[Movies] Talk about the last movie you saw 2: Electric Threadaloo

CynicismKills

CynicismKills

fade said:
Wow, I just watched a MST3K from 1989 on Netflix. I'm not sure if this is very very early Comedy Central, or if it's Cable Access, but it has Dr. Forester and Larry as the Mads, a really old Cambot, and Servo with Larry doing the voice. It's, um, not great. They were apparently still adlibbing for this episode. I was reading the history of the show, and it's quite interesting. It seems like when Joel left the show, he said it was because he was uncomfortable acting. However in a more recent interview (2009 or so), he said that was a lie for the media. In truth he loved doing the show and hated leaving. But since he disagreed with producer/director and partner Mallon, he left to save the show from death.
Click to expand...
I actually preferred Mike over Joel as the host myself. Mike's sarcasm fit the idea of the show more than Joel's dry humor, in my opinion. I mean, I like both, don't get me wrong, but all in all I find I like more Mike episodes than Joel. Early stuff is especially hit and miss. Also yeah initially (first 3 or so seasons?) Dr. Forrester and TV's Larry were the mads, until Pearl took over and added in Brainguy and Bobo over another season or two. Also at some point Crow changed voices too, around the time Mike took over I think but I can't remember for sure there.
 
fade

fade

Staff member
According to Wikipedia, Larry only lasted 1.5 seasons (into the beginning of the comedy central era), and most of the crew were actually glad to see the back of him. He left when the show became scripted because he thought it should be adlibbed. I think you're thinking of TV's Frank, who took over for Larry. Forrester and Frank lasted into the Mike era pretty far. Crow was being voice by Dr. Forrester, so when he Crow changed, too. Pearl took over as the baddie around season 7 or 8, I think, but she had been a running character the season before (she's Pearl Forrester, Clayton's mom). One thing that is interesting is that when they started scripting the show, Mike and Mary (Pearl) were writing the jokes anyway, even when Joel was hosting.
 
CynicismKills

CynicismKills

Yeah I knew Mike had been a writer for most of the show, he'd make random appearances here and there when Joel was host. Also you're right, I had Frank and Larry mixed up there.
 
Yoshimickster

Yoshimickster

You know what had a really disapointing climax? Ninja turtles 2. Shredder gets the ooze, becomes a SUPER Shredder...and probably dies underneath the docks. UGH!
 
fade

fade

Staff member
I still think the 80s-90s cartoon was better than the comic, and the mutagen is one of the reasons. The show's explanation may not have made any scientific sense, but it had story logic.
 
LittleSin

LittleSin

I just watched Disneys Dinosaur for the first time since it came out in theatres.

This movie is a lot better then I remember it being! There are a few early 3D animation things that made it a bit odd (slow down in action scenes, backgrounds being far to detailed compared to the mains, etc.) but over all it was enjoyable.
 
Yoshimickster

Yoshimickster

LittleSin said:
I just watched Disneys Dinosaur for the first time since it came out in theatres.

This movie is a lot better then I remember it being! There are a few early 3D animation things that made it a bit odd (slow down in action scenes, backgrounds being far to detailed compared to the mains, etc.) but over all it was enjoyable.
Click to expand...
Man I haven't seen that since I was a kid. I remember finding the monkey kind of annoying, but I still remember liking it.
fade said:
I still think the 80s-90s cartoon was better than the comic, and the mutagen is one of the reasons. The show's explanation may not have made any scientific sense, but it had story logic.
Click to expand...
Mmmmmmmm, debatable. The comics had a deeper continuity to them that I felt worked a lot better. Though 1987 mutagen was cooler I will give you that.
 
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

Insidious

I checked this out on Netflix after hearing all the positive talk about it on here. And goddamn, am I glad I did because this was a damn fine horror flick. And the ending, oh, how I loved the ending. That's how you ending a flipping horror movie!

