This is a really fascinating debate to read. I recently watched “The Hunt For Red October” for the first time and wasn’t quite taken with it, but it’s not particularly my kind of film. Call me ignorant but I never really thought McTiernan’s artistic merit was up for debate. The man made “Predator” and “Die Hard,” two of the greatest action films ever produced by Hollywood. That’s enough for me!
In terms of framing and directing action sequences, he blows someone like Michael Bay out of the water. “Die Hard” is in the “Raiders” mold in that the action is very coherent and easy to follow, yet it always flows out of the characters and has consequence (i.e. heroes that bleed and are hurt). “Die Hard” of course had excellent dialogue and performances, which helped make it great, but I think McTiernan’s vision is what really shaped the film.
Similarly, “Die Hard With a Vengeance” is one of the few action sequels that actually delivers. It’s not nearly as good as the first one but several exciting sequences (driving a Taxi through Central Park!) and the chemistry between Willis and Samuel L. Jackson really sold the film. If you have the chance, watch the original ending for “Vengeance” on YouTube. It’s much better than the abrupt conclusion that was attached to the final cut.
Oh man. I love “Last Action Hero.” I think it slipped my mind because it’s not easily identifiable as a McTiernan movie due to its broader comedic elements, but I do really enjoy it. One of my favorite action flicks and it has one of the best lines of all time, “Could I speak to the drug dealer of the house, please?” Classic.
The thing about “Last Action Hero” is – it’s a parody of big, noisy action films and yet it has better action sequences than 90% of Hollywood movies today. The whole car chase and shootout when Danny first enters the movie world is brilliantly conceived. McTiernan very skillfully manages that tricky road of poking fun at action cinema while still delivering the genre’s intrinsic thrills.
It may not make a large difference to someone who is just watching for entertainment value, but for action junkies there is a definite difference in the way someone like John McTiernan or Steven Spielberg lenses an action sequence so that you see everything happening within the frame and with conservative editing vs. someone like Michael Bay or Tony Scott who engage in “chaos cinema,” i.e. shaky camera and rapid editing.
While I do think the Central Park chase in Vengeance is spectacular, I would have to say the freeway chase in “Terminator 2” and the bank heist shootout in “Heat” are even superior action sequences from 90’s Hollywood cinema.
Hmm, interesting that you would put Martin Campbell in with Greengrass. Not to get too sidetracked but I find Campbell much more aligned with McTiernan than Greengrass. Campbell is a very traditional action director with a great sense of framing and coherency a la McTiernan. It was Marc Forster’s follow-up Bond entry that went into full-on, Michael Bay/Tony Scott levels of “shakycam” incoherence.
Funnily enough, Tony Scott is a filmmaker who started out much closer to the McTiernan mold. He even utilized Bruce Willis to a similar wise-cracking “Die Hard”-style effect in “The Last Boyscout.” His films these days are almost unrecognizable from his late 80’s, early 90’s work. It’s like the invention of AVID video software made Tony Scott lose his mind.
Judged solely on the way they film action spectacle, I would say McTiernan is more effective than Spielberg. But that’s probably because I enjoy the way McTiernan doesn’t shy away from hard, R-rated violence; the scene where Bruce Willis shoots the terrorist’s kneecaps from underneath the office table in “Die Hard” is surely one of the best uses of squib effects in a Hollywood film.
I loved “The Social Network” and, to a slightly lesser extent, “Benjamin Button.” The only film from Fincher that has really disappointed me on any level was “Panic Room.” I would say that film is his biggest ‘sin.’
I agree w/ Michael Mann – “Miami Vice” and David Lynch – “Inland Empire.”
Directors with a more prolific output, like Spielberg and Burton, have several films that I could name (particularly Burton, who has been on a downslide for the past 10 years). However, I grew up with Spielberg’s “Hook” so I have to admit it holds a place in my heart.
I would say “Death Proof” for Quentin Tarantino, while Nolan’s “Batman Begins” is the only film of his that hasn’t worked for me. The best thing “Begins” did was pave the way for its sequel. The finest Batman origin on film for me is still “Mask of the Phantasm.”
