Citizen Rules...Cinemaesque Chat-n-Review [Archive] - Page 13?login=1

Citizen Rules

10-23-16, 12:19 PM

Glad you watched 2001 CR, because I wasn't even thinking of it for the upcoming Sci-Fi list. I'm going to give it another shot as my first couple of viewings were torturous. By tortuous I'm guessing you mean sloooooow. Yea, it's slow, I like slow movies and I still thought it was too slow for me at times.

In re-viewings I was intrigued by the way "Dave's" breathing inside his space helmet is used when his struggle to dismantle HAL begins. It's so intense and conveys every feeling the movie is trying to convey at that point - with breathing rather than background music.
I wonder if this was the first time this was done or were there previous instances. Good call, just last night I watched a DVD extra feature on the making of 2001 and they did indeed mention what you just said. That at times in the movie the music stops and we here breathing being used as a soundtrack. It also happened with the astronaut is outside of the big ship in a rescue mission.

seanc

10-23-16, 01:39 PM

Glad you watched 2001 CR, because I wasn't even thinking of it for the upcoming Sci-Fi list. I'm going to give it another shot as my first couple of viewings were torturous.

I'm going to give it a second go for the list. Too slow for my taste first go round. Inevitable that it will top the list anyway. Good review CR.

Citizen Rules

10-23-16, 01:46 PM

Thanks Sean...also in the DVD extras Arthur C. Clarke who cowrote 2001 said the movie is like a silent film in that there's very little dialogue, but lots of visuals. Yes, it was slow and I was tired. I need to rewatch it when I'm well rested as it's a challenging film.

Captain Steel

10-23-16, 01:46 PM

I'm going to give it a second go for the list. Too slow for my taste first go round. Inevitable that it will top the list anyway. Good review CR.

It's a movie I've evolved with. As a kid I fairly despised parts of it. Later, I would skip the psychedelic part. Last time I watched it, I watched the whole thing and it was like a new movie to me (although I still hate the scary chorus noise the monolith makes - it freaks me out!) :)

Citizen Rules

10-23-16, 01:51 PM

It's a movie I've evolved with. As a kid I fairly despised parts of it. Later, I would skip the psychedelic part. Last time I watched it, I watched the whole thing and it was like a new movie to me (although I still hate the scary chorus noise the monolith makes - it freaks me out!) :) That moaning monolith sound is creepy! and it was loud, I had to turn down the TV sound during that part. Did you ever think that the end scene in the room with an older Dave was an inspiration for Star Trek TNG episode The Royale?

Captain Steel

10-23-16, 02:08 PM

That moaning monolith sound is creepy! and it was loud, I had to turn down the TV sound during that part. Did you ever think that the end scene in the room with an older Dave was an inspiration for Star Trek TNG episode The Royale?

You'd have to refresh my memory on that episode, Rules. I think I've seen them all, but don't know them by title.

Citizen Rules

10-23-16, 02:14 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27545&stc=1&d=1477242865
Being Canadian (2015)

Director: Robert Cohen
Writer: Robert Cohen
Cast: Robert Cohen, Cobie Smulders, Seth Rogen, Nathan Fillion
Genre: Documentary, Comedy

"What does it actually mean to be Canadian?"

This is just something I seen at Netflix and thought it might be worth a watch. It's only 90 minutes long and is a light-comedy documentary which follows a Canadian, Robert Cohen, across country as he tries to discover what it means to be Canadian. The premise sounded more interesting than the actual film which is largely composed of interviews with a famous Canadians mostly celebrities who then are asked questions and give amusing answers. I had hoped to see more of the unseen Canada, it's small town, quaint costumes and lesser known points of interest.

But the star of the film, Robert Cohen is a Canadian who had been a successful Hollywood comic writer for American TV sitcom shows. So that's mostly what he delivered, laughs from other celebrities. I didn't hate it, and I did laugh a few times. But it really wasn't that well done, but not bad for a Canadian documentary (that's a joke from the film).

You do get to see a whole bushel of stars who hail from Canada. Too many to list. Of course they talk about beer and maple syrup but nothing about back bacon, which I found odd. But oh well, it was a decent 90 minutes.

rating_3-

Citizen Rules

10-23-16, 02:24 PM

You'd have to refresh my memory on that episode, Rules. I think I've seen them all, but don't know them by title. I'm not real good at describing episodes, so here's a link to Memory Alpha's site

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/The_Royale_%28episode%29

And indeed they do mention 2001 on that page. I noticed it when I was watching the movie and the older Dave ends up in a fancy room. That made me think of the ST episode, but just the part where Riker, Worf and Date beam down to a mysterious planet and find an Earth hotel with a dead, missing astronaut in bed.

Captain Steel

10-23-16, 02:38 PM

I'm not real good at describing episodes, so here's a link to Memory Alpha's site

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/The_Royale_%28episode%29

And indeed they do mention 2001 on that page. I noticed it when I was watching the movie and the older Dave ends up in a fancy room. That made me think of the ST episode, but just the part where Riker, Worf and Date beam down to a mysterious planet and find an Earth hotel with a dead, missing astronaut in bed.

Interesting. Although sounding vaguely familiar, I don't have much memory of that episode (now I want to see it!). But yeah it sounds like it was inspired by 2001.
It was a common theme in Trek that some alien entity or civilization would build something or create a society around some artifact of Earth's past. Like in TOS "A Piece of the Action" where the aliens based their whole society around a book about the gangsters of 1920's Chicago.

And you're familiar with my theory that ST-The Motion Picture was inspired by a combination of films: Solaris, 2001 A Space Odyssey, and two particular episodes from the Original Series. ;)

Citizen Rules

10-23-16, 02:52 PM

...And you're familiar with my theory that ST-The Motion Picture was inspired by a combination of films: Solaris, 2001 A Space Odyssey, and two particular episodes from the Original Series. ;) Yup! I remember we talked about Solaris's possible influences on ST-The Motion Picture. :p But I don't remember talking about 2001 influence on STTMP, but I wouldn't be surprised at all that it did influence it. Come to think of it, the worm hole scene in STTMP is like the split screen star tunnel in 2001.

and two particular episodes from the Original Series I don't know if you ever told me about that, which two episodes?

Captain Steel

10-23-16, 03:08 PM

Yup! I remember we talked about Solaris's possible influences on ST-The Motion Picture. :p But I don't remember talking about 2001 influence on STTMP, but I wouldn't be surprised at all that it did influence it. Come to think of it, the worm hole scene in STTMP is like the split screen star tunnel in 2001.
I don't know if you ever told me about that, which two episodes?

Don't feel like looking them up right now... but the one with Nomad (like V-ger: seeking it's human creator) and the one with Decker's father (where there's a giant V-ger like machine, destroying everything in its path on it's way to Earth).

I've gone over what I felt were similarities to Solaris before, but the influences of 2001 on ST-TMP are numerous - the calling out of an alien entity from beyond, the journey to intercept it, some vague similarities between HAL and the Ilia probe / V-ger (both Dave and Kirk try to outwit a machine), the long psychedelic trip in 2001 & the long psychedelic trip through V-ger, and of course the endings where a new life form is created in TMP (McCoy even compares it to a baby delivery and the cosmic baby in 2001). There are a few stylistic & special effects similarities between the films too.

Citizen Rules

10-23-16, 03:26 PM

Oh yea, now I remember talking about that and yes Nomad being very V-ger like. I agree.

Gooch

10-23-16, 05:15 PM

I'm taking a class that covers a lot of basic computer concepts and the teacher has brought up 2001 at least 3 times to point out the flaw that HAL was way too big. "A computer that size would generate so much heat that blah blah blah. As computers get faster they HAVE to get smaller because blah blah blah."
"I'd kinda like to hear his critiques on the orgy scenes in Kubrics final film, Eyes Wide Shut.
"It's all wrong. When we have huge, baccanalian sex-parties, we always wear the SILVER masks with the GREEN robes. Have you ever tried to clean oil-based lube out of a black robe? Kubric was an uninformed jerk!"

Citizen Rules

10-23-16, 07:15 PM

I'm taking a class that covers a lot of basic computer concepts and the teacher has brought up 2001 at least 3 times to point out the flaw that HAL was way too big. "A computer that size would generate so much heat that blah blah blah. As computers get faster they HAVE to get smaller because blah blah blah."
...That's interesting. I wonder why your computer teacher thinks the the size of the main frame of large computer like HAL would generate to much heat? Seems to me it would provide better air movement for cooling. Maybe HAL's processors were located on the outside of the ship for maxxium cooling by the ultra cold of space. I guess Kubrick knew for sure.

Citizen Rules

10-23-16, 10:14 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=26283&stc=1&d=1468865157Kansas City Confidential (1952)
Director: Phil Karlson
Cast: John Payne, Coleen Gray, Preston Foster
Genre: Film Noir

About: An ex-con (John Payne) who has since went straight, is framed for a million dollar heist of an armored car. To make matters worse the actual robbers kill a man and blame it him . After being arrested and beaten by the cops John Payne gets a lead on the real criminals and chases after them in Mexico.

Review: I thought this was a cool story that instantly drew me in and kept me involved. I really liked all five of the main actors and they did an excellent job. All the three bad guys were really nasty and each had his own quirk. I thought John Payne made a good regular Joe, who's forced to take on some tough thugs to clear his name. I liked Preston Foster, he seemed genuine as both the big man and as a father. And of course I liked Colleen Grey.

I liked how the film took us to four different 'worlds'. Each was interesting to see: I liked the crime set up and the actual job part. I liked even more the time in the police station when the cops rough up poor John Payne. But I really liked the time in Mexico, both when he's on the tail of Jack Elam (who was great in this) and finally when they all meet up in a sleepy Mexican fishing village. I like the ending too and how the story wrapped up.

Kansas City Confidential is gritty and gripping with a lot of interesting scenes and characters.

rating_4+

gbgoodies

10-24-16, 02:48 AM

gbgoodies

10-24-16, 03:12 AM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27512&stc=1&d=1477096412
Harry and Tonto (1974)

Director: Paul Mazursky
Writers: Paul Mazursky, Josh Greenfeld
Cast: Art Carney, Tonto the cat, Ellen Burstyn, René Enríquez
Genre: Drama, Adventure, Comedy

The more I think about this movie, the more I like it. Often movie watchers get 'programmed' to respond to highly dramatic events in the movies they watch. There's nothing extra dramatic happening in Harry and Tonto. What it offers is something more substantial, an introspective look at an old man with no job and no place to go. Harry is intelligent, he's learned...he's a retired teacher who reads voraciously and has a lot to say. Sure he's stubborn but he's earned the right to be so. Harry knows who he is, but the world doesn't care.

When his old apartment building is torn down, he begins to shuffle from point to point, much like a ship a drift. Until he reaches a point where he takes charge of his journey. This movie is about that personal journey, it's a life journey that starts for Harry at age 70.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27513&stc=1&d=1477096421

The director/writer Paul Marzusky told Art Careny (Harry) that if he took the role, he'd win an oscar...and he did. Art Careny is best known from that famous 1950's TV sitcom The Honeymooners. Here Art plays a vastly different character from the goofy Ed Norton.

Harry knows who he is, but life has put him a drift. It looks like he will plop himself down at his son's house and become part of the furniture. But Harry want's more than that. So he goes on a road trip with no particular destination but with the hopes of experiencing more of life.

You know, they just don't make films like this anymore. This was made in the earlier 1970's when film making often focused on humanity as opposed to latter films that just churned out entertainment for entertainment's sake. Harry and Tonto still has something important to say, if only we will open our ears and eyes.

rating_4

I liked Harry and Tonto, but not quite as much as you did. I thought it was kind of depressing at times, but overall it's a pretty good movie. I've seen Art Carney as Ed Norton for so many years, so it was nice to see him in a different role for a change.

gbgoodies

10-24-16, 03:21 AM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27540&stc=1&d=1477188134
2001: A Space Odyssey (Stanley Kubrick, 1968)

Director: Stanley Kubrick
Writers: Stanley Kubrick(screenplay), Arthur C. Clarke(novel &screenplay)
Cast: Keir Dullea, Gary Lockwood, William Sylvester
Genre: Sci-Fi Mystery

This film needs no introduction! As everyone has heard of it.
In 1963 master film maker Stanley Kubrick released his genius on a sci-fi short story by another genius, Arthur C. Clarke. The result took the next 4 years to complete, but when this film hit the theaters in 1968...the movie industry would never be the same.

Initial audience reaction was less than stellar. At the film's premier over 200 people got up and left the theater during the movie... including Rock Hudson who's reported to have said, "Will someone tell me what the hell this is about?"...Rock might not have 'got it', and either did the critics who panned 2001...But the film became an instant cult hit with the younger generation, some who reportedly did drugs while viewing the movie for the ultimate space trip.

My thoughts: I hadn't seen this film in decades and I remembered nothing of it, so in a way it was like watching it for the first time. I did have the advantage that I had read the novel so I did know what was going on, in what could be otherwise a very confusing movie.

I was blown away by the sheer beauty of the film! The sets look so real, and this was done in the mid 1960's even before men had landed on the moon. The attention to detail is amazing as in the special effects. Maybe most impressive was: for the first time in sci fi movies a director had taken great effort to get the sciences right. And with all of Kubrick's films, the cinematography is skillfully done. A very artistic, beautiful movie, a visual triumph. The soundtrack too which uses classical music, is the stuff of legends. The Blue Danube is used for the second act which takes place in Earth orbit and at the moon. This classic waltz by Johann Strauss sets the mood for the second act, with its lightness and beauty, thus making the vision of man's journey into space seem ethereal. This balances well with the darker soundtrack that comes towards the films climax....Then there's the famous 2001 theme song, which everyone knows.

The film does slow down in the third act, when the astronauts are on the way to Jupiter, the movie slows to a crawl. Each scene is done slowly. I understand that Kubrick is giving us the feel for space, where task are tedious and take time...slow.

This is truly one of the all time great achievement in movie making.
rating_4_5

I've seen 2001: A Space Odyssey a few times, and sometimes I think Rock Hudson may have been right. I don't quite "get" the whole story, but the visuals and the music are enough to draw me in, hold my attention, and make me want to watch it again. The beginning of the movie is kind of boring, but it picks up after the part with the apes. I doubt I'll ever fully understand the movie, but I like watching it to pick up new things about it each time I see it.

Gooch

10-24-16, 11:54 AM

So here is the back and forth between my professor and I after I sent him your response and a quick explanation:

Gooch: "Somebody on a movie forum was talking about 2001: A Space Odyssey, and I posted what you'd said about HAL being way too big. I mentioned the problem with the heat he would generate. This was the reply:"

Citizen Rules: "That's interesting. I wonder why your computer teacher thinks the the size of the main frame of large computer like HAL would generate too much heat? Seems to me it would provide better air movement for cooling. Maybe HAL's processors were located on the outside of the ship for maximum cooling by the ultra cold of space. I guess Kubrick knew for sure."

Gooch: "I was curious about your thoughts on this. I know that they didn't have enough air moving to cool down HAL inside the ship, and aside from exposing their computer to the random elements of space, absolute zero temperatures would be too much for a CPU to function in.
Again, not urgent."

Goochs Professor: "Interesting, but I didn’t say a HAL sized computer would generate too much heat.
What I said was the size of the computer (distance the bits would have to travel through the system and the time it would take) would slow processing speed and thus severely limit processing speed. As a result, it would be impossible to develop a LARGE and intelligent computer.
I’ve attached a short clip out of a book I have that partially explains what I was actually saying. What I did not explain in class is the compromise between speed and inefficiency (heat generated). Small is faster but heat is a big problem. Large is slower, but heat is less of an issue.
I’ve attached a short clip out of a book I have that partially explains what I was actually saying."
(had to re-write this since it was just a link to a picture of some text. The header in the top right corner said "Quantum Physics".)
"The small size is important for speed, since the velocity of signals that travel down wires is less than the speed of light. In one typical computer cycle (1 nanosecond, or a billionth of a second), light can travel only 30 centimeters, or 1 foot. So to be able to exchange information with other parts of the computer, the whole thing must be small."

Citizen Rules

10-24-16, 12:55 PM

I haven't watched The Space Children or Space Master X-7, but I think most of these old sci-fi B-movies are basically the way you described them. They're fun movies with some plot holes, but they're also entertaining. I'd be surprised if they make the Sci-Fi Countdown, but they're usually worth watching for just for the fun of it. I don't know why but often I tend to enjoy them more than serious sci fi movies. I have 3 more B sci fi's to watch soon. I forget their names, one is Attack of the Crab Monsters.

I've seen 2001: A Space Odyssey a few times, and sometimes I think Rock Hudson may have been right. I don't quite "get" the whole story, but the visuals and the music are enough to draw me in, hold my attention, and make me want to watch it again. The beginning of the movie is kind of boring, but it picks up after the part with the apes. I doubt I'll ever fully understand the movie, but I like watching it to pick up new things about it each time I see it. I can give you a brief 'what the film is about' if you want me to.

Citizen Rules

10-24-16, 01:01 PM

Captain Steel

10-24-16, 02:15 PM

Guess that's why the human brain is only about as big as two fists!

Citizen Rules

10-24-16, 10:59 PM

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-3VsM9o9X1mE/V1wOno6HYXI/AAAAAAAANx4/tsZdp73XQkQ/s660/maxresdefault.jpg

Genius (2016)

Director: Michael Grandage
Writers: A. Scott Berg(novel), John Logan(screenplay)
Cast: Colin Firth, Jude Law, Nicole Kidman
Genre: Biography, Historical, Drama

Genius is based on a novel about the legendary literary editor, Max Perkins. The film takes place in New York 1929, during a particularly interesting time in American literature. Max Perkins was a man of foresight who recognized and published some of the greatest minds in early 20th century American literature. The list of writers who he edited and published is like a who's who list of the greats: including F.Scott Fitzgerald, Ernest Hemingway and the other star of the film, the wildly poetic and exuberant Thomas Wolfe.

Problem is, the director gives us next to nothing about the man Max Perkins (Colin Firth) and why he was such an amazing editor. I know Colin Firth can turn in a good performance, so perhaps it's the directors fault that his character is one dimensional. I learned next to nothing about the man, nor did the movie inspire me in anyway. I know Max Perkins is considered one of the great book editors, but you'd never know why from watching this film.

http://cdn.deseretnews.com/images/article/contentimage/1734352/1734352.jpg

The other problem is Jude Law's Thomas Wolfe is annoyingly over the top! Maybe the man really was this way. But the film makes him look like a loudmouth fool. And Nicole Kidman, yes she does an excellent job but her character isn't flushed out enough for us to really care.

I watch a lot of bio pics and historical period piece films, and they often fail to deliver...Genius, digs into the cliche basement one too many times. I wanted to shut this film off after only 10 minutes and it never got any better. The story is done with tension created by people yelling at each other and I know there was more to this story than tired tropes and pot boiler tricks.

rating_2_5

gbgoodies

10-25-16, 12:25 AM

I've seen 2001: A Space Odyssey a few times, and sometimes I think Rock Hudson may have been right. I don't quite "get" the whole story, but the visuals and the music are enough to draw me in, hold my attention, and make me want to watch it again. The beginning of the movie is kind of boring, but it picks up after the part with the apes. I doubt I'll ever fully understand the movie, but I like watching it to pick up new things about it each time I see it.

I can give you a brief 'what the film is about' if you want me to.

Thanks, but I've read a lot about it, and it doesn't seem to help. It's not the first movie that I didn't fully understand, and I'm sure that it won't be the last, but it's one of the few confusing movies that I like to rewatch to try to figure it out.

Gideon58

10-25-16, 11:08 AM

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-3VsM9o9X1mE/V1wOno6HYXI/AAAAAAAANx4/tsZdp73XQkQ/s660/maxresdefault.jpg

Genius (2016)

[FONT=Arial Narrow]Director: Michael Grandage
Writers: A. Scott Berg(novel), John Logan(screenplay)
Cast: Colin Firth, Jude Law, Nicole Kidman
Genre: Biography, Historical, Drama

Loved your review and as much as you seemed to not like the film, it has piqued my curiosity and will be adding it to my watchlist...Nicole Kidman is ALWAYS worth watching.

