The Movie Thread

[Eisenwurst]

"The Fall of Babylon", a 1950s documentary on the Babylon sequences from DW Griffiths Epic Silent Movie of 1916 "Intolerance".

A Cast of Thousands, great costumes and makeup, impressive sets, and great characters - particularly "Mountain Girl" and "The Kings Bodyguard".



It helps if you're an old bastard like me who remembers the events depicted as they really happened

[Jimbuna]

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Rhodes

The sci-fy channel version of Dune I didn't see. I thought it was bad. But I read that this film was more in line with the book.

It indeed is. However, the sets are cheap, the actors are lousy, and the story unfolds like dried, frozen grease. Terribly boring. It also is all too childish, too colourful, imo. Looks like an underfunded TV production, and it probbaly was right that.

But as I said, I think the Dune novels are extremely difficult to turn into good films, Herbert's narration style just does not lend itself easily to that.

Still speaking of Dune, did you see the documentary about Jodorowsky Dune project?

No. I am completely out of touch with SciFi. Unfortunately. I was big fan in the 80s and 90s, with the classics of books easily avialable. They are now harder to get, and I am unable to diferentiate between the good and the bad authors that came from the mid-90s on. I have the complete novel collection of Philip K. Dick and Frnak herbert, however, plus most of Clarke and much of Asimov, and then many single works by the good ol' classical authors.

[Rhodes]

Yes, indeed. I did saw the sequel Children of Dune, but...meh.

I know what you mean, but Dune Lynch did have the inner monologues/thinks of the characters, and after reading the book, it kind connects well, for me.
I am reading since May of last year The Dune books, I am in the 4th one. Possible after will ready Philip K. Dick book that give Blade Runner, since never read anything of him.
Here is the trailer of documentary about Dune adaptation project by Jodorowsky. It make me wonder if he had done it, what could had represented for scifi films, etc.

[Skybird]

Blade Runner is one of those rare cases where the movie surpasses the literature it bases on in quality. The novel is not bad, but defintely not one of Dick's best ones. If you want to get started with Dick, I recommend the famous Big Threes: "The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch", "UBIK", and "The Man in the High Castle". There are other good ones from his second writing phase, which was the most fruitful in quality of his three "eras", but these three books stand out, and usually get mentioned the most often by critics and fans alike.

The Three Stigmata is really mind-twisting, its Dick at his best and most typical. The deconstruction of "reality" - or what the reader holds for it - is total and complete, mercilessly finished to the last consequence.

UBIK is beside High Castle and Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep Dick's most famous novel, Time magazine lists it as one of the 100 greatest books of the last century. Like Stigmata, it deconstructs realiuty and reflects on the nature of God, but the question of the relation between drug experiences and religion that gets a lot of time in Stigamta, is bypassed here. The end is again mindtwisting,but I found it to be less exhausting to my state of mind than Stigmata.

The Man in the High Castle is one of the most famous alternative reality/history stories ever, and it is exceptionally well written, too, features very good characterizations of the main actors, without needing much words for it. The psychic shock and horror the first two books can trigger, is left out, what you get is an intimate look into a United States that has lost the scond world war and is occupied by Nazi Germans in the East and Imperial Japanese in the West, who both have their different cultural ways to get along with the American natives. I found it pleasant to read, and this is right the reason why I like this book so much. He won the Hugo Gernsback Award for it, which is one of the two highest literature prizes for Science Fiction. Dick wrote this novel under counseling advise by the I Ging, so goes the story.

Do Androids dream is a good book taken for itself, but it looses to these three, and worse: it looses to the movie. I found it after I saw the movie, and compared, and that affected my vierw of the book,l of course. People who find the book first and then see the movie, may wonder about how both link up. Do not expect it to be "Blade Runner". This is not a "book to the movie" (novelization they call it, I think) written by Alan Dean Foster, both things relate to each other, but are not the same.

[Skybird]

Jodorowski, now that I watched your clip, I remember. Stills and draws from his project and sketches by Giger appeared in the german first edition of the Dune 4 novel, that was 1984 I think. I never liked, however, the combination of Giger's art with the world of Dune, to me the novels form very different images and visualizations in my imagination. Parts of that early work found their way into Lynch's movie, you can see the influence of Giger in some of the sets' interior deco.

[Avis30]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Yo man this ish was good!