I love both “Bram Stoker’s Dracula” and “Mulholland Drive,” so I can’t really see those as being weak points for either director. Also, I wouldn’t blame “Alien 3” on Fincher. That movie was a notoriously troubled production with a lot of studio tampering from Fox. It’s safe to say the final film does not represent Fincher’s vision at all. “Panic Room” though…that’s all Fincher.
Interesting choices, Coheed, but I really enjoy “Tenebrae.” Prolific filmmakers like Argento and Carpenter have many stinkers in their catalog, sadly. But I would say I thought Argento was untouchable until I saw “Trauma” (1993). Carpenter’s first big fumble was “Memoirs of an Invisible Man” (1992). The 90’s were not kind to either filmmaker.
This is almost too obvious but Sam Raimi – Spider-Man 3.
I’m sure Exorcist III was critically panned in its day but now it’s pretty well-regarded by horror fans, I feel. The ‘hallway/nurse sequence’ is always mentioned as one of the most terrifying moments in cinema. I would say Exorcist II is fairly underrated. Not a great movie, by any means, but interesting. That John Boorman managed to take one of the most purely Catholic films of all time and make a sequel that went completely beyond religion is a marvel in itself.
My list would include:
Universal Soldier: Regeneration (I stole that from Jack!)
Last Action Hero
Lord of Illusions
Hellraiser 2: Hellbound
Bram Stoker’s Dracula
“But, then again, if I recall correctly, Bram Stoker’ Dracula actually had a pretty positive critical reaction when it first came out and it was only later that people realized how bad it was.”
This just makes me laugh. Coppola’s “Dracula” is one of the best horror movies of the past 21 years. Granted, that’s not saying much, considering the downslide of the genre since the late 90’s. But it’s a great film. Only problem is that the blu-ray looks like crap – Coppola re-did the color timing and now the picture looks utterly bleak and drab.
I’ve been waiting for someone to say Zardoz but maybe that’s not gonna happen…
Oh, I love “Hudson Hawk.” Watched it not that long ago with a friend and we laughed throughout the whole thing. The script is basically nothing but a string of one-liners but the dialogue is genuinely funny. I mean, I love Bruce Willis when he had at least a tuft of hair and delivered smarmy ass one-liners and “Hudson Hawk” is basically the ultimate movie for that.
I’m an action buff, I enjoy spy thrillers and genre exercises. I thought “Haywire” was just abysmal. Soderbergh does not seem comfortable in the action realm. The screenplay was at fault too. There was no arc for Gina’s character beyond “people are trying to kill me and I need to find out why.”
“This is really frustrating because when things like this happen, it gives credence to the argument from studios that audiences don’t want smart filmmaking. People complain about the Fast Five’s and Adam Sandler’s of the world but these are the films that people are seeing.”
Honestly, I don’t see how Haywire is any ‘smarter’ than a Fast and Furious movie. There’s not much to the script other than pedestrian dialogue and a flimsy excuse to string together set-pieces. Zero character development going on here and the filmmaking in general was just lazy.
There’s a scene where Gina Carano carries this large board and tosses it on some stairs, then pushes some chairs over, in order to halt her pursuers. When it cuts back to the cops chasing her, there’s absolutely nothing on the stairs. Was Soderbergh just asleep behind the camera on this one? I’m all for directors doing a “genre exercise” once in awhile but you’ve really gotta bring your A-game to one to make it worthwhile.
Terry Crews was on Twitter, claiming that he kills more people in the opening scenes of “The Expendables 2” than he did in the entirety of the first movie. I’m not saying Crews is a liar (he could kill me with a bowel movement) but I don’t see how that’s even possible unless EXP2 is going to be completely bloodless. And if they’re saving the hardcore violence for an Unrated blu-ray, I’ll somehow be even more offended.
Sadly, I know I’m going to be seeing this in theaters because I’m a huge fan of Jean Claude Van Damme and I want to see him on the big screen again.
Judging by what I saw at my local theater, “Red Tails” is reaching an audience outside of the “Star Wars” fanbase and internet film buffs. It should probably continue to do well.
T2 has better action sequences but its whole notion of “robots are people too” strikes me as hokey. I like the first film better, in part because it’s scary as hell and Michael Biehn is one of the best 80’s action heroes.
