Recommend a movie

[The Dark Knight]

While I accept the fact that Predator is a movie franchise at this point, for me, it's a one-time thing. Dutch and his friends get lured into the jungle, some stuff goes down, Dutch barely prevails, the end. I don't need anything beyond that.

Nor does the franchise. The shadow of the 1987 original is too great for it to escape from, with the general template adhered to and never bettered. However, I can accept the concept of Predator 2 moving to the city, and it does some interesting things with it. The opening transition from the trees, only to reveal the skyline of Los Angeles, is one of the best I've seen in terms of instantly changing the context and visually demonstrating the jump to the next movie. The AvP films, Predators and The Predator degraded the brand into oblivion. But nonetheless, we still have that first movie.

Whatever his reasons might've been, I think Schwarzenegger did the right thing in declining sequels. I'll add that if he'd done something similar after the first (or the second at the latest) Terminator film, my overall appreciation for those movies would probably be a lot higher.

I believe it's a case of Arnold viewing The Terminator as his most iconic role and thus his legacy. Appearing in the films became an obligation. If another was to be made, he'd be appearing in some fashion. The first two Terminator films are some of the best of the genre, but after that? Not even worth discussing.

It brings up an important discussion for everyone, which is knowing when to stop. The best deals are often the ones you don't make. I view Die Hard as a trilogy. The second is serviceable and not terrible. The third is entertaining, gives a fresh context while keeping John as the hungover underdog. The Alien series hit its all time high with Aliens, even if I accept the premise of the third. I view The Godfather I and II as one story, and thus all I need.

It's just a thriller film. No agenda, no "messaging", just the story of a brave man defying some pretty overwhelming odds to do the right thing. I can't imagine anyone not enjoying it, tbh. Figured you might enjoy the movie, if you haven't seen it before.

I've seen a documentary about the ordeal, and wouldn't mind checking out the movie version.

I'm keen to give the Mission Impossible films another viewing as well. They're a case of every sequel getting better rather than worse. In an age of CGI and superhero films, there is still nothing more exciting or inspirational than real stunt work and a man simply running his guts out.

[thecolorsblend]

I'm keen to give the Mission Impossible films another viewing as well. They're a case of every sequel getting better rather than worse. In an age of CGI and superhero films, there is still nothing more exciting or inspirational than real stunt work and a man simply running his guts out.

Yeah. They're on Paramount+ and I've been thinking the same, actually. I've only seen the first one. And even that's a recent thing. But I have wondered if the sequels are worth checking out.

I'll give MI2 a day in court and find out, I suppose.

[The Dark Knight]

The second film is the weakest. The series really hits its stride with Ghost Protocol, Rogue Nation and Fallout. You can tell Cruise decided to take things to the next level across the board, delivering a balance of fun and intrigue the Bond series long gave up on. The original is simplistic in comparison, but it still holds up. I don't mind the third film. It does contain what I consider to be the best cold open to any film: Cruise strapped to a chair and cycling through a range of emotions against a foe who will not yield. But if you want to be sold on the series, make sure you see Ghost Protocol, Rogue Nation and Fallout.

[thecolorsblend]

Saw Top Gun: Maverick yesterday. The reviews are pretty accurate. Zero wokeness, zero Rian Johnson or Paul Feig bs. Just a fun movie that aspires to honor the original without an agenda.

Last I saw, TGM was tracking for a $150 million opening weekend. Assuming that's true, the movie deserves that level of success, if you ask me.

Midway through the movie, I had to run to the men's room. On my way back up the aisle, I looked at the other audience members and most of them were grinning ear to ear at what they were seeing. You can't fake or buy reactions like that.

[Silver Nemesis]

I've seen Luchino Visconti's The Leopard (1963) numerous times over the years, but I only recently got around to reading the novel on which it's based. The book, by Giuseppe Tomas di Lampedusa, is often cited as the greatest modern Italian novel. To be honest, I haven't read enough modern Italian novels to have an informed opinion on that score, but it's certainly a powerful and beautifully-written book. And reading it has made me appreciate Visconti's film adaptation even more.

The plot takes place in the mid-19th century during the unification of Italy. The social upheaval of the Risorgimento is portrayed from the perspective of a noble Sicilian family whose status is irreversibly altered by it. Burt Lancaster stars as Prince Don Fabrizio Salina, a wealthy aristocrat with a love of astronomy (somewhat foreshadowing his more comical role as the wealthy amateur astronomer Felix Happer in Bill Forsyth's classic Local Hero (1983)), who senses the world he knows being rapidly supplanted by a new and unfamiliar Italy in which he and the class system he represents are outdated relics. It's an epic story of change, nostalgia and regret set against a sumptuous backdrop of Sicilian aristocratic decadence.

