Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Spoilers What Movie Are You Watching?
- Thread starter Huntn
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
gee..you must of had a very definite expectation of that second film..?Ref: Bladerunner franchise
I recognize the danger of a third movie and associated expectations. We know there is a Replicant underground/resistance and possibly something akin to a rebellion in the works. What form that takes is up in the air and where and how it lands could be anyplace. There might not even be a rebellion, just another tangent to add to the lore.
As I‘ve said, I was not expecting the second chapter to entirely be about the search for a person born to a Replicant. I walked out of the theater impressed but initially blinded and disappointed because it was not what I had anticipated. But on a second watch I recognized, and accepted, or was assimilatedas to what an impressive film this is, the characters, the atmosphere, everything about it.
- Sapper Morton the replicant who just wants to be left alone to live what life he has. I was not sure to what degree he was involved with rebellion.
- Lt Joshi’s fear of breaking the world, all the ramifications of reproducing Replicants.
- K, a police replicant sent on a mission to locate the child, his relationship with Joi an AI companion because he feels like he is an outcast among human beings, especially his growing hope that he could have been born and is the person he seeks.
- Neander Wallace the megliomaniac billionaire who thinks he is God.
- Luv, Neander’s completely loyal and devoted guard dog replicant who kills with ease.
- And the original Bladerunner, Deckard hiding in the ruins of Las Vegas protecting his child by disappearing as best he can.
I just went along not knowing wot to expect..but prepared for some sort of visual trip.
Which movie?
That and there were city lights that interfered with the picture.
No, not really, but I was not expecting that kind of story line, for what that is worth. 🤔
Evil Dead Rise. Great fun and it has a good audio mix. Fans of the franchise will watch this anyway and probably love it. The rest will get an entertaining blood bath movie.
That being said, I'm not sure where this fits into the franchise. It's not a reboot, not a sequel, not a prequel. Yes we have all the Evil Dead elements, we get a new book, a new variation of deadites... and yet it feels like The Exorcist at times. It does a fantastic fan service with many references to the older movies and Ash vs. Evil Dead, but we don't really get any new info on the whole origin of the deadites or books. The series does a much better job at it. At first I though this is the beginning of the post apocalyptic world from Army of Darkness and the series, but it looks like it's not (it could be). I'm still mad they cancelled the series as that was the best ED we ever got. This works well on it's own.
However...
I've seen the original trilogy many times, so I might watch the 2013 movie and Ash vs ED again soon. That's what this movie did to me.
That being said, I'm not sure where this fits into the franchise. It's not a reboot, not a sequel, not a prequel. Yes we have all the Evil Dead elements, we get a new book, a new variation of deadites... and yet it feels like The Exorcist at times. It does a fantastic fan service with many references to the older movies and Ash vs. Evil Dead, but we don't really get any new info on the whole origin of the deadites or books. The series does a much better job at it. At first I though this is the beginning of the post apocalyptic world from Army of Darkness and the series, but it looks like it's not (it could be). I'm still mad they cancelled the series as that was the best ED we ever got. This works well on it's own.
However...
Ash (Bruce Campbell) is in the movie, on the record that's played. He's warning about not to temper with the books. But that's in 1923, so how did he get there? From what I've read it's supposed to be Ash and not just some voice cameo by Campbell. So how did he end up there and did it happen after Army of Darkness or after Ash vs ED? Did Ash hide the books in the vault after the priests read the book in 1923? We're not getting any answers and only more questions. Cronin already teased a sequel focused on the priests. I'd personally rather see the end of the world and move into the post apocalyptic world that's been teased for over 30 years (I'm not getting any younger...). Or focus a little earlier on the dark ones, but I have my doubt this would work well in a movie. A full trilogy or another series would be better. And since Campbell said he's done with Ash, maybe bring back Mia...?
I've seen the original trilogy many times, so I might watch the 2013 movie and Ash vs ED again soon. That's what this movie did to me.
Oops - the bbc two part TV movie: the sinking of the Laconia.
The movie made it look like an adventure story in comparison to the wiki summary.
Yay - with discussion of blade runner in here, I checked and found the 2049 in my small DVD collection.
Time for another viewing!!
..must remember to add viewing that to 'What have to done with an early intel'.
Last edited:
Renfield. Very entertaining. Didn't expect it to be a brutal comedy, but it works and Nic Cage never looked better.
The Maltese Falcon (1941) directed by John Houston.
Last week I defined Hammet’s book with the word “masterpiece.”
This is one of the very rare cases in which both book and movie can fall under the very same adjective: masterpiece.
Last week I defined Hammet’s book with the word “masterpiece.”
This is one of the very rare cases in which both book and movie can fall under the very same adjective: masterpiece.
Oh, yes.
Agree completely.