There's talk apparently of a sequel. Personally, I hope they don't return to that family, so we can have all new characters and further exploration of this mythos.
 
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

Definitely check it out, Yoshster. Though, I admit, it's not the perfect, absolutely flawless horror movie. But it's definitely one of the better ones I've seen in a good, long while. It definitely had my heart going a couple of times. And the main baddie in it (you'll know it when you see it; just ask Fade) has a great, simplistic design.
 
fade

fade

Staff member
After giving Insidious more thought, I think the ending is actually a plot hole.
Eloise established that the ghosts need time to enter into a body, and that the old woman's ghost had been severed from the dad, yet she was able to apparently easily possess him. Also, how would the mom know that the photo on Eloise's camera was of the dad? Eloise was dead, and there's no evidence in the picture that that's who the photo was of. Finally, it doesn't quite make sense that the dad, being aware that he was astral walking and having been made aware of his history with the ghost, would've fallen for the old lady's trap. Or was his body already possessed by this point? I can't tell. There's the weird stumble and tiredness he seems to exhibit when they enter the house. Since Eloise had established that life=strength, maybe that was supposed to be our visual cue that he had essentially died, since his connection to his body was severed. I don't know. It kind of falls apart there.
 
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

fade said:
After giving Insidious more thought, I think the ending is actually a plot hole.
Eloise established that the ghosts need time to enter into a body, and that the old woman's ghost had been severed from the dad, yet she was able to apparently easily possess him. Also, how would the mom know that the photo on Eloise's camera was of the dad? Eloise was dead, and there's no evidence in the picture that that's who the photo was of. Finally, it doesn't quite make sense that the dad, being aware that he was astral walking and having been made aware of his history with the ghost, would've fallen for the old lady's trap. Or was his body already possessed by this point? I can't tell. There's the weird stumble and tiredness he seems to exhibit when they enter the house. Since Eloise had established that life=strength, maybe that was supposed to be our visual cue that he had essentially died, since his connection to his body was severed. I don't know. It kind of falls apart there.
Click to expand...

First of all, I'd say the old woman's connection to Josh was much, much stronger because of the time she had already spent trying to possess him. For all we know, she had been waiting near him the whole damn time all his life, waiting for another opportunity just like this. But she was likely able to possess him much quicker because she'd already spent so much time with him and had already come so incredibly close (as the pictures that Eloise had show indicated).

Second, his wife was right there with him when he went through the pictures, so she would have seen not only the evolution of the old lady becoming clearer, but as a result, would have recognized her immediately, since instead of Josh in the picture, it was a full shot of the old woman,

Third, I would say there are two of the reasons he fell for her trap: that he, himself, was still very unfamiliar with astral projection. And he was very likely incredibly weakened fighting the two malevolent spirits to rescue his son. Plus, this old woman had already spent a good amount of time near him, so probably knew how he ticked.
 
Covar

Covar

Watched The Breakfast Club for the first time this past Tuesday. What an amazing movie, I'm sad I never saw it earlier.
 
fade

fade

Staff member
ThatNickGuy said:
First of all, I'd say the old woman's connection to Josh was much, much stronger because of the time she had already spent trying to possess him. For all we know, she had been waiting near him the whole damn time all his life, waiting for another opportunity just like this. But she was likely able to possess him much quicker because she'd already spent so much time with him and had already come so incredibly close (as the pictures that Eloise had show indicated).

Second, his wife was right there with him when he went through the pictures, so she would have seen not only the evolution of the old lady becoming clearer, but as a result, would have recognized her immediately, since instead of Josh in the picture, it was a full shot of the old woman,
Click to expand...
Yeah, I get that the mom would've recognized the old woman because of the old photos, but how would she have known that the new photo was of Josh? You can't see anything of Josh's body in the new photo, and he wasn't in the room when Eloise took it. It could've just been of the room, since it'd already been shown that you could photograph ghosts. Which would've scared her, but she clearly made the connection that the old woman had possessed Josh.