The rest of the cast includes Claudia Cardinale, Alain Delon and Mario Girotti (better known among English-speaking audiences as Terence Hill, one half of the Terence Hill and Bud Spencer comedy duo). The stirring score was written by frequent Fellini collaborator Nino Rota, who would later go on to compose the music for The Godfather Parts I and II. The cinematography, lavish costumes and sets are all beautiful, and the screenplay adheres to Tomasi di Lampedusa's novel with careful diligence. The only major omissions from the film's story are the final two chapters of the book. These chapters are important to the novel's themes and provide a moving conclusion to the story of the prince and his daughter Concetta, but since they take place decades after the book's central events I can understand why Visconti chose not to adapt them.

The novel and film of The Leopard are both outstanding works of art in their respective mediums. While I haven't read enough modern Italian novels to authoritatively say where the book would rank among their literary classics (very near the top, I suspect), I have seen hundreds of Italian films. And I would confidently rank Visconti's The Leopard among the top ten. Apparently it's Martin Scorsese's favourite movie, and it's not hard to see why.

[thecolorsblend]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Phone

No exaggeration, I've literally NEVER gone to the movies by myself before. I'm over 40 (and insecure enough about that fact to simply say "over 40" and leave it at that) and Tuesday was the first time I ever went to a movie theater alone.

But what can I say? The Black Phone looked very interesting. The Wiki page above lays out the plot in pretty specific detail. So, it seems wise for me to avoid spoilers. Instead, I'll just say that the movie didn't let me down.

Before going into the movie, all I knew was (A) a movie called The Black Phone exists (B) it's a horror movie and (C) Ethan Hawke is in it.

That's it, that's all I knew. And this is one of those times when knowing pretty much nothing about a movie is sometimes the best way to go into it. Because you have pretty much no preconceived ideas (or spoilers) about anything. You go in totally raw and the movie either sinks or swims on its own merits.

But to get into mild spoilers, I'll say that I wasn't aware of the fact that the story is set in 1978. I kind of enjoy period pieces. So, that was a welcome surprise for me. Your mileage may vary. But that aspect played great.

Anyway, this movie won't change your life, it won't be the greatest thing you've ever seen and you won't learn any game-changing lessons from it. But it's a fun little thrill ride with plenty of thrills and some surprisingly well written characters.

Definitely recommended.

[The Dark Knight]

I recently managed to see Elvis (2022).

I'm a Beatles guy, but I respect Elvis and his place in music and in particular rock and roll. I've been to Graceland, Sun Studios, around Memphis and stayed at the Heartbreak Hotel. Elvis is the Superman of the genre in that he inspired so many others after him through pure soul and bravery considering the era in which he originally smashed his name into history. The movie is not historically accurate, (certain things didn't happen, and situations are condensed) but it trends in the right direction enough for my liking.

Telling the story through the lens of Colonel Parker was inspired and provided an opportunity to show more of the reality behind the myth, and that's exactly what I like to see with biopics. As I've always felt, once Elvis joined the army he really was even more of a prisoner of management and the contract he signed. He was able to be moulded for whatever use they needed him for, and he wasn't really in any position to decline. It all leads to the five year Las Vegas residency. It's a pretty sad story and the film doubles down on Parker's ruthlessness. I think it's important to show that side of things and I believe the causal viewer wouldn't be fully aware of the context certain situations had.

I can't imagine anyone better in the lead role other than Austin Butler. He looks and sounds like Elvis to the point it's uncanny, which solves a big issue any film like this automatically has with someone so distinctively world famous. I think Baz Luhrmann did a good job for the most part. I didn't agree with the use of contemporary music, but the way he transitions scenes and the like is an assault on the senses in a good way. It captures the energy of Memphis from around that time, while bringing the focus back to Elvis' inner circle to contrast to the storm around him. It's a long movie but it needed the time given the ground it covers.

All in all, I'm glad I saw it.

[thecolorsblend]

Rewatched Natural Born Killers the other night. And... it's good.

I mean, it's fair to say that the movie is mired in controversy to this day. And honestly, I can understand that. The news media got burned in absolute effigy in that movie. So, I can see where they'd want to retaliate. And yet, the core premise of the movie, that the media does a lot to inspire these mass murderers (while sort of a Nineties concept), certainly holds water. It's reasonable to ask if the media backlash to Natural Born Killers wasn't a salve for their collective guilty conscience.

