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
Same, same. Hard to explain why I enjoyed it THAT much, seems like it'd just be another generic action-thriller that's worth checking out once for 90-120 minutes, but I really do enjoy it and have seen it many a time.
I watched this early 90's noir thriller starring Linda Fiorentino, Bill Pullman & Peter Berg for the first time in a decade and really enjoyed it.
Fiorentino is in fine form as Bridget Gregory, wife of Pullman's Clay, a medical trainee who she persuades to sell drugs in order to help them get a better life. When he gets $700K through a deal, she absconds with the money and the rest of the film focuses on her trying to evade Clay's attempts to find her in a small town, while taking advantage of Berg's Mike, who is smitten with her.
Quirky and fun, if low budget. Recommended.
I'd sacrifice both the Taken sequels and erase them off the face of the earth and replace them with one A-Team sequel, at least. Yes, I'd bring in the same crew on board to work on the film because they understood how to capture 21st century atmosphere with the spirit of the old show.
I haven't seen that one. I mean, i've seen a little of Bava's work, but not that one. Counting them up, i've only seen 3, Lisa And The Devil, Barron Blood and A Bay Of Blood (4 if we're counting House Of Exorcism, and i'd rather not). Funny, I though i'd seen more.
I agree. The movie is a disgrace. How could they do that? A shame it has the same name as the fabulous cult series.
The casting is wrong. Liam Neeson did't fit.
And Bradley Cooper is just obnoxious and annoying.
And the movie overall felt more like a Mission Impossible mirror universe than A-Team.
More or less it's the actors you have problems with, from what I understand.
That's the main problem for me, yes. I do have to re-watch it though, only seen it once. I just hate when they remake tv-shows and do unreasonable casting. Remember Starsky and Hutch? Another such total casting failure. I Spy sucked too.
Now, back to The A-Team, I know Liam Neeson doesn't really look as bulky as George Pappard, but his Hannibal, other than toning down that snobbish grin of the original, wasn't that different from his TV series counterpart. And while Bradley Cooper himself annoys me like hell, he did play Faceman fairly. He had all the traits of Dirk Benedict's interpretation of Face, just with a 21st century behaviour.
As for Rampage and Sharlto Copley, they nailed the spirit of the characters they were given. Especially Copley being Murdock.
Get Smart is ok I guess (never seen the tv show).
S+H did look good, that is true
@Birdleson, don't worry my friend I'm completely on your page, I thought it was utter junk and I only saw the first Taken and it came across as a Commando rip off without the camp element.
I get the tired of blockbuster mayhem, I'm about done with comic book films, Suicide Squad slightly interests me but I can only really think of one blockbuster I will definitely be seeing this year and that will be Rogue One.
Duel (1971)
Spielberg's feature film debut. Excellent, like I remembered.
Close Encounters Of The Third Kind (1977) - director's cut
I remembered not having been all that impressed with this way back when, and still wasn't. Not bad, but... well...
1941 (1979) - director's cut
This, on the other hand, really was baaaad. I hadn't seen it before, and won't be seeing it again. I assume it was supposed to be funny, but it was just tiresome, noisy and messy. I only got through the first 20 or 30 minutes when I first tried to watch it. Managed to watch the rest a couple of days later.
Always (1989)
Soppy, tiresome, boring, predictable.
The Terminal (2004)
I didn't remember much of this, and I'm not surprised by that - pretty forgettable stuff. Still better than the 2 previous ones above or the one below.
War Horse (2011)
I hadn't seen this before. I was thinking within the first few minutes "I'm not going to like this, am I?" I didn't. Again overly sentimental stuff that didn't feel real and didn't work for me. I don't remember hating Kaminski's cinematography before, but I did in this. The movie looked so artificially pretty that it actually bothered me and totally took me out of the movie.
What more do you need than the Disney version? The George Bruns score alone elevates it to the skies. ( He did Robin Hood too, for instance).
And you can t beat King Louie as animated in that one. Or Kaa. Or anyone else, really.
I don't expect it to be any better, but curiosity often drives me to see films like this. I also want to see how Bill Murray and Christopher Walken do (two of my favorite actors). Zootopia impressed me a lot, so I'm hopeful Disney can stay hot.
Shocker, right?! 'Munich' was my favorite film ever for about a decade before I realized GE had to take that position. It's as great, only with more nostalgia.
However, now that you mention it, it has been a damn long time since I've watched 'Munich.' I try not to watch it more than once a year, if that, because I don't want to become burnt out on it. Every time I see it, it's like seeing it for the first time again.
But hey, you might like War Horse... who knows.
I think I've seen 26 Spielberg movies now, only missing 4 (one of which I have no interest in seeing, another I'm not sure about, and 2 I need to see at some point). There are more those that I don't care for much than those that I do, but he has done some excellent stuff as well. - Munich is definitely one of the good ones.