Page 82 of 173 FirstFirst ... 327278798081828384858692132 ... LastLast
Results 1,216 to 1,230 of 2589

Thread: Rate the last movie you've seen

  1. #1216
    Team Rick MinionZombie's Avatar
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The Mandatorium
    Posts
    24,165
    UK
    The Duke of Burgundy - 8/10

    This was a second time viewing. Peter Strickland (Berberian Sound Studio) made this as a sort of homage to all those erotic European exploitation movies of the 60s and 70s (the sort of stuff Jess Franco would make, for instance), but it's more than just that as its influences are worn lightly on the sleeve. It's a fascinating exploration of a sub/dom lesbian relationship with a dreamy sort of atmosphere in an idyllic but unidentified mid-European country setting, ostensibly in the 1970s, but the world that is inhabited feels decades older in some respects.

    Ned - have you seen this movie, or Berberian Sound Studio?

    Quote Originally Posted by EvilNed View Post
    I don't know, I think it makes plenty sense!
    Aye, I've never had an issue with Deckard being a Replicant, either. Like Rachel was quite unique as a Replicant, it also makes sense to me that Deckard would be similarly unique.

    There is a fine line when it comes to filmmakers tinkering with their work, but I feel that Scott was on the right side of the line with his tweaks to Blade Runner.

  2. #1217
    Zombie Flesh Eater EvilNed's Avatar
    Zombie Flesh Eater

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    6,302
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by MinionZombie View Post
    The Duke of Burgundy - 8/10

    This was a second time viewing. Peter Strickland (Berberian Sound Studio) made this as a sort of homage to all those erotic European exploitation movies of the 60s and 70s (the sort of stuff Jess Franco would make, for instance), but it's more than just that as its influences are worn lightly on the sleeve. It's a fascinating exploration of a sub/dom lesbian relationship with a dreamy sort of atmosphere in an idyllic but unidentified mid-European country setting, ostensibly in the 1970s, but the world that is inhabited feels decades older in some respects.

    Ned - have you seen this movie, or Berberian Sound Studio?
    No I haven't! I really want to see Berberian Sound System, as well as Francesca and Masks (the latter two being neo-gialli).

    Some of them are on Shudder, the horror streaming service. I doubt this one is tho, unfortunately...

  3. #1218
    Rising
    Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,458
    United States
    The Uncanny - 1977:

    Quaint little horror anthology film, features 3 (plus the lead story that serves as the setup for the other 3) stories regarding cats. Features veteran actors Peter Cushing, Ray Milland, Donald Pleasence, John Vernon (all of them sadly gone years ago) and Samantha Eggar.

  4. #1219
    Feeding shootemindehead's Avatar
    Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    4,062
    Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by EvilNed View Post
    I don't know, I think it makes plenty sense!
    Quote Originally Posted by MinionZombie View Post
    Aye, I've never had an issue with Deckard being a Replicant, either. Like Rachel was quite unique as a Replicant, it also makes sense to me that Deckard would be similarly unique.

    There is a fine line when it comes to filmmakers tinkering with their work, but I feel that Scott was on the right side of the line with his tweaks to Blade Runner.
    I think I've posted reasons why I think it's silly on the forum before. Can't remember.

    But, anyway...

    If Deckard is a replicant, he's a pretty crap one. He gets his arse handed to him at nearly every juncture and even has to be bailed out by Rachel. He's much weaker than the robots he's been tasked to catch. Why send a shite robot to catch good ones? Even Roy has to rescue him at the end because he hasn't the strength to hold on to the side of the roof. Batty, etc are much, much stronger. Why would the cops even bother to use him? It's silly. Plus, Deckard being a replicant requires that the police force using him have to be in on some silly conspiracy of sorts, which is even more of a dent to the film's logic. They want the "old" magic back and Replicants don't get old, plus they're illigal on earth. Also, Deckard is jaded. He's tired of hunting and killing robots for a living. If he was a robot himself, why would he care?

    He also shows noticable emotions throughout the film, fear, regret, love - something replicants cannot do. Not even the "special" Rachel model. She doesn't even care when she realises that she's a robot and simply wants Deckard's approval not to "come after her".

    Nobody thought Deckarad was a replicant in the original film, although there was mild discussion among Scott and the writers, but nothing came of that when they were actually shooting the film. It's been shoehorned into the narrative by Scott retconning it to suit his own ill-thought out want for some sort of "twist". But, it remains silly and actually dents the film as a whole in my opinion.

