Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Trumanshow.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: hawkeye_a
Cujo(1983)
Read the book a long, long time ago. This movie was "light horror" and more thriller. I thought the scenes with the dog looked great; couldn't tell if it was a real dog or special effects. My nostalgia was pleased with the campy 80s vibe :).

cujo-1983-poster.jpg

I love that movie.

The book too, but the ending always leaves me a weeping mess.

Watched Bad Boys for Life (2020) last night because of insomia. It was OK. The second one is the best of the trilogy, and while none of the installments are really as masterclass in how to write a motion picture, they're entertaining in their own right. Will Smith and Martin Lawrence do play well together throughout the trilogy, but everything in this one just felt somehow off. Good action scenes, some good jokes and the iTunes 4K looked really good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hawkeye_a
Captain America: Civil War (2016)- Avengers have to deal with governments who want to put them on a short chain, and by the title you can presume they are not all on the same page, a kick ass Avenger vs Avenger fight. Ant Man, Black Panther, Black Widow, Bucky (Winter Soldier), Captain America, Falcon, Hawkeye, Iron Man, Raven, Rhoady, Spiderman, and Vision. Bucky continues to be manipulated as Captain America seeks to rehabilitate him with the help of Raven, Scarlett Witch, Hawkeye, and Ant Man. Post credit scene:
 
  • Like
Reactions: JBGoode
Wall Street:Money Never Sleeps [2010]

9D5A5EF3-17EA-4FE0-9120-3E8A96A4BBBE.jpeg


It’s a really rare occasion that I actually like the sequel better over the original. And that’s exactly how I feel about ‘Wall Street Money never sleeps‘ with Shia LaBeouf and Michael Douglas. The first version that released in 1987 with Wallstreet was immensely popular. The original Wallstreet is even referenced in other business like movies (Boiler room) and some of the actual material from Wall Street in 1987, is referenced in business seminars for investors/day traders. (Being a side-handed investor, I can tell you firsthand the 1987 film addressed quite a few business tactics from the 1987 film.)

Anyways, Wall Street money never sleeps is a direct follow up to the original Wall Street, but shows you a much later life with Gordon Gekko being released from prison and how he makes his way back into the trading industry using those around him. The storyline is incredible, Josh Brolin is the perfect nemesis and this movie and Shia LaBeouf (who I think is a very talented actor), nailed his role. And of course Michael Douglas is always good and you can’t replace Him with anyone else given his natural aura of being cunning and how formidable he is.

And I say this for anybody that like these type of films, you can literally learn something from them if you’re someone that plays around in the stock market, is into investing, etc. Altogether, I really enjoyed the second version of Wall Street much more so over the original 1987 and the ending couldn’t have been played better.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mikzn and Huntn
Wall Street:Money Never Sleeps [2010]

View attachment 1659133

It’s a really rare occasion that I actually like the sequel better over the original. And that’s exactly how I feel about ‘Wall Street Money never sleeps‘ with Shia LaBeouf and Michael Douglas. The first version that released in 1987 with Wallstreet was immensely popular. The original Wallstreet is even referenced in other business like movies (Boiler room) and some of the actual material from Wall Street in 1987, is referenced in business seminars for investors/day traders. (Being a side-handed investor, I can tell you firsthand the 1987 film addressed quite a few business tactics from the 1987 film.)

Anyways, Wall Street money never sleeps is a direct follow up to the original Wall Street, but shows you a much later life with Gordon Gekko being released from prison and how he makes his way back into the trading industry using those around him. The storyline is incredible, Josh Brolin is the perfect nemesis and this movie and Shia LaBeouf (who I think is a very talented actor), nailed his role. And of course Michael Douglas is always good and you can’t replace Him with anyone else given his natural aura of being cunning and how formidable he is.

And I say this for anybody that like these type of films, you can literally learn something from them if you’re someone that plays around in the stock market, is into investing, etc. Altogether, I really enjoyed the second version of Wall Street much more so over the original 1987 and the ending couldn’t have been played better.

I am a big fan of Wall Street, it's among the top-5 on my list (for a while I considered it my favorite [non-Lynch] movie, only to be replaced by Sunset Boulevard), but I can't say I like the sequel that much. It's somewhat pointless, with a useless cheesy feel-good ending, and the addition of a never-heard before daughter that had absolutely no reason to exist (we saw Rudy Gekko in Wall Street) if not to create some love story drama.

