well the first one was detestable, so Hollywood probably considers a sequel to be both logical and essential.
Movie review rant 2015
- Thread starter nanoboy
- Start date
- Status
I don't know what kind of critics you are referring to, but the only thing these two have in common is the fact that they are both American movies. And that's it.
nanoboy
Well-Known Member
Most critics swear by 'The Shawshank Redemption' being the greatest movies of all time. I thought it was just a movie and they got it wrong.
nanoboy
Well-Known Member
Sweet. I'm in!
I thought it was just a movie and they got it wrong.
http://www.troll.me/images/you-shall-not-pass-gandalf/that-blasphemous-comment-shall-not-pass.jpg
Universal Soldier: Day of Reckoning
So last night I thought I would watch Universal Soldier, which is an action movie classic from 1992 starring Jean-Claude Van Damme and Dolph Lundgren as undead soldiers. The movie spawned two or three awful straight-to-video sequels starring other actors, then a somewhat forgettable "official" sequel in 1999 (Universal Soldier: The Return) and another in 2009 (Universal Soldier: Regeneration). They really should have just left it at the original, but you know Hollywood and their greed and stupidity.
Anyway, when I was looking for the original I came across Day of Reckoning. It was made in 2012 and I hadn't heard of it before, but it had Van Damme and Lundgren prominently displayed as the stars so I gave it a chance. Now I just can't wash the stink off me. This movie was barely even worth one star out of ten.
Van Damme and Lundgren have less than four or five minutes screen time combined; they are barely even background-characters. Instead the star is Scott Adkins who has been in lots of movies (e.g. The Expendables II and the Undisputed movies) but who still hasn't learned how to act. The script has very little to do with the preceding movies, it is confusing and rambling, and the movie tries in turn to be artsy, dramatic and mysterious - and failing at all of them. The "dramatic" opening scene involving Adkins' wife and daughter being murdered left me laughing (I mean, literally laughing) because it was handled so badly. Then there are several scenes involving strobing white light - do not watch this movie if you are prone to epileptic seizures!! The fight scenes are good and much more brutal than in the other Universal Soldier movies, but they are spaced way too far apart with nothing in between to keep you occupied. It is that kind of action movie where your mind starts wandering to what you're going to do tomorrow, I wonder if it will be raining or sunny, did I remember to take out the rubbish. By the time you get to the end show-downs (Adkins killing first Lundgren and then Van Damme) you can barely muster the enthusiasm to stop yawning.
While Van Damme spends most of his brief appearances looking like Uncle Fester's corpse after a week at the bottom of a river, for the final scene he instead turns up with his entire head painted black and white like a voodoo lemur. I suspect that this entirely-unexplained action is less to do with story and more to do with making it more difficult to tell when it is a stunt-man fighting Scott Adkins....
Funniest part of the movie - they set the end up to provide for a sequel!
Verdict: a boring incoherent mess.
So last night I thought I would watch Universal Soldier, which is an action movie classic from 1992 starring Jean-Claude Van Damme and Dolph Lundgren as undead soldiers. The movie spawned two or three awful straight-to-video sequels starring other actors, then a somewhat forgettable "official" sequel in 1999 (Universal Soldier: The Return) and another in 2009 (Universal Soldier: Regeneration). They really should have just left it at the original, but you know Hollywood and their greed and stupidity.
Anyway, when I was looking for the original I came across Day of Reckoning. It was made in 2012 and I hadn't heard of it before, but it had Van Damme and Lundgren prominently displayed as the stars so I gave it a chance. Now I just can't wash the stink off me. This movie was barely even worth one star out of ten.
Van Damme and Lundgren have less than four or five minutes screen time combined; they are barely even background-characters. Instead the star is Scott Adkins who has been in lots of movies (e.g. The Expendables II and the Undisputed movies) but who still hasn't learned how to act. The script has very little to do with the preceding movies, it is confusing and rambling, and the movie tries in turn to be artsy, dramatic and mysterious - and failing at all of them. The "dramatic" opening scene involving Adkins' wife and daughter being murdered left me laughing (I mean, literally laughing) because it was handled so badly. Then there are several scenes involving strobing white light - do not watch this movie if you are prone to epileptic seizures!! The fight scenes are good and much more brutal than in the other Universal Soldier movies, but they are spaced way too far apart with nothing in between to keep you occupied. It is that kind of action movie where your mind starts wandering to what you're going to do tomorrow, I wonder if it will be raining or sunny, did I remember to take out the rubbish. By the time you get to the end show-downs (Adkins killing first Lundgren and then Van Damme) you can barely muster the enthusiasm to stop yawning.
