It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Thank God I didn't bother seeing this at the cinema (it's on Sky movies now). What a waste of time. I haven't seen a Superman film before and I don't plan to watch any others.
First off we have the weird, alien intro with Russel Crowe. Oh look, a big battle with flying dragons and lasers and all the rest of it. I feel like this was meant to be a big bit of spectacle to open the film up but it did nothing for me. Felt like a poor mans Avatar imo. (Also, why do they need the dragons? If they're all the same race as Superman, can't they fly? That confused me a bit).
The main problem is that the entire film is packed with way, way too much CGI. I understand that CGI is needed for a film like this but some of it seemed pointless. EG- Superman's (adopted, not Russel Crowe) dad dying. Out of all the ways they could've killed him off, they choose to have a giant tornado. Because, y'know, look at the awesome CGI!
I thought the film took itself way too seriously, it went on way too long (especially that final battle, f***ing hell that was ridiculous), it wasted most of it's cast and it just didn't entertain me. It was a film that wanted to be Batman Begins when in reality it was closer to Transformers (except it didn't have cool cars and Megan Fox, so I think even Transformers beats it when it comes to entertainment value).
Maybe if you like the comics then you'll enjoy this but I just didn't enjoy it on any level. I wasn't expecting something great but I thought I could still enjoy it in a popcorn action flick, switch off your brain and go along for the ride sort of way. But I didn't. That was the worst part. It bored me.
Yes that's how I and many others saw it too. If you want a decent Superman film, watch Donner's original. It may be over 35 years old but it's way, way, way better. It has more story in it's opening 20 minutes than MoS does.
And it looks great on Blu Ray plus Williams' score is shamazing! :D
I agree. Watch the 1978 original. Man of S*** was also the first Superman movie I saw and felt exactly the same way. But after watching the original Donner film, I was completely blown away and felt good. Now that was a superhero movie done right.
Many people seem to like the Lester cut of Superman 2 as well. That, however, I cannot say I do. Donner's cut is an improvement but I don't think S2 is better than S: The Movie.
I will say this though. Somehow I can appreciate both S Returns and Man Of Steel too. The latter sets things up nicely IMO for future films. I can see them take the material of MOS and build good stuff on it. I'm not at all against the casting decisions, nor the story, nor the effects. I was quite fond of MOS in fact;
The worst Superman films, for me, will always remain S III and Quest Of Peace.
Cushing was a consummate gentleman in real life, yet in Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed, he is a real nasty piece of work.
Well i certainly enjoyed myself this afternoon watching this. I was so pumped walking out the cinema! Awesome stuff and nice to see how it tied into the TV show. Also did not see that twist regarding the Winter Soldier! Very clever! The other awesome thing was that i was the only person in that auditorium!!!! So it really was a private showing all on my own! BONUS!!!! :-bd
@MajorDSmythe, I did one of those back around Christmas. I overall prefer the Frankenstein series, mainly because of Cushing but also because I think, quite simply, that the Frankenstein Hammer films are slightly better than the Draculas.
Question: have you ever seen Hammer's naughty Karnstein trilogy? ;-)
It really is a excellent film. I am going again this weekend. If I am lucky maybe I will get my own personal viewing too!
Bond spoofs come as they come; some are good, some are terrible. Austin Powers, however, is more than a Bond spoof. It takes from DN, GF, TB and YOLT, but it brings its own warmth and charm to the game. In truth, I think AP more closely resembles the Derek Flint films starring James Coburn from way back in the 60s. Those two films were also inspired by the 007 series but generated their own extravagant style and spy world. Embracing the 60s, almost worshipping the cultural Zeitgeist from half a century ago, AP blends Bond iconography with Flint outrageousness and distils a very unique formula out of that seemingly ridiculous mix. Centred around the bizarre and hyper-kinetic character of Austin "Danger" Powers, International Man Of Mystery leaves no stone unturned while creating an entertaining parody that never truly mocks its sources of inspiration but rather pays homage to them. For example, George Clinton's score is so obviously a reference to Barry's music for the 60s' Bonds, but it's also in its own right a delightful score. The dynamic duo of Austin and Ms. Kensington actually has genuine chemistry going and with a little help from Burt Bacharach displays something close to true romance at times. Even Dr. Evil, perhaps the most obvious joke on Bond, works surprisingly well in most of his scenes.
