Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The Place Beyond the Pines (2013). Should probably have been three 2 hour movies instead of a tripartite one squashed into 140 minutes. But we don't have the attention span for that much character development any more. Still worth the watching. I could wonder how much the insurance cost for the motorcyle chase through that cemetery in Schenectady...

 
  • Like
Reactions: IronWaffle
The Black Cauldron

250px-The_Black_Cauldron_poster.jpg


I've seen it before as well.... not sure if i'm a fan though. The animation and production quality is great, but the story, characters and script aren't IMHO.
 
The Mummy with Tom Cruise. What to say something positive about this movie... I got nothing.

The movie is all over the place. Tries to be too many things at the same time. probably among the worts performances by Tom Cruise in his carrier.

I prefer the adventurous and comedic films of the Mummy with Brendan Fraser.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huntn
The Mummy with Tom Cruise. What to say something positive about this movie... I got nothing.

The movie is all over the place. Tries to be too many things at the same time. probably among the worts performances by Tom Cruise in his carrier.

I prefer the adventurous and comedic films of the Mummy with Brendan Fraser.

3D9B5ED5-1BEB-4CB2-A9BA-A6664C3623CB.jpeg
The Brendon Fraser Mummy Series was superior. I’ll probably break this out and rewatch it, soon. :) The Mr Hyde aspect of this lastest version was a bit pathetic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
^ Looks up at @Huntn 's image and laughs at Kevin J. O'Connor.


Five Superfighters (1979
)
FiveSuperfighters+1979-2-b.jpg


Lo Mar's energetic kung fu flick focuses on the downtrodden Master Wan and his three young students. While they are trying to make a living, a mysterious fighter in black (sporting a cape no less), challenges all of them to a duel. Said baddie is an 'expert in correcting bad kung fu'. He corrects not only the students, but even their sifu too.

The boys leave their wounded mentor behind without so much as a peep, but they have a plan. To find masters who will teach them various styles of kung fu over six months. At the end of that stretch, the boys will return to their master to avenge him from the wicked Corrector. In their absence, Master Wan unfortunately crosses paths with the Corrector yet again and is beaten even harder.

This is a good thing as it pushes not only the students, but the Master to up his martial arts game too. Master Wan leans in on his wine addiction to become a master of drunken sword. Soooooooo...when the boys return to Wan at the six month mark, they bring the Corrector with them thinking they can avenge Wan.

This is a kung fu movie where the masters are infinitely more interesting and fun to watch than their students. The villain and catalyst is played by Kwan Fung who should have been a member of the Venoms Mob as his acrobatic, bare hand and weapons skill easily matches the most versatile members of the Mob. After his first few films, Kwan was demoted to playing older sifus who do not do much, which was unfortunate as the man was brilliant with pole weapons and very physical forms of kung fu. The choreography by Hsu Hsia is quite good. He balances White Crane, shaolin rod, acrobatics, Monkey style, drunken sword and various kicking techniques into a very fluid and fun series of fights. As someone who loves White Crane style, it was great to see it (even if the "master" teaching it to one of Wan's pupils was not convincing.)

Some of the performers playing the younger cast are pretty good, including Leung Siu Lung's little brother as a rather spirited kicker (he's nowhere near the foot beast as his older brother, but very talented all the same.) The two other standouts beyond Kwan Fung, are Hau Chui-Sing as Wan and Wong Mei-Mei whose amazing high kicks are employed here, in Monkey Kung Fu (with much of the same cast), and even against Ti Lung in The Convict Killer. Why she didn't have a bigger career based on her footwork alone is beyond me.