Shia LeBeouf was also the wrong choice in my opinion. On the plus side, Josh Brolin was quite cool in this movie, and I like that they show the banking world. Also, another good soundtrack.
 
with a useless cheesy feel-good ending

That leads me to ask rhetorically, then what ending should you have suggested? [I.E-... Gekko just ends up on Wall Street for the rest of his life, back in Prison, chooses To live in London....], there has to be a direction of an ending, given you can’t really just leave Gekko in an industry that’s ever-changing that’s not the same as the 80s as it used to be.

The idea is to show that Gordon Gekko is humanized by realizing there is a life beyond money versus controlled by power and greed, that he uses others as leverage around him to put him in a position of superiority his whole life. The ending with his grandson was perfect, and I like the angle that the director chose to put Gordon in a position of an ultimatum he has to choose between money and family, which in the 80s movie, couldn’t have existed.


Shia LeBeouf was also the wrong choice in my opinion.
Shia’s two best movies was Lawless and Wall Street. Prior to filming, he familiarized his character, and studied/partnered with day traders/investing extensively before filming. You can’t just walk into a movie like this and emulate the financial/investor industry. I think it helps to create a Character more believable when you have that type of commitment. One thing I really like about Shia, is he so quick with responses and very articulate. I guess my point is, it’s such a high-speed industry with trading/banking, I think his character with his potent energy was right on Point.

[Also, if you ever watch ‘Boiler room’ with Vin Diesel, you’d know exactly what I’m referring to.]
 
Zodiac(2007)
Hadn't heard of this Fincher movie, which seemed really strange considering how good it is. It does a great job of transporting the audience to a different time and place. It's a slow burn and a well crafted investigative crime drama (based on a true story). "Subtle" is probably how i'd describe this movie; it's pacing, story-telling, performances, popularity.

Good performances all around. Great direction and sets. This is one of those movies i wish they had filmed on film(as opposed to digital); "fake grain" compensates a little.

large_nkUbb208RW6LTpj1A4GrbE4Oub5.jpg
 
That leads me to ask rhetorically, then what ending should you have suggested? [I.E-... Gekko just ends up on Wall Street for the rest of his life, back in Prison, chooses To live in London....], there has to be a direction of an ending, given you can’t really just leave Gekko in an industry that’s ever-changing that’s not the same as the 80s as it used to be.

The idea is to show that Gordon Gekko is humanized by realizing there is a life beyond money versus controlled by power and greed, that he uses others as leverage around him to put him in a position of superiority his whole life. The ending with his grandson was perfect, and I like the angle that the director chose to put Gordon in a position of an ultimatum he has to choose between money and family, which in the 80s movie, couldn’t have existed.



Shia’s two best movies was Lawless and Wall Street. Prior to filming, he familiarized his character, and studied/partnered with day traders/investing extensively before filming. You can’t just walk into a movie like this and emulate the financial/investor industry. I think it helps to create a Character more believable when you have that type of commitment. One thing I really like about Shia, is he so quick with responses and very articulate. I guess my point is, it’s such a high-speed industry with trading/banking, I think his character with his potent energy was right on Point.

[Also, if you ever watch ‘Boiler room’ with Vin Diesel, you’d know exactly what I’m referring to.]
The problem was not the ending per se, it was the whole set up of the movie; the ending is just a cheesy exit. What's the point of it? To humanize Gekko? That destroys completely the meaning of the first movie. The fact that the first one ends bad for all parties involved (Carl Fox too, I guess that the only one that ends up well is Sir Larry Wildman) is the best part of a movie about money sharks. Now, with the sequel we know that Bud Fox will have a great life, and that Gekko will be all happy with his little family reunion. I think that it's extremely difficult to pull off a sequel which ends well when the first one didn't (the opposite is much easier and much more effective in my opinion), and this movie was unable to do so. Now, this is not to say that the movie is crap or anything, it's somewhat entertaining, but I also found it a totally pointless movie that we would not miss if it had never been created.

The concept of family/values over money was very much present in the first one, specifically in the relationship between Bud Fox and Carl Fox, and it was done very poetically instead of the cheap "see the sonogram" type scenes. You could see and sense the fall, which then caused a total shock of the relationships between the characters when Bud realizes what is happening to Bluestar - including the realization that his dad was not going to live forever.

As for Shia LeBouf, I truly can't get appreciate him, but I guess de gustibus non disputandum est, so it's all good.