While Van Damme spends most of his brief appearances looking like Uncle Fester's corpse after a week at the bottom of a river, for the final scene he instead turns up with his entire head painted black and white like a voodoo lemur. I suspect that this entirely-unexplained action is less to do with story and more to do with making it more difficult to tell when it is a stunt-man fighting Scott Adkins....
Funniest part of the movie - they set the end up to provide for a sequel!
Verdict: a boring incoherent mess.
I watched a couple of Tom Cruise movies as well. Tom may be a world-class nut but his movies are often great. Even the worst one are usually "yeah, that was all right". And he sure does know how to run and ride a motorcycle!
Edge of Tomorrow: Live, Die, Repeat
Aliens have invaded Earth so that they can, apparently, start an ineffectual ground-war with humans. At first I was confused about this, but there was a throw-away line about them coming from space on asteroids (not in ships) so I let it pass. I was still a bit confused about how the aliens seemed to be firing weapons at the human helicopters and yet did not seem to have any other technology.
The basic story is that Tom is a smug "face" for the media, explaining all the human battle plans in detail on worldwide news broadcasts (of the kind that aliens might conceivably also be watching but we'll overlook that) but after an unwise blackmail attempt he is busted down to Private and sent into battle on the front-lines where he is less smug and more dead. Fortunately for Tom and the movie's run-time, when he dies it is by virtue of exploding an alien which sprays blood all over him giving him the time-manipulating ability to re-set each day to the beginning. I know that doesn't make sense when written so simply, but in the movie it does. The result is that you then get to watch Tom dying repeatedly for the next hour or so which is quite entertaining. Unfortunately after months of re-sets, endlessly training and re-living the battle, he becomes a super-soldier and hence super-smug. I'm guessing re-setting time also eliminates his need to sleep for several months.
I won't give away any spoilers, but this was a good movie so if you haven't seen it yet then do so. The ending makes no sense though.
Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation
The latest in this movie series, released earlier this year. As usual the IMF team are in trouble with the higher-ups, Tom Cruise is the hero, Ving Rhames is there phoning it in, Simon Pegg is being a flippin' useless comedy side-kick, Jeremy Renner is as pointless as he ever is in all his movies, there's a completely new hot girl (hey, whatever happened to Tom's wife in these movies - they just forgot all about his endless love for her!).
Honestly, I watched this two days ago and I've pretty much forgotten almost everything about it! But, um, the action sequences were cool and.... I dunno, just watch it.
Edge of Tomorrow: Live, Die, Repeat
Aliens have invaded Earth so that they can, apparently, start an ineffectual ground-war with humans. At first I was confused about this, but there was a throw-away line about them coming from space on asteroids (not in ships) so I let it pass. I was still a bit confused about how the aliens seemed to be firing weapons at the human helicopters and yet did not seem to have any other technology.
The basic story is that Tom is a smug "face" for the media, explaining all the human battle plans in detail on worldwide news broadcasts (of the kind that aliens might conceivably also be watching but we'll overlook that) but after an unwise blackmail attempt he is busted down to Private and sent into battle on the front-lines where he is less smug and more dead. Fortunately for Tom and the movie's run-time, when he dies it is by virtue of exploding an alien which sprays blood all over him giving him the time-manipulating ability to re-set each day to the beginning. I know that doesn't make sense when written so simply, but in the movie it does. The result is that you then get to watch Tom dying repeatedly for the next hour or so which is quite entertaining. Unfortunately after months of re-sets, endlessly training and re-living the battle, he becomes a super-soldier and hence super-smug. I'm guessing re-setting time also eliminates his need to sleep for several months.
I won't give away any spoilers, but this was a good movie so if you haven't seen it yet then do so. The ending makes no sense though.
Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation
The latest in this movie series, released earlier this year. As usual the IMF team are in trouble with the higher-ups, Tom Cruise is the hero, Ving Rhames is there phoning it in, Simon Pegg is being a flippin' useless comedy side-kick, Jeremy Renner is as pointless as he ever is in all his movies, there's a completely new hot girl (hey, whatever happened to Tom's wife in these movies - they just forgot all about his endless love for her!).
Honestly, I watched this two days ago and I've pretty much forgotten almost everything about it! But, um, the action sequences were cool and.... I dunno, just watch it.
mm, but what I meant was at the end of Ghost Protocol they reveal that she is really still alive and because he is so in love with her he creeps around watching her from a distance but can't get close in case she gets into danger again. But in this movie it is like she never existed and there is a new love interest. He just forgot all about her.