Gideon58

10-25-16, 11:13 AM

I've seen 2001: A Space Odyssey a few times, and sometimes I think Rock Hudson may have been right. I don't quite "get" the whole story, but the visuals and the music are enough to draw me in, hold my attention, and make me want to watch it again. The beginning of the movie is kind of boring, but it picks up after the part with the apes. I doubt I'll ever fully understand the movie, but I like watching it to pick up new things about it each time I see it.

I'll be honest, I saw this movie about a decade ago and was bored to death but am considering a re-watch after reading your review.

Citizen Rules

10-25-16, 01:02 PM

I'll be honest, I saw this movie about a decade ago and was bored to death but am considering a re-watch after reading your review. I think 2001: A Space Odyssey would be a hard watch for non sci-fi fans. It has a very thin story line and is a visual film. There's hardly any dialogue and much of what happens in the film, happens off screen, so that we never really are filled in on the details. But I think all of that is a big plus for the film as it makes it an enigma.

Citizen Rules

10-25-16, 04:46 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27589&stc=1&d=1477424696

Attack of the Crab Monsters (Roger Corman 1957)

Director/Producer: Roger Corman
Writer: Charles B. Griffith (screenplay)
Cast: Richard Garland, Pamela Duncan, Russell Johnson
Genre: Mutant Giant Creature Sci-Fi B Movie

"From the depths of the sea... a tidal wave of terror!"

About: A group of scientists on a mission to a mysterious island attempt to find the whereabouts of a previous science team that vanished. While there they discover mutant giant crabs who are intelligent. To make matters worse they're trapped on a sinking island.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27590&stc=1&d=1477424702

Review: Hooray for Roger Corman!..The king of B movies:p The drive-in movie theaters of the 1950's wouldn't have been the same without him. Roger Corman might very well have produced more films than any one else. His specialty were low budget sci fi and horror films. He shot Attack of the Crab Monsters in only 10 days and for a paltry sum of $70,000. This might best be described as C or D movie, as production values aren't nothing to write home about. But what Corman lacks in quality he makes up with colorful story lines.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27591&stc=1&d=1477424721

What's not to like about a pair of giant mutated crabs, that eat humans and can then talk telepathically in the eaten humans voice! I thought this was a fun way to spend an hour...and you get a babe, a bunch of scientist and the Professor, Russell Johnson from Gillian's Island.

rating_2_5+++

Chypmunk

10-25-16, 04:51 PM

Ha - was gonna watch that one tomorrow :eek:
I shall switch to an Invasion film now and leave that one 'til next week so it doesn't look like I'm copying you :)

Citizen Rules

10-25-16, 04:57 PM

Ha - was gonna watch that one tomorrow :eek:
I shall switch to an Invasion film now and leave that one 'til next week so it doesn't look like I'm copying you :)I'd be honored if you 'copied' me:p I was actually going to try and find the last sci fi flick you reviewed Beyond the Time Barrier.

Chypmunk

10-25-16, 05:13 PM

I'd be honored if you 'copied' me:p I was actually going to try and find the last sci fi flick you reviewed Beyond the Time Barrier.
Fair enough - we can do 'swapsies' then :D
(BTTB is on YouTube if you can't find it anywhere else)

Citizen Rules

10-25-16, 08:46 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27592&stc=1&d=1477439149
Not of This Earth (Roger Corman, 1957)

Director: Roger Corman
Cast: Paul Birch, Beverly Garland, Morgan Jones
Genre: Sci Fi, Thriller

About: A mysterious man in dark sun glasses is secretly gathering blood from victims that he meets on the streets. He himself is an alien from a dying planet called Davana. His mission is to determine if human blood can save the lives of the Davana's, who have poisoned their own blood with nuclear radiation from a prolonged war. If the human's blood is compatible, they will be put out to pasture for blood harvesting.

Review: In the 1950's director/producer Roger Corman produced film after film, all B budget movies. Mostly they made a big profit. Not of This Earth..deserves a better reputation than just another B movie. It has a lot of creepy vibe going for it and the premise is pretty nifty and it's suspenseful too.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27593&stc=1&d=1477439155

Plus it has two of the great character actors of the late 50's. Beverly Garland who plays the live-in nurse who's hired to transfuse blood to the alien in dark glasses, John Birch. The other is a very unlucky traveling vacuum salesman, Dick Miller, who worked in a lot of Corman's films.

I did think the alien bat-face hunger creature was a little silly, but it did remind me of the scene from Alien. So I guess nothing is really ever new, as it was done here first.

rating_3

rauldc14

10-25-16, 10:39 PM

I want to watch a few 50s B Movies as well. I enjoyed The Blob and The Invasion of the Saucer Men.

Citizen Rules

10-25-16, 10:46 PM

I want to watch a few 50s B Movies as well. I enjoyed The Blob and The Invasion of the Saucer Men. You've convince me to watch Invasion of the Saucer Men:p...It's on youtube btw and looks good. It's only an 66 minutes long so I should be able to squeeze that one in pretty soon.

Citizen Rules

10-25-16, 11:16 PM

https://entrelineasybisagras.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/vieja-medio.jpg
My Old Lady (2014)

Director: Israel Horovitz
Stars: Kevin Kline, Kristin Scott Thomas, Maggie Smith
Genre: Drama, Comedy
Length: 107 minutes

About: A self centered, unethical and unscrupulous American, Mathias ( Kevin Kline) inherits an apartment in Paris that comes with an unexpected resident an old lady who has a contract to live there (Maggie Smith).

Review: I thought this looked like my type of film. The first act was drama with light comedy supplied by a bitter, yet funny Kevin Kline who finds himself out of money and is willing to do whatever it took to get some cash. This is the type of role Kevin Kline was born to and he's very good at it!

But then the second act starts and oh! it was bleak, like a Eugene O'Neil play. On and on and on...about how horrible their childhood was and how messed up they were. It felt like being in a group therapy session with everybody dumping their deepest and darkest secrets out in public....not that I would know what one was like, but the second act really felt that way.

But then in the third act, the movie lightens up again. It's not a bad movie, and I did enjoy most parts of it. Kevin Kline and Maggie Smith had great chemistry. Certainly a worthy film to watch on a cold winter night.

rating_3

Chypmunk

10-26-16, 06:21 AM

I'll have to add Not Of This Earth to my watchlist for the countdown :up:

Gideon58

10-26-16, 10:46 AM

Citizen Rules

10-26-16, 10:29 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27600&stc=1&d=1477531680
War of the Satellites (Roger Corman 1958)

Director: Roger Corman
Cast: Dick Miller, Susan Cabot, Richard Devon
Genre: B budget Sci Fi
Length: 66 minutes

About: The United Nations is attempting to build manned satellites in Earth orbit. Each of the nine previous attempts to cross the Sigma energy barrier has ended in destruction of the satellite ships. Before the tenth attempt can take place, a message from an alien civilization crashes into the ground, to be found by two teenagers parked on lovers lane.

Review: In an interview with Roger Corman, he said the day after it was announced that the Russians had placed Sputnik satellite into orbit, he was pitching the idea for his War of the Satellites. The studio who was financing his film asked Roger what his film was about? Roger replied, that he didn't know, he only had the title, but...he would make a good film. In just six weeks latter and this film was in the theaters. This is why Roger Corman is the The King of B Movies!

War of the Satellites is a fun, quirky little movie. I got a laugh out of how spacious the inside of the satellite ship was...and check out those reclining chairs in the photo. Here's a hint, there is no war between satellites. Of the three Corman early sci fi films I seen, I liked this one least, but it was still a decent watch at only 66 minutes. The burial at space was a first for the big screen.

rating_2

.

Citizen Rules

10-26-16, 10:47 PM

https://www.movieposter.com/posters/archive/main/85/MPW-42762

S.O.B. (Blake Edwards, 1981)

Director: Blake Edwards
Writer: Blake Edwards
Cast: Julie Andrews, William Holden, Richard Mulligan & All Star
Genre: Comedy Parody

About:A down and out move producer who's previous movie was a huge flop, attempts to save his career by reworking his latest movie into an X rated erotic production. With the highlight being a family friendly star (Julie Andrews) take off her top.

Review: There's a rather cruel joke being played on the audience by the director Blake Edwards. Or maybe some would say, it's a witty joke. Either way, many a person has watched this enigma of a film without getting it. I got it...but still found the slapstick style of comedy tediously unfunny. Well Loretta Swit was funny and I'm not saying the other actors were bad, heck they were good and there's a lot of them too, but the script wasn't funny. Instead we get Blake Edwards' rant about Hollywood's shady side of the biz, which would be great if the script was clever and not boorish.

Oh, the big to do is that Julie Andrews bares her breast, hence making the movie a cult classic...and an enigma. It's more of a shock value than comedy value. I have to say Julie Andrews topless wasn't a thing of beauty, though the scene was kind of funny. The best thing for me about S.O.B. was all of the stars in it. It's a plethora of who's who in Hollywood.

http://www.tampabay.com/resources/images/blogs/80s/56788.png

rating_2_5

Citizen Rules

10-27-16, 03:01 PM

https://thehitchcockreport.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/0425.jpg
I Confess (Alfred Hitchcock, 1953)

Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Cast: Montgomery Clift, Anne Baxter, Karl Malden
Genre: Film Noir, Crime Drama

About: A priest who once had a love affair and now is under suspicion of murder but can't clear his name without breaking the seal of the confessional, where he learned the identity of the real killer.

Review: This is the 26th Hitchcock film that I've seen...I enjoyed I Confess, but I wouldn't rate it as one of my favorite Hitch films. I wasn't that engaged in the story, it never felt tense and it never felt like the priest was in any real danger. It still could have worked if we got some deep insight into the inner workings of a priest's life or a detailed police investigation. But both were only lightly touched upon. I would have liked to seen the identity of the murderer kept a secret until the end. That way we could have had some twist and turns.

Montgomery Clift was amazing in: Judgment at Nuremberg, The Misfits and A Place in the Sun...but here he's miscast and seemed to be off in his own world and not 'in the movie'. He lacked emotions and I didn't buy that he was a priest being investigated for murder, while burdened with the knowledge that he knows who the murderer is, but can't tell the police as it would violate the Catholic confessional.

I thought the actor who played the murder was really good in his role and overall it is a film that held my attention.

rating_3

Captain Steel

10-27-16, 09:19 PM

Sorry to do this to you, Rules, but whenever I see the words "I Confess" I have to post this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdDPjorVTUQ

Citizen Rules

10-27-16, 10:14 PM

Ha!...but I, Confess was actually the opposite of that clip:p

cricket

10-27-16, 10:35 PM

I noticed in the other thread you were going to watch Bone Tomohawk. You get to it?

Citizen Rules

10-27-16, 10:41 PM

I noticed in the other thread you were going to watch Bone Tomohawk. You get to it? No, I bailed on it. I watched 15 minutes and wasn't liking it, so I switched to an old B budget sci fi. Have you seen Bone Tomohawk? Did you like it?

cricket

10-27-16, 10:42 PM

I liked it a lot. I figured you would enjoy it until the end.

Citizen Rules

10-27-16, 10:43 PM

I might watch it, but it's over due at the library so I might have to get the DVD again.

cricket

10-27-16, 10:45 PM

Well, I don't really want to say anything because I don't know what you know about it. I think, if you didn't like the start, you probably shouldn't bother.

Citizen Rules

10-27-16, 10:46 PM

Well, I don't really want to say anything because I don't know what you know about it. I think, if you didn't like the start, you probably shouldn't bother.
That's helpful, really. I'm not knocking the film but geez, I have sooo many movies right now to watch that I have to pick and choose and right now I'm in sci-fi mode:p

cricket

10-27-16, 10:48 PM

If you're not going to watch it, I'll tell you more.

Citizen Rules

10-27-16, 10:50 PM

OK, tell me more.

cricket

10-27-16, 10:52 PM

In the latter stages, it turns into a very gory horror movie.

Captain Steel

10-27-16, 10:52 PM

That's helpful, really. I'm not knocking the film but geez, I have sooo many movies right now to watch that I have to pick and choose and right now I'm in sci-fi mode:p

Best mode to be in! ;)

Captain Steel

10-27-16, 10:55 PM

In the latter stages, it turns into a very gory horror movie.

I watched the chopping scene on YouTube - someone linked it not too long ago.

Citizen Rules

10-27-16, 10:57 PM

Best mode to be in! ;) I haven't watch sci fi in a long time. So I'm enjoying the sci fi countdown. Tonight I'm watching either: This Island Earth
or When Worlds Collide

Citizen Rules

10-27-16, 11:03 PM

http://thisdistractedglobe.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/Spellbound%20pic%202.jpg

Spellbound (Alfred Hitchcock, 1945)

Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Cast: Ingrid Bergman, Gregory Peck, Michael Chekhov
Genre: Film Noir Mystery

About: A woman psychiatrist (Ingrid Bergman) falls in love with her patient, (Gregory Peck) who suffers from amnesia. He's accused of murder, but believing him innocent she goes they go on the lam, while she attempts to recover his memory that might prove his innocence.

Review: I enjoyed this! It's an, interesting, romantic, mystery-thriller, but doesn't feel like a noir. It was ground breaking in being one of the first films to portray psychoanalyze, and it portrays that branch of medicine in a good light. Back in 1945 the mentally ill were still being treated as objects of fear and scorn...and were still be subjugated to barbarous treatments...so this gentle style of care as shown, was important for people to see.

I thought Ingrid Bergman and Gregory Peck were quite good and very believable as a romantic couple struggling with the mystery of Peck's identity and the logic of love being more initiative than psychoanalysis. The film itself is aware that the love of the doctor for her patient is illogical...so I don't see that as a flaw.

The love conflict is a major theme of the movie and even the elderly doctor in Rochester points out to Ingrid (and to the audience) that her love for Peck is not logical and not based on good science. But the films premise is that the heart can be more powerful than the mind and love can heal all. And I love that concept!

rating_4_5

Citizen Rules

10-27-16, 11:13 PM

In the latter stages, it turns into a very gory horror movie.I thought you were joking with me for fun, but I just read this at IMDB

In one of the stronger scenes, a man taken prisoner by the savage tribe has his scalp cut off along with his hair. The man is then killed in a gory manner with his torso being hacked into half, and his entrails falling out.

Citizen Rules

10-27-16, 11:27 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=26505&stc=1&d=1470340678
Face in the Crowd (Elia Kazan 1957)

Director: Elia Kazan
Cast: Andy Griffith, Patricia Neal, Anthony Franciosa
Genre: Social commentary drama

About: A drifter in jail (Andy Griffith) who with the help of a woman radio promoter (Patricia Neal) becomes an instant media sensation. As his stardom rises to ever increasing heights, he begins to believe his own hype. A case study of megalomania.

Review: I love this film, I loved it the first time I watched it and even more so after a rewatch. It's a hard hitting expose about the sleazy world of media, advertising and power...with a megalomaniac drifter who has no real talent except in self promotion. I couldn't help think just how prophetic this movie was. In 1957 it might have seemed far fetched and indeed it bombed at the box office, but in the 21st century, I couldn't help thinking about another American media mogul who has risen to dizzying heights of political power, all the while promoting himself as he insults those around him.

Elia Kazan was on a role in the 1950s. For most of that decade he was America's number one director with some big movie hits under his belt (until he testified before congress members in the infamous McCarthy Commie hunt.) Kazan liked doing social commentary, especially about injustices....And A Face in the Crowd is full of self reflection at our unbridled love of media celebrity. The bigger the hype the more we swallow it. Kazan and his script writer Budd Schulberg knew this and together give us one helluva powerful movie...The movie is constructed differently than most films, which is why I say it's an expose film.

Kazan was big on casting unique and new talent in his films. Here he introduces for the first time, Andy Griffith and Lee Remick. Griffith was anything but subtle in this role and had mainly worked in theater as a sort of comic personality...which suits the character of Lonesome Rhodes to a tee. I couldn't see any other actor doing this part, Griffith owns it. And Kazan and Schuberg thought so too, they searched for a long time until they found the one actor who they thought could pull off this role.

In the 2005 documentary Facing the Past, that was included on the DVD extras, Andy Griffith said Kazan encouraged the actors to use method acting and to visual their roles as if they were living them. Griffith says he became so emotionally involved in becoming Lonesome Rhodes that he suffered emotional difficulties for it. In a nutshell the man owns the character!

Patricia Neil is perfectly cast...and Lee Remick choose a damn fine film to make her movie premier in.

Oh and I loved the whole Vitajex scene, very different than the rest of the film, but it works wonders;)....and how naughty for the 1950s!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3RO3mtyHwz0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RO3mtyHwz0)

rating_5

gbgoodies

10-28-16, 02:24 AM

gbgoodies

10-28-16, 02:32 AM

gbgoodies

10-28-16, 02:39 AM

gbgoodies

10-28-16, 02:48 AM

I haven't watch sci fi in a long time. So I'm enjoying the sci fi countdown. Tonight I'm watching either: This Island Earth
or When Worlds Collide

You'll have to let me know if the movie When Worlds Collide has a scene with big spiders. I know it's either that or World Without End, but I can't remember which. (I think it's World Without End, but I don't want to accidentally watch the wrong movie. :eek:)

Chypmunk

10-28-16, 04:31 AM

Gideon58

10-28-16, 11:15 AM

[CENTER]http://thisdistractedglobe.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/Spellbound%20pic%202.jpg

[LEFT][CENTER]Spellbound (Alfred Hitchcock, 1945)

[LEFT]Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Cast: Ingrid Bergman, Gregory Peck, Michael Chekhov
Genre: Film Noir Mystery

Great movie...I actually saw this for the first time in my 11th grade psychology class...might be time for a re-watch.

Citizen Rules

10-28-16, 03:30 PM

You'll have to let me know if the movie When Worlds Collide has a scene with big spiders. I know it's either that or World Without End, but I can't remember which. (I think it's World Without End, but I don't want to accidentally watch the wrong movie. :eek:) I just watched When Worlds Collide last night I can safely say it has no spiders, I promise.

World Without End does have a giant spider, that looks hokey. (I haven't seen this one, I just looked up the images for it)

Citizen Rules

10-28-16, 03:33 PM

Ooooo .... I've seen of those both Hitch's and Spellbound is definitely the superior of the two with I Confess a decent enough watch but just a little lacking .... in other words .... I agree :) Guess I really ought to try A Face In The Crowd at some point, it's just one of those where the synopsis has never really excited me enough to do so yet.

It's bombastic, then again that's who the character is suppose to be. In a weird way, the loud mouth, drunk on his own power, character is like a 1950s version of Donald Trump.

Chypmunk

10-28-16, 03:35 PM

In a weird way, the loud mouth, drunk on his own power, character is like a 1950s version of Donald Trump.
Yeah ... you're not really selling it to me there ;)
I will get round to it at some point tho!

gbgoodies

10-28-16, 08:57 PM

I just watched When Worlds Collide last night I can safely say it has no spiders, I promise.

World Without End does have a giant spider, that looks hokey. (I haven't seen this one, I just looked up the images for it)

Thank You. :up:

Now I know which movie to rewatch, and which movie to avoid. :lol:

gbgoodies

10-28-16, 08:58 PM

It's bombastic, then again that's who the character is suppose to be. In a weird way, the loud mouth, drunk on his own power, character is like a 1950s version of Donald Trump.

That sounds about right. :lol:

Citizen Rules

10-29-16, 03:55 PM

http://www.moviemanuk.net/uploads/4/0/4/1/40414605/be124dbd-0963-4a8c-a5e1-61ac47825ef1-6665-00000a7c2f1ce5f0_orig.png
Café Society (Woody Allen, 2016)
Director: Woody Allen
Writer: Woody Allen
Cast: Jesse Eisenberg, Kristen Stewart, Steve Carell, Blake Lively
Genre: Comedy, Drama, Romance

About: In the 1930s, a nervous young man from the Bronxs travels to Hollywood to get a job with his uncle, the movie producer. There he falls in love with a young woman who's already involved with a married man.

Review: If you've seen any Woody Allen film made in the last 10 years, then you've already seen this one! Cafe Society is the same old rehash that Woody has been telling in one form or another for a long while. The film is basically a visual representation of Woody Allen's fantasies. Like most of his latter films, Woody writes a main character to represent himself in the movie. This time it's Jesse Eisenberg who plays a caricature of Woody. He does the same stumbling, muttering dialogue, the hunch over stance while playing a slightly neurotic, babbling young geekish man who just happens to have beautiful women falling all over him....all while ending up in Woody's dream world of the past, the 1930s, filled with glamour and jazz. We've seen this film before!