However, one thing I'll say: it's Oliver Stone's movie. He wanted to do it, he did it like he wanted to do it, and I certainly appreciate his effort.

As for Boiler Room, what a great movie.
 
The problem was not the ending per se, it was the whole set up of the movie; the ending is just a cheesy exit. What's the point of it? To humanize Gekko? That destroys completely the meaning of the first movie.
I think the directing style made it evident Nobody cares about the first movie, Gekko even admits, Life in the industry has changed, people change, “It’s not the 80’s anymore”. I don’t know how to translate that to you in any other way, then fast forward in 20 years later, where the concept of money is still valued differently others banking, until Gekko realizes the decision he’s making between money and his grandson. The guy is a greed machine until he becomes humanized when he realizes that family has far more value.


Now, with the sequel we know that Bud Fox will have a great life, and that Gekko will be all happy with his little family reunion. I think that it's extremely difficult to pull off a sequel which ends well when the first one didn't (the opposite is much easier and much more effective in my opinion), and this movie was unable to do so.
Interesting that you bring up Bud Fox, I thought that was totally idiotic the way it was portrayed, I know they wanted to put Charlie sheen in the movie for obvious reasons, but that one minute cameo he had could’ve been played better and the dialogue was terrible.


The concept of family/values over money was very much present in the first one, specifically in the relationship between Bud Fox and Carl Fox,
The context I was referring to between Fox and his father wasn’t really the highlight moving forward. I only mentioned Gekko, The movie itself doesn’t care about Fox, because he doesn’t exist in the second GEN version of this movie, where Gekko is a strict businessman, and is anything but family oriented until you finally see that side of him when he realizes he does not need all this money and power, Given he’s been beaten by the industry itself when he time served in prison and how everything shape shifted around him upon his release. He uses Jake to eek his way back into the industry, only to realize he was his own worst enemy when he sacrificed his daughter ultimately until his grandson came along. I just thought it was clever how they brought him back into the world that he’s so much never could be away from, because it’s in the DNA.

Anyways, I digress and I enjoy a good discussion, which is rare in the movie thread.

*****************************

Oh, did I mention the Ultimate businessman himself was in the movie?😁Don himself had a small cameo, The director cut this scene for very obvious reasons, even though I actually really liked it. Two alpha males.

Enjoy!

 
Zodiac(2007)
Hadn't heard of this Fincher movie, which seemed really strange considering how good it is. It does a great job of transporting the audience to a different time and place. It's a slow burn and a well crafted investigative crime drama (based on a true story). "Subtle" is probably how i'd describe this movie; it's pacing, story-telling, performances, popularity.

Good performances all around. Great direction and sets. This is one of those movies i wish they had filmed on film(as opposed to digital); "fake grain" compensates a little.

large_nkUbb208RW6LTpj1A4GrbE4Oub5.jpg

Solid film. Jake Gyllenhaal is in my top three best male actors. I haven’t watched this one in a while, I’ll have to give it a re-run.
 
I think the directing style made it evident Nobody cares about the first movie, Gekko even admits, Life in the industry has changed, people change, “It’s not the 80’s anymore”. I don’t know how to translate that to you in any other way, then fast forward in 20 years later, where the concept of money is still valued differently others banking, until Gekko realizes the decision he’s making between money and his grandson. The guy is a greed machine until he becomes humanized when he realizes that family has far more value.



Interesting that you bring up Bud Fox, I thought that was totally idiotic the way it was portrayed, I know they wanted to put Charlie sheen in the movie for obvious reasons, but that one minute cameo he had could’ve been played better and the dialogue was terrible.



The context I was referring to between Fox and his father wasn’t really the highlight moving forward. I only mentioned Gekko, The movie itself doesn’t care about Fox, because he doesn’t exist in the second GEN version of this movie, where Gekko is a strict businessman, and is anything but family oriented until you finally see that side of him when he realizes he does not need all this money and power, Given he’s been beaten by the industry itself when he time served in prison and how everything shape shifted around him upon his release. He uses Jake to eek his way back into the industry, only to realize he was his own worst enemy when he sacrificed his daughter ultimately until his grandson came along. I just thought it was clever how they brought him back into the world that he’s so much never could be away from, because it’s in the DNA.

Anyways, I digress and I enjoy a good discussion, which is rare in the movie thread.