I've been rewatching some older movies lately....
Aliens
Do I even need to review this? Surely everyone has seen this fantastic movie many times over. It is the best of the two Alien movies with solid performances all round. Director James Cameron followed up his brilliant Terminator with this equally brilliant movie, taking a bunch of the same actors from that movie (Michael Biehn, Bill Paxton, Lance Henriksen) and turning the taut horror Alien into a full-blown action movie. Bill Paxton's Hudson is one of cinema's best freaking-out marines ever, giving the world a whole slew of endlessly quotable freaking-out lines (which apparently he mostly improvised himself. Mostly) and I'm pretty sure that "eat this" - and its many many variations - was started by this movie (when Hicks shoves a shotgun into an alien's mouth). Twenty out of ten.
Aliens
Do I even need to review this? Surely everyone has seen this fantastic movie many times over. It is the best of the two Alien movies with solid performances all round. Director James Cameron followed up his brilliant Terminator with this equally brilliant movie, taking a bunch of the same actors from that movie (Michael Biehn, Bill Paxton, Lance Henriksen) and turning the taut horror Alien into a full-blown action movie. Bill Paxton's Hudson is one of cinema's best freaking-out marines ever, giving the world a whole slew of endlessly quotable freaking-out lines (which apparently he mostly improvised himself. Mostly) and I'm pretty sure that "eat this" - and its many many variations - was started by this movie (when Hicks shoves a shotgun into an alien's mouth). Twenty out of ten.
Greystoke, the Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes
This is, quite simply, the best Tarzan movie ever made. I saw it at the cinema when it first came out (I was ten) and it is just as good now as it was then. If you haven't seen it, then do so right now. Almost every Tarzan movie is a cheesy popcorn flick made with a budget of $20 where Tarzan is a grunting he-man. This 1984 movie is the exact opposite. A serious, thoughtful, moving story of a man torn between two worlds - it is a realistic drama, not an action movie. It was filmed on location in England, Scotland and Cameroon, as well as on amazing rainforest studio sets. The adult chimps are actors in suits and although by today's standards you can clearly tell they are not real (especially it was impossible to hide the legs being too long when they are moving on all fours) they still look very good. One of the nicest bits in this movie is how while watching you notice a movement in the background, and when you take a second look there will be a pigmy hippo or a bongo just hanging out in the undergrowth. There are flaws here and there, as with any movie, but the attention to detail and the superb acting of everybody leaves little room to complain. Even Christopher Lambert (in his first non-French movie role) does a fantastic job as Tarzan, probably the only movie he's been in where he shows he can actually act. Andie McDowell, Ian Holm, Richard Griffiths, David Suchet and Ralph Richardson are just some of the other excellent performers. Ten out of ten.
This is, quite simply, the best Tarzan movie ever made. I saw it at the cinema when it first came out (I was ten) and it is just as good now as it was then. If you haven't seen it, then do so right now. Almost every Tarzan movie is a cheesy popcorn flick made with a budget of $20 where Tarzan is a grunting he-man. This 1984 movie is the exact opposite. A serious, thoughtful, moving story of a man torn between two worlds - it is a realistic drama, not an action movie. It was filmed on location in England, Scotland and Cameroon, as well as on amazing rainforest studio sets. The adult chimps are actors in suits and although by today's standards you can clearly tell they are not real (especially it was impossible to hide the legs being too long when they are moving on all fours) they still look very good. One of the nicest bits in this movie is how while watching you notice a movement in the background, and when you take a second look there will be a pigmy hippo or a bongo just hanging out in the undergrowth. There are flaws here and there, as with any movie, but the attention to detail and the superb acting of everybody leaves little room to complain. Even Christopher Lambert (in his first non-French movie role) does a fantastic job as Tarzan, probably the only movie he's been in where he shows he can actually act. Andie McDowell, Ian Holm, Richard Griffiths, David Suchet and Ralph Richardson are just some of the other excellent performers. Ten out of ten.
After watching Greystoke I then watched 1948's Tarzan and the Mermaids. Former Olympic swimming champion Johnny Weissmuller made his acting career out of playing Tarzan, and this movie was number twelve of those (and his last, before he went on to start making Jungle Jim movies). In the earlier Tarzan movies Weissmuller was pretty good-looking but by the time this one dragged around he was looking rather the worse for wear, like he had swung face-first into one too many trees, and he has a curious habit of talking out of only one side of his mouth. And he runs like a girl.