And yet, my quibble about the movie is that Mickey and Mallory (and Scagnetti, you could say) don't rly embody the movie's message about the media being responsible for creating these monsters. Mickey suffered an abusive childhood, Mallory was regularly assaulted by her father and Scagnetti witnessed his mother's murder. Those events clearly did something to each character's mind, turning them into killers.

In other words, the media had nothing to do with it. The movie is basically arguing against its own idea. Yes, Mickey does express admiration for other high profile murderers. But you never get the idea that he did what he did because he wanted the media to breathlessly cover his exploits like they did, say, Manson.

But that aside, Natural Born Killers is the main reason why I'll always feel a little cheated that we never got to see Nineties-era Oliver Stone direct a Batman film. I've imagined a Batman movie that uses that rapid cut/psychedelic collage style that Stone experimented with back in the Nineties and feel a sense of loss over it.

Then again, a Nineties-era Stone Batman movie wouldn't have shifted very many Happy Meals, which was a big concern for WB back in those days.

Still, Stone looked at Woody Harrelson and correctly predicted that he would make a very convincing cinematic monster. Which is strange considering Harrelson's film work up to that point. At the time cameras began rolling for Natural Born Killers, the high point of Harrelson's film career was probably White Men Can't Jump. So, it seems odd for Stone to expect Harrelson to pivot from that to, well, Mickey Knox.

Honestly, the same can be said for Rodney Dangerfield, whose performance is absolutely chilling. And yet, Dangerfield isn't the first (or the hundredth) guy you'd think of if you wanted to cast a sleazeball in your film.

So, kudos and kudos again to Stone for some incredible outside the box casting decisions.

All in all, I consider Natural Born Killers to be a flawed gem. Not a "masterpiece". Because it's difficult for me to imagine Stone ever directing something that will remotely approach Platoon, Wall Street or any of the other biggies. But there's still a lot to enjoy with Natural Born Killers. Overall, I do recommend it.

[thecolorsblend]

Rewatched The Faculty tonight. Hadn't seen it since, oh, maybe summer 1999 when I rented it on video tape. Had hazy memories of it. I remembered broadly enjoying it. But it wasn't one of those Movies Experiences You'll Never Forget things.

But the movie has attracted a cult following over the years. And usually, movies that do that have some kind of value or staying power. So what the hay, why not give it another look? It's streaming on HBO Max (in America anyway, you Europeans are on your own).

And honestly? Not bad. Not bad at all!

I think The Faculty's original sin is that it's sci-fi creature feature horror in a time and place when audiences were looking for another slasher like Scream. Well, needless to say, The Faculty doesn't scratch that itch.

But if you enjoy a good alien invasion movie (and I do), then The Faculty has a lot to offer.

Now, there are some anachronistic elements. I sincerely don't know if high school hierarchies operate on the paradigm shown in The Faculty anymore. They might. But I get the sense that things have rly changed there.

Another weird element is the incomprehensible relationship between Zeke and Ms. Burke. They treat each other like exes... even tho he's a student and she's a faculty member. Which, if I'm reading this thing right, means their relationship is most likely a felony and Ms. Burke should be up on charges. I mean, you can't rly play the "it was a different time" card here. Even when I first saw the movie, I remember HOPING that I was misunderstanding that part of the movie. Because that sort of thing was verboten even back then.

But when you get away from that, it's a pretty enjoyable movie and I had a blast watching it. Recommended.

[The Joker]

"Escape from New York" 1981

Finally purchased the 4K edition the other day, and it's simply outstanding!

To me, EFNY is one of those 'perfect' films that never should be remade (though inevitably will be). Such an intriguing premise, amazing cast (Donald Pleasence, Lee Van Cleef, Harry Dean Stanton, Tom Atkins, Adrienne Barbeau, Ernest Borgnine, Isaac Hayes, and the impeccably cast Kurt Russel as Snake Plissken), and John Carpenter at the height of his powers as a director. Like many other scores composed and performed by Carpenter during this era, this one features yet another memorable gem.

Since checking this out in 4K, I've been reading up on the 1987 Coleman Luck script for "Escape from L.A.", and .... what a trip that would have been! As it leans into the fanciful than even the 1996 sequel did to be perfectly honest.

But yeah, "Escape from New York" is highly recommended.