Omni's Random Video Noise

→ in
Tools    





Welcome to the human race...
I hope you took my "Action Girls" comment merely in the spirit in which it was intended and not just the specifics.

Since starting this movie binge the female characters I've really gravitated towards are the likes of Mace and Deunan from Stranger Days and Appleseed respectively. They're not shoved off to the side of the story and their appeal comes not just from their relatively unique ability to kick ass on occasion, but also from their depth as characters, such as how they play off of their respective male counterpart protagonists' personalities.
I...thought I did? There's nothing inherently wrong with action girls - I was just citing specific examples of how Bond movies were just as likely to half-ass the development of capable action girls as the more passive damsel types.

I DID get that vibe when I was all "Why is she called Pussy Galore?" and then saw her all-female pilot crew.

But then what? She falls for Bond? Bond is so ******* manly that he can turn lesbians straight.

Frankly, I really didn't want to come across as "taking to task" the man talk scene. It's an unfortunate product of it's times that I was all too prepared for, and the one comment I really felt compelled to make was in response to some of the anti-feminism I've seen in the surf (not necessarily here on the boards). I feel a lot of it's well warranted, but I think people get caught up in their position and lose sight of things objectively.

Just because one person's position is untenable doesn't mean every single one of their arguments is untenable. I've seen people handwave the sexual promiscuity double standard like it's not a thing when it most certainly is. Not that there aren't double standards held against men or that discrimination doesn't go both ways, but this is certainly one that regresses women and it stings of reckless disregard for the truth to deny it's existence.
You did single that particular instance out as your example of how this movie is sexist and then go off on a tangent about the flaws in third-wave feminism, so I really wasn't sure what you were going for there.

In particular, you hear a lot of talk about diversity in video games (Overwatch was raked over the coals and back until they added an overweight and butch character to their multiplayer roster) and while feminists tend to overreact to this, anti-feminists tend to underplay it, like it's not a thing.

I guess my little rant is indicative of some residual irritation I've had from listening to people who seem generally reasonable yet resort to knee-jerk obfuscation tactics like "oh no, such a shame that women are portrayed as attractive" and "I don't find that sexually objectifying because it doesn't turn me on", they're just evasions.
[/center]
what

Rating Kingsman without at least seeing as far as the Church scene is like rating Star Wars on its opening text crawl.
That's a bad comparison. The Star Wars opening crawl lasts a couple of minutes at the very start of the movie while it takes Kingsman about an hour to get to the church scene. A better comparison would be rating Star Wars without seeing Luke and the others reach the Death Star.

Besides, the church scene is awful anyway.
__________________
I really just want you all angry and confused the whole time.
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0



You did single that particular instance out as your example of how this movie is sexist and then go off on a tangent about the flaws in third-wave feminism, so I really wasn't sure what you were going for there.
It was more on a particular criticism of third-wave feminism which Bond is an ideal answer to.

Originally Posted by Iroquois
what
I've seen it.


Originally Posted by Iroquois
Besides, the church scene is awful anyway.
Michael Caine collects a paycheck.
Your review does a good job summarizing the really awkward style of the movie. It specifically references "Old Bond" as if Goldfinger's eccentricities were the sort of whacky it was going for, but that certainly doesn't come across, especially when it's so self-aware.

Originally Posted by Iroquois
It tries to stay edgy through its rough-edged protagonist, self-awareness, ludicrous displays of violence and so forth, but hey, it's not like any of that made Kick-Ass any good.
Kick-Ass operated more clearly in the sphere of a comic book geek getting a realty check about modern heroics, so at least Kick-Ass had an excuse for it's conflicted tone.
__________________
Movie Reviews | Anime Reviews
Top 100 Action Movie Countdown (2015): List | Thread
"Well, at least your intentions behind the UTTERLY DEVASTATING FAULTS IN YOUR LOGIC are good." - Captain Steel



Welcome to the human race...
It was more on a particular criticism of third-wave feminism which Bond is an ideal answer to.
What, in a "hey it could be worse so quit complaining" kind of way?