Yet despite all that, I have a few gripes with the film and they all have something to do with the overall comedy aspect. I can be very critical when it comes to jokes and AP doesn't always succeed in squeezing a laugh out of me. Some jokes wear off pretty quickly yet tend to be repeated a few times too often in the film. In fact, only one funny scene keeps me laughing time and again and it required the presence of Tom Arnold. But why did they have to do the block-the-penis or block-the-boobies thing twice? And the who-cries-for-the-dead-henchman gig?
Anyway, the curious thing is that comedy doesn't interest me so much as everything else when I watch AP. I just love the 60s flavours, the over the top attitude, the cosiness and Mike Myers' versatility. This film makes me happy time and again. It may be my favourite Bond spoof, but even more than that, it's just a delicious film on its own terms.
I am the opposite, I prefer Hammer's Dracula series, even though it ended badly with The Legend Of The Seven Golden Vampires. I know a lot of people defecate on The Satanic Rites Of Dracula, but I like it's mix of contemporary Dracula, and biological warfare / spy thriller.
As for the Karnstein trilogy, i've never seen any of them.
EDIT
Forget that last sentence, i've seen Twins Of Evil.
---
My favourite Jena Malone film. Just be careful of that falling Jesus head.
Jena Malone ranking: 1/24
Okay, a few years ago Hammer returned. The Woman In Black wasn't immensely original, but it was scary as hell. It borrowed from Japanese horror (Ju-On: The Grudge, Ringu) and a couple of those classic ghost house films, but gave it the traditional Hammer treatment by setting it in Edwardian England and bringing a couple of very talented actors to the game. I was excited, being a true Hammer fan, thinking the legendary horror studios had finally made a comeback.
So when The Quiet Ones was announced, I needed the Hammer brand and little else to be excited again. I asked my girlfriend to come but she absolutely loathes scary films so I dragged her with me under the false pretence that it wouldn't be scary at all. False pretence... right. Turns out we got exactly what I had told her it would be: not scary.
I feel a bit let down by The Quiet Ones. This film obviously tries to tap into the current 'real cases of possession' hype. Half the time we watch footage on a 70s video cam, and if you haven't seen enough seances already, we get some more here. Naturally there will be a lot of talking and some jump up moments, irrelevant to the story, which get boring pretty quickly.
After about half an hour of almost nothing, my patience is wearing thin. It's not that I suffer from short attention span or anything. After all, I love horror films that slowly build and then deliver, even if the climax doesn't last longer than 10 minutes or so. Ti West's House Of The Devil, John Carpenter's Halloween, Lucky McKee's May... these films take their time to get to the ultimate terror experience. But the difference is, they deliver other goods while we're waiting. The Quiet Ones struggles in keeping us focused and interested. There's a lot of talk, most of it meaningless, and some almost scary moments that always seem to break the tension too soon. The video cam moments feel so overused in the last 10 years, they actually turn me against the film.
Sure, the acting is good enough. Jared Harris and Olivia Cooke are fine actors and they do what they can. But while the film expects me to descend into terror and madness along with them, the fact that we've seen most if not all of this countless times before and the lack of truly frightening moments make me yawn and check my watch repeatedly. It isn't the first time that Hammer simply takes material from other film studio's - their Mummy, Dracula, Frankenstein, ... series from way back were nothing if not a direct repeating of what Universal had done a few decades earlier - but there was always that fresh, new, updated spirit they brought. The Quiet Ones fails at precisely that. It's generic, which isn't necessarily a bad thing as long as it's also a little scary on the side. But it's not. It's more of the same possession crap and done worse than average.
