The General Movie Thread

[renegadeleader1]

1 hour ago, Thom said:

Why am I suddenly imaging a clip of quick-cut scenes played to the tune of Benny Hill!?

 

 

 

To be far the actor they chose for the British Ambassador did resemble good old Benny.😆

[TangledThorns]

Saw NAPOLEON for date night and it wasn't as good as we hoped which is disappointing as it was the only film I was looking forward to this year.

Overall it seems cinema continues the downward trend since the pandemic, sadly.

 

Edited November 26, 2023 by TangledThorns

[electric indigo]

Some critics I read imply it's a similar experience to "House of Gucci", where you have a great cast, promising trailer, but the actual movie leaves you stone cold as you're unable to connect to the characters while the drama unfolds.

[TangledThorns]

2 hours ago, electric indigo said:

Some critics I read imply it's a similar experience to "House of Gucci", where you have a great cast, promising trailer, but the actual movie leaves you stone cold as you're unable to connect to the characters while the drama unfolds.

I think some of the problem goes to the lack of originality in these films. We know we keep getting sequels or comic books films that naturally unoriginal but now it seems we can lump historical or "true story" films into it. For historical films we can (mostly) find what happens in Wikipedia before the film is released. 

Yes, there are original films out there but I can't recall the last time I wanted to pay to see one in a theater.

 

 

[Dynaman]

Historical films needing to be "accurate" was a relatively recent thing.  At least through the fifties and a good bit beyond (not going to get lost in the swamp of deciding when/if things changed) a film about a historic event or character being historically accurate was pure happenstance.

[Bolt]

1 hour ago, Dynaman said:

Historical films needing to be "accurate" was a relatively recent thing.  At least through the fifties and a good bit beyond (not going to get lost in the swamp of deciding when/if things changed) a film about a historic event or character being historically accurate was pure happenstance.

That is true. But many expected more from ole Ridley. Though apparently some of the historians are incorrect as they site Napoleon's exaggerating accounts as accurate history. 

[renegadeleader1]

1 hour ago, Bolt said:

That is true. But many expected more from ole Ridley. Though apparently some of the historians are incorrect as they site Napoleon's exaggerating accounts as accurate history. 

Here's the thing, Napoleon's "exaggerated accounts" are still far more accurate to what happened than 95% of what Ridley Scott filmed and chose to show us.

 

Look, I get taking artistic license in an effort to better tell a story, but when the story you are trying to tell is utter dog crap, and the real history behind is so much more compelling and far more interesting, you deserve to be called out for your B.S.

 

Especially when accredited historians at universities and the historical advisors that have spent their lives studying this period of history are told to "Shut up! You weren't there, how would you know?" by Ridley Scott himself.

 

Like historical records, personal accounts, letters, and soldiers diaries don't still exist from that period.

 

No, this garbage deserves the hate it's getting from historical circles. One can only hope Steven Spielberg's work to complete Stanley Kubrick's unfinished Napoleon epic as a miniseries will do the era some justice.

[Bolt]

No argument there. It's been pretty obvious, from what many have said, that Ridley produced an expensive disappointment. Personally, I've had zero interest in it from the get go. 
I'm just looking forward to Godzilla: Minus One , on the big screen 

[Big s]

9 hours ago, Dynaman said:

Historical films needing to be "accurate" was a relatively recent thing. 

They still aren’t accurate, maybe just people getting disappointed by them not being accurate is a bit newer. But that is probably due to more available resources and even then it’s hard to trust the available resources. There was a lot of backlash for The Woman King for not being accurate, but then another movie that wasn’t extremely accurate would be Bohemian Rhapsody, but most people liked the it and accepted that it was just entertainment. 
It’s best not to dwell on the actual history and realize that if it’s Hollywood, it’s going to be a good chunk of fiction. That doesn’t excuse a movie for just being bad though and I haven’t seen Napoleon and really wasn’t interested in it anyway, but hearing that it’s not so great will probably have avoid it more

[kajnrig]

I think using historical accuracy as a barometer for film quality is barking up the wrong tree. Just take Scott's previous historical epic, Gladiator. It's nowhere near historically accurate, yet it was a massive hit. From all I've heard and seen of Napoleon, it seems he was hoping to strike success using the same formula, but apparently the character drama just isn't as compelling as before, and thus can't sustain the movie when the holes in reality start to show themselves.

The Woman King being lashed for deviating from historical truth was all well and good, but the movie itself is otherwise a fine if predictable movie. It felt like a lot of the criticism applied a double standard to the movie. It was okay for other historical movies before it to deviate from dry historical truth, but for whatever reason it wasn't okay for that movie (and this one) to do the same. So... yeah. I don't think historical accuracy is necessarily the issue; I think, like is usually the case, the storytelling just isn't up to snuff.

[electric indigo]

I agree that historical accuracy isn't a thing that makes or breaks a movie for me, though as a director, I would avoid some hair-rising ideas (like shooting the Pyramids), if I weren't entirely in the fantasy realm like Guy Ritchie's King Arthur.

The Woman King to me was another example of a film with a great trailer that fell completely flat as a movie experience, excluding the history debate.

[Thom]

Gladiator was one thing, it was almost entirely fictional and you could go wherever you wanted with it. Take the entire thing and place it on another planet in a star-spanning empire, and it wouldn't have changed a bit of it. But when you set a story on an actual person's shoulders, the film makers need to keep embellishments to a bare minimum. Tell the history and let it lead, and try to keep the need to put a personalized spin on it, out of it. 

I haven't seen the movie and don't plan on it, but hearing how it jumps along like a skip-montage and perhaps was meant to be almost humorous(?) certainly was not the way to go.

And please, no more with the sex scenes! All that is is just a cheap gimmick when good story telling falls through.