[Dowly]

[Rhodes]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Jodorowski, now that I watched your clip, I remember. Stills and draws from his project and sketches by Giger appeared in the german first edition of the Dune 4 novel, that was 1984 I think. I never liked, however, the combination of Giger's art with the world of Dune, to me the novels form very different images and visualizations in my imagination. Parts of that early work found their way into Lynch's movie, you can see the influence of Giger in some of the sets' interior deco.

Giger, for Dune, could be good if Ix planet if was to be represented or to the Guild Machines (besides the ones portrait in the film).
But I agree, Dune has a different fell/look of Giger's main work.

And Just come up from seeing Blade Runner 2049. But will wait a few days to post my thoughts about it.

[Skybird]

Ix made it into Star Trek instead. There, Ix is called Borg.

[STEED]

Originally Posted by Rhodes

Just come up from seeing Blade Runner 2049. But will wait a few days to post my thoughts about it.

Not gone down well in America..

Blade Runner 2049 disappoints at US box office

Blade Runner 2049 has made far less than expected on its opening weekend at the US box office.
The $31.5m (£24.1m) total will be a major disappointment for distributor Warner Bros, which had projected ticket sales of between $45m and $50m.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-41546692

I will as normal will wait for three months for it to come out on DVD on the grounds of cost. Bus plus cinema comes to near on £20, nuts to that. My days going to the cinema are over any how I shall wait for your comments.

[Rhodes]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Ix made it into Star Trek instead. There, Ix is called Borg.

Eheheh

Originally Posted by STEED

Not gone down well in America..
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-41546692

I will as normal will wait for three months for it to come out on DVD on the grounds of cost. Bus plus cinema comes to near on £20, nuts to that. My days going to the cinema are over any how I shall wait for your comments.

So, like the first one, also a box office flop and we know what the film valour.
Here, Mondays and Wednesdays are the days with a promotion price at the cinemas (cheaper), one ticket is 6,05€.

[STEED]

I hear the running time is 2 hours 43 minutes that's a bit too long for my taste but I will judge it in three months time on DVD.

[Rhodes]

Yes, the movie is long, 163 minutes. They are attributing to that, plus the R rated (I even didn't know that, here it's 16+. Didn't see anything that can be attribute R to that film) and the demographic - that only people over 25 are going to the cinema to the see the film.
Well, it is not a movie that would appeal to younger viewers (with expections, of course).
Last week I went to see Kingsman: The Golden Circle. A group of kids, possible between 12-15 (+/-) was also there.
Before the film, one of the trailers was Geostorm, a upcoming disaster movie. The cgi of the trailer (and so, of the film) was so terrible and the story may be, but after it ended, their reaction was: "oh, it looks so cool".
The trailer for Blade Runner 2049 was the last one, but after it, they didn't express the same thing, or "it can be fun or interesting", etc.
It would be normal to expect that the going demographics is quite distinct.

[Rhodes]

Well, here are my thoughts of the film!

I liked, liked a lot. I enjoy it, but it is not a mind blowing experience, if someone is expecting that. Of course, that is, for me. Also, the film is quite slow, with some action in the beginning and then takes pace in starting to unravel the action, but I did'nt find it boring.
The film is very well made and filmed/shot, I enjoyed several film planes/angles. As in last film of the director, Arrival, the colour tone is very light gray, that is quite right for the continuous rainy weather of LA, as in Blade Runner, but I preferred the orange tone when the main character goes to another city.
The soundtrack is good, but I would have loved if they went more "Vangelian" in some musics.
I do not want to expose the plot, when more of you seen it, we can discuss it.
The film tries and hits to stand on its own. It is a sequel but they do present a new story with new elements.
There is, of course, a few references to first movie, but they are quite good placed. One for me was a surprise, because I was not expecting; another was foreseeable with the unavailing of the story. Also the brand products displacements are a bit in your face, but since that kind of future as does, they do blend in perfectly.
What I missed was the claustrophobic ambient of the streets, that exists in Blade Runner. They do show that in a new way,but it lacks, for me, the crowed streets environments.
The questions about life/death, are one/we alive, biological/artificial and so on, mainly focus in the replicants and the philosophical discussions about it in the first movie do have a bit of an update here, but that would be reveal a bit of the plot.
R. Gosling does a good job, with several emotional and non emotional scenes and Harrison Ford is also quite good again as an older Deckard; the support cast is also fine and Jared Leto for me was quite good in that role (not a big one, pitty).