Your review does a good job summarizing the really awkward style of the movie. It specifically references "Old Bond" as if Goldfinger's eccentricities were the sort of whacky it was going for, but that certainly doesn't come across, especially when it's so self-aware.

Kick-Ass operated more clearly in the sphere of a comic book geek getting a realty check about modern heroics, so at least Kick-Ass had an excuse for it's conflicted tone.
I think that a major problem with both Kick-Ass and Kingsman in that both of them purported to be self-aware and self-referential about their particular genres but they eventually just gave up and resorted to playing things straight but extreme bro by the time the third act came about (as exemplified by the notorious anal sex scene that plays like a graphically escalated version of the usual "Bond gets the girl" ending, but it sounds like you gave up before it even got to that part). It's a shame because it did some legwork to establish how fundamentally flawed an organisation like the Kingsmen actually was despite its noble intentions, but that all got lost under some facile jokes about how They Don't Make Spy Movies Like They Used To. I wouldn't even excuse Kick-Ass in that regard - I reckon it's just as guilty of making half-assed genre parody as Kingsman, if not more so.



Originally Posted by Iroquois
What, in a "hey it could be worse so quit complaining" kind of way?
Oh, hell no, I was saying Bond was symptomatic of a real problem people are in denial of.

It's certainly not to the same extreme as it used to be (excepting certain regions of the world), we look back on those workplace harassment videos and cringe, but it's foolish to suggest that there isn't a disparity when there mountains of evidence, just in these past 10 years to the contrary.

Originally Posted by Iroquois
I think that a major problem with both Kick-Ass and Kingsman in that both of them purported to be self-aware and self-referential about their particular genres but they eventually just gave up and resorted to playing things straight but extreme bro by the time the third act came about (as exemplified by the notorious anal sex scene that plays like a graphically escalated version of the usual "Bond gets the girl" ending, but it sounds like you gave up before it even got to that part). It's a shame because it did some legwork to establish how fundamentally flawed an organisation like the Kingsmen actually was despite its noble intentions, but that all got lost under some facile jokes about how They Don't Make Spy Movies Like They Used To. I wouldn't even excuse Kick-Ass in that regard - I reckon it's just as guilty of making half-assed genre parody as Kingsman, if not more so.
I largely agree, but I'd argue that Kick-Ass at least managed to convince me that it's a parody from the word go, what with it's dramatic superhero dive into a car followed by a diagnosis of mental illness.

Kingsman didn't even manage that with an opening that rang hollow save for the vague Planet Terror vibe I got from the weaponized amputee and cracked depiction of violence.

Planet Terror was a better parody, hell, Austin Powers is a masterwork of spy parody in comparison.



Welcome to the human race...
Oh, hell no, I was saying Bond was symptomatic of a real problem people are in denial of.

It's certainly not to the same extreme as it used to be (excepting certain regions of the world), we look back on those workplace harassment videos and cringe, but it's foolish to suggest that there isn't a disparity when there mountains of evidence, just in these past 10 years to the contrary.
I suppose so. It's not like there aren't still issues with the series' treatment of women even these days - Skyfall is a pretty significant offender in this regard despite its popularity and general displays of craftsmanship.

I largely agree, but I'd argue that Kick-Ass at least managed to convince me that it's a parody from the word go, what with it's dramatic superhero dive into a car followed by a diagnosis of mental illness.

Kingsman didn't even manage that with an opening that rang hollow save for the vague Planet Terror vibe I got from the weaponized amputee and cracked depiction of violence.

Planet Terror was a better parody, hell, Austin Powers is a masterwork of spy parody in comparison.
Pretty screwed-up way to establish a parodic tone, though (a mentally ill person died, how droll). I'd argue Kingsman was marginally more successful in that it set up a very capable gentleman spy who could shoot and fight only to have him be effortlessly sliced up by the henchwoman because he was caught up in looking and acting like a debonair Bond type.