I do like Aliens better than Alien, although I can concede that Alien is a better film. Aliens just appeals to me more. I like the space marines, the pacing, the action, and Sigourney Weaver’s character arc.
The two biggest for me are probably Empire Strikes Back over A New Hope and The Dark Knight over Batman Begins. A New Hope is fun but I like how ESB just gets deeper into everything: deeper into the Force, the romance, and the SW universe.
Like everybody and their mother, I love Dark Knight but I’m one of the few people I know that just can’t stand Batman Begins. The only good thing BB did was lay the groundwork for TDK. For me, BB is almost as hokey as Batman Forever. I hate the brown and yellow color aesthetic to the film, Batman being friendly with little kids, Liam Neeson’s dumb plot to vaporize water or whatever.
Jirin, are you talking about the theatrical cut or the director’s cut of Aliens? One of my main issues with the director’s cut is that it removes the film’s sense of mystery and discovery, which I otherwise find very present in the theatrical cut. The marines’ arrival on LV-246 is full of dread and intrigue for me…the howling winds of the planet’s surface. The structural damage inside the colony. Where is everyone?
Another pleasure of Aliens is the way it draws parallels to the Vietnam war. The marines are “the ultimate bad-asses”: equipped with state of the art firepower and American military muscle. And yet they are torn to shreds by the more “primitive,” less technologically-advanced indigenous species. A similar allegory plays out in Walter Hill’s “Southern Comfort,” another one of my favorite 80’s films.
Zvelf, at the risk of sounding like a terrible person, that anti-authority streak is one of the things I love about T2. Bear in mind the Rodney King beating occurred as Cameron was filming T2. So when the movie came out, it was eerily prescient to have the villain dressed as a LA police officer. For me it just taps into that primal part of the brain that enjoys seeing people in authority taken down a notch. I know they’re “just doing their job” but, hey, everybody gets irked at the police when they get a speeding ticket or are hassled on the street for no reason. It’s fun to see Arnold as a unstoppable cyborg “sticking it to the man,” as it were. It goes back to being a kid and wishing you had an invincible bodyguard who could beat up anybody who made you upset.
And I’m glad Jonas Silgalis brought them up: Bourne Supremacy and Ultimatum are infinitely better than the Bourne Identity. Particularly Supremacy.
Balistik, bear in mind that Terminator 1 was one of Cameron’s earliest films and was shot on a budget of around $6 million. T2 came almost a decade later and had a budget of $94 million. Also, T2 was shot in a wider aspect ratio.
Balistik, The Matrix sequels are more of a case of an aesthetic preference. If you’re saying the first Terminator looks like a made-for-TV movie at times, I’m taking that to mean: poor film quality, a squashed aspect ratio, cheap special effects, etc. A much larger budget, a more experienced director, and (perhaps most importantly) a wider aspect ratio are all going to help with that.
I think my problem with the film was that the truly standout moments were stacked towards the beginning – this has the most terrifying and realistic plane crash I’ve ever seen on film, followed shortly after by the scene where Liam couches a man through death. This is absolutely harrowing, riveting stuff. And the first appearance of the wolves is handled well.
After that, though, it felt like the script trotted out the cliches…or at least used the wolves as a way too convenient device whenever they needed to jolt the audience or get the characters moving. After the whole “tree jumping” sequence, I just kind of tuned out. It reminded me too much of that “Frozen” movie where a bunch of man-eating wolves arrive out of nowhere to eat people at a commercial ski lift.
It’s probably been a year since I’ve seen this film. I love Carpenter and count “Halloween” and “The Thing” among my very favorite films, but “Prince of Darkness” didn’t work for me. As a horror or thriller film, it wasn’t very frightening. And while the metaphysical ideas suggested were interesting, they didn’t hit me with a sense of dread in my stomach like the best of Lovecraft does.
Overall, the production felt slapdash compared to Carpenter’s best work. I can see this as the beginning of the end for him, although he followed it up with “They Live” – another one of my favorite films. Perhaps I need to revisit “Prince of Darkness” because I usually agree with Jack Lehtonen’s insights.
Lehtonen and I tend to see eye to eye on everything – except for his love of Paul W.S. Anderson, so I think you could easily toss him on the list.