    'Blade Runner' works much, much better with a human Deckard - the way he was actually played by Ford in the film - because it throws up better questions about the nature of humanity, its creation of artifical beings and its destruction of them. Deckard shows visible remorse at shooting Zhora in the back, showing that it's not an wasy job. If he was a replicant, he wouldn't give a shit.

    The idea doesn't make any sense to me, it's ridiculous if you actually stop and analyse it, even briefly. It makes for a lesser film.

    If it had been the idea to have Deckard as a replicant from the beginning of production, then it could have been fitted in better. But it wasn't. Even in Scott's mind it was half baked and nobody was playing their roles with that in mind.

    Anyway, unlike Star Wars (Harmy versions notwithstanding), at least the original version of the film is still around for us to enjoy.
    I'm runnin' this monkey farm now Frankenstein.....

  5. #1220
    Zombie Flesh Eater EvilNed's Avatar
    Zombie Flesh Eater

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    6,302
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by shootemindehead View Post
    I think I've posted reasons why I think it's silly on the forum before. Can't remember.

    But, anyway...

    If Deckard is a replicant, he's a pretty crap one. He gets his arse handed to him at nearly every juncture and even has to be bailed out by Rachel. He's much weaker than the robots he's been tasked to catch. Why send a shite robot to catch good ones? Even Roy has to rescue him at the end because he hasn't the strength to hold on to the side of the roof. Batty, etc are much, much stronger. Why would the cops even bother to use him? It's silly. Plus, Deckard being a replicant requires that the police force using him have to be in on some silly conspiracy of sorts, which is even more of a dent to the film's logic. They want the "old" magic back and Replicants don't get old, plus they're illigal on earth. Also, Deckard is jaded. He's tired of hunting and killing robots for a living. If he was a robot himself, why would he care?
    Deckard does not know he himself is a replicant. That's part of the twist. I always viewed his line, assuming him and Rachel belonged to the same one, were experiments. They were experimenting with memories. Prototypes. So there's no real conspiracy here, they're just experiments. It's also quite possible - it certainly seems to be that way - that the police are conducting their own search for the replicants or at the very least are shadowing Deckards every move.
    There are numerous reasons for why Deckard wouldn't be as strong as a Nexus 6. One being that he couldn't be - that would ruin the illusion. There are biomechanical reasons too - if Deckard knew he was a replicant odds are he would be find himself much stronger.

    Quote Originally Posted by shootemindehead View Post
    He also shows noticable emotions throughout the film, fear, regret, love - something replicants cannot do. Not even the "special" Rachel model. She doesn't even care when she realises that she's a robot and simply wants Deckard's approval not to "come after her".
    I disagree, I think Rachel shows ample emotions throughout the film. The entire experiment revolves around making replicants more human.

    Quote Originally Posted by shootemindehead View Post
    Nobody thought Deckarad was a replicant in the original film, although there was mild discussion among Scott and the writers, but nothing came of that when they were actually shooting the film.
    Actually according to various sources the unicorn footage (the main clue) was shot for the original theatrical release. So I have to disagree with you here - Deckard being a replicant was intended from the start.

    'Blade Runner' works much, much better with a human Deckard - the way he was actually played by Ford in the film - because it throws up better questions about the nature of humanity, its creation of artifical beings and its destruction of them. Deckard shows visible remorse at shooting Zhora in the back, showing that it's not an wasy job. If he was a replicant, he wouldn't give a shit.
    I disagree. I think the question of "what is human?" is much more interesting when posed by an AI than by a human.

  6. #1221
    Feeding shootemindehead's Avatar
    Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    4,062
    Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by EvilNed View Post
    Deckard does not know he himself is a replicant. That's part of the twist. I always viewed his line, assuming him and Rachel belonged to the same one, were experiments. They were experimenting with memories. Prototypes. So there's no real conspiracy here, they're just experiments. It's also quite possible - it certainly seems to be that way - that the police are conducting their own search for the replicants or at the very least are shadowing Deckards every move.
    There are numerous reasons for why Deckard wouldn't be as strong as a Nexus 6. One being that he couldn't be - that would ruin the illusion. There are biomechanical reasons too - if Deckard knew he was a replicant odds are he would be find himself much stronger.
    Nexus 6 is the top of the line in 'Blade Runner'. Rachel is a special model. If Deckard is a special model too, it means that the police have to be in of some silly ruse if they are using him to capture other robots, which in and of itself ridiculous and doesn't sit at all comfortably with the story. He's visibly weaker and the idea that he would used to tackle being svastly superior to himself is a terrible one. There's just too much standing against it.

