Film forum off topic/random chat thread

p to the e

El Duda wrote: »

I'm going to see Bladerunner with a live orchestra next year. I have goosebumps already.

Went to see "Aliens" a few years back in the Borg Gáis with a live orchestra. The sound is incredible.

Tony EH

p to the e wrote: »

Went to see "Aliens" a few years back in the Borg Gais with a live orchestra. The sound is incredible.

Didn't know it got assimilated.

Niska

Blade Runner, Akira and Running Man - all set in 2019 if you're looking for a movie night theme.

(And a subplot of Akira is Tokyo struggling to build a stadium for the 2020 Olympics)

Niska

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Bit strange that it counts all Bond films but only 7 of the MCU and 5 of the X - Men films and not the rest of films in either franchises.

Definitely out of date - No Spectre in the Bond movies (though they do include Never say Never again, which is why it lists the franchise as 24 movies)

(From the Lord of the Rings section, where it lists just one Hobbit movie, data must be from 2013).

p to the e

Tony EH wrote: »

Didn't know it got assimilated.

Damn you trekkies

pixelburp

Deepfakes are getting more and more convincing; though even though this Arnie mashup of No Country For Old Men is pretty cute - some frames look 100% legit - the concerns of privacy and fake news are only going to get more real.

Wonder if it'd work as a cheaper form of de-ageing, given that's the hot tech at the moment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CO5ydSJzxLk

Tony EH

p to the e wrote: »

Damn you trekkies

May the force be with you.

That's right isn't it?

Stop moaning ffs

Tony EH wrote: »

May the force be with you.

That's right isn't it?

Last night I watched wrath of khan, search for Spock, voyage home.
There’s an inherent charm in these films and I watched those three cos I was told they’re a trilogy of sorts. Enjoyable and loads of cringe but boy do they have so many holes in them on many levels. Mainly in universe nonsensical flaws though. I almost kept notes but who has the time.

p to the e

Just what exactly is Terence Howard smoking. I've heard for years that the guy is a bit of a loon and this doesn't really help his cause.

But... what if he's right?

Dades

WTF.

Is he doing a Joachim Phoenix on it and just trolling?

WrenBoy

He's been banging on about his own version of math called "Terryology" for a while now, since 2015 anyway. He's a bit of a loon but he seems happy out.

p to the e

WrenBoy wrote: »

He's been banging on about his own version of math called "Terryology" for a while now, since 2015 anyway. He's a bit of a loon but he seems happy out.

That's what's mad about it. He isn't ranting and raving or making anybody uncomfortable. He's just being a dapper eccentric. There was also rumblings that his bizarre behaviour led to him being replaced by Don Cheadle in Iron Man. That was a hell of a loss of revenue.

The Black Oil

Here be the Michael Fassbender series no one was expecting. :cool:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBbAfDyC8f8

pixelburp

*snort* Part of me doesn't believe this is true, it sounds like something from a satire:

Harriet, the historical drama based on Tubman’s life released earlier this month, stars Cynthia Erivo. But the film’s screenwriter and producer, Gregory Allen Howard, says when he first started working on the movie in 1994 that one studio executive suggested Julia Roberts to portray the legendary slave turned abolitionist. Yes, that Julia Roberts.

In a Q&A with Allen published earlier this month by Harriet studio Focus Features (and reiterated in an L.A. Times essay published Tuesday), Allen recalled how “the climate in Hollywood … was very different” some 25 years ago.

“I was told how one studio head said in a meeting, ‘This script is fantastic. Let’s get Julia Roberts to play Harriet Tubman,'” Allen explained. “When someone pointed out that Roberts couldn’t be Harriet, the executive responded, ‘It was so long ago. No one is going to know the difference.'”

(warning, autoplay video)
https://ew.com/movies/2019/11/19/julia-roberts-harriet-tubman-studio-exec-suggestion/

p to the e

pixelburp wrote: »

*snort* Part of me doesn't believe this is true, it sounds like something from a satire:



(warning, autoplay video)
https://ew.com/movies/2019/11/19/julia-roberts-harriet-tubman-studio-exec-suggestion/

I've mentioned it before but reminds me of the time Steven Seagal wanted to play Jimi Hendrix in a biopic.

Stop moaning ffs

Hope it’s ok to ask here.
Can anyone recommend any good film podcasts that get into great films and the making of them?
Used to have one that picked a classic and spent a whole episode or sometimes two getting into the production and behind the scenes then the film itself but I can’t remember what it was called

Any recommendation appreciated.

FunLover18

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Hope it’s ok to ask here.
Can anyone recommend any good film podcasts that get into great films and the making of them?
Used to have one that picked a classic and spent a whole episode or sometimes two getting into the production and behind the scenes then the film itself but I can’t remember what it was called

Any recommendation appreciated.

Film stories with Simon Brew is a really good podcast where he gets into the production stories behind films. The only thing is that they're quite short with him covering two films usually in half hour episodes. But still, he knows his stuff and has even started his own magazine on the same topic.