I've seen this movie before and sort of blew it off outside of Kwan and Wong Mei-Mei (who teaches the deadly kick style), but as I revisited this a couple of cliches come to mind: "If you want something done right, do it yourself," and "Don't judge a book by it's cover." Added bonus, some of the humor is actually fun (although Monkey Kung Fu's humor feels even more natural and goes into LOL territory in spots.) There's the also the underlying theme of respecting your elders which is huge in Chinese culture and it was interesting to see how that was interpreted here. As simple as this movie is, it's a blast and another interesting Shaw Brothers love letter to kung fu.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Huntn and jkcerda
The Mummy (1999)- Good story, Hamanaptra (City of the Dead) is fictional, although there is a Book of the Dead, exotic sets, nice scenery, good action, Piranha-like man eating scarabs, entertaining, almost believable! ;)

2C259C07-AEB4-44E4-9BEC-CFF7B8DEE475.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Friendly question, what would you call it? I classify it as a remake or a reboot that comes no where close to the 1999 version’s entertainment values.
Primarily because the 1999 version isn't an original. It's a reboot of the 1932 film, The Mummy. The 1999 version had a more warm side to it in terms of dialogue and action sequences. The '32 version was more horror based like the 2017 version. While the 2017 version did rely on CGI, it paid more homage to the '32 version, yet still failed tremendously short of it, than the 1999 version. A lot of people confuse the original The Mummy with a film that came out a decade later called Mummy's Hand which was a zombie mummy killer movie. So here's the deal. Universal has held onto the monster/horror franchise for nearly a century (in a few years). The Mummy '32 is essentially a mashup of various concepts from their '20s and very early 1930-1931 movies. The horror genre and what people perceived to be horror then was popular up until the mid 70s, when people began watching other movies. I think you're old enough to remember spaghetti westerns being the bees knees for most of the 50s and 60s, and then dying out like a candle flame. The 1999 reboot of the franchise was great. The 2017 reboot was a reboot of the '32 and included science fiction and old school horror, but what Universal fails to understand is that brand of horror and modern day horror isn't all too popular with people. This is why Universal put the next film in their schedule, Bride of Frankenstein, on hold. The market just isn't ready for it.


I mean, Universal could have done it the smart way. More sci-fi, less traditional old-school horror. Side-by-side-by-side timelines of various periods in the past revolving around the subject matter/antagonist of the movie. Time hopping evil taking shape in various forms of humans.


But as I've said in the past, horror just isn't a huge seller like it used to be. Even in literature. You could argue with King, but it's King, you can hardly discredit him apart from his appalling prose at times. Literary fiction enjoys more sales than horror. Let that sink in.

Films wise, movie-goers want something funny or action packed or ridiculously sci-fi.
 
Last edited:
The Mummy (1999)- Good story, Hamanptra (City of the Dead) is fictional, although there is a Book of the Dead, exotic sets, nice scenery, good action, Piranha-like man eating scarabs, entertaining, almost believable! ;)

Super fun. We're headed to Universal for our "winter" trip, and it's also one of our favorite rides :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huntn
Murder On The Orient Express (2017)- Excellent version, enjoyable, Kennith Branagh does a great job as the detective Poirot and as the director. It’s almost too bad I already knew the ending. I’m a bit confused why this movie has gotten such low critical and audience reviews. :confused:

772182F1-68BE-4E47-B07C-4B1FD369D706.jpeg
[doublepost=1510361934][/doublepost]
Primarily because the 1999 version isn't an original. It's a reboot of the 1932 film, The Mummy. The 1999 version had a more warm side to it in terms of dialogue and action sequences. The '32 version was more horror based like the 2017 version. While the 2017 version did rely on CGI, it paid more homage to the '32 version, yet still failed tremendously short of it, than the 1999 version. A lot of people confuse the original The Mummy with a film that came out a decade later called Mummy's Hand which was a zombie mummy killer movie. So here's the deal. Universal has held onto the monster/horror franchise for nearly a century (in a few years). The Mummy '32 is essentially a mashup of various concepts from their '20s and very early 1930-1931 movies. The horror genre and what people perceived to be horror then was popular up until the mid 70s, when people began watching other movies. I think you're old enough to remember spaghetti westerns being the bees knees for most of the 50s and 60s, and then dying out like a candle flame. The 1999 reboot of the franchise was great. The 2017 reboot was a reboot of the '32 and included science fiction and old school horror, but what Universal fails to understand is that brand of horror and modern day horror isn't all too popular with people. This is why Universal put the next film in their schedule, Bride of Frankenstein, on hold. The market just isn't ready for it.