Originally Posted by Iroquois
Pretty screwed-up way to establish a parodic tone, though (a mentally ill person died, how droll).
It's a dark comedy. It's practically a record scratch when he gets stabbed in the parking lot.

Originally Posted by Iroquois
I'd argue Kingsman was marginally more successful in that it set up a very capable gentleman spy who could shoot and fight only to have him be effortlessly sliced up by the henchwoman because he was caught up in looking and acting like a debonair Bond type.
It feels too indistinguishable from a standard anti-climax. It doesn't need to be a parody to play that joke, whereas Kick-Ass is specifically playing up an action/superhero trope.



Welcome to the human race...
It's a dark comedy. It's practically a record scratch when he gets stabbed in the parking lot.
Yeah, but even for a dark comedy it's very lacking in amusement. Re-visiting it earlier this year felt like a serious chore mainly because of its incredibly obnoxious sense of humour that did feel even more intolerable than Kingsman's flat jokes.

It feels too indistinguishable from a standard anti-climax. It doesn't need to be a parody to play that joke, whereas Kick-Ass is specifically playing up an action/superhero trope.
I honestly think that worked in its favour, but that's me.

Incidentally, I forgot what happens in Skyfall.
The Bond girl is a high-class henchwoman for the villain and Bond accurately surmises that she has a lifelong history of sexual abuse and slavery, effectively promising to "save" her from her gilded cage by stopping the villain. Cue one rather uncomfortable-looking scene where a naked Bond walks up behind her while she's in the shower (with the implication of sex, of course) and before too long she's being used as the target in a William Tell game between Bond and the villain (spoiler alert, the villain shoots her and she's effectively forgotten five minutes later). Suffice to say that it's got issues.



Yeah, but even for a dark comedy it's very lacking in amusement. Re-visiting it earlier this year felt like a serious chore mainly because of its incredibly obnoxious sense of humour that did feel even more intolerable than Kingsman's flat jokes.
Hmm. Looks like both movies were co-written by Mathew Vaughn and Jane Goldman.

Originally Posted by Iroquois
I honestly think that worked in its favour, but that's me.
Frankly, I didn't find it even remotely amusing. It hardly even seemed like a joke to me. Queue delayed bisection reaction shot, ooo~ooh, what are we watching, Cube? I've seen it before; it's unpleasantly gruesome, it's obvious CG, it doesn't impress me, and if it was supposed to amuse me, Kung Fury did it better.

"I could tell he was dead right away."

Originally Posted by Iroquois
The Bond girl is a high-class henchwoman for the villain and Bond accurately surmises that she has a lifelong history of sexual abuse and slavery, effectively promising to "save" her from her gilded cage by stopping the villain. Cue one rather uncomfortable-looking scene where a naked Bond walks up behind her while she's in the shower (with the implication of sex, of course) and before too long she's being used as the target in a William Tell game between Bond and the villain (spoiler alert, the villain shoots her and she's effectively forgotten five minutes later). Suffice to say that it's got issues.
That sounds terrible, I completely forgot all of that.



Welcome to the human race...
Hmm. Looks like both movies were co-written by Mathew Vaughn and Jane Goldman.
Both are also based on comics written by Mark Millar as well, which explains the common ground. It is my understanding that Vaughn and Goldman do take considerable licence with their adaptations of Millar's comics, though.

Frankly, I didn't find it even remotely amusing. It hardly even seemed like a joke to me. Queue delayed bisection reaction shot, ooo~ooh, what are we watching, Cube? I've seen it before; it's unpleasantly gruesome, it's obvious CG, it doesn't impress me, and if it was supposed to amuse me, Kung Fury did it better.

"I could tell he was dead right away."
Yeah, good point (though, to be fair, Cube wasn't going for laughs - maybe the same bit in Resident Evil was, though). Why am I even trying to defend this movie again?

That sounds terrible, I completely forgot all of that.
Yeah, it's pretty damning and a major reason for why I don't share most people's high opinion of it.





