Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

What DVD / Video did you watch last night? (pt3)

Creed

Sly Stallone is in it as the trainer but it follows the rise of Appollo Creed's son in the boxing world. Pretty by the numbers fayre but everyone gives it good guns. Nice to see an american boxing film acknowledge that british boxers exist and are the best in the world also
 
several Justice League films. Total visual bubblegum as 90% of DC animation is (you do get the odd bit of quality 'Under The Red Hood' for eg). What struck me over and over is what a mardy prick superman is in the JLA films. You an almost forgive snyders interpretation of the character if he was going on the JLA cartoons.
 
Oblivion.

Visually quite interesting with very clear references to earlier films but let down by a very thin plot with little real dramatic substance or impact.
 
Hu-Man (1975) - scientists organize a TV broadcast where that put an actor in dangerous circumstances and harness the watching viewers emotions which they then use that to send him into the future. There's not much of a plot & not much science fiction, its mostly an excuse to send Terence Stamp to various interesting outdoor locations and have him run about. Not great but it's visuals, a groovy looking long haired Stamp and electronic soundtrack had enough to keep me watching.
 
Dragon Blade (2015) - has all the ingredients of a laughably enjoyable piece of rubbish (Ancient Romans meet Early Chinese on the Silk Road for a punchup? Jackie Chan? John Cusack? Massively overpaid Hollywood stars just slumming it for the travel? I'm in!) but it just doesn't work on any level. It's not bad enough to be entertainingly camp (even Adrien Brody affecting a cod-English Depraved Aristocrat accent and flowing hair doesn't go far enough), it leaps about in time and place for no reason at all, the 'humour' is painfully weak and the 'cute kid' character is so grating you wish they'd strangled him at birth. There's not enough myth or magic - no dragons, unfeasibly long eyebrows or vengeful hermaphrodites. It has all of the rubbishness of Shaw Brothers / Golden Harvest / other cult HK cinema but without any of the bonkers folksy charm.

You may or may not be surprised to know that there is no Actual History in this at all; it groans under the weight of every possible variety of anachronism (technological, cultural, linguistic) and none of them are deliberate. The only thing at all which is genuinely interesting, is the insight it gives you into current Chinese perceptions of what Westerners might be good for. In this bizarre parallel universe, the Chinese find the Roman centurions hairy, shouty and only a little bit good at fighting, but by gum they can draw up a construction plan, do great maths, and get a fortress stronghold built in a fortnight - useful little barbarians that they are. The ironic reversal was almost definitely not intended. (There are amaaaazingly long animated sequences of all the gears and cogs and stuff.)

Spot the crudely-stitched in "message for Xinjiang" propaganda ("Here in Silk Road we are 36 nations, we must cooperate and love each other to keep safe!") as well. Also, the Romans burst out into patriotic song - in Latin! - leaving the proto-Chinese characters impressed by their teary-eyed nationalist karaoke. PROJECTION MUCH?
 
Last edited:
trabuquera said:
Dragon Blade (2015) - has all the ingredients of a laughably enjoyable piece of rubbish (Ancient Romans meet Early Chinese on the Silk Road for a punchup? Jackie Chan? John Cusack? Massively overpaid Hollywood stars just slumming it for the travel? I'm in!) but it just doesn't work on any level. It's not bad enough to be entertainingly camp (even Adrien Brody affecting a cod-English Depraved Aristocrat accent and flowing hair doesn't go far enough), it leaps about in time and place for no reason at all, the 'humour' is painfully weak and the 'cute kid' character is so grating you wish they'd strangled him at birth. There's not enough myth or magic - no dragons, unfeasibly long eyebrows or vengeful hermaphrodites. It has all of the rubbishness of Shaw Brothers / Golden Harvest / other cult HK cinema but without any of the bonkers folksy charm.

You may or may not be surprised to know that there is no Actual History in this at all; it groans under the weight of every possible variety of anachronism (technological, cultural, linguistic) and none of them are deliberate. The only thing at all which is genuinely interesting, is the insight it gives you into current Chinese perceptions of what Westerners might be good for. In this bizarre parallel universe, the Chinese find the Roman centurions hairy, shouty and only a little bit good at fighting, but by gum they can draw up a construction plan, do great maths, and get a fortress stronghold built in a fortnight - useful little barbarians that they are. The ironic reversal was almost definitely not intended. (also, the Romans burst out into patriotic song - in Latin! - leaving the Chinese characters impressed by their teary-eyed nationalist karaoke. PROJECTION MUCH?)
Click to expand...
:D its a great film to watch mad high. The warrior dance off. Jackie Chans suprisingly good singing voice doing a few numbers :D
 
