Terminator 1 or 2, which one did you like the best?

1. The Terminator
2. Both are equal to me
3. Ooof, Die Hard by a mile
4. Used to be Aliens, now it's Alien. Love both.
5. Meh... haven't seen any in years.

__________________

Since were all just hanging around waiting for Yoda's next reveal. Thought of some more (at least for me) tough ones;

6. Tatsuya Nakadai vs Toshirō Mifune
7. For a Few Dollars More vs A Fistful of Dollars
8. Ennio Morricone vs John Williams
9. Newman vs Redford

__________________
Entertainment Log
Letterboxd profile

6. Haven't seen enough movies of the two.
7. A fistful of dollars
8. Ennio Morricone over every music composer in the universe.
9. Redford for a having a tad bit more variety

Bill Paxton in True Lies>>>> Titanic and the Abyss combined.

You know this to be true.

But he has a little dick, it's pathetic!

I love Bill Paxton as much as the next guy, but I don't expect his supporting role to do all the legwork for a slightly above average, generic action/comedy whatever hybrid.

I believe you mean "I don't love Bill Paxton nearly enough."

Also, "slightly above average?" It's got Arnold at the peak of his comic and action ability, Cameron's accuity for fluid, complex and riveting action, Jaime Lee Curtis balancing a role that demands she transition from lonely, homely wife to sexy spy, and Tom Arnold being shockingly enjoyable.

And Bill. *******. Paxton.

You're fired.

1) Arnold has limited appeal for me. Perfect for Terminator. Absurdly perfect for Commando. Predator, natch. He's got more natural charisma than he has any right to. But his comic **** though? Nah. No thanks. Never. Nope. Nuh-uh. Get out of town.

2) I've got nothing against Cameron's talent at capturing action. Even rank garbage like Avatar has some spectacular stuff in it (without making it any less rank). But it is all about what function the action plays, and what is in the movie that surrounds it. Sorry, it just doesn't do anything for me. Unlike Aliens, where the action feels like some extension of grotesque American jingoism, or Terminator that cloaks its action in menace, or Titanic which (regardless of the terrible leads and Billy Zane) makes its action feel human and relatable and tragic, True Lies is just boring empty showboating. Yes, excess can be astoundingly boring sometimes, even if done well.

3) Curtis is fine. Less fine is the Arnold manipulating her into doing a strip tease for what she thinks is a stranger. Yes, I'm sure we can shoehorn in talk about how the movie is all about deception and yadda yadda yadda. But that was just tone deaf nonsense. An awful moment typical of Cameron's ****ty grasp of how people can be anything more than props for his films.

4) Give Tom Arnold enough cocaine.....

6. I've only seen Harakiri, from Nakadai, and a handful of Kurosawa's from Mifune, so I can't say.
7. For a Few Dollars More
8. Probably Morricone
9. Newman, but I like Redford well enough

Re: True Lies, I love it. I find it to be a perfect mixture of action and comedy. Given Cameron's resume, I think it usually gets the short-end of the stick when compared to stuff like Terminator or Aliens, but I think it can hold its own against those, and other more revered action films.

6) More familiar with Mifune, so he gets the nod. I'm not in the camp where he can do no wrong though. He often has a number of moments in any movie where I feel he's over playing his over playing. There are limits to how much Mifune Mifune can Mifune.

7) For a Few Dollars more, pretty easily. Fistful is by far the weakest of the trilogy.

8) Ennio Morriccone by a million billion miles. Williams certainly has his moments though.

9) hmmmmmmm....errrrrrrrr.......Newman??....I guess?

And since we're talking True Lies, I dare anybody to watch this scene and deem it anything less than a masterpiece

Ya, its a good scene.

6. I'm more familiar with Toshirō Mifune, so I guess I'll go with him.
7. I'm in the minority, but A Fistful of Dollars gets my vote.
8. Ennio Morricone, easily. John Williams is also excellent though.
9. Redford, I guess.

__________________
IMDb
Letterboxd

1) The problem here is that you need to recognize the comedic brilliance of Arnold in Batman & Robin, Twins and Jingle All the Way. Then you will reach Arnold enlightenment.

2) How is True Lies any emptier or less jingoistic than anything you mentioned?

3) Curtis IS fine. Hence the strip tease. Also, they're both manipulative and deceive each other with his deception clearly being shown as a wrong, albeit humorously so, thing to do.

4) They gave him the exact right amount.

1) I've seen Batman and Robin and Twins and I hate both. Jingle All the Way simply isn't going to happen.

2) The jingosim I mentioned in Aliens is an extension of the team of characters that have been assembled for this mission. They are all id. They are walking slogans. They are amazingly grotesque in ways that is not remotely the same as a slightly more reserved Schwartzenegger with Tom Arnold as a sidekick. These sort of things are only fun when the films accompanying elements are also equally exaggerated, and True Lies seems content to just exaggerates the action. Boring. Action, like violence, means little to me outside of the context of the film.

And I'm pretty sure I only called True Lies empty. And that was in reference to its action. The surrounding film I just find decent.

3) I found it to be a terribly strained attempt at humor. Agonizing actually. Not to mention gross on lots of levels.

4) As long as he was having a good time...

I prefer the John Connor in the first film.

1) Do it. Succumb.

2) The movie has Arnold as an American Spy working for an eye-patched Charlton Heston to hunt down a Middle Eastern Terrorist named "the Spider." It's all exaggerated, mate. It's American jingoism on steroids.

3. Yeah but Jaime Lee Curtis.

4. We all were, Crummy. Join us.

Well, Rocky was first.
I know it's probably because of great filmmaking but I just disliked DeNiro's LaMotta (the character not the performance) so intensely that it made it hard for me to slog through the narrative in which none of the characters are really even decent people when the movie lacked a strong narrative arc or real climax for me. I mean, in the end, he's the same ******* he was in the beginning.
Also, there's the issue of how people think about Rocky versus the film it actually is. Rocky is actually a pretty gritty, low-budget, character-based film that was so damn good it won Best Picture - in the 1970s - despite being a debut effort from a young screenwriter and first leading role for a young, barely-known actor. It does have multiple strong character arcs (Rocky, Mickey, and Adrienne, and Paulie is a really good character too) and obviously the story is excellent and not as rosy and feel-good as people think they remember it to be. It's a classic.
This case may not hold water for some cinephiles, to be honest, I don't usually have to like or relate to the characters of a film to appreciate it or even think it's a masterpiece, but I just could connect with Raging Bull whereas I actually continue to connect more and more with Rocky the older I get.

This is very well-put, Rocky is "simple perfection".