[Movies] Talk about the last movie you saw 2: Electric Threadaloo
- Thread starter Dave
- Start date
Man, I'm late to the party to say I like both RoboCop (original) and Starship Troopers (both book and movie), right?
Let me, however, add that while Starship Troopers 3 is....watchable, though nowhere near 1, Starship Troopers 2 is so horrible it can't even be saved by the boobs. Seriously - if you ever want a truly awful movie experience, watch Starship Troopers 2.
Let me, however, add that while Starship Troopers 3 is....watchable, though nowhere near 1, Starship Troopers 2 is so horrible it can't even be saved by the boobs. Seriously - if you ever want a truly awful movie experience, watch Starship Troopers 2.
I've tried twice but never made it through the second one. It made me never watch the third one. I guess you're saying I ought to.
The third one is a sequel to the first one and pretends very hard the second one doesn't exist.
He Never Died
Huh. That was interesting. Actually it was pretty good. I can't really discuss it because of spoilers, but a very unique and surprisingly gory movie. Obvious twist but well executed.
"Huh. That guy looks just like Trevor from GTA V."
Probably because he's Trevor from GTA V - Steve Ogg.
Huh. That was interesting. Actually it was pretty good. I can't really discuss it because of spoilers, but a very unique and surprisingly gory movie. Obvious twist but well executed.
"Huh. That guy looks just like Trevor from GTA V."
Probably because he's Trevor from GTA V - Steve Ogg.
Last edited:
He was also in West World, and any number of movies or shows as a henchman.
Oh, I did, too. It was a great, creepy scene with an unexpected use of powers.
It was still the wrong guy to do it on.
So I tried watching it last night. I learned that I've tried watching it before, too, and oh my god it's horriblly unfunny.
2? Or 3? 2 really is beyond redemption.
Ah. Yeah, I'm not saying it's a great movie - it doesn't live up to 1. But it isn't as horrible as 2.
It almost is as bad, though.
It's what the first would have been without the
I didn't know there were more than three (unless the rest are ones with Adrian Paul).
A long time ago, I bought the VHS (on clearance) just so I could watch the opening sequence and theme. I will never regret doing so.
--Patrick
I was on leave on my way to the Presidio SF for Russki school, staying with my folks who were at the time in Chicago, when i finally got a used VHS of the movie. Having to watch it for the first time with the folks . . . just telling them to shhhhh or go away . . .
It's Cheese, but it's Awesome Cheese spread over a Queen Triscuit and topped with a Clancy Ham.[DOUBLEPOST=1491054183,1491054004][/DOUBLEPOST]This will probably get double posted but,
Just got done re-watching 'What We Do In Shadows' "What are we? We're WEREwolves not SWEARwolves."
So hoping he get's around to the followup.
2 movies with Adrian Paul, Search for Vengeance is an anime movie though totally unrelated to any of the other movies. It also has the greatest way to kill an immortal in it.
Shove a grenade in his mouth!
GasBandit
Staff member
Ghost in the Shell (spoiler free review):
TLDR version: While it isn't as good as the source material (what is, these days?) or an amazing film on its own, it's nowhere near as bad as professional reviewers seem to make it out to be (Rotten Tomatoes' 42% is way low. I'd give this closer to a 70). It's worth a watch on Netflix or if you catch a matinee, but it's not critical to see in the theater unless you just really want to. I liked it better than Lucy, anyway.
The story borrows elements from all over the shows, manga and movies, then weaves them into a story that is GITS:SAC-ish but not a strict retelling. I don't think the show's overarcing story would really fit into a 2 hour movie, anyway. While the anime series just sort of dropped you in the action and didn't really get around to any origin stories until later, this movie feels like a prequel. It's the Major's origin story, similar to that arc in the second season, but tweaked and remolded enough to almost-but-not-quite be something new. Scarlett Johansson makes a decent Major, and most of the rest of section 9 is "eh, good enough," but "Beat" Takeshi Kitano steals the show as Chief Aramaki, and comes off feeling more badass than any of his cyborg underlings.
