Spoilers What Movie Are You Watching?

[S.B.G]

Stumbled into The Lady from Shanghai (1948) this evening. Excellent.

and the black and white cinematography was as gorgeous as Ms. Hayworth.

One of my favorites right there.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Stumbled into The Lady from Shanghai (1948) this evening. Excellent.

and the black and white cinematography was as gorgeous as Ms. Hayworth.
View attachment 631616

One of my favorites right there.

Agreed, a genuine classic, and a wonderful movie.

 

[Huntn]

Dirty Harry (1971)- Iconic.
Harry Callahan: Uh uh. I know what you're thinking. "Did he fire six shots or only five?" Well to tell you the truth in all this excitement I kinda lost track myself. But being this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and would blow your head clean off, you've gotta ask yourself one question: "Do I feel lucky?" Well, do ya, punk?

Actor Andrew Robinson, forever branded as a heavy...(just my impression)

 

[kazmac]

Dirty Harry (1971)- Iconic.
Harry Callahan: Uh uh. I know what you're thinking. "Did he fire six shots or only five?" Well to tell you the truth in all this excitement I kinda lost track myself. But being this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and would blow your head clean off, you've gotta ask yourself one question: "Do I feel lucky?" Well, do ya, punk?

Actor Andrew Robinson, forever branded as a heavy...(just my impression)

Dammit, I love Clint's 60s and 70s films. As far as Robinson, I don't know. The only two films I've seen him in is this and the first Hellraiser.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Dammit, I love Clint's 60s and 70s films. As far as Robinson, I don't know. The only two films I've seen him in is this and the first Hellraiser.

Well, Dirty Harry is a sort of cliché, - and, I think that there may well be an element of male wish fulfilment fantasy in it - but, dammit, there is a reason a cliché becomes a cliché; it is still a thoroughly enjoyable and extremely taut thriller and an exceptionally well made movie.

And yes; I admit it - Clint was brilliant in it.

 

[Huntn]

Well, Dirty Harry is a sort of cliché, - and, I think that there may well be an element of male wish fulfilment in it - but, dammit, there is a reason a cliché become a cliché; it is still a throughly enjoyable and extremely taut thriller and an exceptionally well made movie.

And yes; I admit it - Clint was brilliant in it.

While I can't say I've seen every 1960 era cop film, I'd counter in a friendly way that if he was cliche, he was the first that the cliche was built on. Before him, there was Bullitt (1968), but that character, while he could be abrasive to superiors was basically a rule follower. DH was a pragmatist, more than willing to save a victim's life by breaking the rules of law enforcement and civil rights.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

While I can't say I've seen every 1960 era cop film, I'd counter in a friendly way that if he was cliche, he was the first that the cliche was built on. Before him, there was Bullitt (1968), but that character, while he could be abrasive to superiors was basically a rule follower. DH was a pragmatist, more than willing to save a victim's life by breaking the rules of law enforcement and civil rights.

That is why I said that there is a reason a cliché becomes a cliché; Dirty Harry did set the template.

 

[Tech198]

U stole my post Good movie though.

The Mummy (1999)
The Mummy Returns (2001)

IMDB should start taking out shares, they'd make a fortune from me.

 

[kazmac]

While I can't say I've seen every 1960 era cop film, I'd counter in a friendly way that if he was cliche, he was the first that the cliche was built on. Before him, there was Bullitt (1968), but that character, while he could be abrasive to superiors was basically a rule follower. DH was a pragmatist, more than willing to save a victim's life by breaking the rules of law enforcement and civil rights.

If you ever take a peek at the ultra violent 1970s Italian police films that took over once spaghetti westerns faded out, some were trying to up DH. In action and violence, yes. But in that character, no. Hmm, I think I just thought of a thesis for a film class (Clint Eastwood inspires Italian westerns and vigilante-ish cop films. )

Well, Dirty Harry is a sort of cliché, - and, I think that there may well be an element of male wish fulfilment fantasy in it - but, dammit, there is a reason a cliché becomes a cliché; it is still a thoroughly enjoyable and extremely taut thriller and an exceptionally well made movie.

And yes; I admit it - Clint was brilliant in it.