A younger Woody Allen himself was funny in his own movies, but the elderly Woody constantly casting a character in his own likeness (nervous, self loathing, New York Intellectual, who by some stroke of luck is irresistible to woman) has gotten pathetically old hat.

Quote from Orson Welles:I hate Woody Allen physically, I dislike that kind of man. I can hardly bear to talk to him...That particular combination of arrogance and timidity sets my teeth on edge... To me, it’s the most embarrassing thing in the world—a man who presents himself at his worst to get laughs, in order to free himself from his hang-ups. Everything he does on the screen is therapeutic.
Orson WellesHow prophetic! It's a good thing Orson isn't around to witness Woody still doing the same thing nearly 50 years latter...making movies that are all about one of the most uninteresting persons in the world, Woody Allen.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27612&stc=1&d=1477767297

The two saving graces of this film is: Woody does know how to dress and shoot a period piece movie to make it look stunning. The other grace is Blake Lively (The Age of Adeline). Blake out charms and out classes the rest of the cast, especially the inept Jesse Eisenberg and the milquetoast Kristen Stewart.

rating_2_5

Citizen Rules

10-29-16, 11:35 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27632&stc=1&d=1477794883
When Worlds Collide (1951)

Director: Rudolph Maté
Writers: Edwin Balmer(novel)
Cast: Richard Derr, Barbara Rush, Peter Hansen
Genre: Sci-Fi

About: A new star is discovered with an orbiting planet and scientist calculate that the new star will crash into Earth, destroying all life.
With less than a year to do so, a group of scientist hurriedly build a large rocket with the hopes of taking 40 people to another planet to start over again.

Review: George Pal the producer and man behind When Worlds Collide, was well known in the 1950s as producing, big budget, A list sci-fi movies with amazing special effects including: Destination Moon (1950), The War of the Worlds (1953) and The Time Machine (1960).

When Worlds Collide is a neat film, with impressive special effects for the day. The story at times is exciting and at other times a little dry, but always the film attempts to include as much hard science as it can for 1950s audiences. Shot in Technicolor the film looks great and the large rocket ship-plane is pretty darn cool!

We also get a romance triangle with a young Barbara Rush in the middle. On top of that is a look at the dark side of humanity represented by a greedy rich, older man in a wheel chair who wants to buy his way to safety but cares nothing for the rest of humanity.

I thought this was a pretty cool sci fi flick.

rating_3_5

gbgoodies

10-30-16, 03:07 AM

I haven't seen Café Society, but I'm very hit or miss with Woody Allen's movies. I'm not much of a fan of Jesse Eisenberg either, so that, in addition to your review, which doesn't make the movie sound like it's worth my time anyway, means I'll probably just pass on this movie.

gbgoodies

10-30-16, 03:09 AM

I remember bits and pieces of When Worlds Collide, but I'll probably rewatch it for the Sci-Fi Countdown.

Captain Steel

10-30-16, 04:04 AM

I remember bits and pieces of When Worlds Collide, but I'll probably rewatch it for the Sci-Fi Countdown.

GBG, Just wanted to let you know that I finally watched Time After Time (1979) which I believe was based on your recommendation. It's one sci-fi movie I'd never seen, but saw it pop up on TCM On-Demand so gave it a watch. Thanks.

Citizen Rules

10-30-16, 12:55 PM

Captain Steel

10-30-16, 02:51 PM

Time After Time is pretty good, especially thanks to a good-bad guy David Warner...and a good but usually bad guy Malcolm McDowell. I had never seen that film either until GBG nominated in the Sci Fi HoF. So score two points for GBG:)

I love Mary Steenburgen, but her performance in this movie seemed a little wonky. It almost seemed like she was channeling a Diane Keaton character from a Woody Allen movie.
Just strange, but neat to see her in one of her early roles.

As with a lot of time travel movies I couldn't help but wonder at the supposed dilemma when they have access to a time machine - they could simply go back and prevent unwanted things from happening as many times as they wanted to. Wells could have just gone back to the beginning of the film and detained "Jack" back in the 19th century until the police arrived. ;)

But, apparent time-travel plot paradoxes aside, an interesting film especially since they went the route of using historical figures rather than Wells' character known as "The Traveler."

Gideon58

10-30-16, 03:25 PM

[CENTER]http://www.moviemanuk.net/uploads/4/0/4/1/40414605/be124dbd-0963-4a8c-a5e1-61ac47825ef1-6665-00000a7c2f1ce5f0_orig.png
Café Society (Woody Allen, 2016)
[LEFT]Director: Woody Allen
Writer: Woody Allen
Cast: Jesse Eisenberg, Kristen Stewart, Steve Carell, Blake Lively
Genre: Comedy, Drama, Romance

Woody is always worth watching IMO and I will be adding this one to my watchlist.

Gideon58

10-30-16, 03:27 PM

Citizen Rules

10-30-16, 03:29 PM

I highly recommend Face in the Crowd to you, I think you will like it:)

Woody is always worth watching IMO and I will be adding this one to my watchlist. I'd be interested in seeing your review of this one. I would have scored it much higher had someone other then Jesse Eisenberg been cast as the lead/proxy for Woody. The rest of the film was decent, it looked great.

Citizen Rules

10-30-16, 03:34 PM

I love Mary Steenburgen, but her performance in this movie seemed a little wonky. It almost seemed like she was channeling a Diane Keaton character from a Woody Allen movie.
Just strange, but neat to see her in one of her early roles.

As with a lot of time travel movies I couldn't help but wonder at the supposed dilemma when they have access to a time machine - they could simply go back and prevent unwanted things from happening as many times as they wanted to. Wells could have just gone back to the beginning of the film and detained "Jack" back in the 19th century until the police arrived. ;)

But, apparent time-travel plot paradoxes aside, an interesting film especially since they went the route of using historical figures rather than Wells' character known as "The Traveler." Yeah, I don't know what was with Mary Steenburgen in this film. I wrote this in my review of Time After Time

This was Mary Steenburgen second major film and she does have a weird way of talking in this film. She spoke very slowly, almost like she was dazed or dimwitted. But her character was supposedly a smart, self made woman. I liked her in this film anyway. Her and Malcom had good chemistry. In fact they married shortly after this film. The best thing to do with time paradoxes is don't over think them, artistic licenses you know;)

Captain Steel

10-30-16, 06:40 PM

Okay - so it wasn't just me (as far as Mary Steenburgen's acting in Time After Time)! ;)
I had no idea she married Malcom McDowell!!! Never knew that!
A movie that drove me crazy with time paradoxes was About Time (2013).

I've never seen Face In the Crowd, but coincidentally my brother was telling me about it not long ago. We were talking about Andy Griffith and I mentioned his movie career before his TV series... I knew he was in No Time for Sergeants, and I said something about whether he was playing a country bumpkin or not, he always played big-hearted good guys. That's when my brother told me that wasn't so for Face in the Crowd - that the character was a complete departure from the roles Andy usually played.

Citizen Rules

10-30-16, 06:50 PM

Okay - so it wasn't just me (as far as Mary Steenburgen's acting in Time After Time)! ;) I don't know what kind of effect she was going for by talking like that. I mean was her character suppose to be stoned? Or recently bopped on the head? I don't get it.

I had no idea she married Malcom McDowell!!! Never knew that! Yea, I never knew about that, until I just read my own review¯\_(ツ)_/¯(meaning I had forgotten that tidbit of info, until just now.)

A movie that drove me crazy with time paradoxes was About Time (2013). I've never seen that, but it is on my list of sci fi's to watch for the countdown. I have 223 movies on that list!

That's when my brother told me that wasn't so for Face in the Crowd - that the character was a complete departure from the roles Andy usually played. If you read my review, I learned from IMDB that Andy Griffith was so deep in the character that he claims it caused him emotional discomfort.

Captain Steel

10-30-16, 06:59 PM

Citizen Rules

10-30-16, 07:05 PM

Regarding About Time - it's one of those weird ones that's almost difficult to classify as sci-fi.
For the most part it's a romance movie, but the plot revolves around time travel. But - unlike movies such as Back to the Future, there's no science (technology, time machines, etc.) behind it, so it might be accurately categorized as "fantasy"?
In this movie the ability to time travel is inherited and sometimes passed from one generation to the next! (But it still encompasses all the questions & paradoxes that time travel stories bring up.) I'd call it close enough to be sci fi. To me fantasy is Harry Potter or LOTR. Have you seen The Time Traveler's Wife (2009) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0452694/)
or Predestination (2014) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2397535/)

GBG told me about both of those and the first is sort of like you describe About Time, I though it was very well done. Predestination is more tripper and I thought very cool.

Captain Steel

10-30-16, 07:14 PM

Citizen Rules

10-30-16, 07:23 PM

I keep passing over the Time Travelers Wife (but can watch it because it's in the On-Demand list for my cable package).

Another I plan to watch but keep putting off which is also on the list is Transcendence (2014) starring Johnny Depp - it's description sounds like sci-fi, but IMDB doesn't categorize it as such (only as "Drama, Mystery, Romance").
IMDB categorizes About Time as "Comedy, Drama, Fantasy".

Never heard of Predestination - but I see it stars Ethan Hawke, so I'll have to look for it.

Transcendence is hard sci fi. IMDB is run by drunken monkeys:eek:
I reviewed that film and I think I really give a good impression of what it's about, and without spoiling any plot lines...and while being brief. Take a look at my review

http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1257651#post1257651

Time Travelers Wife is heavy on romance, drama and the human spirit. But it's not hard sci fi. Still I really enjoyed it.

mark f

10-30-16, 07:38 PM

IMDb also lists Transcendence as "Sci-Fi" and "Thriller" farther down the page under "Genres" where they list all the genres alphabetically.

Citizen Rules

10-30-16, 10:11 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27648&stc=1&d=1477876219
This Island Earth (1955)

Director: Joseph M. Newman
Cast: Jeff Morrow, Faith Domergue, Rex Reason
Genre: Sci-Fi

About: A scientist working on an improved method of converting uranium for atomic power, receives a mysterious package from an unknown electronics firm. Included is a highly advanced electronics and a manual for building an 'interocitor'...After the scientist completes building the interocitor unit, he's contacted by a strange looking man who invites him to an advanced research project...which ends up looking like a trap.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27649&stc=1&d=1477876236

Review: This Island Earth is a big budget, technicolor, sci fi film that was well received by audiences back in the 50s. Based on the novel by Raymond F. Jones, This Island Earth. I found the story line very different than most 50's sci fi, as it was more thought out and involved. The first two thirds of the film that take place on Earth is excellent. Perhaps the best part of the film is the alien Exeter played by Jeff Morrow. He has both a wisdom and a sadness to him that is rare for such a film. And yet he's threatening as well. The third act of the film after they leave Earth feels rushed and not as well thought out.

Kudos to the make up department for creating a unique look for the Metalunans. They are not too weird looking, so we can relate to them, but just odd enough to make them threatening. The film's poster advertises that this took 2 1/2 years to make, and indeed the film looks great.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27650&stc=1&d=1477876564

If I had one complaint it was the inclusion of the mutant worker, which adds nothing to the story line. Universal Studios head Edward Muhl at the time thought sci fi should have monsters for the kids. And this film does. Luckily the monster part takes up only a few minutes of an otherwise engaging and creative movie.

rating_3_5

Citizen Rules

10-31-16, 10:09 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27657&stc=1&d=1477961748
Invasion of the Saucer Men (1957)

Director: Edward L. Cahn
Cast: Steven Terrell, Gloria Castillo, Frank Gorshin
Genre: Sci Fi Monster Comedy
Length: 69 minutes

The 1950's were the heyday of the drive-in movie theater. An American phenomenon that started back in the 1930's and really took off after WWII, with a younger generation who had easy access to cars and wanted to do everything in them! including watching movies!

By 1958 there were over 5000 drive-ins which helped create a new genre of movies the: teen drive-in B movie. These were cheaply made and often featured teens in the lead roles and they were short, around an hour long. Which allowed the drive-in owners to start the show after sun down, run the first movie, then have a break for intermission (that's where the money was made) and still have time to show the second movie, as drive-ins almost always had a double feature. All this had to be done and still allow people to get home at a decent time. Especially as drive-ins were big with teens and young married couples with children.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27658&stc=1&d=1477961772

Invasion of the Saucer Men is a 1957 science fiction/horror comedy film, release by American International Pictures as a double feature along with I Was a Teenage Werewolf. Movies made specifically for the drive-ins became important as first run movies from the big studios were usually only available at walk-in theaters. Hence the need for movie distributors like AIP to step up and fill the void.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27659&stc=1&d=1477961784

Invasion of the Saucer Men is a heck of a fun flick! Just don't expect hard science fiction or big budget film making. It has comic elements that are clever, without being hokey or slapstick. The teens park on 'lovers lane' to 'make out' in their cars, which is actually in a cow field! When a bright light appears, a pair of inquisitive teens accidentally run over an alien. They try to call the police, but everyone thinks they're drunk! To make matters worse whenever the aliens are around, a strong smell of alcohol is the air, which is blamed on the teens. Meanwhile the air force is busy covering up 'another' UFO site. While the police try to arrest the kids!

Fun rating rating_3

gbgoodies

11-01-16, 01:31 AM

GBG, Just wanted to let you know that I finally watched Time After Time (1979) which I believe was based on your recommendation. It's one sci-fi movie I'd never seen, but saw it pop up on TCM On-Demand so gave it a watch. Thanks.

I'm glad you finally watched Time After Time. You didn't say much about it though. Did you like it? (You can tell me the truth, even if you hated it, but I hope you liked it.)

Captain Steel

11-01-16, 01:43 AM

I'm glad you finally watched Time After Time. You didn't say much about it though. Did you like it? (You can tell me the truth, even if you hated it, but I hope you liked it.)

Overall, I liked it. As I said in a former post, Mary Steenburgen's acting was a bit wonky! As Rules pointed out - she was supposed to be this independent modern career woman, but at times she sounded like she was stoned or some kind of ditzy airhead.
And I started questioning the time travel paradoxes (since Wells had access to a time machine why not just go back and prevent ALL the trouble before any of it started, then he could return to the future to go on dates with his new girlfriend without having to chase a killer?) ;)

Being from '79 it felt a little dated (but hey, I like "B" sci-fis from the 50's).

It had some wonderful little moments (it's always fun imagining how someone from the past might view the future). For some reason I keep remembering when Wells is in McDonalds just rubbing the plastic table top in utter awe... then he says to a stranger next to him, "I've never seen wood like this before!"

gbgoodies

11-01-16, 01:55 AM

Overall, I liked it. As I said in a former post, Mary Steenburgen's acting was a bit wonky! As Rules pointed out - she was supposed to be this independent modern career woman, but at times she sounded like she was stoned or some kind of ditzy airhead.
And I started questioning the time travel paradoxes (since Wells had access to a time machine why not just go back and prevent ALL the trouble before any of it started, then he could return to the future to go on dates with his new girlfriend without having to chase a killer?) ;)

Being from '79 it felt a little dated (but hey, I like "B" sci-fis from the 50's).

It had some wonderful little moments (it's always fun imagining how someone from the past might view the future). For some reason I keep remembering when Wells is in McDonalds just rubbing the plastic table top in utter awe... then he says to a stranger next to him, "I've never seen wood like this before!"

I'm catching up on the rest of this thread now, and I read what you guys said about Mary Steenburgen's acting. I agree with both of you about that, but I think that Malcolm McDowell and David Warner more than make up for her. I loved both of them in Time After Time.

I think there's something about Mary Steenburgen's voice that makes her sound a bit wonky sometimes. I didn't really like her much in Back to the Future III either, but I don't dislike her either. (It's kind of like the way that Judy Holliday usually sounds like a bit of a ditz because of her voice.)

I loved Mary Steenburgen when she was a guest on an episode of the TV show "Becker". She plays a patient, and Dr. Becker says "I pity the poor bastard married to her.". Dr. Becker was played by her husband Ted Danson. :lol:

Captain Steel

11-01-16, 02:19 AM

gbgoodies

11-01-16, 03:54 AM

I've actually never seen any of the Back to the Future sequels (not in their entirety anyway).

I've liked Mary in most things I've seen her in, which isn't much.
I liked her in Powder (1995) and especially in Parenthood (1989).

There was always something attractive about her and she seems to have matured nicely with time (with her acting and otherwise)! It was just a kick to see her acting all ditzy in her second film role especially since it was a complete surprise to me that she was in the movie when I put it on.

Another line that stands out from Time After Time, when Jack the Ripper says, "Ninety years ago I was a freak, today I'm an amateur."

You should watch the Back to the Future sequels when you get a chance. IMO, they're not as good as the first movie, but they're worth seeing. Back to the Future III is my least favorite, but not because of Mary Steenburgen. I just didn't like it as much as the other two movies.

I haven't seen either Powder or Parenthood, but Powder is on my watchlist.

In reference to some of the other sci-fi movies you guys mentioned:

If About Time is the movie that I think it is, I tried watching it a while back because it sounded like my kind of movie, but the guy who starred in it, (I don't know his name), had such a strong accent that I found it distracting and turned the movie off. It's on my watchlist for the sci-fi countdown.

I loved both The Time Traveler's Wife and Predestination, and they're both strong candidates for my sci-fi list.

I haven't seen Transcendence, and I've read mixed reviews of it, but it's on my watchlist for the sci-fi countdown so I can make my own decision about it.

Chypmunk

11-01-16, 04:11 AM

Citizen Rules

11-01-16, 01:10 PM

Saucer Men is on my list for watching sometime this week; will have to see if I can find a copy of This Island Earth somewhere for a rewatch!
Hopefully at some point the number on my sci-fi watchlist will start going down instead of keep creeping up :D The copy of Invasion of the Saucer Men on youtube worked, but wasn't the greatest quality. I read that the movie is out of print so that a really good copy might be hard to find. I have a few more George Pal and Roger Corman sci fi's to watch. Hopefully I'll get to them soon:p

Citizen Rules

11-01-16, 10:35 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27671&stc=1&d=1478050642
Going Attractions:
The Definitive Story of the American Drive-in Movie (2013)

Director: April Wright
Writer: April Wright
Cast: Roger Corman, Patricia King Hanson
Genre: Documentary History Americana

I really liked this documentary it was fast paced, well made, with interviews and lots of neat photos and film shot at surviving drive-in theaters. It's all about the phenomenon of the American drive-in movie theater. Once in the late 1950s there were over 5000 drive-ins, today they are only about 400 that still show movies. Most of the theaters are either in a start of disrepair or have been torn down and turned into shopping centers. The documentary explores the reason why drive-in theaters were once popular and why they fall out of favor.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27673&stc=1&d=1478050661

It's kind of sad for me as I grew up going to drive in theaters. I went as a little kid with my parents. I'd be in my pajamas so when I got tired I would fall asleep in the back seat. I remember as a little kid the best part was they playground. This documentary was put together by a woman film maker who directed and wrote it.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27672&stc=1&d=1478050653

The director traveled around the U.S. visiting abandoned drive-in theaters and talking to the owners of the the ones still working. I thought this was entertaining and informative with lots of historical photos and facts. I went to drive-ins theaters on dates and so I could relate to this film. Sadly in my area all the drive-ins are long gone.

rating_3_5+

Gideon58

11-02-16, 11:15 AM

Gideon58

11-02-16, 11:16 AM

I've liked Mary in most things I've seen her in, which isn't much.
I liked her in Powder (1995) and especially in Parenthood (1989).

Loved Steenburgen in Parenthood.

Citizen Rules

11-02-16, 01:11 PM

Good post Gideon, and no you never talked about going to drive-ins as a kid before. I thought maybe some of us older MoFos might have done that before. My parents did the same thing, put us little kids into pajamas and drove off to the drive-in theater. For me as a little kid the playground was the fun part, I can't even image playing on toys in front of 100s of cars with other little kids...while wearing my pajamas!:eek:

I looked up the V Drive-In theater, there are some web pages about it:

"The V Drive-In was located on the Vestal Parkway in Vestal, NY. It’s most distinguishing feature was that you drove into the theater right under the screen. There was playground equipment on a enbankment in front of the screen in its early days, but these were gone by the 1980’s. The theater was torn down in 1991 to make way for a large strip mall. A movie theater now sits where the projection building was."