I admit we don't know the mechanics of possession, but it seems like once the connection to Josh was severed, the old lady would've lacked the ability to even try to continue the possession process, since it required astral walking. Seems like that would've essentially hit the reset button, but again, I don't know.
 
HCGLNS

HCGLNS

Saw the Lorax over the weekend. Decent film, enjoyed the singing bits. Wife cried at the end. Son dumped popcorn all over me. Daughter shared her pretzel bites.
 
sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

Covar said:
Watched The Breakfast Club for the first time this past Tuesday. What an amazing movie, I'm sad I never saw it earlier.
Click to expand...
It is odd how that generation of teen movies really had some classics. Normally teen popcorn flicks are so bloody shallow, and disposable. But those films were so true to the live of teen agers and young adults that they pretty much transcend the junk they were meant to be and are as good as many dramas are now.
 
Covar

Covar

It almost feels like John Hughes was deliberately writing about teenagers, while most others are written to teenagers. Not sure if I make sense there.
 
Gared

Gared

I'm not really sure that they were meant to be just junk teen popcorn flicks back then though. Today that class of movie is, certainly, but back then the "family" movie genre actually included movies that the entire family could watch and enjoy, and which usually had moral lessons for the younger generations and slightly more adult humor in places for the older generations to enjoy. Even two of my go-to comedies from the 80's (Uncle Buck and The Great Outdoors) had a fair amount of object and/or moral lessons thrown in with the absurd comedy. I think that most of that just died after the 80's, because it was prevalent back in the 60's and 70's with Disney movies that the entire family could enjoy then too, things like the original Parent Trap movie, starring Haley Mills as both sisters, or the Herbie movies, or the (original) Flubber and (original) Nutty Professor movies.
 
Sparhawk

Sparhawk

Watched Tintin this week, enjoyed it very much. The animation took some getting used to, and only in a couple of points did it pull me out of the movie with the animation style/motion capture.
 
LittleKagsin

LittleKagsin

Went and saw Mirror Mirror last night.

Honestly, I liked it, but I don't think it will do well or that many will feel the same why I do. The story was..fine and the acting was okay. Dialogue between the dwarves was hilarious. But the star of that movie? Those insane costumes. Ugh, my brain was on overload just looking at them, they were so beautiful, stunningly detailed, I just...if that show doesn't win something for cotumes I will kick someone in the head. It's horrible, but as much as I enjoyed what was happening on screen, I could just look at it and be happy because of the costumes - there were so many! Also, I think Lily Collins is adorable, so that is a plus. =^^= (And is also where I realized my new fetish is men in trench coats, or riding coats, or any long coat that flows - that was the final straw for me...mmmm, trench coats.)

Overall I thought it was a fun, simple, family-oriented movie. I didn't mind the changes they made to the Snow White story. And I could see this movie becoming my new I'm-ill-and-just-want-to-watch-a-happy-movie movie.
 
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

Cabin in the Woods

Let me be very clear about this: GO SEE THIS MOVIE. If you're a fan of Joss Whedon's work at all (Buffy, Angel, Firefly, Dollhouse), then you absolutely must see this movie. There's a couple of relatively tame jump scares, but because it's Whedon, he puts comedy in the drama and drama in the comedy. Just when any other horror movie would have a scary moment, he makes you laugh more than scream.

It's basically a giant love letter to classic horror movies (it's going to take repeated viewings for me to catch all the nods and references). But it's also kind of an essay on the film industry itself (similar to Inglorious Basterds, but not on the same Oscar-worthy level). Without spoiling anything, each of the three main groups are different layers of the film industry. It's also got this amazing moment towards the end where, with literally any other movie, it would end right there, but it actually just opens up to the awesome finale.

So yes, highest recommendation. If you don't like Whedon, then this might not be for you. But I know there's a great deal of Whedon fans on this board, so I say to thee: GO SEE THIS MOVIE. NOW.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top