have pork or meat, you support the practice of just what you see in the movies that you can't stand to watch. Perhaps it's easy to block out how you got that burger in front of you as you eat it in a diner, but it doesn't change the fact that an animal in full health and peak of life was killed to feed your face.

    As the girl in Jurassic Park said, I happen to be a vegetarian... ;)

    You would have to be, to get away with the argument you're making. ;)
  • Posts: 12,271
    I never could be. I love meat too much - chicken especially.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited June 2017 Posts: 17,691
    chrisisall wrote: »

    Slaughter is a cornerstone of industry, and every time you have pork or meat, you support the practice of just what you see in the movies that you can't stand to watch. Perhaps it's easy to block out how you got that burger in front of you as you eat it in a diner, but it doesn't change the fact that an animal in full health and peak of life was killed to feed your face.

    As the girl in Jurassic Park said, I happen to be a vegetarian... ;)

    You would have to be, to get away with the argument you're making. ;)

    I can't WAIT until cloned meat... no full animal, just cells grown. And it will be crazy profitable so it WILL replace animal slaughter. Then I might have a hamburger again (it's been almost exactly 40 years since my last one).
  • Lancaster007Lancaster007 Shrublands Health Clinic, England
    Posts: 1,874
    Wonder Woman - local cinema. Really enjoyed this super hero film. A nice extended origin story before 'the world of man' intervenes. Gal Gadot is absolutely gorgeous, beautiful eyes and thighs, and totally badass, but also with humanity. Very loud (I must be getting old!), and some great action set pieces, for me the 'trenches' was better than the finale, but even so a great film with a good cast and I'll be happily watching it again on blu-ray in the near future.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    A Cure For Wellness

    Quite enjoyed this. It's way too long and isn't as clever as it thinks it is. But acting is all top notch, the sets and photography incredible and it has some very memorable sequences.

    By the end it turns into something like a big budget Hammer horror film which is no bad thing!

    Brutal dentist scene not for the squeamish!
  • Posts: 7,653
    The hound of Baskerville 1959 - With Peter Cushing playing Sherlock Holmes in this Hammer presentation of the famous book, it also was the first SH movie in colour. A really nice gothic presentation that altered the ending of the book somewhat but did so in an excellent way. This was also one of the earlier parts played by one Christopher Lee as a leading man. An excellent movie with a great cast and placed well inside the original era it was written.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    Wonder Woman - local cinema. Really enjoyed this super hero film. A nice extended origin story before 'the world of man' intervenes. Gal Gadot is absolutely gorgeous, beautiful eyes and thighs, and totally badass, but also with humanity. Very loud (I must be getting old!), and some great action set pieces, for me the 'trenches' was better than the finale, but even so a great film with a good cast and I'll be happily watching it again on blu-ray in the near future.

    Good review. I'll see it one more time in the theatre, myself.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited June 2017 Posts: 23,561
    JERSEY GIRL

    jersey-girl-jersey-girl-25371450-700-465.jpg

    Oh man, I can't believe this film was a BO bomb. I love it so much! Raquel Castro is cute like you wouldn't believe and Affleck is pretty good too. There's tears and there's laughter and, granted, also a few scenes during which Affleck and Liv Tyler discuss certain aspects of the nocturnal life of grown-ups, which is pretty uncommon in a film that is mostly going after that bitter-sweet rom-com feeling. But hey, it's vintage Smith, and I love every second of it. A heart-warming film. Full of clichés, but like ice cream with extra syrup and a hot chilli-pepper buried inside, JERSEY GIRL hits all my soft spots. I love Kevin Smith for delivering this movie, even if the rest of the world doesn't.

    CLERKS II

    c2b.jpg

    Another great little film from Smith. Seriously, while CLERKS was a good way to start a career, CLERKS II has better jokes and better overall acting to offer. It's good to be back with Randal and Dante, Jay and Silent Bob, and with newcomers Elias, Emma and Becky. As usual, you need to be in the Kev Smith boat in order to enjoy even five minutes of this film but I am and I do, yes sir!

    ZACK AND MIRI MAKE A PORNO

    31zach.xlarge1.jpg

    Look, critics can go to hell. This film is comedy gold. Sure, you can't be too prudish or 'christian' about the whole thing; Kevin Smith uses up the entire glossary of the kamasutra of gonzo porn. In that sense, it takes some nerve to watch this film; this thing is unsafe for work. Unsafe, unclean, inappropriate for work, people! But if you dig Seth Rogen, Justin Long, Elizabeth Banks, perhaps even real-life pornstars Tracy Lords and Katie Morgan, you might have a good time with this naughty and funny little film. I don't care if critics and audiences alike are easily shocked. Yes, this film delivers it all. So? I'm laughing. Funny, if incredibly boundless, film, but definitely not suited for the easily offended.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,043
    cooperman2 wrote: »
    I'm afraid any film that features the slaughter of animals for entertainment is beyond despicable and for that reason i will never watch Apocalypse Now again.
    So much for MOONRAKER.
  • Posts: 15,818
    SaintMark wrote: »
    The hound of Baskerville 1959 - With Peter Cushing playing Sherlock Holmes in this Hammer presentation of the famous book, it also was the first SH movie in colour. A really nice gothic presentation that altered the ending of the book somewhat but did so in an excellent way. This was also one of the earlier parts played by one Christopher Lee as a leading man. An excellent movie with a great cast and placed well inside the original era it was written.

    One of my favorite Sherlock Holmes films. I'm a bit biased, though as I love Hammer films, Cushing and Lee.
  • ToTheRight wrote: »
    SaintMark wrote: »
    The hound of Baskerville 1959 - With Peter Cushing playing Sherlock Holmes in this Hammer presentation of the famous book, it also was the first SH movie in colour. A really nice gothic presentation that altered the ending of the book somewhat but did so in an excellent way. This was also one of the earlier parts played by one Christopher Lee as a leading man. An excellent movie with a great cast and placed well inside the original era it was written.

    One of my favorite Sherlock Holmes films. I'm a bit biased, though as I love Hammer films, Cushing and Lee.

    It's a good one. All of those Cushing/Lee Hammer flicks are great. I watched The Curse of Frankenstein not too long ago, and more recently The Mummy for obvious reasons.
  • Posts: 12,271
    The Godfather Part II (1974). Followed up my theater trip to the first one with the incredible sequel. I personally prefer the first just slightly, but both are absolutely two of my favorite films ever.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    FoxRox wrote: »
    The Godfather Part II (1974). Followed up my theater trip to the first one with the incredible sequel. I personally prefer the first just slightly, but both are absolutely two of my favorite films ever.

    They make such a good 7 hour film together
  • Posts: 15,818
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    SaintMark wrote: »
    The hound of Baskerville 1959 - With Peter Cushing playing Sherlock Holmes in this Hammer presentation of the famous book, it also was the first SH movie in colour. A really nice gothic presentation that altered the ending of the book somewhat but did so in an excellent way. This was also one of the earlier parts played by one Christopher Lee as a leading man. An excellent movie with a great cast and placed well inside the original era it was written.

    One of my favorite Sherlock Holmes films. I'm a bit biased, though as I love Hammer films, Cushing and Lee.

    It's a good one. All of those Cushing/Lee Hammer flicks are great. I watched The Curse of Frankenstein not too long ago, and more recently The Mummy for obvious reasons.

    I love The Curse of Frankenstein and Horror of Dracula. The Hammer version of The Mummy is my favorite. George (Mr Somerset, Mr Somerset) Pastell is great. I hope to see the new version of The Mummy.
Sign In or Register to comment.