As far as actors go, Keanu Reeves and Nicolas Cage are two of my favorites that tend to make people roll their eyes whenever I mention them. Either that or they’re a closet Nic Cage fan and they’ve seen movies like “Vampire’s Kiss” so they totally get it.
It might just me but I feel like Miike gets enough respect and acclaim from the international film community these days, especially after “13 Assassins.”
The John McTiernan Thread over 1 year ago
This is a really fascinating debate to read. I recently watched “The Hunt For Red October” for the first time and wasn’t quite taken with it, but it’s not particularly my kind of film. Call me ignorant but I never really thought McTiernan’s artistic merit was up for debate. The man made “Predator” and “Die Hard,” two of the greatest action films ever produced by Hollywood. That’s enough for me!
In terms of framing and directing action sequences, he blows someone like Michael Bay out of the water. “Die Hard” is in the “Raiders” mold in that the action is very coherent and easy to follow, yet it always flows out of the characters and has consequence (i.e. heroes that bleed and are hurt). “Die Hard” of course had excellent dialogue and performances, which helped make it great, but I think McTiernan’s vision is what really shaped the film.
Similarly, “Die Hard With a Vengeance” is one of the few action sequels that actually delivers. It’s not nearly as good as the first one but several exciting sequences (driving a Taxi through Central Park!) and the chemistry between Willis and Samuel L. Jackson really sold the film. If you have the chance, watch the original ending for “Vengeance” on YouTube. It’s much better than the abrupt conclusion that was attached to the final cut.
Go to Comment
The John McTiernan Thread over 1 year ago
Oh man. I love “Last Action Hero.” I think it slipped my mind because it’s not easily identifiable as a McTiernan movie due to its broader comedic elements, but I do really enjoy it. One of my favorite action flicks and it has one of the best lines of all time, “Could I speak to the drug dealer of the house, please?” Classic.
The thing about “Last Action Hero” is – it’s a parody of big, noisy action films and yet it has better action sequences than 90% of Hollywood movies today. The whole car chase and shootout when Danny first enters the movie world is brilliantly conceived. McTiernan very skillfully manages that tricky road of poking fun at action cinema while still delivering the genre’s intrinsic thrills.
Go to Comment
The John McTiernan Thread over 1 year ago
It may not make a large difference to someone who is just watching for entertainment value, but for action junkies there is a definite difference in the way someone like John McTiernan or Steven Spielberg lenses an action sequence so that you see everything happening within the frame and with conservative editing vs. someone like Michael Bay or Tony Scott who engage in “chaos cinema,” i.e. shaky camera and rapid editing.
Go to Comment
The John McTiernan Thread over 1 year ago
While I do think the Central Park chase in Vengeance is spectacular, I would have to say the freeway chase in “Terminator 2” and the bank heist shootout in “Heat” are even superior action sequences from 90’s Hollywood cinema.
Go to Comment
The John McTiernan Thread over 1 year ago
Hmm, interesting that you would put Martin Campbell in with Greengrass. Not to get too sidetracked but I find Campbell much more aligned with McTiernan than Greengrass. Campbell is a very traditional action director with a great sense of framing and coherency a la McTiernan. It was Marc Forster’s follow-up Bond entry that went into full-on, Michael Bay/Tony Scott levels of “shakycam” incoherence.
Funnily enough, Tony Scott is a filmmaker who started out much closer to the McTiernan mold. He even utilized Bruce Willis to a similar wise-cracking “Die Hard”-style effect in “The Last Boyscout.” His films these days are almost unrecognizable from his late 80’s, early 90’s work. It’s like the invention of AVID video software made Tony Scott lose his mind.
Judged solely on the way they film action spectacle, I would say McTiernan is more effective than Spielberg. But that’s probably because I enjoy the way McTiernan doesn’t shy away from hard, R-rated violence; the scene where Bruce Willis shoots the terrorist’s kneecaps from underneath the office table in “Die Hard” is surely one of the best uses of squib effects in a Hollywood film.
Go to Comment
Panned movies that would have been treated better had another director's name been on it... over 1 year ago
Hm, I’ll try my hand at this. Forgive me if I’m way off the mark.