trabuquera said:
Dragon Blade (2015) - has all the ingredients of a laughably enjoyable piece of rubbish (Ancient Romans meet Early Chinese on the Silk Road for a punchup? Jackie Chan? John Cusack? Massively overpaid Hollywood stars just slumming it for the travel? I'm in!) but it just doesn't work on any level. It's not bad enough to be entertainingly camp (even Adrien Brody affecting a cod-English Depraved Aristocrat accent and flowing hair doesn't go far enough), it leaps about in time and place for no reason at all, the 'humour' is painfully weak and the 'cute kid' character is so grating you wish they'd strangled him at birth. There's not enough myth or magic - no dragons, unfeasibly long eyebrows or vengeful hermaphrodites. It has all of the rubbishness of Shaw Brothers / Golden Harvest / other cult HK cinema but without any of the bonkers folksy charm.

You may or may not be surprised to know that there is no Actual History in this at all; it groans under the weight of every possible variety of anachronism (technological, cultural, linguistic) and none of them are deliberate. The only thing at all which is genuinely interesting, is the insight it gives you into current Chinese perceptions of what Westerners might be good for. In this bizarre parallel universe, the Chinese find the Roman centurions hairy, shouty and only a little bit good at fighting, but by gum they can draw up a construction plan, do great maths, and get a fortress stronghold built in a fortnight - useful little barbarians that they are. The ironic reversal was almost definitely not intended. (There are amaaaazingly long animated sequences of all the gears and cogs and stuff.)

Spot the crudely-stitched in "message for Xinjiang" propaganda ("Here in Silk Road we are 36 nations, we must cooperate and love each other to keep safe!") as well. Also, the Romans burst out into patriotic song - in Latin! - leaving the proto-Chinese characters impressed by their teary-eyed nationalist karaoke. PROJECTION MUCH?
Click to expand...
This sounds great. Is it on DVD? And as your last paragraph implies, is it a PRC production?
 
Saw it on Netflix Idris2002. Make sure you take lots and lots and LOTS of drink / drugs / mind-altering substances before you start.
About the money, wiki says "The film was shot with a budget of US$65 million ... financed by Sparkle Roll Media Corporation, Huayi Brothers Media Corporation, Shanghai Film Group, Home Media & Entertainment Fund, Tencent Video and the Beijing Cultural Assets Chinese Film and Television Fund..."

so I think a completely opaque mix of any spare cash Jackie Chan has lying around that needs accounting for, a bit of PRC government slush and who knows what else.
 
DotCommunist said:
Creed

Sly Stallone is in it as the trainer but it follows the rise of Appollo Creed's son in the boxing world. Pretty by the numbers fayre but everyone gives it good guns. Nice to see an american boxing film acknowledge that british boxers exist and are the best in the world also
Click to expand...
Better than I expected.
 
Funny Girl - Barbara Streisand musical from 1968 based on the rise of Fanny Brice from the NYC tenements to the toast of the stage under the tutelage of Florenz Ziegfield. Marvellous.

Stranger Things - Season 1. Immensely enjoyable.
 
krtek a houby said:
Funny Girl - Barbara Streisand musical from 1968 based on the rise of Fanny Brice from the NYC tenements to the toast of the stage under the tutelage of Florenz Ziegfield. Marvellous.
Click to expand...

I revisited this recently because I went to see the stage show. I think the first half is great when its all about Babs. Once the plot shifts to her romance with a miscast and extremely wooden Omar Sharif, the ooompf goes out of the film.
 
Reno said:
I revisited this recently because I went to see the stage show. I think the first half is great when its all about Babs. Once the plot shifts to her romance with a miscast and extremely wooden Omar Sharif, the ooompf goes out of the film.
Click to expand...

You think? I loved them both but I could see the outcome, despite knowing nothing about the real story. It's alright but I prefer Hello Dolly :D
 
Blind Husbands (1919), Enjoyable early entry from director Erich von Stroheim into the German "mountain film" genre, an army Leitenant (von Stroheim) trys it on with the wife of an American Dr. while they are on a climbing holiday in the Alps.
 
Last edited:
Anomalisa, Charlie Kaufmann's stop frame animated midlife crisis drama. Beautifully observed and animated, typically idiosyncratic and meta, but I can see why this wasn't a crowd pleaser. It's a bit of a downer. I enjoyed how perverse it was to recreate the most mundane of environments and situations on elaborately detailed miniature sets. The film mostly takes place in an anonymous hotel and conference centre. There is a long sex scene which unlike the one in Team America, doesn't get played for laughs. The fact that it's performed by puppets oddly enough makes it more human and and the characters appear more vulnerable.