The story is fairly straight-forward. Tarzan and Jane (played by Brenda Joyce, taking over from Maureen O'Sullivan from the earlier movies) are living in the jungles of Acapulco, quite near to an island cult composed mostly of multi-cultural Californian surfers wearing 1940s-style swimming trunks which look very similar to adult diapers. A couple of evil pearl traders are pretending to be the islanders' god Balou but their plan goes awry when a girl named Mara, chosen to be Balou's wife, swims away and ends up at Tarzan's tree-house. The islanders track her down and re-acquire her, and so a rescue party is formed by Tarzan, Jane, Benji (Tarzan's ukelele-playing friend who spends most of the film singing songs about his own awesomeness), and of course the British Inspector-General. They are led to the island by Mara's boyfriend Tiko - you know the two are lovers by the way they turn their heads to the side and press their cheeks together... well, it was 1948 I suppose. There follows a lot of hijinks involving Tarzan dressing up as Balou to doubly fool the clueluess male islanders while Benji tries to get into the pants of all the hot young islander ladies. The ending is an abrupt murder by Tarzan of the lead pearl trader - no joke, he punches him straight over a cliff and the camera lingers on the scene as the body crashes onto the rocks below. And then everybody lives happily ever after.
I guess I'd rate this movie about four out of ten. It's not good but it's sort of fun. It's got hot 1940s ladies and hunky 1940s men, a baby chimp, a rubber octopus... but no Asian elephants with giant fake ears, and no weird dwarf-in-a-suit dodo. I don't think they are even pretending they are in Africa any more. Maybe three out of ten. No, wait. Two out of ten. Just go watch Greystoke instead. Right now.
The story is fairly straight-forward. Tarzan and Jane (played by Brenda Joyce, taking over from Maureen O'Sullivan from the earlier movies) are living in the jungles of Acapulco, quite near to an island cult composed mostly of multi-cultural Californian surfers wearing 1940s-style swimming trunks which look very similar to adult diapers. A couple of evil pearl traders are pretending to be the islanders' god Balou but their plan goes awry when a girl named Mara, chosen to be Balou's wife, swims away and ends up at Tarzan's tree-house. The islanders track her down and re-acquire her, and so a rescue party is formed by Tarzan, Jane, Benji (Tarzan's ukelele-playing friend who spends most of the film singing songs about his own awesomeness), and of course the British Inspector-General. They are led to the island by Mara's boyfriend Tiko - you know the two are lovers by the way they turn their heads to the side and press their cheeks together... well, it was 1948 I suppose. There follows a lot of hijinks involving Tarzan dressing up as Balou to doubly fool the clueluess male islanders while Benji tries to get into the pants of all the hot young islander ladies. The ending is an abrupt murder by Tarzan of the lead pearl trader - no joke, he punches him straight over a cliff and the camera lingers on the scene as the body crashes onto the rocks below. And then everybody lives happily ever after.
I guess I'd rate this movie about four out of ten. It's not good but it's sort of fun. It's got hot 1940s ladies and hunky 1940s men, a baby chimp, a rubber octopus... but no Asian elephants with giant fake ears, and no weird dwarf-in-a-suit dodo. I don't think they are even pretending they are in Africa any more. Maybe three out of ten. No, wait. Two out of ten. Just go watch Greystoke instead. Right now.
I take it you don't count Alien3 or Alien Resurrection as movies then? I know they were bad, but to deny their existence altogether is a bit much.
Hix
I know there were two movies with those names and that they coincidentally starred the same actress, but they are not part of the Alien and Aliens set. Perhaps you live in an alternative universe where those movies are a part of an actual quadrilogy? I deny the existence of such a possibility.
You're suggesting I live in an alternate universe? That's funny considering you live in New Zealand!
Hix
NB: For ZooChatters in the Northern hemisphere who may not be aware, it's been scientifically proven that NZ is a parallel universe developing independently of ours. That's the reason why Australia refuses to let them become Australia's 7th and 8th states.
Hix
NB: For ZooChatters in the Northern hemisphere who may not be aware, it's been scientifically proven that NZ is a parallel universe developing independently of ours. That's the reason why Australia refuses to let them become Australia's 7th and 8th states.
Since when? I thought they were part of the UK, same thing as The Shetland Isles and the Isle of Wight?
no, Australia and Great Britain are polar opposites. See, for example, the remake of Total Recall.Since when? I thought they were part of the UK, same thing as The Shetland Isles and the Isle of Wight?
In fact Australia even uses the letters U, S and A to start off its own name, to signify its submissiveness to that country. It is no coincidence that the shorthand version of Australia is simply USA with the letters scrambled.
I can assure you that they are not affiliated with the U.S.A. If they were then we would have platypi in all of our zoos.
- Status