V Drive-In links:
http://www.newyorkdriveins.com/southerntierregion/vestal/vestal.php

https://drive-ins.com/theater/nytvdri/v-drive-in-theater-vestal-ny

Drive-In data base,(is your old drive-in still standing?)
http://www.driveintheater.com/

http://www.newyorkdriveins.com/southerntierregion/vestal/vestalscreen.jpg

Citizen Rules

11-02-16, 11:34 PM

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/AJoh2-uDMKc/sddefault.jpg
Lions for Lambs (2007)
Director: Robert Redford
Cast: Tom Cruise, Meryl Streep, Robert Redford
Genre: Political Drama
Length: 92 minutes

So just what is it, that you (the reader) wants to know about this movie? Hmmm...I guess that's my job as a reviewer to guess at...So I need to try and write what makes this movie different than all the other upteen movies out there. Not an easy task as Lions for Lambs is neither an amazing film or a crummy one. Nor is it mediocre. But I don't want you to think that it's blasé, it's not.

Lions for Lambs is three, 30 minute movies in one. There are three different but related stories that take place at the same time.

Story 1 has Meryl Streep as an experienced news journalist who's granted an exclusive one on one interview with an up an coming senator played by Tom Cruise. The senator wants to sell the news media on the Presidents plan for using elite forces in Afghanistan.

Story 2 is set in Afghanistan with two Army rangers trapped behind enemy lines as a result of the President's new war plans being put into effect.

Story 3 is about a professor, Robert Redford who tries to convince a promising student to take his studies and his life seriously. His former students are the two Rangers from story 2.

I though this was a pretty decent little movie. It's only 90 minutes so it doesn't get too deep, but on the other hand it was always interesting.

So there you have it.

rating_3

Citizen Rules

11-02-16, 11:58 PM

https://scdn.nflximg.net/images/1400/2691400.jpg
Incident at Oglala (1992)

Director: Michael Apted
Narrator: Robert Redford
Genre: Historical Documentary
Length: 99 minutes

This documentary narrated by Robert Redford covers the events of June 26, 1975 when two FBI agents in pursuit of a Native American suspect drove onto the Pine Ridge Indian reservation in South Dakota. A shoot out followed in which the agents were both shot and then latter executed at close range. Several members of the reservation were charged with the crime. These men had ties to an the activist group AIM, American Indian Movement. Ultimately the documentary uncovers a state of fear that took place on the reservation due to corruption in the administration of the reservation and a hostile split on the reservation between the traditionalist who followed traditional beliefs and the more westernized members of the reservation.

This is a very well done documentary that covers an important piece of forgotten history, but it shouldn't be forgotten. One man is still in prison to this day. Some say he's innocent, others say he murdered two FBI agents. The film takes an even approach and interviews people from both sides who were involved with the incident. Which allows the viewer to draw their own conclusions. It also uncovers a sickening amount of corruption and abuse by both the judicial system and abuses by those in charge of the reservation, the tribal chairman.

I was surprised at how good this was. A must see.

rating_4

Citizen Rules

11-03-16, 11:01 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27691&stc=1&d=1478225361
2010: The Year We Make Contact (1984)

Director: Peter Hyams
Writers: Arthur C. Clarke (novel), Peter Hyams (screenplay)
Cast: Roy Scheider, John Lithgow, Helen Mirren, Bob Balaban, Keir Dullea
Genre: Sci-Fi Mystery

About: In this sequel to Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey, we find a joint U.S.- Russian expedition being sent on a Russian space ship to Jupiter. Their mission to learn what has happened to the first ship Discovery, and the missing astronaut Dave Bowman. There in orbit is a giant monolith the same one Dave Bowman had encountered nine years early. The only clue is his last message:

https://nitehawkcinema.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/600full-2010-the-year-we-make-contact-screenshot.png

Review: I don't know why people are so down on this film. Sure the idea of sequels seem like a tired money making idea...and sure this isn't directed by Stanley Kubrick...and yes this has a totally different feel than 2001...But all of the doesn't make this a bad movie.

First, a lot of credit for 2001 goes to Stanley Kubrick as it should, but lets not forget the man who came up with the idea and wrote the story, novelist Arthur C. Clarke. And 2010 is based on Arthur C. Clarke's second novel in the series, named 2010. So this is not, just another attempt to make money. This movie gives fans more of the story that 2001 presented as a mystery.

Second, the director pays respect to 2001 and never tries to out do it or ruin it's continuity, 2010 is respectful to the original 2001. The director Peter Hymas spoke to Kubrick and got his 'blessing' to make this film. And he even pays tribute to both Kubrick and Clarke on a cameo magazine cover.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27690&stc=1&d=1478225286

What 2010 does right is to fill in some of the mystery of 2001, while importantly leaving the main mystery, as a mystery. 2010 tells it's narrative through the human experience via some very talented actors. The characters they play, take the part of 2001's vast visuals. Here the story comes with the heart of the characters via emotions.

I found 2010 to be a touching movie, in a spiritual, metaphysical, mystical way. And I've found myself thinking about the film and the greater idea of something more important than ourselves. And that's rare for a film to do that.

rating_4

Captain Steel

11-03-16, 11:53 PM

I've always viewed the two movies this way:
2001 is part sci-fi movie, part work of art. While 2010 is a decent sci-fi movie.
The first translates a story into an impressionist statement on existentialism set down on film, the second tells the rest of the story using a science fiction movie.

Chypmunk

11-04-16, 04:29 AM

2010 is decent, it's certainly not the same spectacle as 2001 but never understood the hate for it myself - nice to see someone else enjoy it for what it is.

Citizen Rules

11-04-16, 01:29 PM

2010 is decent, it's certainly not the same spectacle as 2001 but never understood the hate for it myself - nice to see someone else enjoy it for what it is. Lots of great scenes once they get into space, which happens quickly. The few scenes shot on Earth are nothing to write home about, IMO. Though the dolphin pool in the house was pretty cool. I assumed the dolphins were free range and could swim out to the ocean when they wanted.

Gideon58

11-04-16, 04:27 PM

Lots of great scenes once they get into space, which happens quickly. The few scenes shot on Earth are nothing to write home about, IMO. Though the dolphin pool in the house was pretty cool. I assumed the dolphins were free range and could swim out to the ocean when they wanted.

I tried to watch 2010 once...it was only slightly more interesting than 2001, which is not exactly a glowing testament.

Gideon58

11-04-16, 04:29 PM

[CENTER]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/AJoh2-uDMKc/sddefault.jpg
[LEFT]Lions for Lambs (2007)
Director: Robert Redford
Cast: Tom Cruise, Meryl Streep, Robert Redford
Genre: Political Drama
Length: 92 minutes

I tried to watch this once and turned it off about 15 minutes in...out of respect for you Citizen, I will give it another shot.

Citizen Rules

11-05-16, 12:11 AM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27695&stc=1&d=1478314766
Things to Come (1936)

Director: William Cameron Menzies
Writer: H.G. Wells(novel), H.G. Wells(screenplay)
Cast: Raymond Massey, Edward Chapman, Ralph Richardson
Genre: Sci Fi, political social commentary

H.G. Wells' story of a 40 year long war that starts in 1936 and plunges most of mankind into a 'dark age' like anarchy...complete with plaques and a strong-man chieftain. Thus the continual war making, ends man's technological progress...But far to the south, a group of people, the 'Air Men' have avoided war, embraced rationality and eventually bring a near utopian civilization to the Earth.

Things To Come is not the most popular sci-fi movie ever made, but at the time it was an ambitious movie, costing a million dollars! With it's foreword looking themes and futuristic sets it's still worth watching, if for no other reason than the novelty of seeing what people in the past thought the future would look like.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27696&stc=1&d=1478314777

One of the things they got right was the big open atrium of the city, complete with exterior elevators and terraces, just like modern hotels have today. The other forward looking idea was the use of big screen TVs. Not bad for a 1936 movie. Luckily no one in the 21st century wears that type of clothing!

Overall not a gripping film, in fact it's said that it set back sci fi for a decade, as the big budget film failed and studios were reluctant to make another sci fi like this.

rating_3_5

Captain Steel

11-05-16, 03:02 AM

Citizen Rules

11-05-16, 10:38 PM

Things To Come (along with a mere handful of other films) really stands out since science fiction wasn't even a movie genre in the 30's.

Granted, horror was a popular genre, and some of those stories crossed over into sci-fi (such as Frankenstein and the Invisible Man), but they were still considered horror as opposed to sci-fi. Captain when was the last time you watched Things To Come? I have never seen it before and was amazed! to see a couple of iconic shots in the film. Does this shot from Things To Come, remind you of anything?

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27708&stc=1&d=1478396296

Citizen Rules

11-05-16, 10:58 PM

https://dr56wvhu2c8zo.cloudfront.net/killermovies/assets/images/video-44893-1448045012-640x360.jpg
Attack of the Giant Leeches (1959)

Director: Bernard L. Kowalski
Cast: Ken Clark, Yvette Vickers, Jan Shepard
Genre: Sci Fi/Horror B budget-Drive In
Length: 62 minutes

Don't let the cheesy name fool you, this is a pretty darn interesting movie! It's a cut above the usual, B-budget teen drive-in monster movies that were produced in the 1950's. This one was produced by Gene Corman, younger brother to Roger Corman. Put it this way, you could remove the monster from the film and you would still have an interesting and colorful story.

What I thought was interesting was the backwoods bayou take on the atomic large sized monster craze...this time it's giant intelligent leaches. OK, OK...I know that sounds cheesy but the main story is about a portly man who runs a store where all his Cajun buddies hang out. Just so happens he married to a very hot and trampy woman, who talks down to him causing him all sorts of embarrassments, even worse she runs around on him, behind his back, ala Baby Doll. There's a pretty steamy scene too, where the wife, Playboy playmate Yvette Vickers is sensually messaging lotion on her long legs as a cigarette dangles from her mouth. Letting us know, she's a bad girl for sure!

http://img.youtube.com/vi/kO1rTrE0hDY/hqdefault.jpg
Sorry for the poor quality of the pic, I couldn't find a better one.

Her husband who looks like Raymond Burr from Ironsides, catches his best friend with his cheatin' younger wife and chases them around the bayou with a shotgun, pretty intense, especially as he makes them get into the water where the giant leaches are lurking! Later the police believes he's done them in and hid the bodies.

Meanwhile there's a city slicker game warden who's trying to stop the illegal pouching, which puts him at odds with the bayou folks and even his girlfriend. His girlfriends dad is the local doctor and wants to use dynamite to blow up the creatures, which is a clear violation in the game wardens eyes.

Best of all is the giant leaches, we never really see them clearly, it's always dark and in the water, so it's up to our immigration to decide what they really look like. What makes them horrific is they keep their victims alive and suck their blood. The cave scene is chilling, even by today's standards.

https://goregirl.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/attack-of-the-giant-leeches3.jpg?w=450&h=327

At only 1 hour, there's lots to like in this movie!

rating_3_5

Citizen Rules

11-05-16, 11:16 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=26579&stc=1&d=1471023072
Touch of Evil (1958)
Director: Orson Welles
Writer: Orson Welles(screenplay)
Cast: Charlton Heston, Orson Welles, Janet Leigh
Genre: Film Noir

Marlene Dietrich once said of her time working with the great Orson Welles, ''People should cross themselves when they speak of him''. Indeed, Orson was a genius and he shows his mastery of visual arts in his 1958 film noir, Touch of Evil.

The films opening sequences goes down in the annuals of cinematography as one of the great camera shots of all time. We, the audience, sees one long and uninterrupted tracking shot. Orson set the bar with this shot which latter would be duplicated by other film makers.

Originally Universal Pictures, the studio bank rolling the movie, wanted the film to be shot on a studio lot on constructed sets. But Orson would have none of that preferring to shoot in a real city. He decided to film almost exclusively at night, which gave him control over the production. Sadly, during post production editing, Orson was out of the country and so despite his objections, the film was cut up by the studio. A situation that ironically Orson complains about in the movie Ed Wood.

https://40.media.tumblr.com/8b84b0de10ba81b809ea21cf244201dd/tumblr_inline_npn2g7UcJF1swtpm9_540.jpg
Orson Welles as the corrupt Police Chief, Hank Quinlan

With the sole exception of Citizen Kane, Orson's feature films would all suffer the same indignation of being hacked up by the studios, thus destroying much of Welles' film vision. And ultimately causing him to retreat from Hollywood, which robed us of what might have been a large canon of masterpieces by Welles.

Touch of Evil is a triumph for Orson Welles, thanks to a turn of events his film was restored to his vision in the 1998 cut. When Orson Welles initially discovered the studio had cut his film in his absences, he fired off a detailed 58 page memo on how he wanted the film to be edited. The memo was presumed lost until found to be in the position of Charleston Heston, years latter. Universal Studios in 1998 gave it's OK and the once cut up film was restored to Welles ideas, giving the boy genius his film back.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27709&stc=1&d=1478398989

One of the hallmarks of Touch of Evil is the cinematic idea Welles adopted after watching (and being confused by) another great film noir, The Big Sleep. Welles once stated his goal was to infuriate the audience with a closed-lip plot. He does that by keeping the audience in the dark as he shows us the events as they happen and at almost real time. We go along for the investigation and are told nothing of the back stories of the characters we encounter. Mike Vargas (Charlton Heston) is our proxy and we are kept as clueless as he is at the start of the film. Only as he begins to discover the truth, do we. Welles extenuates that feeling by use of many closeups and low dutch angle camera shots, which makes us feel like we're a fly on the wall, listening in.

Welles chews the scenery in most films he appears in. Sometimes that doesn't work well, but like Kane, his characterization here helps give the film impact. I liked Charleston Heston in this, I think he makes a fine proxy for the audience as we go along for the ride at his side. Janet Leigh made a good victim! And woo hoo! we even get Zsa Zsa Gabor and the great Marlene Dietrich. I love Marlene's character in this film and she loved being in it and working with the master, Orson Welles.

rating_5

Citizen Rules

11-06-16, 09:48 PM

http://gotomars.free.fr/cos/csshuttlearrives2msnd5.jpg

Conquest of Space (1955)

Director: Byron Haskin
Producer: George Pal
Cast: Walter Brooke, Eric Fleming, Mickey Shaughnessy, Benson Fong
Genre: Sci-Fi

About: On an orbiting space station 'wheel' built by an international coalition, a team of Americans train for the first flight to the moon. At the last moment the moon mission is scraped and they're sent on a much more dangerous mission, to Mars.

Review: Conquest of Space is a big budget sci fi, by producer George Pal. Pal was well established as producing some of the great big budget sci fi films of the early to mid 50s:

Destination Moon (1950)
When Worlds Collide (1951)
The War of the Worlds (1953)

This time however his futuristic film bombed with both audiences and critics. He didn't go back to making sci-fi films for 5 years, finally returning in 1960 with the well received, Time Machine. After watching Conquest of Space, it's not hard to understand why it was so disliked at the time.

Unlike his early sci fi's that broke new ground in realistic special effects, this one had what looked like very cheap, small plastic models, almost laughable. The only saving grace is that the star field backdrop was beautifully done with splashes of color.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27721&stc=1&d=1478484003

But what is really unforgivable is the silly one dimensional characters who joke and spar with dialogue that is as contrived and stale as can be...and sounds like something out of a matinee serial movie made for kids. Phil Foster who played the father on TV's Laverne & Shirley, tore up the scenery with his booming caricature voice. He's funny and even likable but not suited to a serious sci-fi.

One BIG plus is a diversified cast, which had a black American astronaut which is amazing for the 50s. Even more amazing is one of the main leads, is an Asian actor, Benson Fong, playing a Japanese who has the courage to volunteer and has the respect of his fellow astronauts. His was the best scene in the movie.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27720&stc=1&d=1478483046

The drama comes from the dangers of space and from a type of 'space psychosis' that effects the men after longer periods in outer space...and the Captain has been in space a very long time!

rating_2_5

Captain Steel

11-06-16, 10:01 PM

Captain when was the last time you watched Things To Come? I have never seen it before and was amazed! to see a couple of iconic shots in the film. Does this shot from Things To Come, remind you of anything?

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27708&stc=1&d=1478396296

I had the same reaction when I first saw it, Rules, which was probably a few years ago (on TCM of course - pretty much my sole source for old movies).

It was just amazing to see such an old film tackle sci-fi in a much more mature way than the Buck Rogers or Flash Gordon serials.

As far as the shot - it reminds my of a few things, but I'm afraid to say! ;)
Not sure exactly what it is - like if it's a shot from up high looking down on thousands of people who are just dots? It's got an art deco feel to it. I see something like an obelisk in the center (the Washington Monument of the future). Since there's a big circle it's bringing up images of "carousel" from Logan's Run (or HAL's "eye").
I'll let you tell me when you get time.

This is a weird aside, but there's a guy in Things to Come (a future general or something?) who wears a uniform and kind of an animal fur shawl. It looks very much like the outfit worn by the bad guy's right-hand-man in the Postman (1997)! I wonder if it was inspired?

Citizen Rules

11-06-16, 10:19 PM

To me, that shot looks very similar to the overhead shot of the core reactor in Forbidden Planet. It even has the small cat walks and tiny, tiny people for scale.

Yea, you got a Logan's Run vibe from that film too? Several of the shots really reminded me of Logan's Run in the 2036 city. I used one of them in the 4 pic montage.

Also when we first see the chieftain bad guy in the animal fur shawl, he's seated in a large decaying, domed building with a hole in the center roof....which really reminded me of the first shot of Peter Ustinov in the decaying U.S. Capital building surrounded by cats.

I bet you're right about Postman (1997) and the general with the fur shawl. Now, I have to see that movie and Logan's Run again! I actually like the Postman, especially the first half.

Captain Steel

11-06-16, 10:24 PM

Yes, I like the Postman too. A lot of people don't like it. My only criticism of it (and this will come as no surprise)... just too long. Shave off about a half hour or so and it would be perfect! :)

Citizen Rules

11-06-16, 10:31 PM

Yea, I like Kevin Costner but man...he's always in those really long movies. It's been 15 years since I seen it and I've only seen it once, but if memory serves me it gets more grandiose towards the end of the movie, sort of like Waterworld (which I also like)...but I prefer more subtle.

Citizen Rules

11-08-16, 03:08 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27735&stc=1&d=1478631042

Beast from Haunted Cave (1959)

Director: Monte Hellman
Writer: Charles B. Griffith
Cast: Michael Forest, Sheila Noonan, Frank Wolff
Genre: Crime, Horror
Length: 75 minutes

About: A group of criminals pull of a gold robbery and then take a cross country ski trip in the snowy backwoods of South Dakota to hide out from the police. After the bad guys blow up a cave as a diversion, a mysterious giant creature stalks them.

Review: Another one of those B-budget horror thriller films from the Corman brothers. For this one they actually shot on location! and traveled to South Dakota's Black Hills to film the ski scenes in real snow! And they filmed in a real, abandoned mine shaft. This gives the film a more realistic look than most of the Corman early films.

I thought this was just OK, until we get to the creature in the cave. Which comes latter in the film. OMG, it was creepy for 1959. Wisely the creature is never clearly shown, being concealed in dark shadows which allows the human mind to fill in the gory details. To make the creature they covered it in spun glass, that made it look like it was draped with old cobwebs. Very effective.

In the best scene which predates Aliens, the creature has captured some humans, keeping it's victims alive wrapped in a cocoon and hung from the cave walls. Then the creature feeds on the living victims by sucking their blood. Ooouh!

rating_2_5+

Chypmunk

11-08-16, 03:12 PM

Some more nice sci-fi watches there ... I really must get back on track tomorrow :)

Citizen Rules

11-08-16, 03:15 PM

Some more nice sci-fi watches there ... I really must get back on track tomorrow :) Last night I watched one of your recent 50s sci fi B films. I'll review it real soon. Hint...I liked it!

Chypmunk

11-08-16, 03:16 PM

Last night I watched one of your recent 50s sci fi B films. I'll review it real soon. Hint...I liked it!
:eek:

Citizen Rules

11-09-16, 10:38 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27756&stc=1&d=1478745412

Devil Girl from Mars (1954)

Director: David MacDonald
Cast: Patricia Laffan, Hugh McDermott, Hazel Court
Genre: Sci-Fi
Country: British

About: On a dark night the owners of a small Scottish inn that has shut down for the winter, find themselves with unexpected guest at the front door, including a woman dressed in black leather, form Mars. Her goal: collect Earth men and take them back to Mars for breeding stock.

