Postal actually wasnt that bad for a Uwe Boll movie.
I liked Skyfall and especially the lack of gadgets. It had some flaws but every Bond movie does. I am sorry to see Dame Judy Dench go. I thought Bardem was very good and comparing him to Kahn is a bit unfair. Wrath of Kahn is one of the greatest movies of all time, so obviously its gonna be tough to compare favorably with Ricardo Montalban.
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
I liked Skyfall and especially the lack of gadgets. It had some flaws but every Bond movie does. I am sorry to see Dame Judy Dench go. I thought Bardem was very good and comparing him to Kahn is a but unfair. Wrath of Kahn is one of the greatest movies of all time, so obviously its gonna be tough to compare favorably with Ricardo Montalban. [/quote]
I was referring to his Ahab-like obsession with M. Silva begs for comparisons with Khan and Nolan’s Joker. I also mentioned Anton Chigurh (played by Javier Bardem) who’d have been a more fitting adversary to Daniel Craig’s Bond, so it’s not the actor I have a problem with, just the confused tone.
The blond hair and gaudy wardrobe were flat out of place in a Daniel Craig Bond movie and worked against the darker aspects of Silva’s past: his handy pest extermination tips and the cyanide anecdote were great, but they could’ve toned down the appearance. Silva was supposed to be a ghost but he didn’t exactly blend in.
His look actually reminded me of Cesar Romero’s Joker more than Ledger’s.
Also, let’s get some spoilers in here if we’re going to discuss the finer points of the movie.
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
I liked Skyfall and especially the lack of gadgets. [/quote]
Bond without gadgets = Jason Bourne. Every Bond has had gadgets and that’s part of the story line. Bond was never meant to be “old school” and I think that it’s a missed homage by going that route.
james
Expendables 2 was everything I expected but worse lol.
I agree with James. Bond without gadgets to me makes it just another action movie. I like the campy aspect but campy don’t pay the bills.
[quote]bond james bond wrote:
Expendables 2 was everything I expected but worse lol.
[/quote]
That’s no lie.
BTW, when are you going to change the av now that 46 has gone back to Yamaha - and hopefully a winning season again?
Anyone seen the new Red Dawn, Ive heard it was horrible. I dont want this movie to ruin the original for me. (a childhood favorite) So are there any kind words to be said about it?
[quote]SHREDTODEATH wrote:
Anyone seen the new Red Dawn, Ive heard it was horrible. I dont want this movie to ruin the original for me. (a childhood favorite) So are there any kind words to be said about it?[/quote]
No
[quote]atypical1 wrote:
[quote]bond james bond wrote:
Expendables 2 was everything I expected but worse lol.
[/quote]
That’s no lie.
BTW, when are you going to change the av now that 46 has gone back to Yamaha - and hopefully a winning season again?
[/quote]
Holy Shit!, somebody who knows who Rossi is lol. I’ve been waiting for some testing photos to surface to change it. Not very colorfull but it’ll do for now, thanks for reminding me. Don’t get me started on the Doctor James, I’ll derail this thread faster than you can say eighth world championship 
I took my daughter to see Wreck it Ralph…I usually fall asleep at Pixar type movies, but I really enjoyed this, took me down memory lane with a lot of arcade games from my childhood (street fighter, burger time, Tapper etc) some very unique ideas of the characters of video games. Also a big fan of John C Reilly.
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
I liked Skyfall and especially the lack of gadgets. It had some flaws but every Bond movie does. I am sorry to see Dame Judy Dench go. I thought Bardem was very good and comparing him to Kahn is a but unfair. Wrath of Kahn is one of the greatest movies of all time, so obviously its gonna be tough to compare favorably with Ricardo Montalban. [/quote]
I was referring to his Ahab-like obsession with M. Silva begs for comparisons with Khan and Nolan’s Joker. I also mentioned Anton Chigurh (played by Javier Bardem) who’d have been a more fitting adversary to Daniel Craig’s Bond, so it’s not the actor I have a problem with, just the confused tone.
The blond hair and gaudy wardrobe were flat out of place in a Daniel Craig Bond movie and worked against the darker aspects of Silva’s past: his handy pest extermination tips and the cyanide anecdote were great, but they could’ve toned down the appearance. Silva was supposed to be a ghost but he didn’t exactly blend in.
His look actually reminded me of Cesar Romero’s Joker more than Ledger’s.
Also, let’s get some spoilers in here if we’re going to discuss the finer points of the movie. [/quote]
You know your movies, so respect. But I’m still not sure a true Coen-brothers bond movie would work for most people, which is what an Anton-Chigurh style character would require to make it work, IMO. Personally, I’d love to see the Coen brothers take a crack at a bond flick.
[quote]atypical1 wrote:
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
I liked Skyfall and especially the lack of gadgets. [/quote]
Bond without gadgets = Jason Bourne. Every Bond has had gadgets and that’s part of the story line. Bond was never meant to be “old school” and I think that it’s a missed homage by going that route.
james
[/quote]
Each to his own, I suppose, but it seems a lot less gimmicky to me without all the gadgets. And moving Q towards being a computer whiz rather than a man-toy engineer is an ok direction in my book.
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
[quote]SHREDTODEATH wrote:
Anyone seen the new Red Dawn, Ive heard it was horrible. I dont want this movie to ruin the original for me. (a childhood favorite) So are there any kind words to be said about it?[/quote]
No[/quote]
well then i wont be seeing it till netflix has it.