The movie suffers from there just not being enough time to cover everything in depth, so a lot gets glossed over. Thermoptic camo is never really explained or even called attention, it's apparently just something that exists. Additionally, the setting is changed a little, the tech is dialed back ever so slightly - cybernetic enhancements are common, but the Major is the first ever successful full-body prosthetic cyborg - even the others on her team are still all meatsacks, but with enhancements. Unfortunately, while Batou gets a lot of screen time and an early name drop, but the rest of the Section 9 crew is just taking up space, with a teensy bit of attention paid to Togusa and pointing out that he's unique in that he refuses to get cybernetic enhancements - but then he quickly fades into the background with the others. It also does the thing that GITS:SAC did in that it presents little or no explanations for most things - which is practically an anime trope, but doesn't transfer well into western cinema. I know people talk about how "Show, don't tell" is a virtue in visual storytelling, but here it often falls into more of a "Glimpse, then discard." Also, the movie focuses mostly on only one of the two "big questions" raised in most GITS incarnations: the role and definition of humanity in an ever-more technological world where the distinction between the two gets blurrier all the time. It's been my opinion that this (and the action, naturally) is the "hook" that gets people interested in the story, but what keeps people is when they get into the questions of individuality vs collectivism in a society where consciousness can be swapped, blended, copied, and edited. The movie doesn't touch on this latter concept at all (other than to get off into the weeds once or twice about how "your memory doesn't define you, your actions do"), but rather focuses on the humanity question.
That aside, it's a good popcorn movie that doesn't disgrace the source material. The visuals are really good, with a few problems here and there (some of the CGI in the action sequences looks 90s-fake). The settings are well done, some places being bright and colorful and others dark and dingy and still others rich and deep. I like how the movie creates a multiracial Japan and deals with the Major's ethnicity - almost as if they anticipated the controversy that we all saw over the last year or so. It doesn't get anywhere near as philosophically deep or complex as the show or the movies, but it hints that the discussions are there to be had. Grade: B, maybe B+ if you are a GITS fan.
TLDR version: While it isn't as good as the source material (what is, these days?) or an amazing film on its own, it's nowhere near as bad as professional reviewers seem to make it out to be (Rotten Tomatoes' 42% is way low. I'd give this closer to a 70). It's worth a watch on Netflix or if you catch a matinee, but it's not critical to see in the theater unless you just really want to. I liked it better than Lucy, anyway.
The story borrows elements from all over the shows, manga and movies, then weaves them into a story that is GITS:SAC-ish but not a strict retelling. I don't think the show's overarcing story would really fit into a 2 hour movie, anyway. While the anime series just sort of dropped you in the action and didn't really get around to any origin stories until later, this movie feels like a prequel. It's the Major's origin story, similar to that arc in the second season, but tweaked and remolded enough to almost-but-not-quite be something new. Scarlett Johansson makes a decent Major, and most of the rest of section 9 is "eh, good enough," but "Beat" Takeshi Kitano steals the show as Chief Aramaki, and comes off feeling more badass than any of his cyborg underlings.