Agree across the board. Good point about the possible element of male wish fulfillment fantasy too. It's a great movie that remains so decades later. And not just for that awesome monologue. It brings up some very interesting views about law and disorder.

I like seeing so many of these 1970s films again (or for the first time) and realizing 1) They still hold up and 2) They live up to the praise they get. Good is good. And sometimes, perhaps, a little dirty.

 

[bradl]

I am really looking forward to this movie coming out:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4669986/

The reviews for this (heard about it this morning on NPR, and just read the others) from the screening at Cannes are saying that this movie is phenomenal.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/17/m...nterracial-couple-sets-cannes-abuzz.html?_r=0

The Film ‘Loving,’ About a History-Making Interracial Couple, Sets Cannes Abuzz
By RACHEL DONADIOMAY 16, 2016

CANNES, France — In “Loving,” which was unveiled here on Monday to raves, the director Jeff Nichols tells the story of Richard and Mildred Loving, the interracial couple whose 1958 marriage broke Virginia’s anti-miscegenation law and eventually led to the landmark Supreme Court ruling that deemed marriage a human right.

“I truly believe this is one of the most pure love stories in American history,” Mr. Nichols said at a news conference here on Monday about the white Southern construction worker, played by the Australian actor Joel Edgerton, and his African-American wife, played by the Ethiopian-Irish actress Ruth Negga.

The Lovings wed in Washington, and returned to their native Virginia, only to be arrested. Their prison sentences were suspended on the condition that they leave the state for 25 years, a ruling they eventually defied. As the civil rights movement gained momentum, the A.C.L.U. took on their case, and in 1967 the Supreme Court ruled in their favor in Loving v. Virginia.

“The court case is fascinating; how these lawyers got this case to the Supreme Court could make a movie in and of itself,” said Mr. Nichols, who also wrote the screenplay. “I didn’t want to make that movie,” he added. “I wanted to make a movie about two people in love.”

The film has received strong reviews, with critics noting Mr. Nichols’s understated direction and strong performances by Mr. Edgerton and Ms. Negga. At the news conference, Ms. Negga was asked if she was ready to win an Academy Award.

She said that “Loving” was “the most important film I’ve ever made and one of the most important films in history, I think.” Ms. Negga, who appeared in “The Samaritan” (2012) with Samuel L. Jackson, was also in “12 Years a Slave,” but didn’t make the film’s final cut. “That was one of the most difficult phone calls I received,” she said. “But things balance out.”

“Loving” takes an intimate, oblique approach, focusing on the couple more than the larger currents of history. “There are certain moments that a lesser screenwriter or someone really drawn into the patina of Hollywood might have rearranged the truth in order to make it more Hollywood,” Mr. Edgerton said. “Let’s have them high-fiving their children in the courtroom and having a party to celebrate,” he added.

“Loving” is the second film by the director to make its debut at the Cannes Film Festival, after “Mud” (unveiled in 2012). His “Midnight Special” is now in theaters.

In making “Loving,” the director and the actors drew heavily on the documentary “The Loving Story,” which uses real footage of the couple. Mr. Nichols came to the project after his agent told him that there was interest in making a feature based on the documentary, which HBO broadcast in 2012. (There was also a 1996 television drama, “Mr. and Mrs. Loving,” starring Timothy Hutton and Lela Rochon.)

“I looked at the trailer, the trailer’s great, the trailer made me cry,” Mr. Nichols said. “I sent it to my wife. She sent me an email back and she said, ‘I really love you, but if you don’t make this movie I’m going to divorce you.’”

BL.

 

[Savor]

Going to watch X-Men: Apocalypse probably tomorrow. I didn't know it opened here yesterday. I doubt it will surpass the enjoyment I got out of Captain America: Civil War though.

I think Cap 3 is the best and might be my favorite MCU ever surpassing The Avengers and maybe Winter Soldier. The only reason why I don't love it is because how Iron Man and Spider-Man lost to Captain America. I know it is Cap's film and all, but I knew heading into it Iron Man will likely lose and he did by a simple slip from Bucky. The premise is also a bit shallow and not entirely clear with their stance on it. I just love the interactions with Tony and Peter, which is why it is #1 to me because I love those heroes too much even with their flaws. And Black Panther is very cool.