Rush Hour
Action Comedy / English / 1998

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
For the Action Movie Countdown.

Reassessment time.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Beef Burrito, Chicken Wings, Baby Back Ribs, Eel, Camel's Hump, what in the ****.

It's unfortunate that Chan would go on to be very dismissive of much of his American work, I imagine Battle Creek Brawl was a cruddy first experience and studios' eagerness to culturally charge his appearance in an American setting (even though it was handled pretty evenly in Rumble in the Bronx) pulled comedy to the forefront, sacrificing the action stuntwork Chan is known for and personally enjoys.

I've always been put off myself by the racial humor in the Rush Hour movies, I really don't find lines like "you don't ever touch a black man's radio" or Chan saying "what's up my *****" funny, they're just feeble attempts to stir the effervescent melting pot at best and cringe-inducing at worst. It's also far FAR from Chan's best action work.

That said, and as much he may deny it, Rush Hour has easily got to be one of his best movies. Chan's movies almost always tend to drag narratively, the action sequences, spectacular as they may be, are the dying pulse that encourages viewers to endure the rest of it's idle nonsense. The race humor in Rush Hour isn't funny, but neither is the usual immature slapstick we tend to find in his other movies.



Jackie Chan's likable not just because of the jokes, or even the insane stunts he performs, but because brings a charming passion to each project, and at least that doesn't feel absent here. Starring alongside Chris Tucker tends to be the dividing point with these movies, save the diehard Chan fan who daren't suffer a movie with any less than 3 kung fu fights in it, you either love him or hate him, at least that seems to be how it comes down, but I for one feel that while yes, he can become extraordinarily obnoxious, it's a gradient, in the first Rush Hour he is quite tolerable.

What really works here is that both of these actors aren't really playing characters terribly far beyond their own personalities and they're such clashing personalities that they're naturally perfect to compliment each other. Call backs to whether one speaks determines whether they can speak and dialog about their respective fathers who they looked up to as policemen only to have it come down to "my dad could beat your dad" contest are great. Tucker's charisma and resourcefulness really gels well with Chan's determination and skill, at least when it comes to the job, which is the entire point of the movie.

There's also something special about seeing these two fish from either sides of the pond liking very different music, but can agree that they both enjoy War by Edwin Starr enough to warrant a training montage.


Final Verdict:
[Pretty Good]

Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	tumblr_mvt2v7x9An1svt5w5o1_500.jpg
Views:	1560
Size:	48.1 KB
ID:	27138   Click image for larger version

Name:	rush_hour_a.jpg
Views:	803
Size:	23.9 KB
ID:	27139  





A Better Tomorrow II
Crime Drama / Chinese / 1987

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
For the Action Movie Countdown.

The first one was good and False Writer slated it above the first.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
"Rice is just like my father and mother, don't **** with my family."

Kissing, Sausage, Chicken, Eggs, Pizza, Milk, other crap.

I now see where Iro got that gif of Chow-Yun Fat giving the thumbs up.

So let's solve this mystery: how is it that Chow-Yun Fat is not only in the movie, but front and center of the promotional material in a sequel to a movie that wasn't even remotely about his character, yet he still DIED in?

Is it a prequel? No.

Did he survive? Multiple gunshot wounds to the chest for that long?

Please, let's be realistic, obviously Mark had a previously unmentioned IDENTICAL TWIN BROTHER NAMED KEN, yeah, so, we're not gonna take this story quite as seriously are we?

So the plot this time involves Ho and Kit conscripted into dealing with a new counterfeiting gang that has assumed control. Both of them go undercover, Ho through his old connections and Kit through a feigned interest in a suspect's daughter.

Kit's wife is pregnant and she's still the same pouty sock puppet as before and yet this information doesn't appear to penetrate Kit's skull when he out of nowhere decides it would be wise to take his fake girlfriend home to his wife. Spoiler warning: it's not. Both of them pull Monogamy Syndrome on him and this subplot immediately aborts because the girlfriend is killed off shortly after.