    Quote Originally Posted by EvilNed View Post
    Actually according to various sources the unicorn footage (the main clue) was shot for the original theatrical release. So I have to disagree with you here - Deckard being a replicant was intended from the start.
    Just because the unicorn footage was shot it doesn't mean that Scott had the Deckard is a replicant in mind from the beginning. In fact, Scott, Francher and Peoples briefly discussed this idea during filming, it was never written that way and none of them actually went away with it bolted on in their heads and only Scott persued it more and more as production went on. None of the actors knew of it, not even Ford. Ford plays Deckard as a human and in fact argued against the Deckard is a replicant angle when this was being pushed by Scott well after the film had released. Deckard is also not a replicant in Dick's book. But the questions on what is it to be a man are in there and Deckard increasingly comes to question his humanity to the point that he takes the Voight-Kampff test himself and passes.

    The ONLY person that had this Deckard is a replicant thing as an indisputible thing was Scott and he believed that he could somehow crank it into the film midway and in later versions seek to solidify it.

    A lot of people are happy with this idea because they think it gives the picture and extra level and let's be honest, 'Blade Runner' is a pretty empty film. I like, but there's not an awful lot to it, so the Deckard is a robot satisfies some need in some people. If people like the idea, then fine. But, to me it's always been silly, half baked and you need to ignore a lot of things to make it really work within the actual film.
    I'm runnin' this monkey farm now Frankenstein.....

  7. #1222
    Zombie Flesh Eater EvilNed's Avatar
    Zombie Flesh Eater

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    6,302
    Undisclosed
    We'll never know to what extent Scott intended Deckard to be a replicant in the film. But the fact remains they shot the unicorn footage for a reason and if you're trying to tell me they shot it just for fun you're not really having me convinced...

    To me it's quite apparent, there are too many clues for it to ignore.

    Just like how Land obviously takes place after Day.

  8. #1223
    Team Rick MinionZombie's Avatar
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The Mandatorium
    Posts
    24,165
    UK
    Quote Originally Posted by EvilNed View Post
    No I haven't! I really want to see Berberian Sound System, as well as Francesca and Masks (the latter two being neo-gialli).

    Some of them are on Shudder, the horror streaming service. I doubt this one is tho, unfortunately...
    I'll have to keep a look out for "Francesca" and "Masks". Thanks for the tip.

    "The Duke of Burgundy" is a stronger film overall than "Berberian Sound Studio" because there is a more defined narrative running throughout, but 'BSS' is far more of a 'dream like' movie and works rather well. There's some interesting ways it plays around with time and location in a very dream-like manner as the film slips towards a nightmare. It's also an intriguing watch for fans of gialli.

    Quote Originally Posted by EvilNed View Post
    We'll never know to what extent Scott intended Deckard to be a replicant in the film. But the fact remains they shot the unicorn footage for a reason and if you're trying to tell me they shot it just for fun you're not really having me convinced...

    To me it's quite apparent, there are too many clues for it to ignore.

    Just like how Land obviously takes place after Day.
    Aaaaaaaaarrrrrrggggghhhhhhhh! Don't mention that again!!!


  9. #1224
    Feeding shootemindehead's Avatar
    Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    4,062
    Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by EvilNed View Post
    We'll never know to what extent Scott intended Deckard to be a replicant in the film. But the fact remains they shot the unicorn footage for a reason and if you're trying to tell me they shot it just for fun you're not really having me convinced...

    To me it's quite apparent, there are too many clues for it to ignore.

    Just like how Land obviously takes place after Day.
    They actually shot it as test footage, used on the budget from 'Legend' (but not for it) - because pre-production was being done on that while 'Blade Runner' wrapped and it was rightly dropped because it looked shite. It still looks out of place. The idea that Deckard was a replicant was never officially solidifed with anybody, not even Scott originally, who wanted it to be an ambiguous idea. He later changed to a more official stance with his own cut in the 90's. Part of me thinks it was more an effort to keep 'Blade Runner' "alive" than anything else.

    The fact remains that nobody was on board with this shit, not even Scott was that hard about it in the 80's and it was only later on that Scott wanted copper fasten it.