I doubt Apocalypse will surpass Days of Future Past and maybe not even First Class. But it should still very good but X-Men characters show better character development and drama than The Avengers to me. If I can enjoy Batman v Superman, I probably will enjoy Apocalypse more. The only blockbuster movie I think might surpass Civil War for me for 2016 might come from Rogue One.

 

[Tech198]

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (2000)

 

[Huntn]

Arsenic and Old Lace (1944)- Never gets old. Cary Grant has good comic timing.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Arsenic and Old Lace (1944)- Never gets old. Cary Grant has good comic timing.

Ah, now that is what I call a true classic, - that is a wonderful movie: It is witty, clever, has a terrific script, an excellent cast, some nice strong female roles, and was shot in a lovely elegant black and white. What is there not to like?

 

[Huntn]

X-2 (X-Men 2) 2003- The beginnings of the war against mutants. An impressive assault on the Oval Office by Nightcrawler. Wolverine continues the search for his past. The introduction of Col William Striker, an excellent portrayal by actor Brian Cox. Xavier's School For Gifted Children is attacked. The fateful visit to Alkali Lake. The second of the best 3 X-Men Movies (an opinion ).

Wolverine defends Xavier's School​

 

[S.B.G]

Aliens, best of the franchise is on BBC America right now.

 

[Tech198]

Ghostbusters (1984)
Ghostbusters II (1989)

 

[Huntn]

Going to watch X-Men: Apocalypse probably tomorrow. I didn't know it opened here yesterday. I doubt it will surpass the enjoyment I got out of Captain America: Civil War though.

I think Cap 3 is the best and might be my favorite MCU ever surpassing The Avengers and maybe Winter Soldier. The only reason why I don't love it is because how Iron Man and Spider-Man lost to Captain America. I know it is Cap's film and all, but I knew heading into it Iron Man will likely lose and he did by a simple slip from Bucky. The premise is also a bit shallow and not entirely clear with their stance on it. I just love the interactions with Tony and Peter, which is why it is #1 to me because I love those heroes too much even with their flaws. And Black Panther is very cool.

I doubt Apocalypse will surpass Days of Future Past and maybe not even First Class. But it should still very good but X-Men characters show better character development and drama than The Avengers to me. If I can enjoy Batman v Superman, I probably will enjoy Apocalypse more. The only blockbuster movie I think might surpass Civil War for me for 2016 might come from Rogue One.

For myself and MCU the more focus on a few characters the better, the larger the ensemble the more action, but less meaningful story and less memorable. I don't own a single Avenger movie, Capt America never grew on me, and X-Men including Avengers is running 2 or 3 to 1 against although I regard some of the comic-to-movie stories as outstanding. I still need to verify I watched X-Men: Days of Future Past and I've already griped about Jennifer Lawrence as Mystique.

 

[pachyderm]

 

[kazmac]

For myself and MCU the more focus on a few characters the better, the larger the ensemble the more action, but less meaningful story and less memorable. I don't own a single Avenger movie, Capt America never grew on me, and X-Men including Avengers is running 2 or 3 to 1 against although I regard some of the comic to movie stories as outstanding. I still need to verify I watched X-Men: Days of Future Past and I've already griped about Jennifer Lawrence as Mystique.

I won't mind if you keep griping.

Yes, another stupid rant:

This big Bucky and Cap fan still hasn't seen Civil War (was sick today and that kaboshed seeing it tonight), but I'm okay with that. I am still kind of miffed this isn't Bucky-Steve-Natasha-Sam-Sharon with T'Challa woven in. I couldn't give a flying fig about the rest of the characters they shoe-horned in. And I find it super hard to believe with all the great material Ed Brubaker wrote for Bucky and Steve during his run, that the screenwriters couldn't come up with a viable story without resorting to making it an Avengers film even if they didn't call it one.

I am sure I will absolutely enjoy Steve, Bucky, Sam, Natasha and T'Challa... but still. I prefer fewer characters as well.

end rant/

All that said, I am tickled pink that Mark Ruffalo's Hulk will somehow end up in Asgard.