The girlfriend is the daughter of suspect, Lung (not to be confused with actor Ti Lung), who turns out to be Ho's Uncle and is quickly absolved of suspicion when an "escaped" Ho asks to stay with him only to be rebuked and told to turn himself and start over after he's paid his dues in jail.

Unfortunately, despite being cleared, Lung's property is in demand the counterfeiters cleverly frame him for a double homicide which he himself isn't entirely convinced he hasn't inadvertently committed.

Lung escapes to America where a church is massacred by his assassins and he's inexplicably framed AGAIN. Okay, I bought the first time because you showed it, but it made no ******* sense this time, the police found him unarmed and cradling a wounded child in his arms and they pin the whole thing on him? Especially when there are SURVIVORS who can testify that he was working there before gunmen suddenly shot the place up?



Lung, struck again, FOR SOME REASON, by guilt with the situation I guess eventually finds himself resigned to the fact that his daughter's never coming to America to join him (given that she's dead, having been killed by a traitor) and this just destroys him.

I'm not talking about introverted or uncommunicative or even emotionally unstable, the guy becomes a twitchy drooling IDIOT. But hold on, because we're in a America and this is where we meet Ken, who is essentially Mark, but does a whole lot more mugging.

Our introductory scene to Ken is gangsters trying to shake him down at his restaurant for protection fees and we get a hilariously ill-conceived argument in rough English which delivers such classic quotes as "**** YOUR RICE!" and "EAT THE ****ING RICE!".

Ken eventually, somehow, becomes aware of Lung and we have a staggeringly agonizing second act in which Ken needs to coax Lung to eat food who now has a permanent dopey expression on his face and now seems completely confounded by the mind-bogglingly difficult concept of PEELING AN ORANGE. I'm not kidding Ken needs to REMIND THIS BASTARD WHAT CHEWING IS.

They're supposed to bond over this. Look, I don't care if you witnessed your entire extended family have their skin flayed off in front of your eyes with a cheese grater. 1 of your friends died in front of you, your daughter maybe died offscreen, and you witnessed a couple random people die as well. I don't give a **** if you even think it's YOUR FAULT, this isn't post traumatic stress, this is ****ING STUPID.

Every mentally handicapped person I've ever met can handle the mind-blowing epiphany of CHEWING, YOU HAVE NO EXCUSE!!

Stand the **** up, growing a ****ing spine, SPEAK, like you ****ing know what language is, and if a chimpanzee can outwit your ability to eat a ****ing orange then pick something else off the floor and ****ing eat it, Ken dumped the entire ****ing fridge out onto the ****ing floor because you couldn't ****ing handle ****ing EATING!!!

It's FOOD! This isn't some guy who's become so depressed and self-loathing that he's lost the desire for self-preservation, HE'S A RAVING LUNATIC!



THE ****!? Right out of ****ing nowhere, just as suddenly as it came, it went, apparently all it took was seeing Ken take a bullet in the arm to turn his constant dragging roiling stupidity into roiling RAGE and cure him.

Ultimately, Ho, Kit, Ken, Lung, and Dude #5 combine to create a dream team bent on busting this counterfeiting gang, but Kit meets Ken (where he delivers such brilliant lines as "don't speak of the dead in a cemetery" which is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard in my life) and sees a shooting star superstitiously saying it ominously fortells his doom.

Oh? Kit is dumb? Glad to know that, I can care about him less now if he dies.

You'd think, as I did, or at least hoped, that given the surprise twist ending of the first A Better Tomorrow that this is a red herring and that Kit actually won't die.

But he dies.

...

Okay, so... you foreshadowed a twist...
TOLD US you're foreshadowing a twist...
and then did exactly that twist.

How is this even remotely a worthy follow-up to the original?

I suppose it earns some points for the big and slightly disjointed shootout in which everyone, including the good guys, inexplicably manages to get shot, but doesn't necessarily kill them like 99% of all other action movies.