The Maltese Falcon (the movie) is an absolute masterpiece, gripping and unforgettable. A superb movie.
The acting here is all, it’s a majestic example of what true acting is. This movie is with little or no special effects, long scenes, very little action. 90% of it is Spade talking to people. And yet, it manages to be gripping as you correctly say. This time I particularly enjoyed Lorre’s performance of Mr. Cairo, which is a delicate transposition of the character found in the book.
Last edited:
Peter Lorre was superb as Mr Cairo, but so was Sydney Greenstreet, - a compelling performance - and Humphrey Bogart was rarely better (perhaps solely when he played the role of Rick in Casablanca).
However, what I also love about this sort of movie (okay, the casting was superb, as was the script, acting, story, ambience, atmosphere - what superlative cinematography - all based on excellent source material) is that the actors are not classically good looking; instead, they look like real people.
And yes, joy of joys, no specal effects.
You don't need them in many stories, and one of the things I deplore, these days, is the sacrifice of story so that one can indulge in special effects. If they don't support the story, omit them. They are not necessary for the story.
As you say, setting, script, acting - including long scenes, allowing the scene to be set and allowing one to get to know the characters - these are what matter when telling a story and holding the attention and interest of the audience or viewers.
Now, the acting is superb and they inhabit their roles to perfection, but, one of the things I dislike about many American movies is this insistence on a cookie-cutter attractive appearance - often at the expense of sheer acting ability (which is something you do get in European movies, where the emphasis tends to be more on acting ability, and celebrating character acting and roles, rather than the proverbial leading man/lady stuff).
And I love movies which have the courage to go for downbeat endings, for the world and its stories don't always end happily ever after.
Another movie with a similar ambience - one which I absolutely adore - superb source material (courtesy Graham Greene), script, story, ambience, atmosphere, cinematography - and superlative cast and acting, and, for that matter score and soundtrack - is The Third Man.
Last edited:
Wholeheartedly agreed on each point.
Casting back then must’ve been mostly based on actual abilities rather than look. I assume that look was subject to the script, so if they needed a beauty, they’d call on a Bacall or a Lake (two of the most beautiful women that ever graced the silver screen. Recently I also saw a movie with a young Rampling, just wow, although with the latter you can already see the move towards “beauty for sexual reasons” rather than just beauty).
To be honest, if well written I like long scenes with long dialogues, an art that is dissipating. The scariest thing is that I am reading that sludge content will invade our theatres.
an incredible film with an insane performance by Welles! Now I know what oldie watch next. Speaking of Welles, how about A touch of Evil?
The Third Man is one of my all time favourite films (movies).
Everything - just everything - about it is superlative.
And that scene on the Ferris Wheel.....(which Welles scripted, although most of the rest had been scripted by the superb Graham Greene); magnificent.
Anton Karas on the zither (he composed that insanely brilliant theme....one my mother always loved, she remembered when the movie came out, and used to recount how she watched it, rapt), and the cinematography - shot on location in central Vienna, a movie that chronicles life amid the ruins of a defeated, disgraced, occupied and morally compromised city, and the ethical dilemmas attendant upon that. Wonderful.
And, that ending, an ending which foregoes the easy option, opting instead for the bitter sweet integrity of art, for it shows us that Holly Didn't Get The Girl, and those final shots as she walks away, past him, and out of his life, are gripping and utterly unforgettable.
Everything - just everything - about it is superlative.
And that scene on the Ferris Wheel.....(which Welles scripted, although most of the rest had been scripted by the superb Graham Greene); magnificent.
Anton Karas on the zither (he composed that insanely brilliant theme....one my mother always loved, she remembered when the movie came out, and used to recount how she watched it, rapt), and the cinematography - shot on location in central Vienna, a movie that chronicles life amid the ruins of a defeated, disgraced, occupied and morally compromised city, and the ethical dilemmas attendant upon that. Wonderful.
And, that ending, an ending which foregoes the easy option, opting instead for the bitter sweet integrity of art, for it shows us that Holly Didn't Get The Girl, and those final shots as she walks away, past him, and out of his life, are gripping and utterly unforgettable.
I haven’t watched it in 20 years. Time to re-watch it.
What a cast; what a story; what a setting; what a script.....and that zither..
An absolute masterpiece.
The Super Mario Bros. Movie and it didn't work for me. It's a long trailer for video games, filled with references to 40 years of Nintendo video game history. It works when the characters do their specific moves and the matching music is playing, but other than that it was pretty boring.
I saw it in the theater and I quite liked it although I will admit it's not something I would recommend to most people I know. I think it takes a certain type to enjoy it.
I like the directors style, much like his father he's setting a precedent, Possessor up next...
Q-6
Last edited:
L.A. Confidential (1997)
Solid watch with interesting twists and turns...
Q-6
Solid watch with interesting twists and turns...
Q-6