I think I've said what I need to say about X-Men except for this: I'll probably tune for Wolverine 3 as I love Hugh as Logan even if some of his storylines did not work for me. I really hope they bring back Liev Scriber too. He was a terrific Victor Creed/Sabertooth.

---

Just watched Lolly Madonna XXX (1973)

Wasn't really paying attention to anyone but Jeff Bridges, whom I remember as a very young crush thanks to his kindly zoologist in King Kong (1976) Nice to get that warm and fuzzy feeling about him again as I've long respected his acting talent.

 

[shinji]

I just watched Louis Theroux's last two documentaries. One about alcoholism and another about traumatic brain injury.

Not his best, but still worth watching if you're a fan of his.

 

[Huntn]

I won't mind if you keep griping.

Yes, another stupid rant:

This big Bucky and Cap fan still hasn't seen Civil War (was sick today and that kaboshed seeing it tonight), but I'm okay with that. I am still kind of miffed this isn't Bucky-Steve-Natasha-Sam-Sharon with T'Challa woven in. I couldn't give a flying fig about the rest of the characters they shoe-horned in. And I find it super hard to believe with all the great material Ed Brubaker wrote for Bucky and Steve during his run, that the screenwriters couldn't come up with a viable story without resorting to making it an Avengers film even if they didn't call it one.

I am sure I will absolutely enjoy Steve, Bucky, Sam, Natasha and T'Challa... but still. I prefer fewer characters as well.

end rant/

All that said, I am tickled pink that Mark Ruffalo's Hulk will somehow end up in Asgard.

I think I've said what I need to say about X-Men except for this: I'll probably tune for Wolverine 3 as I love Hugh as Logan even if some of his storylines did not work for me. I really hope they bring back Liev Scriber too. He was a terrific Victor Creed/Sabertooth.

---

Just watched Lolly Madonna XXX (1973)

Wasn't really paying attention to anyone but Jeff Bridges, whom I remember as a very young crush thanks to his kindly zoologist in King Kong (1976) Nice to get that warm and fuzzy feeling about him again as I've long respected his acting talent.

Sympatico bro...

I'm in the minority, have mentioned this before, but can't help myself, X-Men Origins: Wolverine was a terrific background tie-in to X-Men and X2 capturing the same atmosphere, including the best ensemble performance of iconic characters in a single X-Men movie imho, with Hugh Jackman (Logan), Danny Houston (Stryker), Liev Schreiber (Victor Creed), Taylor Kitch (Remy Lebeau), Kevin Durand (Fred Dukes), William Adams* (John Wraith), Lynn Collins (Kayla Silverfox), and Ryan Reynolds (Wade Wilson).

*Has adopted a silly stage name- Will.i.am.

While disconnected from comic material (like what came before it) it was consistent with these two previous movies, something I value. And I'm still aggravated with the at-odds portrayals of the barely able to speak Sabertooth in X-Men vs Mr. intellectual in Origins:Wolverine lol, something Marvel needs to get a handle on. I just talked myself into popping in XMO:W!

 

[Apple fanboy]

Non Stop.
I'm not sure I've ever seen a Liam Nieson film I didn't like.

 

[Huntn]

X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009)- How Logan became Wolverine. Stryker, the manipulator. The answer to where he got his jacket and motorcycle. Nuff said.

Your country needs you.
I'm Canadian...

A Brothery Disagreement
​

This made me think of the Deadpool (2016) movie. I'm no expert on Deadpool, but my impression is they took big liberties with the character in O:W, which would be no surprise with the history of X-Men movies. Did anyone like this movie?

 

[Apple fanboy]

X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009)- How Logan became Wolverine. Stryker, the manipulator. The answer to where he got his jacket and motorcycle. Nuff said.

Your country needs you.
I'm Canadian...

A Brothery Disagreement
​

This made me think of the Deadpool (2016) movie. I'm no expert on Deadpool, but my impression is they took big liberties with the character in O:W, which would be no surprise with the history of X-Men movies. Did anyone like this movie?

Wolverine or Deadpool. I like all of the Xmen movies, though the reboots are not quite as good IMO. Not seen Deadpool to comment.