It all ends with Ho, Ken, and Lung all armed, bloody, and sitting in recliners surrounded by dead bodies as the police arrive. All I can say, is that despite the odd scene that actually plays into the themes of the original, such as when Ho is forced to prove his loyalty by shooting Kit, it's a far inferior sequel.


Final Verdict:
[Meh...]

Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	vlcsnap-152839.jpg
Views:	793
Size:	36.4 KB
ID:	27144   Click image for larger version

Name:	HK_Better_Tomorrow2_13_event.jpg
Views:	1371
Size:	52.0 KB
ID:	27145  



Welcome to the human race...
Lung, struck again, FOR SOME REASON, by guilt with the situation I guess eventually finds himself resigned to the fact that his daughter's never coming to America to join him (given that she's dead, having been killed by a traitor) and this just destroys him.

I'm not talking about introverted or uncommunicative or even emotionally unstable, the guy becomes a twitchy drooling IDIOT. But hold on, because we're in a America and this is where we meet Ken, who is essentially Mark, but does a whole lot more mugging.

Our introductory scene to Ken is gangsters trying to shake him down at his restaurant for protection fees and we get a hilariously ill-conceived argument in rough English which delivers such classic quotes as "**** YOUR RICE!" and "EAT THE ****ING RICE!".

Ken eventually, somehow, becomes aware of Lung and we have a staggeringly agonizing second act in which Ken needs to coax Lung to eat food who now has a permanent dopey expression on his face and now seems completely confounded by the mind-bogglingly difficult concept of PEELING AN ORANGE. I'm not kidding Ken needs to REMIND THIS BASTARD WHAT CHEWING IS.

They're supposed to bond over this. Look, I don't care if you witnessed your entire extended family have their skin flayed off in front of your eyes with a cheese grater. 1 of your friends died in front of you, your daughter maybe died offscreen, and you witnessed a couple random people die as well. I don't give a **** if you even think it's YOUR FAULT, this isn't post traumatic stress, this is ****ING STUPID.

Every mentally handicapped person I've ever met can handle the mind-blowing epiphany of CHEWING, YOU HAVE NO EXCUSE!!

Stand the **** up, growing a ****ing spine, SPEAK, like you ****ing know what language is, and if a chimpanzee can outwit your ability to eat a ****ing orange then pick something else off the floor and ****ing eat it, Ken dumped the entire ****ing fridge out onto the ****ing floor because you couldn't ****ing handle ****ing EATING!!!

It's FOOD! This isn't some guy who's become so depressed and self-loathing that he's lost the desire for self-preservation, HE'S A RAVING LUNATIC!



It's a third of the movie we're dedicating to a paper-thin subsitute for a character from the last movie bonding with a contrived man-child over his abilty to gum food off the floor when the story obviously already has him pegged for tragedy.

Given how good the first movie was, I'd say that warrants a few F-bombs.



Welcome to the human race...
Yeah, it's my understanding that the main reason A Better Tomorrow II exists (aside from being the obvious cash-grab sequel thing) is that John Woo was trying to help out Dean Shek with his financial troubles, so it made sense that he gave him a huge role with a lot of capital-A Acting to do even when the writing really doesn't stack up. It's definitely goofy as hell, but I can't really hold it against the movie too hard - the character has been traumatised again and again so it all has a cumulative effect that simply breaks him and sends him insane. Corny, but not implausible - besides, this is a movie where dudes jump through the air while firing guns so, you know, I roll with it.



Yeah, it's my understanding that the main reason A Better Tomorrow II exists (aside from being the obvious cash-grab sequel thing) is that John Woo was trying to help out Dean Shek with his financial troubles, so it made sense that he gave him a huge role with a lot of capital-A Acting to do even when the writing really doesn't stack up. It's definitely goofy as hell, but I can't really hold it against the movie too hard - the character has been traumatised again and again so it all has a cumulative effect that simply breaks him and sends him insane. Corny, but not implausible - besides, this is a movie where dudes jump through the air while firing guns so, you know, I roll with it.
Just remember Rule of Cool, not Rule of Drool.