Stop moaning ffs

FunLover18 wrote: »

Film stories with Simon Brew is a really good podcast where he gets into the production stories behind films. The only thing is that they're quite short with him covering two films usually in half hour episodes. But still, he knows his stuff and has even started his own magazine on the same topic.

That’s fantastic thanks I’ll look him up. Thank you!

Dades

+1 for the Film Stories podcasts.

If you're into Bond, the same guy does Smersh Pod, which looks at all the Bond movies, plus a bunch of other random movies in different episodes. (The podcast on Indy and Last Crusade is one of the funniest pods I've ever heard).

The "Now Playing" podcasts have been going for years and have in-depth analysis at all kinds of movies. (Just finished Silence of the Lambs)

Also, look out for Empire Magazine's "spoiler specials" for in-depth look at many big movies and their journey to screen. Their MI: Fallout pod is six hours long, and a real eye-opener in how a massive blockbuster can just wing it.

Stop moaning ffs

Dades wrote: »

+1 for the Film Stories podcasts.

If you're into Bond, the same guy does Smersh Pod, which looks at all the Bond movies, plus a bunch of other random movies in different episodes. (The podcast on Indy and Last Crusade is one of the funniest pods I've ever heard).

The "Now Playing" podcasts have been going for years and have in-depth analysis at all kinds of movies. (Just finished Silence of the Lambs)

Also, look out for Empire Magazine's "spoiler specials" for in-depth look at many big movies and their journey to screen. Their MI: Fallout pod is six hours long, and a real eye-opener in how a massive blockbuster can just wing it.

The middle one sounds ideal and even better if they have a huge back catalogue thanks a million!

Stop moaning ffs

Rabbit hole.

Watched raiders. Smiled my head off.

Now watching temple of doom.

Holy Vishnu you could not get away with this now. It’s mad.

** the scene with short round and Indy when they’re playing cards and willie is jumping and screaming around the fire being attacked by the forest and they can’t even hear her is just brilliant. So funny.

Dades

Yeah, the world has gone a bit 'woke' for a Hindu sect foiled by an American with the help of the British army!

FunLover18

Dades wrote: »

Yeah, the world has gone a bit 'woke' for a Hindu sect foiled by an American with the help of the British army!

I don't mean to pick on you specifically Dades, your post just highlights a trend online of people suggesting that "wokeness" is hampering storytelling which I don't understand, if anything it's having the opposite effect where lazy stereotypes are being put to bed.

EDIT: I've just realised you might have been being sarcastic.

Sad Professor

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Now watching temple of doom.

Holy Vishnu you could not get away with this now. It’s mad.

I'm not sure you could say they got away with it then either.

pixelburp

Been an actual age since I watched Doom. Apart from the super dodgy stereotyping, I seem to recall it was quite a dark, grim Jones film, in comparison to the others, with some folks putting that down to Spielberg going through a divorce at the time...

Stop moaning ffs

Sad Professor wrote: »

I'm not sure you could say they got away with it then either.

I was only ten or something so don’t remember if it caught trouble. But watching it last night I was shocked by a lot of it. It’s still a ton of fun but the stereotypes and racial stuff going on is really upfront. Doesn’t ruin the film at all I was just thinking you couldn’t do that now at all.

Sad Professor

It's dark but I also think it's the most fun and inventive of the films. Which is why it's always been my favourite.

Stop moaning ffs

Sad Professor wrote: »

It's dark but I also think it's the most fun and inventive of the films. Which is why it's always been my favourite.

Had a chat last night about Indy v Han. Which is better. It got heated

My take would be

Raiders Indy > ANH Han
Temple Doom Indy < ESB Han
Last Crusade Indy > ROTJ Han
Crystal Skull Indy < TFA Han


But then apparently Ford was asked if Solo and Jones were different.
And in classic harrison ford style he said "their clothes"

Tony EH

pixelburp wrote: »

Been an actual age since I watched Doom. Apart from the super dodgy stereotyping, I seem to recall it was quite a dark, grim Jones film, in comparison to the others, with some folks putting that down to Spielberg going through a divorce at the time...

It has this aura from some. But frankly it's a load of old pony. A few parents in America kicked up a fuss about it at the time and made a few headlines and it happened on the cusp of the PG-13 rating introduction.

'Raiders of the Lost Ark' has far more disturbing imagery than 'Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom' ever had. People's faces melt, for god's sake. How Mr. Playmount ever got that movie passed as a PG remains one of the wonders of the world.

p to the e

Tony EH wrote: »

It has this aura from some. But frankly it's a load of old pony. A few parents in America kicked up a fuss about it at the time and made a few headlines and it happened on the cusp of the PG-13 rating introduction.

'Raiders of the Lost Ark' has far more disturbing imagery than 'Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom' ever had. People's faces melt, for god's sake. How Mr. Playmount ever got that movie passed as a PG remains one of the wonders of the world.

Didn't someone's heart get pulled out of their chest?