The Shadow – Sam Raimi
The Phantom – Chris Columbus
Alpha Dog – Larry Clark
The Fast and the Furious – Katheyrn Bigelow
Go to Comment
The Greatest Alleged Sins by Supposed Brilliant Auteurs over 1 year ago
I loved “The Social Network” and, to a slightly lesser extent, “Benjamin Button.” The only film from Fincher that has really disappointed me on any level was “Panic Room.” I would say that film is his biggest ‘sin.’
I agree w/ Michael Mann – “Miami Vice” and David Lynch – “Inland Empire.”
Directors with a more prolific output, like Spielberg and Burton, have several films that I could name (particularly Burton, who has been on a downslide for the past 10 years). However, I grew up with Spielberg’s “Hook” so I have to admit it holds a place in my heart.
I would say “Death Proof” for Quentin Tarantino, while Nolan’s “Batman Begins” is the only film of his that hasn’t worked for me. The best thing “Begins” did was pave the way for its sequel. The finest Batman origin on film for me is still “Mask of the Phantasm.”
Go to Comment
The Greatest Alleged Sins by Supposed Brilliant Auteurs over 1 year ago
I love both “Bram Stoker’s Dracula” and “Mulholland Drive,” so I can’t really see those as being weak points for either director. Also, I wouldn’t blame “Alien 3” on Fincher. That movie was a notoriously troubled production with a lot of studio tampering from Fox. It’s safe to say the final film does not represent Fincher’s vision at all. “Panic Room” though…that’s all Fincher.
Go to Comment
The Greatest Alleged Sins by Supposed Brilliant Auteurs over 1 year ago
Interesting choices, Coheed, but I really enjoy “Tenebrae.” Prolific filmmakers like Argento and Carpenter have many stinkers in their catalog, sadly. But I would say I thought Argento was untouchable until I saw “Trauma” (1993). Carpenter’s first big fumble was “Memoirs of an Invisible Man” (1992). The 90’s were not kind to either filmmaker.
This is almost too obvious but Sam Raimi – Spider-Man 3.
Go to Comment
The Greatest Alleged Sins by Supposed Brilliant Auteurs over 1 year ago
Hook was seriously the coolest movie since “Tron” if you were in elementary school when it came out. That’s all I’m gonna say.
Go to Comment
The Greatest Alleged Sins by Supposed Brilliant Auteurs over 1 year ago
Just throwing some more out there:
Ang Lee – Hulk
Terry Gilliam – The Brothers Grimm (though this is arguably the result of studio tampering)
Tony Scott – Domino
I guess those are kind of obvious choices.
Go to Comment
Critically panned films that you think deserve a reevalution. over 1 year ago
I’m sure Exorcist III was critically panned in its day but now it’s pretty well-regarded by horror fans, I feel. The ‘hallway/nurse sequence’ is always mentioned as one of the most terrifying moments in cinema. I would say Exorcist II is fairly underrated. Not a great movie, by any means, but interesting. That John Boorman managed to take one of the most purely Catholic films of all time and make a sequel that went completely beyond religion is a marvel in itself.
My list would include:
Universal Soldier: Regeneration (I stole that from Jack!)
Last Action Hero
Lord of Illusions
Hellraiser 2: Hellbound
Bram Stoker’s Dracula
Go to Comment
Critically panned films that you think deserve a reevalution. over 1 year ago
“But, then again, if I recall correctly, Bram Stoker’ Dracula actually had a pretty positive critical reaction when it first came out and it was only later that people realized how bad it was.”
This just makes me laugh. Coppola’s “Dracula” is one of the best horror movies of the past 21 years. Granted, that’s not saying much, considering the downslide of the genre since the late 90’s. But it’s a great film. Only problem is that the blu-ray looks like crap – Coppola re-did the color timing and now the picture looks utterly bleak and drab.
I’ve been waiting for someone to say Zardoz but maybe that’s not gonna happen…
Go to Comment
Exdendables 2.......... over 1 year ago
I really hope this is the “Empire Strikes Back” of the “Expendables” movies.