 
Last edited:
trabuquera said:
Saw it on Netflix Idris2002. Make sure you take lots and lots and LOTS of drink / drugs / mind-altering substances before you start.
About the money, wiki says "The film was shot with a budget of US$65 million ... financed by Sparkle Roll Media Corporation, Huayi Brothers Media Corporation, Shanghai Film Group, Home Media & Entertainment Fund, Tencent Video and the Beijing Cultural Assets Chinese Film and Television Fund..."

so I think a completely opaque mix of any spare cash Jackie Chan has lying around that needs accounting for, a bit of PRC government slush and who knows what else.
Click to expand...

"...Dragon Blade is a hot mess and a spectacular misfire, not just by its star but also by its director, and if anything, further confirms that the once-promising careers of Hollywood stars John Cusack and Adrien Brody are going the way of Nicolas Cage."

Harsh :D
 
My Stranger Things withdrawal inspired me to watch Super 8 again and that lead to more JJ Abrams produced monster mayhem, so I also rewatched 10 Cloverfield Lane and then Cloverfield.

I still enjoyed them all. Super 8 is spot on in recreating that vintage Spielberg magic, but it also works on its own terms because the writing and acting is great. In the 70s and early 80s Spielberg was my biggest hero, but now I don't connect with what he does at all anymore, so it's now up to others to make films which still feel like Spielberg.

10 Cloverfield Lane is one of the few decent Hollywood films I've seen recently. Many people don't seem to like the genre hopping lasts 15 minutes but I think the ending is great.
Usually someone would escape from a nutcase conspiracy theorist and find that they just told a pack of lies but the joke is that the truth is so much more extreme than any conspiracy nut could have imagined. Mary Elizabeth Winstead always makes for a great heroine and the point of the ending is her story arc. Having to deal with and outwit a survivalist psycho prepares her for the alien invasion she finds outside and it has turned her into an efficient survivalist herself. A woman who appears emotionally fragile at the start, is ready to kick alien ass by the end of the film.

I still enjoyed Cloverfield and was checking what the links between the two films are, but there aren't really any, are there ? Cloverfield doesn't feel as fresh as it did at the time as the found footage thing has been done to death since then. Cloverfield wasn't the first found footage genre film, but it was the first to apply major Hollywood production values and that worked because these type of horror films are usually made because they are easy to produce on next to no budget. So when Cloverfield goes epic in its destruction, the you-are-really-there quality of the lo-fi way of shooting really puts you there. It's also a great New York movie, its monster apocalypse has a sense of place as it was shot from a street level POV on location. Roland Emmerich's disaster films and all these Marvel city destructions always look like their locations have been created on sound stages and in CGI, but the Manhatten of Cloverfield looks like the city I know. I love touches like that empty horse drawn Central Park carriage against a keeling high rise.
 
Last edited:
I really enjoyed 10 Cloverfield Lane. I think there's an opportunity to build a franchise out of completely discinnected tales which exist in that post invasion universe which never have to rely on returning characters or continuing a narrative or a time line.
 
Nanker Phelge said:
I don't recall it being acceptable even then...
Click to expand...
I was being flippant. I remember going to see the film with a friend when it came out and we couldn't believe what a pile of shit and a subtext minefield it was. Now I read all over the internet that apparently it's a classic. It's usually the same people who claim that The Goonies and Shawshank Redemption are cinematic masterpieces.
 
I did enjoy it at the cinema, but never seen it since.

I hate shawshank.

I really disliked Goonies when it came out, but my son got into it as a child and watched it a few times. It's a weak and disjointed bit of fun. He loved it cos it had the indiana jones kid in it. He loved Indiana jones, the princess bride, star wars and stand by me...and the outsiders. At one point, around 10, he wanted nothing more than to be a cross between river pheonix in stand by me and c thomas howell in the outsiders.

He confused his secondary school teachers with his film, literature and music references.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

DaveCinzano
What films are currently on your TO WATCH list?
2 3
Replies
63
Views
3K
krtek a houby
krtek a houby
Eivets Rednow
What gives you writing inspiration/energy?
Replies
4
Views
130
Eivets Rednow
Eivets Rednow
N
Last time you shouted at TV?
2
Replies
30
Views
910
T & P
T & P
savoloysam
Is it OK to watch Al Pacino after 11PM?
2
Replies
31
Views
852
editor
editor
trashpony
What should I download to watch on a loooooong train journey?
2 3
Replies
69
Views
2K
trashpony
trashpony
Back
Top Bottom