I heard it was god awful
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
I liked Skyfall and especially the lack of gadgets. It had some flaws but every Bond movie does. I am sorry to see Dame Judy Dench go. I thought Bardem was very good and comparing him to Kahn is a but unfair. Wrath of Kahn is one of the greatest movies of all time, so obviously its gonna be tough to compare favorably with Ricardo Montalban. [/quote]
I was referring to his Ahab-like obsession with M. Silva begs for comparisons with Khan and Nolan’s Joker. I also mentioned Anton Chigurh (played by Javier Bardem) who’d have been a more fitting adversary to Daniel Craig’s Bond, so it’s not the actor I have a problem with, just the confused tone.
The blond hair and gaudy wardrobe were flat out of place in a Daniel Craig Bond movie and worked against the darker aspects of Silva’s past: his handy pest extermination tips and the cyanide anecdote were great, but they could’ve toned down the appearance. Silva was supposed to be a ghost but he didn’t exactly blend in.
His look actually reminded me of Cesar Romero’s Joker more than Ledger’s.
Also, let’s get some spoilers in here if we’re going to discuss the finer points of the movie. [/quote]
You know your movies, so respect. But I’m still not sure a true Coen-brothers bond movie would work for most people, which is what an Anton-Chigurh style character would require to make it work, IMO. Personally, I’d love to see the Coen brothers take a crack at a bond flick.
[/quote]
I meant that Chigurh was a less conspicuous antagonist than Silva, but played by the same actor, so they didn’t have to make him as far out as they did (we’re not talking about Nicolas Cage here, and they certainly shouldn’t have taken so much inspiration from Nolan’s Joker)… Casino Royale made a bold move towards stripping the Bond formula right back and it worked. The villains were all business then but now it seems that they’re picking elements from the previous Bonds (a pinch of Connery here, a soupcon of Brosnan there).
There’s always a shift in tone when they bring in a new Bond. But for my money Daniel Craig found his niche the first time out. I don’t see Craig as an actor with much of a lightness of touch anyway (he usually comes across as pretty morose), but he made the role his own in Casino Royale and I think it’s a mistake to move away from that into more traditional Bond territory (like adding in more humor).
The whole point of Craig’s Bond was to get away from that since it was so overdone by the end of Brosnan’s run.
They can’t go back to that after this so their going to have to keep moving forward with the next movie. Can’t really be helped, though: they came up with the concept of a meta-Bond movie for the 50th anniversary and had to transplant the character into a different world to do it.
I watched The Watch on DVD last night. I really liked this one. I don’t always like Stiller and Vaughn, but this one had me cracking up. Low expectations helped, however.
The Skin I Live In - Antonio Banderas plays a plasic surgeon who pioneers a revolutionary, though illegal synthetic skin following the death of his wife. His research focuses around a mysterious woman who has been a captive for 6 years, during which time she has become a bizarre combination of prisoner, guinea pig, prototype, lover and muse -thanks to her uncanny resemblance to his wife.
But did he choose her for her looks or do his experiments run deeper than medical curiosity?
[quote]roybot wrote:
The Skin I Live In - Antonio Banderas plays a plasic surgeon who pioneers a revolutionary, though illegal synthetic skin following the death of his wife. His research focuses around a mysterious woman who has been a captive for 6 years, during which time she has become a bizarre combination of prisoner, guinea pig, prototype, lover and muse -thanks to her uncanny resemblance to his wife.
But did he choose her for her looks or do his experiments run deeper than medical curiosity?
[/quote]
Never heard of this film. How old is it?
The last time I saw Antonio Banderas in a truly captivating role was when he played Armond in “Interview with the Vampire”.
[quote]roybot wrote:
The Skin I Live In - Antonio Banderas plays a plasic surgeon who pioneers a revolutionary, though illegal synthetic skin following the death of his wife. His research focuses around a mysterious woman who has been a captive for 6 years, during which time she has become a bizarre combination of prisoner, guinea pig, prototype, lover and muse -thanks to her uncanny resemblance to his wife.
But did he choose her for her looks or do his experiments run deeper than medical curiosity?
[/quote]
Oddly enough I just lost the disc of this before I could even watch it. It was just in the theater here too. I’ll have to order another one, thanks for the reminder.
james
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
The Skin I Live In - Antonio Banderas plays a plasic surgeon who pioneers a revolutionary, though illegal synthetic skin following the death of his wife. His research focuses around a mysterious woman who has been a captive for 6 years, during which time she has become a bizarre combination of prisoner, guinea pig, prototype, lover and muse -thanks to her uncanny resemblance to his wife.
But did he choose her for her looks or do his experiments run deeper than medical curiosity?
[/quote]
Never heard of this film. How old is it?
The last time I saw Antonio Banderas in a truly captivating role was when he played Armond in “Interview with the Vampire”.
[/quote]
Quite recent (released in 2011). It’s Spanish language and has a plot that defies genre, which is why it’s not that well known. It’s a twisted dark romance, sci-fi, body horror and revenge movie all rolled into one.
Banderas gets to play both hero and villain depending on how the plot unfolds.
Strange you should mention vampires: Banderas’ leading lady played one of Drac’s brides in Van Helsing.