Review: I liked it! This is much better than the title would suggest. The story starts out as a proper British drama set in a quaint Scottish pub in the countryside. The pub is closed but still a number of people manage to show up for lodging. Including an escape murderer there to visit his old girlfriend, a bar maid. He seems innocent of the crime but is he? Well the barmaid turn him over to the authorities? Along comes two lost scientist on the way to find a crashed meteorite. There tired and lost and need a warm drink and a place to stay for the night. Then there's the beautiful woman who wants more to be a pretty face...And of course the star the 'devil girl from Mars'! Who threatens all the guest by holding them hostage and threatening to kill them.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27757&stc=1&d=1478745420

As I watched this interesting film I couldn't help think of how similar it was to a classic Petrified Forest (1936). It's literally the same story with the same outcome, only instead of Humphrey Bogart as a desperado holding the occupants of a remote cafe hostage...it's the woman from Mars doing the bad stuff.

rating_3+

Citizen Rules

11-09-16, 11:11 PM

https://exclamationmark.files.wordpress.com/2006/08/it_conquered_the_world.jpg
It Conquered the World (Roger Corman, 1956)

Director: Roger Corman
Cast: Peter Graves, Beverly Garland, Lee Van Cleef
Genre: Sci Fi monster B-budget

About: A disillusioned scientist who has ironically warned officials of hostile aliens destroying satellites as a warning... then helps guide one of the last aliens alive on Venus to Earth. Where he hopes the alien well rid humans of feelings and emotions, bringing about a more logical society. Instead the alien tries to take over mankind with thought control devices.

Review: OK, OK! I know, the monster looks ridiculous! Even the cast of the movie made jokes about it...But the plot line is decent and you get to seen two well known actors early in their careers: Peter Graves and Lee Van Cleef. Both actors are good in their roles and yes Lee Van Cleef is cast as the bad guy, what did you expect? I really liked seeing Beverly Garland again. She did a number of films with Roger Corman and is always a stand out in.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27760&stc=1&d=1478747393

It Conquered the World is an interesting B-budget sci-fi monster movie with a run time just over an hour. With a pretty girl, two big stars, a cool convertible car and a rubber monster. Just over look the hokey monster and enjoy!

rating_2_5+

TONGO

11-09-16, 11:41 PM

^ Probably just what was needed after today ;) :up:

Chypmunk

11-10-16, 05:19 AM

"We're doomed Captain Mainwaring ..... doomed!"

Nice that you watched both of those - I swear the monster in It Conquered... was made in an oversize jelly-mould :D

Citizen Rules

11-10-16, 01:04 PM

^ Probably just what was needed after today ;) :up: Ha very true:p

"We're doomed Captain Mainwaring ..... doomed!"

Nice that you watched both of those - I swear the monster in It Conquered... was made in an oversize jelly-mould :D Ha, true! I read that the prop guy who made the monster some years latter found and restored. This is a color picture of it. Even more scary....not!

https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-rPu9cJBIHwk/V294NnUgUrI/AAAAAAAAIok/R1MhXisID38n-41rCkzRE0WNAdwm8o6AACKgB/s400/pb6.jpg

seanc

11-10-16, 04:35 PM

Citizen Rules

11-10-16, 07:53 PM

I want to see the Drive-In doc, where did you see that Citizen? I love the drive-in from when I was a kid. Found one near me this year and started taking my boys. I think we went half a dozen times. Already can't wait to start going again next year. I got the DVD from my local library...Very cool! that you have a drive-in near by and can take your sons there! I haven't been to one in decades.

Captain Steel

11-10-16, 09:55 PM

Ha very true:p

Ha, true! I read that the prop guy who made the monster some years latter found and restored. This is a color picture of it. Even more scary....not!

https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-rPu9cJBIHwk/V294NnUgUrI/AAAAAAAAIok/R1MhXisID38n-41rCkzRE0WNAdwm8o6AACKgB/s400/pb6.jpg

And if anyone's wondering where they got Chucky's face from for those Child's Play movies...

http://underyourbed.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/movie_curse_of_chucky.jpg

Citizen Rules

11-10-16, 09:56 PM

Yeah! That's about right too.

Citizen Rules

11-11-16, 07:14 PM

https://8583b52b4a309671f69d-b436b898353c7dc300b5887446a26466.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/12344339_the-original-marnie-explains-that-puzzling_67edde52_m.jpg?bg=5B372C
Halloweentown (1998)
Director: Duwayne Dunham
Cast: Debbie Reynolds, Kimberly J. Brown, Judith Hoag
Genre: Halloween Family Advenure

About: A seemingly normal middle class family, has a visit from their eccentric grandmother (Debbi Reynolds) who encourages the oldest teenage daughter to learn of her heritage. But mom wants nothing to do with the past and Halloween....but why is this?

Review: This is what I watched for Halloween. My wife picked it out and I knew nothing of it, other than it was a made for TV Hallmark, family movie with some kids and Debbie Reynolds, and Halloween themed too...I expected not to like it, but I liked it! It was interesting, well paced I was instantly interested in the story and the mystery. The kid actors were good (and often kid actors can be annoying), especially the two older girls were good actresses. The movie was creative and fun.

No it's not scary, but just a good old fashioned story about a teen girl who's mom doesn't want her to know she's a witch. So she disobeys mom and follows grandma to Halloweentown were all sorts of strange creatures live in harmony (talking skeletons that drive taxis, witches, warlocks, ghost, goblins, etc). However harmony is threatened in Halloweentown and the teenage witch must learn how to use her powers to save the town. Very suitable for kids...and myself!

rating_3

Citizen Rules

11-11-16, 11:04 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27782&stc=1&d=1478920081

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27783&stc=1&d=1478920440

Director: Julian Jarrold
Cast: Sarah Gadon, Bel Powley, Emily Watson, Rupert Everett
Genre: Comedy, Drama, Romance

About: On the eve of V.E. Day which marks the end of World War II in Europe, the teenage Princesses: Elizabeth and Margaret are allowed to leave Buckingham Palace, incognito to join the celebrations. What follows is an adventure mixed with romance.

Review: This is my idea of a great movie! A Royal Night Out (2015) is one of those rare films that comes along and tells a charming story that is both captivating and exciting to watch. It does this without insulting the royal family and presents the young princesses as real teenage girls who are eager to explore the world that they have been sequestered from. It does this all within the frame work of a PG rating and does it well.

Unlike a lot of movies this does not rely on tricky flashbacks or multiple time frames to tell its story. It's close to being shown in real time, as the film starts early in the evening on V.E. day and follows the escapades of P1 and P2 (Princess One and Princess Two) over the course of the evening.

http://nlc.p3k.hu/data/cikk/16/155078/1_topfill_480x270.jpg?t=1478163761
Bel Powley left, who aptly plays the younger Princess Margaret,
and Sarah Gadon as the future Queen Elizabeth.

What makes this movie special is the lively, heartfelt performances by a rambunctious Bel Powley who gives spirit and spunk to her fun loving character the young Princess Margaret. And an equally good performance by Sarah Gadon as the more reserved but still curious, Princess Elizabeth. I thought both actresses made the movie as did the actors who played their parents, the King and Queen.

This is very loosely based on actual events, so don't look for utter realism here as everything that happens is strictly hush-hush.

rating_4_5

Gideon58

11-12-16, 02:13 PM

Citizen Rules

11-12-16, 02:20 PM

It was a fun watch, as they say. Both of the actresses who played the Princesses, also were in another period piece film I'll be watching soon, Belle (2013)

Gideon58

11-13-16, 04:54 PM

[SIZE=6]http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=26579&stc=1&d=1471023072
Touch of Evil [SIZE=5](Orson Welles, 1958)
Director: Orson Welles
Writer: Orson Welles(screenplay)
Cast: Charlton Heston, Orson Welles, Janet Leigh

I really enjoyed reading this review...your passion for this film and your respect for Welles as an artist really comes through here and I will be adding this film to my watchlist.

Citizen Rules

11-13-16, 10:54 PM

:) thanks Gideon. I love film noir and Touch of Evil is one of the great noirs.

Citizen Rules

11-13-16, 11:33 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27790&stc=1&d=1479094437
The War of the Worlds (1953)

Director: Byron Haskin
Writers: H.G. Wells(novel), Barré Lyndon(screenplay)
Cast: Gene Barry, Ann Robinson, Les Tremayne
Genre: Sci-Fi

Producer George Pal set the bar for big budget, sci-fi special effects over 60 years ago with his 1953 film version of the classic novel by H.G. Wells, The War or the Worlds. When the movie hit the theaters, the reputation of the classic sci-fi story was already well known.

In 1897, H.G. Wells, a young English writer took the literary world by storm with his imaginative and moralistic sci-fi stories. Many of his novels have been made into movies: Island of the Lost Souls (1932), The Invisible Man (1933), Things to Come (1936) The Time Machine (1960) to name a few.

https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-d5285d3dece29a41bdbeeb6ba70dbf1b?convert_to_webp=true

On Halloween eve, October 30, 1938 the classic story was reintroduced to frightened audiences in a dramatized radio broadcast by none other than Orson Welles.

When the 1950's rolled around, another respected giant in the world of sci-fi, George Pal, once again brought the classic story to the big screen. George Pal had already made such amazing special effects films as: When Worlds Collide (1950) and Destination Moon (1950), but he topped them all with his cutting edge, technicolor version of The War of the Worlds.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27791&stc=1&d=1479094445

The producer George Pal wisely chose to cast complete unknowns in his film. As he wanted the focus to be on the Martians and not on Hollywood stars. The two leads are excellent at giving us a human connection to the film.

What makes this movie special, is the special effects. For the first time audiences seen Martians who looked like they could be real beings from another world. The alien ships were not only menacing but very realistic looking, in by today's standards.

At only 90 minutes there's not a lot of story deposition or character arcs. This is about people fleeing for their lives...and hoping to destroy an advanced alien invasion, that seems unstoppable.

And it works! The film still holds up well today.

rating_4

Captain Steel

11-14-16, 12:30 AM

Classic.
Probably the ultimate sci-fi movie regarding special effects & otherwise until Forbidden Planet came along.
As a kid, it actually scared me when the alien appeared

Chypmunk

11-14-16, 04:26 AM

One of my fav sci-fi's and nice that Universal included the original radio broadcast of WotW as an extra on the Citizen Kane Spec Ed dvd as I'd actually never heard it in it's entirety before that.

Citizen Rules

11-14-16, 01:43 PM

Classic.
Probably the ultimate sci-fi movie regarding special effects & otherwise until Forbidden Planet came along.
As a kid, it actually scared me when the alien appeared

One of my fav sci-fi's and nice that Universal included the original radio broadcast of WotW as an extra on the Citizen Kane Spec Ed dvd as I'd actually never heard it in it's entirety before that.

The War of the Worlds scared me as a kid too. I mean the Martian was pretty frightening with the realistic looking skin and veins that pulsated. A step up from a Roger Corman monster for sure:p

In the DVD extras they talked about the construction of the ships, and they were large scale, made out of copper with working electronics inside. There were three of them made, sadly they were recycled for copper and so no longer exist:(

Chypmunk

11-14-16, 02:08 PM

Don't got any extras per se on my WotW dvd (just the cinematic trailer but I don't count those as extras myself) but then it's just the bog-standard edition sadly :(

Citizen Rules

11-14-16, 02:16 PM

Don't got any extras per se on my WotW dvd (just the cinematic trailer but I don't count those as extras myself) but then it's just the bog-standard edition sadly :( Chyp, the DVD I borrowed from the library had a beautifully restored print of the film. It really looked great! There were many different extras including: A commentary track for the movie by the two stars Ann Robson and Gene Barry. Another commentary track by film historians. Then there was a mini doc on the making of WotW and they interviewed the woman (who with her father) created the Martian...as well as archival interviews with the designer of the Martian ships. And there was another doc about the impact of WotW, with stuff on George Pal and production. So what I'm trying to say is:p it's a great DVD!:)

Chypmunk

11-14-16, 02:27 PM

Chyp, the DVD I borrowed from the library had a beautifully restored print of the film. It really looked great! There was many different extras including: A commentary track for the movie by the two stars Ann Robson and Gene Barry. Another commentary track by film historians. Then there was a mini doc on the making of WotW and they interviewed the woman who with her father created the Martian...as well as archival interviews with the designer of the Martian ships. And there was another doc about the impact of WotW, with stuff on George Pal and production. So what I'm trying to say is:p it's a great DVD!:)
I'm sure it's absolutely splendifourous - wasn't an option that was available when I bought the film though. There is a Special Collector's Edition I could now buy that has all this as extras:
Commentaries: Audio commentary by actor Gene Barry and actress Ann Robinson
Audio commentary by "fans" Joe Dante, Bob Burns, and Bill Warren
Extras:"The Sky is Falling: Making The War of the Worlds" -documentary (29:58)
"H.G. Wells: The Father of Science Fiction" - featurette (10:28)
"The Mercury Theater on the Air Presents: The War of the Worlds Radio Broadcast" (with stills of Orson Welles - 59:09)
Theatrical trailer (2:19)
12-page Booklet
but tbh I have the film (it's a good copy as well), the trailer and the 1938 radio broadcast (on the CK SE dvd) already so I can't really justify the spend just for commentaries and cpl of shorts.

The irony is I could get all that now for cheaper than I paid years ago for my copy without all the extras :bawling:

edit: ah f*ck it, 'tis nearly Xmas .... ordered :D

Citizen Rules

11-14-16, 11:45 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27803&stc=1&d=1479181318Santa Claus Conquers the Martians (1964)

Director: Nicholas Webster
Cast: John Call, Leonard Hicks, Vincent Beck
Genre: Family Comedy Sci-Fi

About: The Martian's children have the blues so they send a flying saucer to Earth to kidnap Santa Claus so he can make presents and cheer up the little green kids.

Review: Pretty wacky name for the movie, especially as Santa doesn't really conquer the Martians, it's more like he's extra nice to them. Nice is the word:) This is a nice, Christmas, Sci Fi, Family Comedy movie, suitable for small children. I doubt many adults would like this as it's pretty darn hokey. I was mildly amused by it, but mildly is the key word. Mostly it's worth watching for how bad it is.

I suppose the nicest thing I can say is, the Martian family were really nice to the Earth kids and despite the fact there was a bad Martian who wanted to through the kids out an airlock into space. We find that most Martians are basically nice, but boring people from another planet. Now, Santa Claus is always Santa. He's kind, he's jolly, he loves kids everywhere, even Martian kids. I liked Santa he was great and even though he was kidnapped he never lost the spirit of Christmas. See nice beats mean:)

Made in 1964, it has two claims to fame: The first appearance of a Mrs. Santa Claus.
The film also marks the first documented appearance of Mrs. Claus in a motion picture, coming three weeks before the TV special Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer also featured the character.
And the first movie appearance by a young Pia Zadora. She's one of the Martian's kids.

http://www.ruthlessreviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/santa2.jpg
Can you spot Pia? Hint she looks a little space out! Ha, get it!

Santa Claus Conquers the Martians is often listed as one of the worst movies ever made! Don't believe it! That dubious credit goes to the next film I'm going to review....

rating_1

Citizen Rules

11-16-16, 03:08 PM

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/wK2ydPgaxQg/hqdefault.jpg

Voyage to the Planet of Prehistoric Women (1968)

Director: Peter Bogdanovich (as Derek Thomas)
Cast: Mamie Van Doren, Mary Marr, Paige Lee
Genre: Z budget sci fi
Length: 78 minutes

Quite possibly the worst movie I've ever seen!...When is a movie not a movie? Voyage to the Planet of Prehistoric Women answers that question. Originally this was a
Soviet Russian film called Planeta bur (1962), it was dubbed into English, had some of the original scenes deleted and new scenes featuring sexy Venusian mermaid women edited in. A voice over narrative tells the personal story of one of the astronauts who falls in love with a Venusian. The voice over is done by a young Peter Bogdanovich who also directed the new material for Roger Corman under the name Derek Thomas.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Pm7KzTwa48w/hqdefault.jpg

What results is a misshaped, cut up film that tells a bizarre story none too well. Add to that bad English dubbing and a movie print in such poor shape that the only remaining colors are a sickly green, tinting a blurry image. The photos I used is indicative of the quality, including the odd purple ban down the right side.

I get the feeling the original Soviet film was pretty well done as the stock footage used in this bastardized version shows the Soviet film as one with decent looking space hardware and concepts. It's hard to believe that the very next film that budding director Peter Bogdanovich directed would be The Last Picture Show (1971).

If you can find a decent print of this movie, it's interesting to watch for historical film reasons.

rating_1

seanc

11-16-16, 03:33 PM

Some of these films you are watching Citizen, they don't even sound like proper movies. Juxtapose that with a lot of films you have turned off in the first fifteen minutes. I am starting to question your sanity brother. ;)

Citizen Rules

11-16-16, 03:39 PM

Ahh...but I'm having so much fun watching them:p...well not the last two, they were pretty bad.

seanc

11-16-16, 03:51 PM

Ahh...but I'm having so much fun watching them:p...well not the last two, they were pretty bad.

Do you watch them by yourself? The reason I ask is they seem like they might be fun with someone who would make fun of them with me. I don't feel like I would have fun watching them by myself, could be wrong though.

Movie Max

11-16-16, 03:51 PM

That's true. You didn't give Bone Tomahawk a chance, and yet, you can somehow sit through the last two?:confused:

Citizen Rules

11-16-16, 04:07 PM

Do you watch them by yourself? The reason I ask is they seem like they might be fun with someone who would make fun of them with me. I don't feel like I would have fun watching them by myself, could be wrong though.Sean, I watch every single movie along with my wife, I never watch a movie by myself. Even all the Hof films, she watches them along with me. Luckily we have more or less the same taste in movies. Though she didn't like the last film. We actually both feel asleep during it. I watched it because it was one of the first films Peter Bogdanovich directed and Venusian babes sounded interesting.:p and it was free on youtube.

That's true. You didn't give Bone Tomahawk a chance, and yet, you can somehow sit through the last two?:confused:Max, I don't know how to put it into words but Bone Tomahawk in it's opening scene was too strong for me (in a certain way) and along with the dialogue and style of film making I just wasn't interested in it. I find each year that I like even less the new films that are being made. Unless they are period pieces, or bio-pics. I did see Belle (2013) the other night and really liked that one.

Movie Max

11-16-16, 04:14 PM

Unless they are period pieces, or bio-pics. I did see Belle (2013) the other night and really liked that one.

I understand.

seanc

11-16-16, 04:38 PM

Sean, I watch every single movie along with my wife, I never watch a movie by myself. Even all the Hof films, she watches them along with me. Luckily we have more or less the same taste in movies. Though she didn't like the last film. We actually both feel asleep during it. I watched it because it was one of the first films Peter Bogdanovich directed and Venusian babes sounded interesting.:p and it was free on youtube.

Max, I don't know how to put it into words but Bone Tomahawk in it's opening scene was too strong for me (in a certain way) and along with the dialogue and style of film making I just wasn't interested in it. I find each year that I like even less the new films that are being made. Unless they are period pieces, or bio-pics. I did see Belle (2013) the other night and really liked that one.

I haven't seen it yet but the word of mouth about Love And Friendship has me thinking you should check it out. Your comment just jogged my memory.

Citizen Rules

11-16-16, 05:06 PM

I haven't seen it yet but the word of mouth about Love And Friendship has me thinking you should check it out. Your comment just jogged my memory. I'll check that one out, thanks!

I understand. Max, you're a good guy to talk to:p and you watch a of movies, you should consider joining the next main Hof the 12th. Also there's still time to join the 40s HoF Part 1 hosted.:)

Citizen Rules

11-16-16, 11:01 PM

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=80017
The Prestige (Nolan, 2006)

Director: Christopher Nolan
Writer: Jonathan Nolan(screenplay)
Cast: Christian Bale, Hugh Jackman, Scarlett Johansson, Michael Caine
Genre: Drama, Mystery, Sci-Fi

About: In the early 1900's two London stage magicians vie for supremacy with a dangerous game of one-up manship. Each magician strives to do the ultimate illusion, with deadly results.