The movie suffers from there just not being enough time to cover everything in depth, so a lot gets glossed over. Thermoptic camo is never really explained or even called attention, it's apparently just something that exists. Additionally, the setting is changed a little, the tech is dialed back ever so slightly - cybernetic enhancements are common, but the Major is the first ever successful full-body prosthetic cyborg - even the others on her team are still all meatsacks, but with enhancements. Unfortunately, while Batou gets a lot of screen time and an early name drop, but the rest of the Section 9 crew is just taking up space, with a teensy bit of attention paid to Togusa and pointing out that he's unique in that he refuses to get cybernetic enhancements - but then he quickly fades into the background with the others. It also does the thing that GITS:SAC did in that it presents little or no explanations for most things - which is practically an anime trope, but doesn't transfer well into western cinema. I know people talk about how "Show, don't tell" is a virtue in visual storytelling, but here it often falls into more of a "Glimpse, then discard." Also, the movie focuses mostly on only one of the two "big questions" raised in most GITS incarnations: the role and definition of humanity in an ever-more technological world where the distinction between the two gets blurrier all the time. It's been my opinion that this (and the action, naturally) is the "hook" that gets people interested in the story, but what keeps people is when they get into the questions of individuality vs collectivism in a society where consciousness can be swapped, blended, copied, and edited. The movie doesn't touch on this latter concept at all (other than to get off into the weeds once or twice about how "your memory doesn't define you, your actions do"), but rather focuses on the humanity question.
That aside, it's a good popcorn movie that doesn't disgrace the source material. The visuals are really good, with a few problems here and there (some of the CGI in the action sequences looks 90s-fake). The settings are well done, some places being bright and colorful and others dark and dingy and still others rich and deep. I like how the movie creates a multiracial Japan and deals with the Major's ethnicity - almost as if they anticipated the controversy that we all saw over the last year or so. It doesn't get anywhere near as philosophically deep or complex as the show or the movies, but it hints that the discussions are there to be had. Grade: B, maybe B+ if you are a GITS fan.
I think it's just getting to a critical point now with so many asian characters in adaptations becoming white and Hollywood's racism being so slow to adapt.I think the white washing complaints are overblown, the reason why is spoilers, but if she had blue hair maybe people would bitch less.
Well in the case of Dr. Strange, it was changed specifically not to piss off China. Doubtless the producers didn't want to risk the movie not being screened in China and made the call, and in all honestly, probably the correct one if they wanted it shown. And, although anecdotal, when my wife and I saw it, I told her about the whole controversy and her opinion basically boiled down to: "It's an American movie, cast who you want. Whether the character is white or Asian doesn't matter. If this were made in China, we wouldn't even be thinking about things like this".
And in GITS's case? It appears the outrage comes from Asian-American groups. Japan apparently doesn't give two-shits about the casting choice, and appears to take a similar view of my wife's opinion on the Ancient One. Of course, Asian-American opinions are still perfectly valid and are not incorrect in wanting further representation.
Not surprising that homogeneous cultures don't really care, like you said, it is Asian-American groups making the stink, because, really they've never been given a fair shake here.
Keep in mind that Rotten Tomatoes score is not a grade, but a percentage of critics who liked the movie. So saying a 70 is more accurate is saying 27 percent more critics should've liked the movie when they didn't.
Is it something that really matters or is it something written to give them an excuse to cast a white person?
Of course, being made in Japan doesn't automatically make every character Japanese. Anime characters are almost never *drawn* with a specific nationality, and everyone from every country looks the same. (Unless they are old/meant to be a sterotype). In the case of Ghost in the Shell, the shell itself certainly has no set race, only the brain inhabiting it does. Which is probably a big reason why people in Japan don't care about the nationalities not being physically represented. Taking a movie made with actual non-generic body types and then turning everyone white is certainly white washing. But complaining that an anime adaptation is white washed when the overwhelming style of anime is white skin with giant round eyes is just silly to me. At the same time, I do acknowledge that white washing is a huge problem, and the persistent nature of such is going to make people more sensitive to things that come from foreign sources having white people cast as main characters.
GasBandit
Staff member
Well... they should have
Can't say. Spoiler. Guess you'll just have to find out when it hits netflix.
If only this forum had a mechanism to hide spoilers for those that don't wish to see.
It's just that the claims of "they wrote a reason for it" sounds similar to when that women in that video game "was actually an alien who breathes through her skin" to justify the impractically small amount of closing she wore.
It's just that the claims of "they wrote a reason for it" sounds similar to when that women in that video game "was actually an alien who breathes through her skin" to justify the impractically small amount of closing she wore.