    As such, it ends up making for a weaker film, not a stronger one, because of the logical holes it digs - the reason being it was never more than a half-assed, ill thought out extra layer tacked on mid way. But as said, if people want Deckard to be a replicant, they have Scott's retcon to look at. I'll stick with the original film, which makes more sense...

    ...and of course Land take place after Day.
    I'm runnin' this monkey farm now Frankenstein.....

  10. #1225
    Zombie Flesh Eater EvilNed's Avatar
    Zombie Flesh Eater

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    6,302
    Undisclosed
    Gotta disagree on all points! I think it was always clearly meant to portray ambiguity at the very least! Even from the start.

  11. #1226
    Team Rick MinionZombie's Avatar
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The Mandatorium
    Posts
    24,165
    UK
    Eyes Without A Face - 7.5/10

    Very moody French film, ostensibly a sort of horror/thriller, but relatively subdued. It's from 1959, although there are a couple of moments that go surprisingly far for 1959 (e.g. a woman's facial mask is surgically removed ... sure it's in black and white, and it cuts before you see most of what's under there, but you do see the un-masked face of the surgeon's daughter at one point). The climax is a bit muddled in some ways - the policemen's plan is half-assed at best and they just kind of abandon their duty - but other than that it's a good film.

    The Greasy Strangler - 7/10

    This is a weird one. It's sometimes very frustrating and even a bit grating, but at other times it's bizarrely hilarious. It was produced by Elijah Wood's production company Spectrevision, and is one of the most curious films I've seen in a long time. "Bullshit artist!" ... "Hootie tootie disco cutie!" ... an uncomfortable amount of nudity and strangely shaped fake willies (fake to the viewer, real to the characters) ... and a numerous eyeballs exploding out of their sockets. It's kind of tiring at times, but oddly satisfying at others, but ultimately I'm glad the film exists. Very weird, rather creepy, generally disquieting, but worth seeing - although it's as likely to piss you off as it is to entertain you.

  12. #1227
    Rising
    Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,458
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by shootemindehead View Post

    ...and of course Land take place after Day.
    There's several reasons why it could not, or at least it should not, have happened after Day, unless you want to believe that the characters in Day, all of them, are the biggest and most suicidal idiots the world has ever seen and just love being stuck in a bunker besieged by ever growing hordes of zombies when they could easily just have moved to one of the several much safer city-outposts of Land

  13. #1228
    Feeding shootemindehead's Avatar
    Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    4,062
    Ireland
    Seriously...I don't think anyone has any desire to go down this rabbit hole again.
    I'm runnin' this monkey farm now Frankenstein.....

  14. #1229
    Team Rick MinionZombie's Avatar
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The Mandatorium
    Posts
    24,165
    UK
    The Angry Birds Movie - 5.5/10

    Colourful and goofy, but more aimed at kids than the whole family. Supporting characters get short shrift (if they're even named), and some of the gags make absolutely no sense whatsoever. There's some good jokes scattered throughout, but this is ultimately a movie based on a videogame and suffers accordingly. It's okay.

    Weirdly, you could read in to this movie in unintended ways regarding domestic terrorism.

    Quote Originally Posted by shootemindehead View Post
    Seriously...I don't think anyone has any desire to go down this rabbit hole again.
    Darn tootin' ... !!!
    Last edited by MinionZombie; 26-Feb-2017 at 09:35 AM.

  15. #1230
    Zombie Flesh Eater EvilNed's Avatar
    Zombie Flesh Eater

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    6,302
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    There's several reasons why it could not, or at least it should not, have happened after Day, unless you want to believe that the characters in Day, all of them, are the biggest and most suicidal idiots the world has ever seen and just love being stuck in a bunker besieged by ever growing hordes of zombies when they could easily just have moved to one of the several much safer city-outposts of Land
    Hey, it's tough to act on something you don't know! Don't be so hard on them.

    This is a weird one. It's sometimes very frustrating and even a bit grating, but at other times it's bizarrely hilarious. It was produced by Elijah Wood's production company Spectrevision, and is one of the most curious films I've seen in a long time. "Bullshit artist!" ... "Hootie tootie disco cutie!" ... an uncomfortable amount of nudity and strangely shaped fake willies (fake to the viewer, real to the characters) ... and a numerous eyeballs exploding out of their sockets. It's kind of tiring at times, but oddly satisfying at others, but ultimately I'm glad the film exists. Very weird, rather creepy, generally disquieting, but worth seeing - although it's as likely to piss you off as it is to entertain you.
    This is on my watch list.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •