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
I've yet to see The Dead Zone but I rewatched A History of Violence almost a year back, forgot just how entertaining it was. Hopefully you enjoy it.
And being an Arrow release there are some great extras and a nice booklet.
I will post a Cronenberg ranking when I’ve finished his films. So far it has been a really fun ride.
The trailers sold this Dwayne Johnson starring monster flick as an urban battle royale between a giant silverback gorilla and a flying wolf. It certainly is that, and there’s a huge skyscraper climbing lizard too. Directed by San Andreas helmer Brad Peyton and based off a hit 80’s game, this film definitely delivers on the expected CGI mayhem and thrills. Buildings are smashed, cars and large objects are flung, and the scientifically mutated animals are suitably terrifying, courtesy of state of the art special effects. In particular George, the gorilla, looks incredibly realistic at times.
So on the most rudimentary and obvious level (the one catering to prepubescent kids) the films works. Unfortunately, there’s really nothing more to it than the aforementioned destruction and CGI. Attempts to inject emotional subtext to the narrative fall terribly flat (and come across as cheesy) and the ‘human’ characters in the film are woefully underdeveloped. Malin Ackerman, Jeffrey Dean Morgan and Jack Quaid all ham it up in an obvious manner, perhaps recognizing that they are playing second fiddle to the CGI. As such, they are reasonably entertaining to watch. Naomi Harris on the other hand isn’t. She attempts an American accent here and butchers it in an embarrassing manner (normally the problem goes the other way) while overacting in an overtly distracting manner. She’s just miscast, as she is in the Bond films imho. Johnson is his usual muscular world saving self, but even he seems a bit weary here, and is upstaged by gorilla-George. Will Yun Lee (Colonel Moon from DAD) has a 'blink and you'll miss it' role but it was good to see him.
Overall the film reminds me a little of last year’s The Mummy. Like that 2017 film, there’s something a bit ‘by the numbers’ about it combined with flat characterizations and a slightly 'off' tone. I personally don't think it's anywhere as good as Kong: Skull Island. or Peyton's (and Johnson's) own San Andreas. Still, it's worth a viewing for the destruction. Personally, I hope Johnson's Skyscraper later this year is better.
You've got me on a Cronenberg fix with all your posts! ( no bad thing!)
I rewatched Videodrome the other day and it really is such an imaginative concept. Superbly twitchy performance from James Woods that really carries the film through its absurdities.
And did you notice, you never see Max Renn take off the helmet....
Think a revisit to The Brood is next....
Videodrome is extremely good. Got to check out Crimes of the Future which sadly isn’t quite as good, but can’t win them all. I think I will go for Spider (2002) next - today...
From the opening shot I was hooked, fantastic Cinematography, I won't say it's Tarantino's best though I enjoy it as much as Reservoir Dogs which is my personal favourite.
Those two do have a lot in common.
I also enjoyed the wide aspect ratio. Felt refreshing and made the interior shots feel rather majestic.
Like Fincher's The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, that one is best enjoyed when it's cold and snowy out.
Just edited my original post. Corrected it to include Christmas, which seems the best possible time to watch it. Now that snow is disappearing here, waiting until next winter doesn't seem such a bad idea.
Good thinking! I love that weather can heighten and affect a movie-watching experience. Those are always my two go-to's for when it's cold out.
There's hardly any memorable song, several others seem to have been written, uh, in the spirit of MY FAIR LADY and MARY POPPINS (and/or CHITTY CHITTY BANG BANG). Rex Harrison gives a re-hash of Professor Higgins, minus a decent script. None of the other actors/singers deserve a special mention, neither do cinematography and/or ultimately Richard Fleischer's direction.
One may enjoy it in the right mood. But of the musicals we've been watching consciously over the last year or so, (MFL, MP, CCBB, CABARET, CHICAGO...), this one will have to settle for last place in the ranking.
This is well-earned.
The wide shots are fantastic I have it in HD though I often check to see if there will be a 4K release, this film has alot of detail and I think upscaled further will be eye popping. I am due a rewatch think I'll watch it tonight.
Scary Movie
The Invention of Lying
Being There is great.
Agreed the last great Peter Sellers performance, Forest Gump slightly ripped of Chance Gardener and less subtley.
Never bothered to see that. Or M Butterfly.
Definitely one of his best and most intelligent films.
The performance from Jeremy Irons is just incredible and he was a brave man to take it on in the first place. Such is the skill in his performance and the direction, a few minutes into the film you forget these character's are being played by the same person.
Music, production design and photography also top notch.
Sure there is comedy even in this one. But most of his other work is much more comedy-oriented, and this applies to WFTP only to a very limited degree. Even STALAG 13 is foremostly a comedy, or they wouldn't have dared turn it into HOGAN'S HEROES later on.
What I'm trying to say is that WFTP is excellent, but excellent as being on a level with the top Hitchcock films, rather than with ONE, TWO, THREE or SOME LIKE IT HOT or THE APARTMENT (I'm not that fond of that one, but mention it as an example). It's basically a non-Wilder movie which he managed to execute flawlessly. I have problems ranking it along with his comedies.
As you can see, three of those four are overtly 'heavier' stuff (although my appreciation owes much to the dark comedy aspect of a lot of it — that extends to THE APARTMENT as well, which can't exactly be called 'light' either). My favoring this side of Wilder's work might make it easier to situate WITNESS FOR THE PROSECUTION just outside the top, since what I'm considering top is closer to it in spirit than something like, to keep with an example of yours, SOME LIKE IT HOT.
I'm not sure WFTP is Wilder's lone example of suspense, either, if that's what aspect you're keying in on re: it being Hitchcock like? FIVE GRAVES TO CAIRO does well for itself in this way.
* Keeping in mind that I'm yet to see THE EMPEROR WALTZ; A FOREIGN AFFAIR; ONE, TWO THREE; IRMA LA DOUCE; THE FORTUNE COOKIE; AVANTI!; or BUDDY BUDDY.
That's an interesting discussion. I'd be hard-pressed to argue against WFTP, although of course CHARADE would need to be under consideration.
STALAG 17 is a nice blend. This is one of the reasons I think Wilder was great. He could aptly do either to the exclusion of the other or integrate them seamlessly.