Go to Comment
Critically panned films that you think deserve a reevalution. over 1 year ago
Oh, I love “Hudson Hawk.” Watched it not that long ago with a friend and we laughed throughout the whole thing. The script is basically nothing but a string of one-liners but the dialogue is genuinely funny. I mean, I love Bruce Willis when he had at least a tuft of hair and delivered smarmy ass one-liners and “Hudson Hawk” is basically the ultimate movie for that.
“Hey mister, are you gonna die?”
Go to Comment
wide release films for Jan 20 2012 over 1 year ago
I’m an action buff, I enjoy spy thrillers and genre exercises. I thought “Haywire” was just abysmal. Soderbergh does not seem comfortable in the action realm. The screenplay was at fault too. There was no arc for Gina’s character beyond “people are trying to kill me and I need to find out why.”
Go to Comment
wide release films for Jan 20 2012 over 1 year ago
“This is really frustrating because when things like this happen, it gives credence to the argument from studios that audiences don’t want smart filmmaking. People complain about the Fast Five’s and Adam Sandler’s of the world but these are the films that people are seeing.”
Honestly, I don’t see how Haywire is any ‘smarter’ than a Fast and Furious movie. There’s not much to the script other than pedestrian dialogue and a flimsy excuse to string together set-pieces. Zero character development going on here and the filmmaking in general was just lazy.
There’s a scene where Gina Carano carries this large board and tosses it on some stairs, then pushes some chairs over, in order to halt her pursuers. When it cuts back to the cops chasing her, there’s absolutely nothing on the stairs. Was Soderbergh just asleep behind the camera on this one? I’m all for directors doing a “genre exercise” once in awhile but you’ve really gotta bring your A-game to one to make it worthwhile.
Go to Comment
Chuck Norris Is So Powerful He Can Make Expendables 2 PG-13 over 1 year ago
Terry Crews was on Twitter, claiming that he kills more people in the opening scenes of “The Expendables 2” than he did in the entirety of the first movie. I’m not saying Crews is a liar (he could kill me with a bowel movement) but I don’t see how that’s even possible unless EXP2 is going to be completely bloodless. And if they’re saving the hardcore violence for an Unrated blu-ray, I’ll somehow be even more offended.
Sadly, I know I’m going to be seeing this in theaters because I’m a huge fan of Jean Claude Van Damme and I want to see him on the big screen again.
Go to Comment
wide release films for Jan 20 2012 over 1 year ago
Judging by what I saw at my local theater, “Red Tails” is reaching an audience outside of the “Star Wars” fanbase and internet film buffs. It should probably continue to do well.
Go to Comment
A Discussion on Joe Carnahan's The Grey over 1 year ago
The scene where Neeson talks the man through dying was the definite highpoint of the film for me.
Go to Comment
Sequels That Outdid The Original over 1 year ago
T2 has better action sequences but its whole notion of “robots are people too” strikes me as hokey. I like the first film better, in part because it’s scary as hell and Michael Biehn is one of the best 80’s action heroes.
I do like Aliens better than Alien, although I can concede that Alien is a better film. Aliens just appeals to me more. I like the space marines, the pacing, the action, and Sigourney Weaver’s character arc.
The two biggest for me are probably Empire Strikes Back over A New Hope and The Dark Knight over Batman Begins. A New Hope is fun but I like how ESB just gets deeper into everything: deeper into the Force, the romance, and the SW universe.
Like everybody and their mother, I love Dark Knight but I’m one of the few people I know that just can’t stand Batman Begins. The only good thing BB did was lay the groundwork for TDK. For me, BB is almost as hokey as Batman Forever. I hate the brown and yellow color aesthetic to the film, Batman being friendly with little kids, Liam Neeson’s dumb plot to vaporize water or whatever.
Go to Comment
Sequels That Outdid The Original over 1 year ago
Jirin, are you talking about the theatrical cut or the director’s cut of Aliens? One of my main issues with the director’s cut is that it removes the film’s sense of mystery and discovery, which I otherwise find very present in the theatrical cut. The marines’ arrival on LV-246 is full of dread and intrigue for me…the howling winds of the planet’s surface. The structural damage inside the colony. Where is everyone?