Review: If you like Christopher Nolan films with their mysterious existential elements and his highly stylized way of story telling, you should love The Prestige. It works both as a beautifully filmed tale of revenge and jealousy between two top stage magicians....and it has a deep mystery that focuses on who killed who. The movie escalates from a seemingly innocent, yet tragic stage illusion into something much more deadly. True to Nolan's film making style it's a brain twister with several twist and turns, that are interwoven through out the movie.

http://img.cinemablend.com/cb/5/b/6/6/1/3/5b6613da8c9bffb34bb6978521a71fb7fad375e6c51d24462cd7a0d90cfa92bf.jpg

This is listed as sci-fi, but other than a side story line involving the inventor Tesla played by David Bowie who makes some pretty interesting devices for the stage, it's basically a highly charged drama mystery.

The two leads, Christian Bale and Hugh Jackman did a fantastic job of being likeable, yet arrogant and driven by their hatred for each other. Neither are nice people and as the film states, to make it to the top the magician has to be able to get his hands dirty...and dirty they get!

The other notable actor in this is Scarlet Johansson who does more than just look great in her stage costume. She's the linchpin between the two adversaries and acts as a romantic catalyst...and adds a mystery to what her true intentions are.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/160/377832429_ebbd196a1f.jpg?v=0

The Prestige seems to have it all.
rating_4

Movie Max

11-16-16, 11:33 PM

Max, you're a good guy to talk to:p and you watch a of movies, you should consider joining the next main Hof the 12th. Also there's still time to join the 40s HoF Part 1 hosted.:)

Thanks. As for the HoFs, I'm not looking for that kind of long-term commitment right now, but thanks.:p

Have you already seen The Illusionist (2006)?

Citizen Rules

11-17-16, 02:49 AM

Thanks. As for the HoFs, I'm not looking for that kind of long-term commitment right now, but thanks.:p

Have you already seen The Illusionist (2006)?No I haven't, but thanks for recommending it, sounds good to me:p so I just now requested it from my library. I'll probably review it in a week or two. Did you like it?

Movie Max

11-17-16, 08:59 AM

No I haven't, but thanks for recommending it, sounds good to me:p so I just now requested it from my library. I'll probably review it in a week or two. Did you like it?

Yes, enough to own it on DVD.

Chypmunk

11-17-16, 09:13 AM

Aha, so glad you got to Voyage to the Planet of Prehistoric Women before I did as now I know not to bother ;)

I remember enjoying The Prestige - I skipped The Illusionist too as they were oft talked about in the same breath ... looks like I should give that one a whirl at some point in the future too then.

MovieMeditation

11-17-16, 02:27 PM

I used to love and adore The Prestige. I don't like it nearly as much anymore, but it's still a good film that I can enjoy watching. :up:

Captain Steel

11-17-16, 02:29 PM

For Rules or anyone else interested... I just came across this YouTube video (it's over an hour long!) but it was kind of a coincidence since it contains some of the movies you recently reviewed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRu03Jy-gz0&t=1022s

Citizen Rules

11-17-16, 02:53 PM

I used to love and adore The Prestige. I don't like it nearly as much anymore, but it's still a good film that I can enjoy watching. :up: As much as I liked/respected it, it's not a film I plan on watching again. Most movies are like that for me and if I watch certain films more than twice I end up not liking them as much. Seeing how The Prestige was built on a mystery and now I know the mystery, there's nothing much for more there.

For Rules or anyone else interested... I just came across this YouTube video (it's over an hour long!) but it was kind of a coincidence since it contains some of the movies you recently reviewed.
Captain did you watch it? What's it about?

Captain Steel

11-17-16, 03:01 PM

Captain did you watch it? What's it about?

Yes, I've been watching it slowly - it's simply a countdown of the 50 Worst Movies Ever Made, but the countdown itself is from 2004, so doesn't contain any movies after that. An interesting watch that you can view for as long or short as you like. (Lots of bad 50's sci-fi movies!)

Gideon58

11-17-16, 06:53 PM

http://www.filmedairhersey.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/the-prestige-800x445.jpgThe Prestige (Christopher Nolan, 2006)

Director: Christopher Nolan
Writer: Jonathan Nolan(screenplay)
Cast: Christian Bale, Hugh Jackman, Scarlett Johansson, Michael Caine
Genre: Drama, Mystery, Sci-Fi

Great review, Citizen...heard a lot of buzz about this movie but your review is the first thing that has actually made me want to add it to my watchlist. The fact that you seemed to like it but have no interest in a re-watch intrigues me even more.

Citizen Rules

11-17-16, 10:02 PM

Great review, Citizen...heard a lot of buzz about this movie but your review is the first thing that has actually made me want to add it to my watchlist. The fact that you seemed to like it but have no interest in a re-watch intrigues me even more.I think you'd be impressed with the skill of the story telling. It has many twist and mysteries...and I could not figure them out tell the very end. So it's a worthwhile film to see.

Citizen Rules

11-17-16, 10:36 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27818&stc=1&d=1479436520
Mesa of Lost Women (1953)

Directors: Ron Ormond, Herbert Tevos
Cast: Jackie Coogan, Allan Nixon, Richard Travis
Genre: Sci-fi monster B movie
Length: 70 minutes

About: A mad scientist with a secret lab inside a rock mesa in a remote Mexican desert, captures local women to inject them with spider venom....creating an army of beautiful but deadly spider women. He also creates giant tarantulas by implanting human pituitary glands into the spiders. When a small plane crashes on top of the rock mesa the survivors are in for some fun!

Reviews: Wow! this is one odd movie! It's an uneven film with some strange editing, that makes one appreciate Ed Wood as a director all the more. I wouldn't call it a B-budget movie, it's more in the Z-budget territory! And yet is has some weird vibes to it, like some Salvador Dalí creation mixed with an ample dose of Peyote.

There's a voice over narration that starts telling the viewer the back story. OK so far, but this narration goes on and on and on, until the viewer is begging mercy. And just when you feel you can't take any more, the narration stops and the story starts. But in what has to be a brilliant attempt by the film makers to create temporary insanity in the viewer, a loud flamenco guitar is used for the soundtrack, and it plays the same damn guitar cord over and over! When you least expect it, out of the blue comes this flamenco guitar!!! After the movie was over I expected that guitar to follow me around, sort of a personal soundtrack.

Oh yea, one more strangely odd, yet effective thing...the infamous Tarantula dance by the attractive but frightening looking Tarantella (Tandra Quinn).

rating_2

Citizen Rules

11-17-16, 11:20 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27819&stc=1&d=1479439177
Brewster's Millions (1985)

Director: Walter Hill
Cast: Richard Pryor, John Candy, Lonette McKee
Genre: Comedy

About: A down and out minor league baseball player who dreams of making the pros (Richard Pryor) is kicked off his ball team along with buddy (John Candy) only to discover he's inherited 300 million dollars from a long lost uncle's estate. Only one catch, to get the 300 million he has to spend 30 million dollars in a month and he's not allowed to tell anyone why he's spending all his money.

Review: I had never seen this one before and it was a big hit back in the day. I watched it for John Candy as I'm fan of Candy's and have been watching all of his films. But the star is Richard Pryor and this might be the first time I've seen him in a starring role. Pryor is very likable, in the same way that Cary Grant was likable, Richard's humor comes from poking fun at himself, much like Cary did. This makes Richard Pryor's character very likable and empathetic.

I was a bit disappointed by the story as I thought we would be taken on a wild millionaire's ride as he jet-seated around the world and spent his money on glitzy, high priced items. There wasn't many of those scenes, though he did have a posh hotel room that rented for a cool million per month.

I thought the Hackensack Bulls' baseball park set with a train that runs trough was pretty cool.

John Candy had a smaller role and he was fine here, but this is no John Candy film, the movie belongs to the talented Richard Pryor.

rating_3

edarsenal

11-17-16, 11:26 PM

serious reps for sitting through all of those bad sci-fi flicks. You crazy citizen you. ;)

Reps on War of the World, I remember a TV movie of the radio show as a kid (somewhere around the early 70's). Can't for the life of me remember the name of the movie, but remember getting scared by it. It bounced back and forth from them working out the details for the radio broadcast to the show and how many people freaked out and to what extremes they went to, to the apology made on the air that it was only a Halloween treat.

Big fan of The Prestige. VERY good film and rewatches reveal so much more than the initial surprises like any good magician's trick.
The Illusionist does come up though The Illusionist is more of a love story. I own a copy of it as well and have watched it quite a number of times. Giamatti is my favorite in it. I'm pretty sure you'll enjoy it as well, CR.

Posted this and saw your review of Brewsters. Haven't seen this since it came out. Remember a few funny scenes and yes, this is a Pryor film all the way.

Camo

11-17-16, 11:30 PM

I think you'd be impressed with the skill of the story telling. It has many twist and mysteries...and I could not figure them out tell the very end. So it's a worthwhile film to see.

Good review of The Prestige mate; thankfully i noticed Gideons comment or i would've thought that there was nothing that i've seen here and left.

It was actually partially spoiled for me which i guess accounts for me just thinking it was pretty good, what was ruined for me: Bale was twins haha.

I don't agree that Jackman or Bale were likable though, i think both of them were set up to be likable with Bales family and Jackmans reason for hating Bale, but i don't think it worked well for me at least.

gbgoodies

11-17-16, 11:30 PM

Reps on War of the World, I remember a TV movie of the radio show as a kid (somewhere around the early 70's). Can't for the life of me remember the name of the movie, but remember getting scared by it. It bounced back and forth from them working out the details for the radio broadcast to the show and how many people freaked out and to what extremes they went to, to the apology made on the air that it was only a Halloween treat.

You might be thinking of The Night That Panicked America (1975).

edarsenal

11-17-16, 11:33 PM

OMIGOD THAT'S IT!!
thanks GB!!!

Citizen Rules

11-17-16, 11:34 PM

serious reps for sitting through all of those bad sci-fi flicks. You crazy citizen you. ;) You know when I started watching these 50s sci-fi monster b movies, I didn't realize they made like a million of them! I though I could watch them all but :nope:

Reps on War of the World, I remember a TV movie of the radio show as a kid (somewhere around the early 70's). Can't for the life of me remember the name of the movie, but remember getting scared by it. It bounced back and forth from them working out the details for the radio broadcast to the show and how many people freaked out and to what extremes they went to, to the apology made on the air that it was only a Halloween treat.I seen that too, back when I was a kid. I haven't seen it since but I remember liking it, I should try and find it. Have you seen the Tom Cruise version of WotW? I know everyone hates it and I like the original better but still I enjoyed it too.

The Illusionist is more of a love story. I own a copy of it as well and have watched it quite a number of times. Giamatti is my favorite in it. I'm pretty sure you'll enjoy it as well, CR.
I didn't know Giamatti is in it, all the better:p

Citizen Rules

11-17-16, 11:35 PM

You might be thinking of The Night That Panicked America (1975). Hey it's GBG!:) yup that's the name all right, thank you for posting that:)

gbgoodies

11-17-16, 11:36 PM

OMIGOD THAT'S IT!!
thanks GB!!!

You're welcome. I haven't checked recently, but it used to be on YouTube. (It was on my watchlist for the 1970's Countdown, but I never got a chance to watch it.)

gbgoodies

11-17-16, 11:38 PM

I didn't know Giamatti is in it, all the better:p

Every time I hear the name Giamatti, I think of the guy who banned Pete Rose from baseball for life. :mad:

gbgoodies

11-17-16, 11:40 PM

Hey it's GBG!:) yup that's the name all right, thank you for posting that:)

I've been trying to keep up with your review thread, but you're watching movies faster than I can read your reviews about them. :lol:

Citizen Rules

11-17-16, 11:43 PM

I've been trying to keep up with your review thread, but you're watching movies faster than I can read your reviews about them. :lol:Ha! yea, the b sci fi movies from youtube are usually only 1 hour long, so I sometimes watch 2 a night. I watched a serious sci-fi that I hope will make the countdown. I should review that one tomorrow.

edarsenal

11-17-16, 11:49 PM

yeah, there is COUNTLESS bad sci-fi films from the 50's :D. Which is why Science Mystery Theater had SO MUCH fodder to wander through. Not to mention every other local late night movie show with screwball hosts that I remember seeing in the 70's and early 80's. (Good times)

and I did see the recent WoW's and didn't care too much for it

and yes, Giamatti has a very major part in The Illusionist and does an amazing job, as usual

gbgoodies

11-17-16, 11:49 PM

Ha! yea, the b sci fi movies from youtube are usually only 1 hour long, so I sometimes watch 2 a night. I watched a serious sci-fi that I hope will make the countdown. I should review that one tomorrow.

Some of the B-movies are pretty good, and they're usually entertaining, but I'd be surprised if many of them would make the Sci-Fi Countdown.

Citizen Rules

11-18-16, 11:31 PM

http://2paragraphs.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Billy-in-the-middle-620x338.jpg

Wild Oats (2016)

Director: Andy Tennant
Cast: Shirley MacLaine, Jessica Lange, Demi Moore, Billy Connolly, Howard Hesseman
Genre: Comedy, Adventure

About (spoiler free): A recent window, Eva (Shirley MacLaine) who receives a life insurance policy check by mistake for the outrageous some of 5 million dollars, has to decide if she keeps it or gives it back. Her best friend Maddie is sick and so Eva decides to blow the whole sum on an exotic time in the Canary Islands. There they live like movie stars, gambling and buying expensive clothes and end up meeting a nice but somewhat mysterious and confused man played by comedian actor Billy Connolly. Meanwhile back in the states Eva's estranged daughter, Crystal (Demi Moore) is contacted by an aging insurance fraud investigator (Howard Hessman) who's hot on the trail of her mom.

Review: Gads! this sounds like a great movie with an all star cast...too bad the comedy is stilted and the plot sillier, than silly putty. There was a real chance here to make a really nice film with the comedy coming from the life experiences of the two leads (Shirley MacLaine and Jessica Lange) but the script fails the two accomplished actresses and their left high and dry.

And what we get is a movie that starts off mediocre and goes to downright stupid with a bossman in his jungle strong hold with a henchman guarding the place with a machine gun. Even Adam Sandler would know better than to take on this movie. OK, maybe he wouldn't, but Shirley and Jessica sure should have.

Watch if for some on location scenes shot in the Canary Islands.

rating_2

edarsenal

11-18-16, 11:35 PM

you're right, for that kind of list of actors this SHOULD have been quite entertaining - how frickin sad

damn fine review though

Citizen Rules

11-18-16, 11:39 PM

Thanks Ed, I was really looking forward to Wild Oats too. Well tonight I'm rewatching The Queen (2006) I seen MovieMax mention it and thought why not!

edarsenal

11-18-16, 11:49 PM

I've been on the fence about The Queen, have you reviewed it previously? Can't remember

Gideon58

11-19-16, 11:49 AM

I've been on the fence about The Queen, have you reviewed it previously? Can't remember

If you're interested, I wrote a review of The Queen which is on the first page of my review thread.

Citizen Rules

11-19-16, 12:17 PM

I've been on the fence about The Queen, have you reviewed it previously? Can't rememberNope, I hadn't ever reviewed The Queen before, but I watched it last night, loved it, so will write a review, starting right now!

edarsenal

11-19-16, 12:31 PM

If you're interested, I wrote a review of The Queen which is on the first page of my review thread.

Thanks Gideon, I'll definitely be checking it out

Citizen Rules

11-19-16, 01:11 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27831&stc=1&d=1479574852
The Queen (2006)

Director: Stephen Frears
Writer: Peter Morgan
Cast: Helen Mirren, Michael Sheen, James Cromwell
Genre: Biography, Drama, History

About: An up-close and personal look at Queen Elizabeth II reaction to the untimely death of Princess Diana and the events that followed. As a nation and the world mourns the loss of Diana, the Royal family's initial reaction of saying nothing causes a backlash at the monarchy. These events are taking place as the UK's most personable Prime Minister ,Tony Blair is being sworn into office.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27834&stc=1&d=1479575394

Review: Helen Mirren won a Best Actress Oscar for her unflinching portrayal of the Queen. The Queen was also nominated for four other Oscars including Best Directing and Best Picture.

2006's The Queen gives us one of the frankest looks at the Royal family. What we see is not always pretty. To the films credit it dodges no bullets and lays the events of August 1997 squarely on the line. If ever a film has been deserving of being called a Biography, this is it.

I've watched quite a number of documentaries and shows about the Royals and instantly I accepted Helen Mirren as the Queen. She is the Queen...With her spot on performance, complete with a certain reserved stiffness that the real Elizabeth shows in her public side, she makes the Queen real, that then makes the movie real.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27832&stc=1&d=1479575320

The actor who played Prime Minister Tony Blair (Michael Sheen) nailed the Cheshire grinning PM of Britain so much that four years latter he reprises his role as Tony Blair in The Special Relationship (2010).

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27833&stc=1&d=1479575369

I remember the events of 1997 when the world was shocked to learn of the lose of Princess Diana. I remember the outpouring of love for her with flowers piled high around Buckingham Palace. I remember the controversy over the apparent lack of concern by the Royals in the days before Diana's funeral was held. I remember the intense media coverage and the final outcome too. The Queen tells this story that I know while filling in the behind the scenes reasons why the Queen took the actions that she did.

rating_4_5

Citizen Rules

11-19-16, 10:47 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27853&stc=1&d=1479610053
Belle (2013)

Director: Amma Asante
Writer: Misan Sagay
Cast: Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Matthew Goode, Emily Watson
Genre: Biography, Drama, History

Based on the real life story of a young girl, Belle (Gugu Mbatha-Raw) who's the mixed race daughter of a Royal Navy Admiral. She's raised during her fathers absences by her prominent and wealthy great uncle, who's the highest judge in Britain.

The movie takes place in 18th century England, and is not what you are expecting. Most likely you think this is going to explore racism and bigotry. And you might expect to see the people of 18th century London hurling insults and dirty water at Belle. It would have been easy for a film maker to craft a film like that and get maximum emotional appeal from the audience.

http://www.btchflcks.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Belle-Review-e1400594806144.jpg

Instead the film takes a much more positive look at the life of Belle. Yes, she does meet resistance due to her mixed race and yes there are a couple of bigoted people, but most of the people we see in the film love and respect her. Her half sister loves her, as does her great uncle who raises her. She is courted and found a beauty by two prominent men. I liked that the movies positive message is focused on the good that is in most people's heart. Of course she does meet the a few people who are antagonistic of her, but she handles them with class and poise.

Maybe it's the romantic in me, but I was glad to see Belle succeed and rise above any discrimination she might have faced. The best thing I can say about this film is it's intelligently written and does not manipulate the audiences feelings unduly.

rating_4

Captain Steel

11-20-16, 01:53 AM

Movie Max

11-20-16, 07:22 AM

The actor who played Prime Minister Tony Blair (Michael Sheen) nailed the Cheshire grinning PM of Britain so much that four years latter he reprises his role as Tony Blair in The Special Relationship (2010).

I haven't seen it, but, he also played him in The Deal (2003), a prequel to The Queen.

MovieMeditation

11-20-16, 07:33 AM

Still need to see The Queen...

Citizen Rules

11-21-16, 10:59 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27868&stc=1&d=1479784203
DUNE (1984)

Director: David Lynch
Writers: Frank Herbert(novel), David Lynch(screenplay)
Cast: Kyle MacLachlan, Virginia Madsen, Francesca Annis
Genre: Sci-Fi

10,000 Years into Mankind's Future. The spice drug Melange, a substance that expands consciousness, extends life and makes interstellar travel possible...is threatened by a genetically superior super being who's the son of a powerful Duke. In a ploy to kill him, a series of events take place that reshape the future of mankind.

I highly recommend watching the original Theatrical Cut and not the extended version that was done for TV. The Theatrical Cut, doesn't drag and includes some scenes that were far too disturbing for TV. If the version you watch starts out with a young woman (Virginia Madsen) superimposed over a star field, then you're watching the Theatrical Cut.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=28813&stc=1&d=1486835664
Princess Irulan

Dune (1984) is either loved or hated, with scant little space in between. I seen Dune in it's first run at the theater. I had seen the trailers on TV and then read the novel by Frank Herbert...then I watched the movie, which I enjoyed. David Lynch's version of Dune had a great look to it and his casting was sublime. For me, someone who was familiar with the book, the movie served as a visual abridged version of the novel I had just read. Other people at the time thought the movie was weird or confusing. And if I hadn't read the book I would have agreed with that.

