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
"It is NAHT! In the file! It is NAHT!"
The first was somewhat disappointing and by-the-numbers, the second was goddamned amazing.
It was one of the most riveting films in cinema when it came out, and is still my favourite Lynch movie along with WILD AT HEART. Strange, moody, bizarre, unpleasant, strangely fascinating. Sometimes even funny.
A great classic, and a kind of blueprint for Twin Peaks.
Let me begin by saying I didn't really like the first one as much as everyone else seemed to. It's was ok I suppose. I also wasn't all that wowed by Logan, another film which members have been raving about. So I approached this lauded 2nd entry in the Wick series with some trepidation.
Well, all I can say is I was completely blown away. I couldn't take my eyes off the screen from the opening second all the way to the end of the 2 hr runtime. A lot of care went into making this film, that much is clear. The visuals are absolutely outstanding, and remind me a lot of SF (in the sense that like the Bond effort it transcends the genre by capturing locations and scenes in stylish ways that seem otherworldly). There was a lot of talk after the film's release for director Chad Stahelski to helm a future Bond film. I say EON should consider cinematographer Dan Laustsen instead. This man knows how to lens and light a film. The fights are almost balletic in their conception and the whole film has a big budget feel that elevates it over more mundane efforts in this genre.
There's not much of a plot or character development here. It's pretty much Keanu killing nameless (and sometimes faceless) goons in video game style for 2 hrs (using gun fu, a fascinating combination of close quarters gun fight and martial arts). However, he does it with such style, all while conveying a melancholic yet resolute demeanour throughout the film. It's only when he starts talking that we realize his acting is still stuck in the Bill & Ted era. Thankfully the always tremendous Ian McShane is there to raise the acting level.
This is a great film for action fans, but that could be expected. What surprised me is that it is a very impressive film for fans of stylish film making too (of which I am one).
That is a great film. For me, the best 5 Lynch films are The Elephant Man, The Straight Story, Blue Velvet, Eraserhead, and Mulholland Drive. After that I'm not as big of a fan, but I think he did a really nice job with those ones.
I actually spent a good portion of my day yesterday watching all three movies. I don't believe I've ever done a triple feature in one day before. Anyway, it's been years since I last watched any of the Raimi Spider-Man movies. With the new one coming out in just a couple of weeks I decided to watch all five Spider-Man movies, starting with Raimi's trilogy.
Spider-Man (2002)
I loved this movie when it was first released, I was about 13. I got caught up in Spidermania and loved everything Spiderman, I still do. This movie hasn't aged well. It's not terrible by any means but it just feels simple and generic, especially compared to modern day superhero movies. Everything seems to go by so quick that you never really end up feeling anything for anyone. It's basically just there to show off Spidey in action. Which was alright at the time because it was only the second big budget superhero movie (right after the original X-Men). However, this movie brought back some good memories of a simpler time and I enjoyed being a kid again while watching it. I will say there's something about Raimi's first Spidey movie that makes me think of Burton's first Batman movie. I'm not quiet sure what it is though.
Spider-Man 2 - Extended Cut (2004)
I remember seeing this in theaters twice and honestly if it were re-released in theaters I'd go see it again. This one is a much better entry than the first movie. They got just about everything right with this one. The character development is great, the action is amazing, the special effects looked good. I have very few complaints about this movie. Alfred Molina is probably the most well cast person in a comic book movie. There's no way they could've found a better person to play Doc Ock. The man looks like he just jumped right out of a comic book. This was my first time watching the Extended Cut of this film. I only noticed a couple of changes and none of which really added to the story or changed anything. You can honestly watch the original version and be okay.
Spider-Man 3 (2007)
This one was as disappointing as I remember it being. It's starts off great but roughly around the time Peter has his so-bad-it's-good dance montage is when the film takes a nose dive. Which is such a shame because both Maguire and Dunst finally seemed like they were really comfortable in their roles. Had Raimi not been forced to add Venom I think the movie would have been a success and we probably would've gotten at least one more from him. Having said that, there is no excuse for some of the things Raimi did in this movie. He still could've given us a great Venom. I sometimes wonder if he did the things he did knowing it wouldn't turn out good.
Overall it's an alright trilogy but I'm glad Raimi isn't behind the camera anymore and I'm also glad Maguire and Dunst are not in front of them. Maguire is an okay Peter Parker but a terrible Spider-Man. Dunst, while beautiful, isn't that knock out model that Mary Jane needs to be. However, I will say that she and Maguire had great chemistry on screen.
Spider-Man trilogy ranking:
Spider-Man 2
Spider-Man
Spider-Man 3
If I have time tonight, I'll do a double feature of The Amazing Spider-Man duology. After that I may watch Captain America: Civil War just so I can see all the Spider-Man screen appearances. Plus it'll be good to lead into Spider-Man: Homecoming.
The Amazing Spider-Man
Spider-Man 2
The Amazing Spider-Man 2
Spider-Man
Spider-Man 3
I had wanted to see this for a long time, but damn it. One of the stupidest films I ever saw.
This was the first movie I took my son to see in the cinema when he was four, so I thought it would be fun to see it again.
I wish Jim Carrey had been the cat instead of ducking Mike Myers. It has some fun moments. The little girl steals the show, they always do.
Funniest line is probably from the cat who will not use the "D" word on a dog, but refers to it as a "Canine-American".
First viewing for me of this biopic on the founding of McDonalds. The film has a standout performance by Michael Keaton as Ray Kroc, a travelling milkshake mixer salesman who through happenstance encounters Dick and Mac McDonald, brothers who run a small eponymous burger joint in San Bernadino. Kroc is fascinated by their finely tuned operation, which runs like clockwork - a sort of Henry Ford style assembly line for burgers with huge lines. He befriends the brothers, gets them to reveal their backstory and arranges to franchise the operation. Kroc encounters several roadblocks & hurdles along the way (not least from the brothers themselves, who are wary of expansion, loss of control & don't trust him) but eventually he succeeds in a big way, finally even wresting control away from the founders.
Keaton is outstanding as always as the ambitious Kroc, who built one of the greatest business empires through vision, persistence and hard work. Kroc is not all that likable, but Keaton is and that helps. He is ably supported in this film by Nick Offerman and John Carroll Lynch (two excellent character actors) as the two brothers McDonald, Laura Dern as his wife Ethel, and Linda Cardellini as Joan - who Ray eventually divorces Ethel for.
There are elements of Fincher's Social Network in this film, at least in terms of it showcasing Kroc as a somewhat unscrupulous, soulless & ruthless person whose drive and vision lead to massive wealth, but not without casualties. It's a fascinating but exposition heavy study of one of America's business giants, and what it takes to really succeed. The brothers had a love for quality and hamburgers, but Kroc had a love for growth and business. That made all the difference. In a way, it's an unfortunate allegory on America's success as much as it is McDonalds.
Time for a Big Mac with Fries.
At least it has Carrey.
Yes, there is another reboot to be released this year.
I think this reboot has something to do with Sony giving control of the franchise to Marvel.