Another pleasure of Aliens is the way it draws parallels to the Vietnam war. The marines are “the ultimate bad-asses”: equipped with state of the art firepower and American military muscle. And yet they are torn to shreds by the more “primitive,” less technologically-advanced indigenous species. A similar allegory plays out in Walter Hill’s “Southern Comfort,” another one of my favorite 80’s films.
Go to Comment
Sequels That Outdid The Original over 1 year ago
Zvelf, at the risk of sounding like a terrible person, that anti-authority streak is one of the things I love about T2. Bear in mind the Rodney King beating occurred as Cameron was filming T2. So when the movie came out, it was eerily prescient to have the villain dressed as a LA police officer. For me it just taps into that primal part of the brain that enjoys seeing people in authority taken down a notch. I know they’re “just doing their job” but, hey, everybody gets irked at the police when they get a speeding ticket or are hassled on the street for no reason. It’s fun to see Arnold as a unstoppable cyborg “sticking it to the man,” as it were. It goes back to being a kid and wishing you had an invincible bodyguard who could beat up anybody who made you upset.
And I’m glad Jonas Silgalis brought them up: Bourne Supremacy and Ultimatum are infinitely better than the Bourne Identity. Particularly Supremacy.
Go to Comment
Sequels That Outdid The Original over 1 year ago
Balistik, bear in mind that Terminator 1 was one of Cameron’s earliest films and was shot on a budget of around $6 million. T2 came almost a decade later and had a budget of $94 million. Also, T2 was shot in a wider aspect ratio.
Go to Comment
Sequels That Outdid The Original over 1 year ago
Balistik, The Matrix sequels are more of a case of an aesthetic preference. If you’re saying the first Terminator looks like a made-for-TV movie at times, I’m taking that to mean: poor film quality, a squashed aspect ratio, cheap special effects, etc. A much larger budget, a more experienced director, and (perhaps most importantly) a wider aspect ratio are all going to help with that.
Go to Comment
A Discussion on Joe Carnahan's The Grey over 1 year ago
Yeah, I wouldn’t let an 11 year-old see this unless they’re really secure with the notion of Death. :P
Go to Comment
A Discussion on Joe Carnahan's The Grey over 1 year ago
I think my problem with the film was that the truly standout moments were stacked towards the beginning – this has the most terrifying and realistic plane crash I’ve ever seen on film, followed shortly after by the scene where Liam couches a man through death. This is absolutely harrowing, riveting stuff. And the first appearance of the wolves is handled well.
After that, though, it felt like the script trotted out the cliches…or at least used the wolves as a way too convenient device whenever they needed to jolt the audience or get the characters moving. After the whole “tree jumping” sequence, I just kind of tuned out. It reminded me too much of that “Frozen” movie where a bunch of man-eating wolves arrive out of nowhere to eat people at a commercial ski lift.
Go to Comment
Prince of Darkness (1987): Coherent Philosophy, Theology and Physics or a Jumbled Mess? over 1 year ago
It’s probably been a year since I’ve seen this film. I love Carpenter and count “Halloween” and “The Thing” among my very favorite films, but “Prince of Darkness” didn’t work for me. As a horror or thriller film, it wasn’t very frightening. And while the metaphysical ideas suggested were interesting, they didn’t hit me with a sense of dread in my stomach like the best of Lovecraft does.
Overall, the production felt slapdash compared to Carpenter’s best work. I can see this as the beginning of the end for him, although he followed it up with “They Live” – another one of my favorite films. Perhaps I need to revisit “Prince of Darkness” because I usually agree with Jack Lehtonen’s insights.
Go to Comment
Mubi User Actor Obsessions about 1 year ago
Go to Comment
VULGAR AUTEUR RANKING 11 months ago
Lehtonen and I tend to see eye to eye on everything – except for his love of Paul W.S. Anderson, so I think you could easily toss him on the list.
As far as actors go, Keanu Reeves and Nicolas Cage are two of my favorites that tend to make people roll their eyes whenever I mention them. Either that or they’re a closet Nic Cage fan and they’ve seen movies like “Vampire’s Kiss” so they totally get it.
It might just me but I feel like Miike gets enough respect and acclaim from the international film community these days, especially after “13 Assassins.”
Go to Comment