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/15589/292225931.8/0_ff39e_80df7115_Lhttp://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=28812&stc=1&d=1486835657
Paul Atreides later known as Paul Muad'Dib

I think the reason people dislike Dune is it can't match the book for detailed nuisances and 'plans within plans'....There's no way David Lynch within the two hours allotted to him by the executive producers and the studio could tell a complex, multi character, multi plotted, story in only 2 hours. He would have needed to make a 4 hour movie if not longer to do that. So what we get is a visual record of most of the scenes that occur in the novel, but without the meat. The scenes are brief. Too brief for the casual viewer to connect to the film. In the end it's just too much story for only 2 hours.

On the plus side David Lynch gave us a beautifully envisioned Dune, richly detailed with colorful characters. It is what it is and I for one enjoy it.

rating_4

Captain Steel

11-21-16, 11:43 PM

Interesting. A few months back I finally sat through an entire viewing of Dune without interruption. It's a film I'd only seen snippets of, but could never seem to make it through a straight viewing. I'd forgotten that it was made by David Lynch - then kept wondering why it was so dang weird and reminded me somewhat of several other weird films I'd seen (Lynch films, of course).

One aspect (and I'm still not sure if I liked it or didn't) was the regular use of the characters' internal thoughts as voice overs. It was definitely unique and I can't think of any other films where that was done for almost all of the main characters.

I think when I watched it I was finally in the mood for its weirdness (plus I'd seen the documentary Jodorowsky's Dune (2013) which we discussed and which kind of renewed my interest in watching the Lynch version in its entirety.)
Still not sure how I'd rate it, but it's definitely not for everybody.

gbgoodies

11-21-16, 11:57 PM

I tried watching Dune a long time ago, but the only thing that I remember about it was that I hated it, and I couldn't sit through the whole movie.

I read that they're making a new Dune movie, so maybe I'll give that a chance when it's released.

Camo

11-22-16, 12:02 AM

I'm with you gbg. I think Dune is one of the worst films i've ever seen and i love David Lynch. It does have its fans though and that's fine, glad you enjoyed it Citizen.

Citizen Rules

11-22-16, 02:31 PM

Interesting. A few months back I finally sat through an entire viewing of Dune without interruption. It's a film I'd only seen snippets of, but could never seem to make it through a straight viewing...Which version did you see Captain? If it was the extended version, I find that one boring. If there was a scene with a baby worm being drowned in a tank of water, that was the infamous extended version...David Lynch hated that version so much he had his name taken off the credits.

David Lynch: [Lincoln] Lynch disowned the extended television cut. He chose the name "Judas Booth" to appear as the screenwriter in this cut. This name is a combination of Judas Iscariot, the apostle that betrayed Jesus Christ, and John Wilkes Booth, Abraham Lincoln's killer. With this in-joke, Lynch meant that the studio betrayed him and killed the film. The director's credit is the usual in these cases Alan Smithee.

The original Theatrical cut is shorter by 49 minutes. But the Theatrical cut contains a brief but disturbing scene, that equals the infamous dwarf scene in Solaris (1972).

I'd forgotten that it was made by David Lynch - then kept wondering why it was so dang weird and reminded me somewhat of several other weird films I'd seen (Lynch films, of course).
Mainly he's known for Twin Peaks, Mulholland Drive, Inland Empire (I never seen those) and back in the 80s he did Elephant Man, Blue Velvet and of course Dune. But not all of his films are weird:p The Straight Story (1999), was a conventional and even heart warming story.

One aspect (and I'm still not sure if I liked it or didn't) was the regular use of the characters' internal thoughts as voice overs. It was definitely unique and I can't think of any other films where that was done for almost all of the main characters. I'm guessing that was done to save time. That way we do get some of the back story without the need to make the film longer. I read that Lynch had wanted it .

Upon completion, the rough cut without post-production effects ran over four hours long. David Lynch's intended cut of the film (as reflected in the 7th and final draft of the script) was almost three hours long. However, Universal and the film's financiers expected a standard, two-hour cut of the film. To reduce the run time, Dino De Laurentiis, his daughter 'Raffaella De Laurentiis, and Lynch excised numerous scenes, filmed new scenes that simplified or concentrated plot elements, and added voice-over narrations, plus a new introduction by Virginia Madsen.

Still not sure how I'd rate it, but it's definitely not for everybody.Yup! that's true:p...If I hadn't read and really loved the book, I would probably think Dune was unique visually, and weird and kind of cool but lacking continuity in the story. And if you read all that stuff I posted you can see what happened to make it that way.

Gideon58

11-22-16, 05:18 PM

Citizen Rules

11-22-16, 05:42 PM

Thank Gideon, that was my second watching of that film. I liked it so much that I requested from my library several documentations on Queen Elizabeth II.

Captain Steel

11-22-16, 11:55 PM

Rules - I think I saw the original theatrical version of Dune. It was on cable and I don't recall the scene you mentioned from the extended version.

Now you'll have to tell me which scene was the disturbing one that was on par with Solaris. It's been a while since I watched Dune so my memory needs refreshing (I recall there were a couple slightly disturbing scenes.)

Coincidentally, I haven't seen the same Lynch films that you haven't seen. (I keep reminding myself to try to watch Mulholland Drive someday. I never watched an episode of Twin Peaks). I think of his The Elephant Man as a mainstream movie - the subject matter is unusual, but the story is linear where the only surreal moments occur in actual dreams. It's a great, disturbing and very moving film.

I always wonder what a surreal ultra-violent fantasy film would look like if Lynch, Tarantino and Burton teamed up! ;)

Citizen Rules

11-23-16, 01:56 PM

...Now you'll have to tell me which scene was the disturbing one that was on par with Solaris. It's been a while since I watched Dune so my memory needs refreshing (I recall there were a couple slightly disturbing scenes.)I hadn't seen this particular scene for 32 years! And even though I've seen Dune at least a half dozen times since, I totally forgot about this scene as it's cut from the extended version.

Towards the start of the film, we're introduced to the bad guys, the Harkonnens. The cut scene, has a young effeminate boyish male enter the Baron Harkonnen's chamber, where he places flowers on the wall...and he's scared senseless! I mean he's little, puny and shaking all over, he looks like he's entered into hell. The Baron with a lusting, devious gleam in his eye walks over to him, caresses his face and then...pulls out his heart plug, with blood splattering the Baron in the face, who's loving it. As the poor young male is being drained of his blood, the camera cuts to a close up of the Baron's face, so that we can't seen what he does next to young male, but it appears to be something violent, sexual done as the poor victim dies.

It's effective, like the Solaris dwarf scene, because it's brief and we never seen what is actually happening, we only see that the victim is terrified, which then allows our minds to fill in the disgusting stuff.

Gideon58

11-23-16, 04:30 PM

Personally, I didn't care for The Queen. I think this was more due to expectations because I was expecting a lifetime biography of Elizabeth.
But the movie focuses only on one small period in her life, namely the death of her daughter-in-law Diana - which is the true crux of the movie - and how that event effected the Queen.
I know what you mean, Captain...there seems to be a trend lately with films purported to be biopics or marketed as such...instead of giving us an overview of the subject's entire life, they just seem to focus on a very specific period in the subject's life. There were actually two different movies made about Truman Capote. One was Capote that won Phillip Seymour Hoffman the Oscar and the other released the following year was Infamous, but instead of being a story of the author's life, they both turned out to be about the exact same thing...when Capote traveled to Kansas to meet the killers behind the murders that were the basis of his novel "In Cold Blood." I remember being excited when Citizen told me about a movie about Errol Flynn called The Last Robin Hood, which really interested me because I also wanted to learn about Flynn...the movie opened after Flynn had made the last movie he ever made and focused on his affair with a 15 year old girl. When I sit down to watch a biopic, I would like an overview of most of their life, like Coal Miner's Daughter. now that was a biopic!

Camo

11-23-16, 04:47 PM

Gideon58

11-23-16, 06:29 PM

I disagree personally. If i want to learn about someones life i'll read a book. I don't think Capote would've been any better if they focused on his earlier years; i think it would've either been worse or too long actually. I'm not saying a biopic that is an overview of someones life can't be good, i just don't think it has to be that. I've not seen The Queen but i'd much rather watch a film focused on a specific period in her life than a movie about her whole life.

I'm not saying that a biopic has to focus on the subject's entire life, but if it's going to be about a specific period in the subject's life, it should be marketed and presented as such...a good place to start would be the title. If you see an advertisement for a movie called Capote, you are probably going to expect the movie to cover a good deal of his life, as opposed to something like My Week with Marilyn,a movie that deals with someone famous, but the title tells you right off that you're not going to be watching a complete biography but a very specific series of events in Marilyn's life. I will admit that when I saw the title The Queen, I wasn't expecting a movie about the woman's reaction to Diana's death, I was expecting movie about the monarch herself, but that's just me.

Camo

11-23-16, 06:37 PM

Captain Steel

11-23-16, 10:52 PM

I hadn't seen this particular scene for 32 years! And even though I've seen Dune at least a half dozen times since, I totally forgot about this scene as it's cut from the extended version.

Towards the start of the film, we're introduced to the bad guys, the Harkonnens. The cut scene, has a young effeminate boyish male enter the Baron Harkonnen's chamber, where he places flowers on the wall...and he's scared senseless! I mean he's little, puny and shaking all over, he looks like he's entered into hell. The Baron with a lusting, devious gleam in his eye walks over to him, caresses his face and then...pulls out his heart plug, with blood splattering the Baron in the face, who's loving it. As the poor young male is being drained of his blood, the camera cuts to a close up of the Baron's face, so that we can't seen what he does next to young male, but it appears to be something violent, sexual done as the poor victim dies.

It's effective, like the Solaris dwarf scene, because it's brief and we never seen what is actually happening, we only see that the victim is terrified, which then allows our minds to fill in the disgusting stuff.

Ah yes!

I think the entire scene with the introduction of the Harkonnens was my favorite part of the movie (maybe I just love bad guys?).

There was the ultra-gross draining of the Baron's pimples or blisters by his Doctor (weren't they saving the puss and funneling it somewhere?), and the introduction of his two hit-men (were they his sons or nephews or something?)
Sting played one by the name of "Feyd Rautha," of course. But more interestingly, the actor who played "the Beast Rabban" was Paul L. Smith; famous for his role as the brutal prison guard Midnight Express (1978) and (even more curiously) for playing Bluto in Popeye (1980)!

Citizen Rules

11-23-16, 11:04 PM

Yup the Harkonnen's were wickedly gross, inlcuding the pus extraction, gross and the critter squeeze box, ugh!

I never seen Popeye or Midnight Express, but I could see him be a brutal prison guard. The actor who played the Baron Kenneth McMillian was Valerie Harper's boss on Rhoda. He was pretty good in that too.

Captain Steel

11-23-16, 11:07 PM

Well i disagree with that again because it would take me 30 seconds of searching after hearing the title to find out exactly what it is about. And i take the titlle as the movie is completely focused on this real life person; as in the movie is more about the queen than it is the whole royal family. Mostly though i just don't care about titles.

I think the issue is really with the titles. For instance I recently viewed Abe Lincoln in Illinois (1940) - now this was a very aptly named title (whereas if it had just been called "Lincoln" it would be mighty disappointing to find out that it only covered his young adulthood & early career up until he was elected President and then ends there - not covering the most famous part of his life). But because of the title, you know going in it's not about his Presidency, the Civil War or his assassination.

Similarly with Young Mr. Lincoln (1939) the title lets you know it's about his early life - not his entire life.

My problem with The Queen is really the title. A more appropriate title would've been something like "The Death of Diana" or "Lady Di: the Aftermath" or "The Royals and the Death of Lady Di" because that's what it is mostly about.

Citizen Rules

11-24-16, 12:45 PM

I agree with Capt and Gideon that titles like The Queen are misleading if they don't actually represent the entire story... and that can give a false impression on what the movie is really about. In turn the movie then can not live up to a viewer's preconceived notions as to what they are about to watch...which then causes disappointments.

Preconceived movie ideas, are often the movies downfall, when it doesn't deliver what a person imaged it would. It happens to me all the time.

With that all said, I agree with Camo, in that generally I prefer a film like The Queen that focuses on one specific event as opposed to telling the whole life story. It's hard to squeeze an entire life into two hours. Though it has been done successful before.

Citizen Rules

11-24-16, 03:28 PM

http://pre13.deviantart.net/b6d1/th/pre/f/2016/088/e/b/banner_oficial_de_the_jungle_book__2016___by_dwowforce-d9wxhht.jpg
The Jungle Book (2016)
Director: Jon Favreau
Writers: Justin Marks(screenplay), Rudyard Kipling(book)
Cast: Neel Sethi, Bill Murray (voice), Ben Kingsley(voice), Christopher Walken(voice), Idris Elba(voice)
Genre: Adventure, Drama, Family

about: A boy who is branded in the jungle and raised by talking wolfs. The other animals like him and refer to the boy as 'Mowgli' a man-cub. When a furious, hateful tiger 'Shere Khan' learns of the existence of the man-cub, he demands the wolf pack turns the him over so he can kill him. Instead the boy, with a help of a friendly panther, 'Bagheera', leaves his wolf home and journeys to new places deep in the jungle. There he meets a friendly bear named Baloo (Bill Murray).

Review: This 2016 version of the classic, The Jungle Book, is a live action-CG film. The only live actor is the boy Mowgli, the talking animals are all CG;) I guess I liked this for what it was. It had the tried and true formula of the:

reluctant hero who's forced to leave the safety of his home and go on a quest to defeat an ultimate evil. Along the way he's guided by a wise mentor, meets mystic figures and earns their respect and pals up with a fun loving side kick. Sound familiar? This could be Star Wars set in the jungle. It was too violent for small children, lucky for me I'm not in pre-school;)

The young actor who played the man-cub, Neel Sethi did an awesome job of being natural on screen and believable too. He's really good. It was fun to see him interact with all of these different types of animals, and each animal species had it's own ways about it.

rating_3

gbgoodies

11-24-16, 03:38 PM

I love the Disney version of The Jungle Book, and I'm looking forward to seeing this new version. I remember the trailer looked pretty scary, so I'm not surprised that it's too violent for small children.

Camo

11-24-16, 08:26 PM

My problem with The Queen is really the title. A more appropriate title would've been something like "The Death of Diana" or "Lady Di: the Aftermath" or "The Royals and the Death of Lady Di" because that's what it is mostly about.

I haven't seen it but wouldn't those with the possible exception of "Lady Di: the Aftermath" be even more misleading? If i read that i'd think Diana would be the main character, at least The Queen is actually about The Queen. Saying that i'm surprised they didn't slip Diana into the title since a movie about her death would probably be of more interest to the general public than a movie about the queen.

I get what you guys are saying and i agree the title is misleading. I just don't see how that could be a problem for you in 2016, a minute or two of searching and you'd find out it's not a straight biopic of the queen. Then you can decide whether you want to see it or not. I think people who would have a problem with that after that either just like moaning or more likely would've preferred it to be a whole life biopic of the queen which brings us back to it not being about the title.

Captain Steel

11-24-16, 10:17 PM

I haven't seen it but wouldn't those with the possible exception of "Lady Di: the Aftermath" be even more misleading? If i read that i'd think Diana would be the main character, at least The Queen is actually about The Queen. Saying that i'm surprised they didn't slip Diana into the title since a movie about her death would probably be of more interest to the general public than a movie about the queen.

I get what you guys are saying and i agree the title is misleading. I just don't see how that could be a problem for you in 2016, a minute or two of searching and you'd find out it's not a straight biopic of the queen. Then you can decide whether you want to see it or not. I think people who would have a problem with that after that either just like moaning or more likely would've preferred it to be a whole life biopic of the queen which brings us back to it not being about the title.

Yes. Since the movie is about the death of Diana, Diana's not in it. Yet her death is the focus that effects almost everyone else in the Royal family & British gov. The big backlash (if I remember correctly) is the Queen's long-held resentment over Diana and her divorce from Charles and how that gets all mixed in with the aftermath of her demise and how the family has to try to balance their proprietary public displays of grief with the fact that the Queen was not happy with Lady Di.

Anyway, not to belabor the point. For people interested in that event and how it effected the Royals, they will probably like The Queen as it is well acted and well done (but it's not a toe-tapper, knee-slapper or feel good movie.) ;)

Camo

11-24-16, 11:08 PM

Yes.

If you agree that those titles are more misleading than The Queen, then why did you bring them up as alternatives when your problem is that the title is misleading?

Anyway, not to belabor the point. For people interested in that event and how it effected the Royals, they will probably like The Queen as it is well acted and well done (but it's not a toe-tapper, knee-slapper or feel good movie.)

haha. I don't even know if i'll ever see it, i'm sure it's good but it's not something of much interest to me. I was initially responding to Gideons: Capote example which is a film i think is pretty great.

Captain Steel

11-24-16, 11:22 PM

If you agree that those titles are more misleading than The Queen, then why did you bring them up as alternatives when your problem is that the title is misleading?

haha. I don't even know if i'll ever see it, i'm sure it's good but it's not something of much interest to me. I was initially responding to Gideons: Capote example which is a film i think is pretty great.

I think my point was that if you took great interest in the death of Diana, then you'll probably find the movie very interesting, but for those who kind of did a media black out on it, the movie may be a bit of a bore that takes a long look at a sad subject.

I've seen both Capote films - I find it very weird that they both told the same story and didn't they both come out within a year of each other?

Citizen Rules

11-24-16, 11:26 PM

For me, The Queen was an inside look at Queen Elizabeth and her royal family, that's what I liked about it. The death of Diana was just the catalyst to allow the movie to study the Queen in depth.

Camo

11-25-16, 12:31 AM

I think my point was that if you took great interest in the death of Diana, then you'll probably find the movie very interesting, but for those who kind of did a media black out on it, the movie may be a bit of a bore that takes a long look at a sad subject.

Okay. But your initial post that i was responding to was this - http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1610502#post1610502

You said yourself that your problem is the title. None of your posts since then have addressed my responses to your problem with the title. You also agreed with me that the alternatives you suggested were much more misleading than The Queen. So i don't get your posts since then really.

I've seen both Capote films - I find it very weird that they both told the same story and didn't they both come out within a year of each other?

It's an often cited The Prestige/The Illusionist kind of example of studios competing with each other on the same film. Antz/A Bugs Life is probably the most well known since it is the birth of Dreamworks.

Captain Steel

11-25-16, 12:55 AM

Okay. But your initial post that i was responding to was this - http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1610502#post1610502

You said yourself that your problem is the title. None of your posts since then have addressed my responses to your problem with the title. You also agreed with me that the alternatives you suggested were much more misleading than The Queen. So i don't get your posts since then really.

It's an often cited The Prestige/The Illusionist kind of example of studios competing with each other on the same film. Antz/A Bugs Life is probably the most well known since it is the birth of Dreamworks.

I'm unable to focus.

nebbit

11-25-16, 03:55 AM

A good start Citizen :yup:

Citizen Rules

11-26-16, 02:28 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27920&stc=1&d=1480263379
Little Boy (2015)

Director: Alejandro Monteverde
Writers: Alejandro Monteverde, Pepe Portillo
Cast: Jakob Salvati, Emily Watson, David Henrie
Genre: Drama

1945 in a small Californian coastal town...An 8 year old boy, who's very small for his size is willing to do whatever it takes to get his dad to come home from the war.

Review: Don't be mislead by the title, Little Boy is not a kids movie. It's an adult drama about a small boy, nick named Little Boy, who encounters bullying due to his diminutive size, as well as experiencing bigoted hatred towards a Japanese American who lives in town.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27921&stc=1&d=1480263387

The eight year old, Pepper Busbee, played skilfully by the young actor Jakob Salvati, is a fan of magic shows and after performing a trick with a stage magician he begins to believe he has the power to move objects with his mind...and much more. When his dad goes off to fight in World War II and is latter captured by the Japanese army, Little Boy believes he can 'will his dad back home'. I've never seen a film that dealt with this subject matter before, and it resonated with me on several levels.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27922&stc=1&d=1480263396
After Little Boy is challenged by his older brother to move a mountain with his 'mind powers', so to teach the youngster that his powers are mere fantasy, an earthquake happens...which then further deepens the belief in Little Boy that he can will an end to World War II so his dad can come home.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27923&stc=1&d=1480263403

The town's priest is the only person who will treat the Japanese American man with respect. With the priest help, Little Boy begins to turn his hatred of Hashimoto (Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa) to understanding.