*****************************

Oh, did I mention the Ultimate businessman himself was in the movie?😁Don himself had a small cameo, The director cut this scene for very obvious reasons, even though I actually really liked it. Two alpha males.

Enjoy!


I think we'll have to agree to disagree here!

Ah, I didn't know about that deleted scene, too bad they removed it. I mean, it's not a great scene but I liked the alphas poking each other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 44267547
Inglorious Basterds [2009]
784963A4-92C4-4B0D-A6CF-E1FD0130B20A.jpeg


Ahhh Landa! 😁

Most times when I write about a movie on here, I’ve at least watched it twice, if not more. This is that one movie that I just can’t get enough of. We’ve all watched it, and this in my opinion is Quinton Tarantino’s best work with Inglorious Basterds (I will refer to film as I.G. in short). And not just because of the plot, but the massive lineup that he installed with such a talented cast has too many members to mention here, but Christoph Waltz being my favorite.

As a matter fact, I actually watched I.G. twice over the last week, and then watched certain scenes again, because the movie is so well directed. The opening scene with Landas character interrogating the homeowner, of course the bar shoot-out with Fassbender [See movie poster above] scene was amazing, but my favorite scene in the entire movie was the restaurant scene with Landa and Shoshana, You just can’t script that type of talent with Christoph Waltzs character acting more with his facial expressions than he does with his words. The man is just incredible, as well as the rest of the staff, and then add being multilingual with multiple cast members speaking French, German and Italian.

I really enjoy critiquing films, and I have nothing negative whatsoever to say about this movie. I do think Quinton Tarintino is an extremist and well... a lot of other words that can describe him, but his talent for putting together this type of work that Leaves such an impression After 10 years, just show you his consistency and uniqueness with his directing style.
 
Inglorious Basterds [2009]
View attachment 1663351

Ahhh Landa! 😁

Most times when I write about a movie on here, I’ve at least watched it twice, if not more. This is that one movie that I just can’t get enough of. We’ve all watched it, and this in my opinion is Quinton Tarantino’s best work with Inglorious Basterds (I will refer to film as I.G. in short). And not just because of the plot, but the massive lineup that he installed with such a talented cast has too many members to mention here, but Christoph Waltz being my favorite.

As a matter fact, I actually watched I.G. twice over the last week, and then watched certain scenes again, because the movie is so well directed. The opening scene with Landas character interrogating the homeowner, of course the bar shoot-out with Fassbender [See movie poster above] scene was amazing, but my favorite scene in the entire movie was the restaurant scene with Landa and Shoshana, You just can’t script that type of talent with Christoph Waltzs character acting more with his facial expressions than he does with his words. The man is just incredible, as well as the rest of the staff, and then add being multilingual with multiple cast members speaking French, German and Italian.

I really enjoy critiquing films, and I have nothing negative whatsoever to say about this movie. I do think Quinton Tarintino is an extremist and well... a lot of other words that can describe him, but his talent for putting together this type of work that Leaves such an impression After 10 years, just show you his consistency and uniqueness with his directing style.
Eh

I like it as well. That opening scene you mentioned is too long imho.

It is my favorite film of his for sure.
 
Eh

I like it as well. That opening scene you mentioned is too long imho.

It is my favorite film of his for sure.

There’s a lot of dialogue that set up the opening scene, but once it hit that ‘climax point‘ of the Frenchman identifying the Jews to Landa under his floorboard was intensifying, especially with the music in the background. The ‘long opening’ was worth it for that alone.
 
Doctor Strange (2016)- RTA Rating: 86%. Benedict Cumberbatch gives an excellent performance as the egotistical Dr. Strange who finds his way back and into the mystic arts after suffering a devastating, debilitating accident as he cavalierly drives his car a bit too fast. :)
 
  • Love
Reactions: mikzn
There’s a lot of dialogue that set up the opening scene, but once it hit that ‘climax point‘ of the Frenchman identifying the Jews to Landa under his floorboard was intensifying, especially with the music in the background. The ‘long opening’ was worth it for that alone.
could have been 1.5 minutes shorter.
 
Sputnik (2020)
At the height of the Cold War, a Soviet spacecraft crash lands after a mission gone awry, leaving the commander as its only survivor. After a renowned Russian psychologist is brought in to evaluate the commander's mental state, it becomes clear that something dangerous may have come back to Earth with him.

71zlyc6LR3L._RI_.jpg
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.