I mean, Universal could have done it the smart way. More sci-fi, less traditional old-school horror. Side-by-side-by-side timelines of various periods in the past revolving around the subject matter/antagonist of the movie. Time hopping evil taking shape in various forms of humans.


But as I've said in the past, horror just isn't a huge seller like it used to be. Even in literature. You could argue with King, but it's King, you can hardly discredit him apart from his appalling prose at times. Literary fiction enjoys more sales than horror. Let that sink in.

Films wise, movie-goers want something funny or action packed or ridiculously sci-fi.
Outstanding explanation. I’d still call it a reboot, even though the 1999 was also a reboot. :D
 
Men in Black 3 and Captain America The Winter Soldier. For modern blockbusters, these are my favorite two movies of the last five years.

Presently watching a subtitled version of Outlaw Genes (1982) Basically, Chan Wai-Man's career triad just can't stop himself from getting involved in violent conflicts with opposing gangs. When Ko Fei's boss not only moves on Chan's turf but kills Chan's girl, well the stuff hits the fan majorly. This boasts one of the most insane end chases / fights I've seen in a Hong Kong gangster film. So I am thrilled that someone got a hold of a dicey pan and scan VHS with subs and put it up on YouTube. Not quite the quality of the unsubbed version I found on a Chinese film site, but watchable.

I am not big on gang films, but I'll watch this and a few other early triad movies Chan Wai Man made because watching him fight is the bees knees to me (bare handed or with choppers, the triad machetes) This the last film he made where he truly went all out fighting-wise, so I tend to stop here with his triad-centric output as I zone during gang films where he's not kicking butt.
 
Last edited:
The Place Beyond the Pines (2013). Should probably have been three 2 hour movies instead of a tripartite one squashed into 140 minutes. But we don't have the attention span for that much character development any more. Still worth the watching. I could wonder how much the insurance cost for the motorcyle chase through that cemetery in Schenectady...

Was there a book that you read regarding the three 2hr movies comment? :)
 
Was there a book that you read regarding the three 2hr movies comment? :)

Nope, just struck me that the three phases of the movie each had such a distinct focus and so could surely have been a film unto itself. We learned a lot and the acting offered undercurrents that somehow signalled there was so much more..

In the segmentation of the film I was reminded of that great trilogy Yellow Asphalt, where in fact one of its three segments was later taken up by a different director, completely relocated geographically and ethnically. No longer the perils of adultery between an Israeli greenhouse manager and a Bedouin housemaid, as in the third segment of the trilogy, but the dangers encountered by the family of an adulterous British tea planter and an Indian housekeeper during the twilight of the Raj, spun into the full length film Before the Rains.

I wouldn't say that A Place Beyond the Pines had that quite that much potential for extension, but I ended up wanting more or even imagining how the "more" could spin from a couple of the segments. Sure beats looking at watch wondering if some flick is almost over. :)
 
Where Eagles Dare (1968)- A covert military mission into WWII Germany, thrilling! :D

EFEC01D8-0CC8-41D0-8D3A-BDCD1CC168AE.jpeg

When Clint Eastwood snuck up behind the guy in the radio room with a knife, why did he not shoot him first?

Why did’nt Richard Burton have a pistol on him when riding atop the cable car? :)
 
Last edited:
good movie, i enjoyed it. its kinda like nightmare before x-mas meets narnia but animated. very creative, i recommend.




excellent movie. its kinda like a darker and more grimey Rocky. the ending was good.


 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.