I respected the way the film handles the subject of war time bigotry towards the lone Japanese American living in the small Californian town. At one point he explains to Little Boy that the town's folks hate him because 'he has the face of the enemy'. Most other movies would have taken his character and the relationship with Little Boy and done some sappy, feel good moments. Not this film! The actor (Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa) plays his character with a quiet dignity, but even more important he has a real world anger and mistrust...and who wouldn't if your house was vandalized and the town's folk mocked and threatened you.

I really like this film. I found it very different than other films and I like the way it handled it's subject matter, very intelligently done.

rating_4_5+

Citizen Rules

11-26-16, 06:43 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27917&stc=1&d=1480200162
The Last Picture Show (1971)

Director: Peter Bogdanovich
Writers: Larry McMurtry (novel/screeplay) Peter Bogdanovich(screenplay)
Cast: Timothy Bottoms, Jeff Bridges, Cybill Shepherd, Ben Johnson, Cloris Leachman, Ellen Burstyn, Eileen Brennan, Randy Quaid
Genre: Drama

About: A group of high school students in a small, desolate Texas town in 1951 come of age as the town slowly dies.

Review: A pretentious film, whose main claim to fame is its stark black & white photography and the desolate, wind swept streets of a small, rural Texas town. There's no dening the film has oodles of atmosphere...and it's other strong point is the fresh faced cast of unknown actors which gives the film a feeling of realism. Then again realism isn't a strong suit of this movie.

Based on the best selling novel, the film fails to capture the essences of it's characters. Their hollow shells with little meat, we scarcely know who they are or what they want as they drift about town. Instead of character development or a strong story, the movie relies on shocking (for 1971) full frontal nudity scenes, that are spliced into the movie for no other reason than to cover Bogdanovich's weak script. When the movie lags and it lags alot, Bogdanovich brings in a cop chase to create tension. Unfortunately those scenes aren't part of the narrative in any substantial way.

The first part of the movie starts off very slow with no plot. For a long time I wasn't even sure what was going on. I don't usually use this word in a review, but I was bored by the movie. At two hours long it has plenty of time to bring the characters and their lives into focus. But in Altman-esque style we get colorful characters set in an even more colorful world, and yet they do nothing. They're all dressed up with nowhere to go.

In The Last Picture Show Bogdanovich doesn't have anything much to say, so he pulls out a bag of tricks and show that he's a better director than script writer. Take away the nudity and shoot this in color and you'd have a film that no one would remember. Mostly it's the look and sets that make this movie. Most of the scenes that take place have no set-up for the character's motivation, stuff just happens. Much of the blatant sex seems like a comment on American changing values of 1971, than the going-ons of a small Texas town in 1951.

On the positive side Ben Johnson made a memorable character and picked up an Oscar for his work. Cloris Leachman gave a tour de force performance, especially the end scene which undoubtedly influenced viewers opinion, giving the film more credibility than it deserves.

On the other hand, Timothy Bottoms, as likeable as he is, is miscast. He slumps around the town like he's stoned out of his head and this is suppose to be the star quarter back of the football team. He's more of a deadbeat. It been better if his character was cast as the perennial loser, high school drop out, someone going nowhere fast. Cybill Shepard, at times seems fresh and believable at other times she's too hammy as the virgin who can't wait to get laid.

My biggest problem with the film is there are scenes that go nowhere and would have been better to cut them all together, instead of including an abbreviated version of the scene just because it was in the book. A couple examples:

When Timothy Bottoms and Cybill Shepherd decide to elope, Cybill says coyly she's left a note for her parents that the couple have crossed state lines to get married, at which Timothy Bottoms says he hopes the cops won't arrest them. Which they do.... but nothing really happens because of that scene. It doesn't change impact or change the characters growth or the narrative. Why Cybill left the note isn't made clear.

In another scene a secondary character, the preacher's son, kidnaps a little girl causing a police chase. But after they find him, nothing happens and no one cares. All that is added is another dramatic police scene to create some tension. It's clear Bogdanovich didn't know how to handle the script...but at least the film looks great.

3.5+

cricket

11-26-16, 07:24 PM

I liked that movie but it's been about 3 years now and I don't remember it vividly. I haven't seen S.O.B..

mark f

11-26-16, 07:34 PM

The Last Picture Show was great in 1971 and it still is. S.O.B. has nothing to do with this.

Captain Steel

11-27-16, 12:29 AM

Cybill Shepherd, when young, should go on the Female Beauty We Appreciate thread! ;)

Citizen Rules

11-27-16, 08:40 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=27932&stc=1&d=1480293585
Experimenter (2015)

Director: Michael Almereyda
Writer: Michael Almereyda
Cast: Peter Sarsgaard, Anthony Edwards, Jim Gaffigan, Winona Ryder
Genre: Biography, Drama

About: Based on a true life series of infamous psychological test that were conducted on unwitting subjects in 1961, by the highly controversial, social psychologist Stanley Milgram. His radical experiments delved into why so many Nazis readily obeyed orders in the concentration camps. His experiments involved a 'teacher' who would ask a series of memory related question to a 'learner' subject, located in the next room. Every time the 'learner' got the answer wrong the 'teacher' would flip a switch sending a painful jolt of electricity. The first shock was a harmless 45 volts, BUT the voltage increased with each wrong answer, all the way up to a dangerous 450 volts!

Review: What a movie! and to think hundreds of people were subjected to these experiments all in the name of science. I don't want to give away to much here, as this is a must see. The results of the test and the suffering the victims endured has to be seen to be believed!

This movie was a real eye opener. It's odd as it's done in a semi documentary style with the psychologist breaking the fourth wall and talking directly to us, the audience, about events that would happen latter in his life. Very different type of movie. But what I found most disturbing was the results of these test, and for that you need to watch this movie!

Equal odd is that the first time we see an older Winona Ryder she looks for all the world like an older Audrey Hepburn. I had never noticed that before about here. If that's not enough oddness Jim Gaffigan,reminded me of Chris Farley. In reading about Gaffigan I seen that he started as a stand up comic too. Though in this movie he plays a victim who screams for mercy as he's being electrocuted. ...Proving that this weird movie is even weirder with consequences, the actor who plays the infamous psychologist Peter Sarsgaard is a twin to a younger Ben Gazzara.

If you have a curious mind and can stomach what you see in Experimenter, you will learn something shocking about humans.

rating_3

Captain Steel

11-27-16, 08:46 PM

Citizen Rules

11-27-16, 08:52 PM

Rules, one compliment deserves another - so I must compliment you as having some of the best reviews on this site!

You cover all the things I look for - I always want to know the date (especially since there are so many films with the same titles). And I always look to your list of stats/facts/credits - especially the stars. Then you give a write up saying WHY you like or dislike a film (can't stand when people's reviews consist of "this was good" or "this film sucked!" without giving any reasons for such critiques).

Your additions of photos, subject headings and ratings make for very professional and easy-to-read reviews! Thanks Captain:p As I watching Experimenter, last night I was thinking, 'Captain needs to see this one!'...I found the subject matter very interesting, I think you would too. Have you seen this? If not maybe it's available On Demand cable? It might not be the fanciest movie, but it's got brain food! Really.

Captain Steel

11-27-16, 09:08 PM

Thanks Captain:p As I watching Experimenter, last night I was thinking, 'Captain needs to see this one!'...I found the subject matter very interesting, I think you would too. Have you seen this? If not maybe it's available On Demand cable? It might not be the fanciest movie, but it's got brain food! Really.

Yeah, I'd love to see this. I remember learning about these tests in psychology classes in school.

Another famous one was the prison test (college students were put into the roles of the prisoners and the guards, the experiment went bad as the students got too caught up in their roles and abuses began to occur) - I know they made at least one movie about that - don't recall if it was a made-for-TV movie or not.

So, I'll definitely be putting this one on the list.

Despite her real life, I still think Winona Ryder is very attractive. And yes, Jim Gaffigan is a hilarious stand-up comedian. What I really liked about his stand-up act is it is relatively clean (compared to almost all other stand-up comedy these days) but roll-on-the-floor funny. If you can find his live performances on the DVD's "Beyond the Pale" and "King Baby" - I highly recommend them!

Have to post a sample (not his best bits - for those look up "Gaffigan Hot Pockets" on YouTube!)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=At97qw6H7_s

Citizen Rules

11-27-16, 09:16 PM

Yeah, I'd love to see this. I remember learning about these tests in psychology classes in school. I wish I would have taken some sort of psychology classes, I was always fascinated by the subject. I suppose I could check out some documentations on the subject.

Another famous one was the prison test (college students were put into the roles of the prisoners and the guards, the experiment went bad as the students got too caught up in their roles and abuses began to occur) - I know they made at least one movie about that - don't recall if it was a made-for-TV movie or not. Anyone know what movie that is? I've heard of the experiment, but not the movie.

Despite her real life, I still think Winona Ryder is very attractive. Yup, but she looked different, her face was more thin, more gaunt.

And yes, Jim Gaffigan is a hilarious stand-up comedian. If he's not already doing so, he needs to star in the Chris Farley Story, movie:p

mark f

11-27-16, 09:54 PM

Anyone know what movie that is? I've heard of the experiment, but not the movie.
There's at least three that I've seen.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0420293/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0250258/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0997152/

Citizen Rules

11-27-16, 10:22 PM

Thanks Mark:)

cricket

11-27-16, 10:25 PM

I've seen those bottom two and liked them. Not confident you'd feel the same way.

Citizen Rules

11-27-16, 10:29 PM

Thanks Cricket, I read about them...I think you're right.

Captain Steel

11-27-16, 11:19 PM

I think I saw a bit of the German one.
Had a feeling there was more than one of these.

Citizen Rules

11-28-16, 04:19 PM

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=70740
Night of the Hunter (Charles Laughton, 1955)

Director: Charles Laughton
Writers: Davis Grubb(novel), James Agee(screenplay)
Cast: Robert Mitchum, Shelley Winters, Lillian Gish
Genre: Film Noir

About: In prison (Robert Mitchum) who's a religious fanatic preacher, learns about a stash of $10,000 from a robbery. When the preacher is released from prison he goes looking for the money an finds the widow of the man who stole the money and then marries her. He then begins tormenting her children to learn of the whereabouts of the stolen money.

Review: Is there anything more iconic that Robert Mitchum's LOVE HATE finger tattoos? Those ink marks have been imitated everywhere, from rock musicians, to the Simpson's TV show. Just Google Love Hate finger tattoos and you'll see, they're everywhere! Even on toes!

http://media.paperblog.fr/i/778/7786865/kids-in-the-dark-L-CX65x1.png

I'd seen this movie before when I was first getting into film noir and I remember how it impressed me. This time around I'm even more impressed by the unique cinematography and set designs. Especially the river voyage scene where the children drift downstream in a small boat. I loved the way the river set looked almost poetic, with the small animals along the shore and in the background silhouettes of old farm houses. I loved the lighting and the star filled sky too. And that was all done on the set. No it doesn't look real, and it doesn't look gritty noir either, it wasn't suppose to...It does look like a storybook, as the children take the same journey Moses did down the Nile.

I thought this film balanced it's religious themes quite nicely. One of the highlights was when the stalking Reverend (Robert Mitchum) was singing Leaning on the Everlasting Arms cappella with Rachel (Lillian Gish). I like the juxtaposition of how the evil Mitchum sings lean on me while the good Lillian Gish sings lean on Jesus. A nice touch to define the difference betwixt them.

rating_4_5+

cricket

11-28-16, 04:22 PM

The first time I watched that was with my wife and it didn't do much for me. I really need to see it again.

Citizen Rules

11-28-16, 04:27 PM

It was a big hit in the Film Noir Part 2 Hof. Most liked it very well. It's a strange mix of visual beauty with a really good-bad! Robert Mitchum. I almost gave it a 5/5.

Gideon58

11-28-16, 07:22 PM

My problem with The Queen is really the title. A more appropriate title would've been something like "The Death of Diana" or "Lady Di: the Aftermath" or "The Royals and the Death of Lady Di" because that's what it is mostly about.

Totally agree with you Captain...a title that was more specific regarding what the film was about would have been less troubling to me...even just "Diana and the Queen" would have let the viewer know they were going to watch something set in a specific period and not a bio of the Queen.

Gideon58

11-28-16, 07:24 PM

[CENTER]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CeK0Ki4UEAALTdx.jpg
Night of the Hunter (Charles Laughton, 1955)

Enjoyed this review...will be adding this to my watchlist...I actually saw the television remake with Richard Chamberlain and really enjoying it, it's about time I looked at the original.

Citizen Rules

11-28-16, 10:17 PM

I like Richard Chamberlain, especially in Shogun and The Thorn Birds. I didn't know he did a remake of Night of the Hunter in 1991, I see it only has a 3.8 IMDB rating. Yea, you should see the original! Nobody is more wickedly good than Robert Mitchum.

Camo

11-28-16, 10:35 PM

Totally agree with you Captain...a title that was more specific regarding what the film was about would have been less troubling to me...even just "Diana and the Queen" would have let the viewer know they were going to watch something set in a specific period and not a bio of the Queen.

Not to drag this up again. But why on earth does it trouble you? Why do you care about the title? I can see it being a problem in the 1940s maybe when it wasn't as easy to find out what the film is about beyond its poster but not today.

Love Night of the Hunter. It looks amazing as you say, too bad Laughton didn't direct anything else. Weirdly there seems to be a decent amount of members along with Cricket that found it underwhelming, i thought it would be a major favourite here.

gbgoodies

11-28-16, 11:45 PM

I liked Night of the Hunter, but I didn't love it. I remember thinking there were a couple of small plot holes, but offhand, I can't remember what they were. But I thought Robert Mitchum was terrific in it.

Citizen Rules

11-29-16, 10:53 PM

....Love Night of the Hunter. It looks amazing as you say, too bad Laughton didn't direct anything else... I read somewhere that Laughton hated directing and only directed this one movie. I thought he made wise choices in how he handled the movie and I'd like to have seen him direct more.

I liked Night of the Hunter, but I didn't love it. I remember thinking there were a couple of small plot holes, but offhand, I can't remember what they were. But I thought Robert Mitchum was terrific in it. Mitchum is the man! I can't image anyone else doing the role.

This photo wasn't in the movie, it looks like a publication photo, but it is cool!
http://cdn2-www.comingsoon.net/assets/uploads/2016/08/SonnetHunter.jpg

Citizen Rules

11-29-16, 11:23 PM

http://galeri12.uludagsozluk.com/502/the-illusionist_897468_m.png
The Illusionist (2006)

Director: Neil Burger
Writers: Neil Burger(screenplay), Steven Millhauser(short story)
Cast: Edward Norton, Jessica Biel, Paul Giamatti
Genre: Period Drama, Mystery

About: An acclaimed stage Illusionist, named Eisenheim. Who in 19th century Vienna performs stage illusions that transcend the believable. Some believe he has real powers and is not just a stage magician. When he meets up with a childhood love (Jessica Biel) who's now a Duchess, betrothed to wed the Crown Prince Leopold, he begins a series of dangerous illusions in attempt to win her love and discredit the Crown Prince. The Crown Prince is not a man to be trifled with and Eiseneheim and the Duchess's affair brings danger to the pair.

Review: This was recommended to me after I reviewed another movie, The Prestige (2006). Both movies were made in the same year and are about 19th century magicians...but that's where the similarity ends. This film The Illusionist is a PG-13 Drama Romance with a healthy dose of mystery included.

Edward Norton is Eiseneheim, the Illusionist. Usually Norton is a powerhouse in his films but here he choose to play the illusionist as a very quiet, soft spoken and mysterious person. It's not a stand out performance, but then again it's what the movie needs to balance out the other characters, who are more verbose.

http://ferdyonfilms.com/Illusionist%20Giammati.jpg

Paul Giamatti is a police inspector employed by the antagonistic Duke. What works well is, even though Giamatti's character is told to investigate and stop Eisenheim, he still manages to make the audience care about his character, while giving us a three dimensional performances.

https://65.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m9r7ckeRZk1qhe17ko1_500.jpg

The Duchess played by Jesica Biel could have been replaced with any actresses, and it wouldn't have mattered. She wasn't bad, but she didn't stand out either, sort of luke warm. The actor who played the belligerent Prince Leopold, made a good bad guy and was pretty darn intense.

The illusions are done on screen by CG, which made them look unbelievable, but then again Eisenheim is suppose to have the power to raise spirits and talk to them, all which is said to be unbelievable.

rating_3

gbgoodies

11-29-16, 11:52 PM

I saw both The Prestige and The Illusionist around the time they were released on DVD. I vaguely remember that I liked The Prestige more than The Illusionist, but it's weird that I remember bits and pieces of The Prestige, but I don't remember anything about The Illusionist. I'll have to rewatch The Illusionist when I get a chance.

Captain Steel

11-30-16, 01:38 AM

The Duchess played by Jesica Biel could have been replaced with any actresses, and it wouldn't have mattered.

LOL! My favorite line from that review! Funny because it's true.
I'm no Biel hater and she certainly is gorgeous, but yeah I don't think she's had a stand out performance yet.

The guy who played the Prince is Rufus Sewell and this actor seems born to play bad guys. He's just got naturally hateful and creepy eyes. Just saw him in an occult thriller called "Bless the Child" (2000) and while the movie was just alright, Sewell as a Satan-worshiping self-help guru was just creepy as hell - not even his performance, just the look in his eyes! He just seems evil. I'm wondering if he could even play a good guy? :)

More trivia - Sewell was also in the John Adams series along with Paul Giomatti in the starring role. Sewell played Adams' sometimes nemesis Alexander Hamilton.

Gooch

12-01-16, 12:29 PM

"Their hollow shells with little meat, we scarcely know who they are or what they want as they drift about town."

I felt this way too, but I always felt a like it was more about their own feelings of distance and ambiguity. How do you get to know people who don't even know themselves? These are kids in a tiny west Texas town that is, as you said, dying while they are growing. They have no role models and no outlet to the world. I always felt like the most striking aspect of the book was how lost and uncertain the kids were, something I thought was portrayed well in the film. The only people they knew who had made it through to adulthood are sad and full of regret, even if they were good people. Cloris Leachmans character is a great example.

Chypmunk

12-01-16, 12:36 PM

Pah, you beat me to The Illusionist - managed to snag a second-hand copy for the princely sum of £1.26 delivered and it landed this morning ..... I'll have to shelve watching it for a while now so as to maintain a modicum of 'independence' in my movie viewing :D

Citizen Rules

12-01-16, 04:16 PM

Citizen Rules

12-01-16, 11:12 PM

https://manigiriesh.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/13235141_1703790939845752_3153290811697106852_o.jpg?w=788
The Man Who Knew Infinity (2015)
Director: Matthew Brown
Writers: Matthew Brown
Cast: Dev Patel, Jeremy Irons, Malcolm Sinclair
Genre: Biography, Drama

About: The short life of Srinivasa Ramanujan, a man born into poverty in India, during the early 20th century. After traveling to England he went on to become one of the most important mathematicians of our time, with his ground breaking theorems.

Review: I hate math! But, I loved this up-close and personal look at a genius who's mind was on pair with Issac Newton. And yet today his name is not well known outside of mathematics academic circles. His story is a moving one and makes one wonder how many geniuses languished in the gutters of poverty through the course of human history? The world nearly never learned of his genius had it not been for a mathematics professor at Cambridge, England Professor G.H. Hardy (Jeremy Irons).

Dev Patel plays the stellar genius who experiences mathematical formulas as the thoughts of God. Dev Patel made a name for himself in a much different role as the good natured and always optimistic, young Indian entrepreneur in The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1412386/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_9) (2011).

I would have thought a movie about math would be boring, but this was very well done, interesting too. It's not a big movie, but it tells an important story.

rating_3_5

Swan

12-01-16, 11:36 PM

He knew infinity... meant forever...

Citizen Rules

12-03-16, 11:36 PM

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51-o4zhf-kL._SY445_.jpg
The Diamond Queen
BBC 3 part documentary
Total length 3 hours

After watching the movie The Queen, I got in the mood to watch more about her Royal Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. I found this at my library and it's a 3 part BBC documentary on the then upcoming Diamond Jubilee of the Queen.

It's compose of archival footage with many interviews from the royal family especially from Prince William, Duke of Cambridge and his younger brother Prince Henry of Wales. And the daughters of Sarah Fergusen and Prince Andrew, Princess Beatrice of York, Princess Eugenie of York. Among others royal members and former Prime Ministers.

I thought this was exceptional well done, with much inside information and it was very respectful to the queen.