I'm truly disappointed in The Quiet Ones. Well acted and well shot is the best I can give the film. But I need more to recommend it. Only if you're interested in this material, in these so-called "true events" involving weird psychology experiments, you might get something out of it. But I doubt it. Sorry Hammer, no recommend for The Quiet Ones.
I ended up with Rushmore being my next Wes flick.
Really liked it. Usually Wes's stories are more kafkaesque so to speak and altough they tell stories that don't happen everyday you can still connect with them. With Rushmore..idk I felt the "larger than life" theme but it was more down to earth than his other movies so to speak.
Jason Schwartzman's movie debut was off the roof. Amazing acting. It's a shame he didn't become bigger star after that movie. Overall I liked this movie more than The Royal Tenenbaums, but the Tenenbaums was my first Wes movie so I'm kinda connected with it. That's why I placed it higher than Budapest. And Moonrise is #1 cause it's the first Wes movie I've seen in cinema (and I enjoyed it most, so it seems like it will stay at #1 for a while). It doesn't seem right seeing Grand Budapest last cause I liked and enjoyed the movie, but I guess I'll put Rushmore at #2 right now. When GBH gets released on BluRay/DVD I'll make sure of my definitive Wes ranking. I sorta didn't liked the "pointless" ending of Rushmore, but then again most of Wes's movies end...sorta abruptly.
1.Moonrise Kingdom
2.Rushmore
3.The Royal Tenenbaums
4. Grand Budapest Hotel
edit: I totally forgot that if I knew a person like Max in real life the chances are that I would probably hate that person. But in the movie I liked him.
A year before Hammer made Horror Of Dracula, which began their Dracula series, they made this film, which started their Frankenstein series. What sets this one apart, is that not only do we get the great Peter Cushing as Victor Frankenstien, but also the living legend we know as Christopher Lee taking in the role of The Monster.
Hammer: Frankenstein
1. Curse Of Frankenstein (1957)
Yogi the Movie - A creature created by Hanna Barbara and now upped to a movie, totally over the top but my 10 year old was totally in awe with it. She has since then looked for the cartoons on tv and they are still higly amusing. A fun movie to watch with you young kids alone as an adult not so much.
It's probably my second least favorite Tarantino film, but it's still one crazy, thrilling, entertaining ride with one hell of a finale. I don't like how the film turns dangerless and comedic at the end, in a sense, but that car chase is so intense, and all of the small scenes and addictive dialogue really build up to that.
My favourite film in Hammer's Frankenstein series. I prefer Frankenstein in this film, he comes off as more heroic then in 'CURSE...'. I think he did genuinely want to help Karl, of course, getting his name in the history books would have been a bonus. I also think Cushing worked wonderfully with Francis Matthews, it's a pity they didn't work together in another Frankenstein film.
Hammer: Frankenstein
1. Revenge Of Frankenstein (1958)
2. Curse Of Frankenstein (1957)
The special effects are the main redeeming feature of this otherwise fairly tedious science fiction flick. Matt Damon is dressed up like The Terminator and Jodie Foster (an actress I have great respect for) seems to be channelling William Shatner's Captain Kirk. The film SHOULD be more entertaining but it feels like elements from other sci/fi films (The Matrix, Total Recall) have been mixed together in a fairly clunky manner. The action is rather poorly edited and relies too much on slow motion for dramatic effect.
The emotional content feels cheesy and contrived for the most part, and none of the performances really stand out. By the end it descends into pure nonsense as Matt Damon (in robot suit) fights an over-the-top cartoon villain (also in robot gear).
I wasn't expecting all that much but this turned out worse than I expected sadly.
4/10
'RoboShite'
That is all.
With three movies having treacherous IMF operatives I think it is high time to abolish the service, they are very untrustworthy,
Lets hope nr. 5 has some different plot ideas than traiterous collegeas.