[Bolt]

I'm sticking with Terry Gilliam's version of Napoleon, in Time Bandits 

[TangledThorns]

Ridley Scott's historical films are very hit or miss. For every Black Hawk Down or The Last Duel we get a Naploeon or House of Gucci. So maybe Ridley Scott's next historical film will be really good?!?? 😜

[Big s]

2 hours ago, TangledThorns said:

Ridley Scott's historical films are very hit or miss. For every Black Hawk Down or The Last Duel we get a Naploeon or House of Gucci. So maybe Ridley Scott's next historical film will be really good?!?? 😜

He’s kind of a 50/50 kind guy all around. For every Alien there’s a Covenant. Not sure on shows, since I think I’ve only seen one that he was involved with and that was Raised by Wolves. That show went off the rails while jumping shark and somehow crashed into a fridge that got nuked 

[sh9000]

Honest Trailer.

[TangledThorns]

On 11/27/2023 at 6:11 PM, Big s said:

He’s kind of a 50/50 kind guy all around. For every Alien there’s a Covenant. Not sure on shows, since I think I’ve only seen one that he was involved with and that was Raised by Wolves. That show went off the rails while jumping shark and somehow crashed into a fridge that got nuked 

I kinda liked (not loved) Raised by Wolves, mainly because of its cast. Speaking of Raised by Wolves, I recognized Abubakar Salim was in Napoleon as Thomas-Alexandre Dumas too. Someone could make a interesting film about his son too.

Edited November 29, 2023 by TangledThorns

[Big s]

5 minutes ago, TangledThorns said:

I kinda liked (not loved) Raised by Wolves, mainly because of its cast. Speaking of Raised by Wolves, I recognized Abubakar Salim was in Napoleon too.

I almost liked it. I was into the first season, but the second one was like they couldn’t decide on how to go with the story, so they decided to throw everything that anyone came up with into it without a real focus and it just turned into a spectacular mess that nobody could clean up even if it had gotten another season.

[Dynaman]

On 11/26/2023 at 7:50 PM, Big s said:

They still aren’t accurate

the word "accurate" being in quotes means that they are still not accurate.  But an example of the difference is the Alamo with John Wayne vs the one from a decade or so ago.  In The Duke's time accuracy be darned!  We want our heroes to be heroes!  (and not have the Alamo taken since they fell asleep and didn't have a proper watch posted).  Since I think both films were not big money makers that may not be the best example.

 

[sh9000]

The Abyss.

Die Hard.

[Bolt]

Both Classics ! I know Bruce doesn't think so, but i do consider Die Hard to be a Christmas flick..

[Big s]

3 hours ago, Bolt said:

Both Classics ! I know Bruce doesn't think so, but i do consider Die Hard to be a Christmas flick..

There’s a reason it’s being rereleased in December 

[Mog]

Finally watched Cocaine Bear on Prime.

Was it silly and stupid?  Yes.  But there are worse ways to entertain yourself.

My only gripe is that the trailer showed the best bits.

If there’s a sequel, they need to entitle it

Spoiler

Cocaine Bear . . . and Cubs.

 

[Big s]

23 minutes ago, Mog said:

Finally watched Cocaine Bear on Prime.

Was it silly and stupid?  Yes.  But there are worse ways to entertain yourself.

My only gripe is that the trailer showed the best bits.

If there’s a sequel, they need to entitle it

  Hide contents

Cocaine Bear . . . and Cubs.

 

There sort of is a sequel coming. I think it was Cocaine Hippo or some other animal. 
I guess things can’t be as bad as the upcoming”Bad CGI Gator” movie. That’s the title not a description 

[kajnrig]

43 minutes ago, Big s said:

There sort of is a sequel coming. I think it was Cocaine Hippo or some other animal. 
I guess things can’t be as bad as the upcoming”Bad CGI Gator” movie. That’s the title not a description 

The one hope I have for this movie is that it seems like there's a chance they're going to really lean into the CGI part of the bad CGI alligator and play up the weird shenanigans that that can get up to in ostensibly the real world. Clipping, t-posing, etc.

The majority of the trailer doesn't give me that impression, but there's a hint or two of it in there.

[Big s]

55 minutes ago, kajnrig said:

The one hope I have for this movie is that it seems like there's a chance they're going to really lean into the CGI part of the bad CGI alligator and play up the weird shenanigans that that can get up to in ostensibly the real world. Clipping, t-posing, etc.

The majority of the trailer doesn't give me that impression, but there's a hint or two of it in there.

It does have some scenes in the preview where it was glitching through a wall and floating in the air for no reason. It’s probably just a horrible movie, really horrible movie, really really horrible movie, but the concept is kinda funny 

[Old_Nash_II]

Unexpected

[renegadeleader1]

3 hours ago, Old_Nash_II said:

Unexpected

Not for me. The guy that made this film has a youtube channel that does a let's watch of bad/cheesy movies from the 70s, 80s, and 90s created a patreon to get the funding for this.

[sh9000]

World War II:  From the Frontlines.

[Bolt]

Going to take my son to see The Boy and the Heron tomorrow, otherwise i'd be watching Godzilla Minus One again. 

[Bolt]

Coming Jan 16 & 17 in US theaters  

[TangledThorns]

Interesting...
 

 

[Tking22]

2 hours ago, TangledThorns said:

Interesting...

Texas and California allies? Yeah, this is a work of fiction.

[TangledThorns]

36 minutes ago, Tking22 said:

Texas and California allies? Yeah, this is a work of fiction.

Depends on which part of California perhaps 😜

[Big s]

2 hours ago, TangledThorns said:

Depends on which part of California perhaps 😜

Totally. Yucaipa is very different from LA