Kuetsar Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Wesley Snipes is so good in Passenger 57 he should have gotten a pass on paying taxes for the rest of his life anyway. Is that controversial? Because that's what I secretly believe. He clearly did. . . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Posted October 17, 2014 Author Share Posted October 17, 2014 Snipes had to go to jail for his, er, tax problems. Cage just has to make one rotten movie after another for the rest of life. Yeah, I know jail is bad and all, but I can't help but feel Wesley got the better deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuetsar Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Snipes had to go to jail for his, er, tax problems. Cage just has to make one rotten movie after another for the rest of life. Yeah, I know jail is bad and all, but I can't help but feel Wesley got the better deal. Well even real shitty movies can pay residuals, and you don't have to worry about dropping the soap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingus Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 I doubt that Snipes had much to worry about in the shower. Celebrities tend to get treated like royalty in prison. Add in the fact that this is fuckin' Blade we're talking about and he was put in jail by The Man on charges which most criminals would probably feel are total bullshit, I'd bet that Snipes was likely seen by even the hardest cases as being the folk hero of his cell block. If anyone tried to lay a hand on him (even if Wesley couldn't just kick their ass himself) they probably would be found dead the next day, with the official record showing that they'd committed suicide by shanking themselves fifty-seven times in the back. After watching Armageddon for the millionth time, I fail to see why it's so reviled. Michael Bay's signature style of jiggling the camera around, editing like a particularly hyperactive music video, and making all the sound mix REALLY LOUD. Lots of bad performances from a not-bad cast (Liv Tyler isn't a bad actress at all, compare her to Kristen Stewart for example; she's just not a great one). Plenty of terrible groan-inducing lines of dialogue. An egregious misunderstanding of the laws of physics which isn't merely insulting our intelligence, it's calling our intelligence's mother a filthy fucking whore. The incredibly dumb assumption that it makes more sense to train oil drillers how to fly a spaceship rather than teaching astronauts how to operate a drill. A compulsive obsession with blowing up everything. An overdose of needless subplots and contrived conflicts which drag the film to a punishingly long running time. And finally, the fact that when it was released we'd just seen all the exact same shit done better in Deep Impact. Frankly, what is there to like about Armageddon? It's tiresomely big, long, stupid, and loud even by the standards of an action flick. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Magnificent 7 Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Controversial opinion - The Connery Bond movies dont hold up today. They get by on pure nostalgia rather than being actually good. Please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fowler Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 FRWL is such a great movie, you are insane. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twiztor Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 The Connery Bond movies dont hold up today. They get by on pure nostalgia rather than being actually good. they're good movies but ConneryBond forcing himself on women is just wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Posted October 18, 2014 Author Share Posted October 18, 2014 Breakfast at Tiffany's is fucking awful. The racism alone is enough to detest it. And the (now repentant) filmmakers' dismissal of "Well, OK, if you just leave out that part..." Well, you can't. Because it's so hateful. And even in the time it was made, it was hateful. It was 1961, not the frigging stone ages. Besides, the romance storyline isn't even that compelling or interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingus Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Yeah, he straight-up raped Pussy Galore in Goldfinger (although that one almost feels like a sly, bitter self-parody of its own series if you watch it in a certain frame of mind) and there were probably other examples I've forgotten. There's a LOT of really, really hardcore misogyny and racism in many of those Connery Bond flicks. The early series is still highly regarded now mostly to a combination of colorful lead characters, still-admirable sensory craftsmanship with the visuals and soundtracks, and rose-colored nostalgia. A lot of the early Bonds are also really damn slow, too, even by the standards of the time; compare how tightly paced something like North By Northwest is in comparison. I still like them (well, not Thunderball and REALLY not Diamonds Are Forever), but they certainly fit into the category of "guilty pleasure". Armageddon > Deep Impact. By a long, long, long way. Why? Deep Impact had a much smarter script, better acting, and was just all-around a more elegant piece of filmmaking. The cast wasn't quite so much an unbelievable Who's-Who as Armageddon boasted, admittedly, but DI was still working with a pretty deep bench of talent: on the IMDB cast list, you gotta go like thirty names down before you hit Kurtwood Smith and Denise Crosby in tiny parts. And it was 31 minutes shorter, too (I have no idea why Michael Bay keeps insisting on these punishingly long running times for all his movies). It had less action than Armageddon, yeah, but that movie's action was so bombastic and shaky-cam and strobe-light-edited that it was nearly unwatchable. I'm getting tired of constantly repeating "it's okay if you disagree with me, just please put a little effort into explaining the reasons behind your dissenting opinions" only to have people keep dropping their "you're wrong, Movie X sucked" bombs. Keep that shit on Twitter where it belongs. Why do you come to a communication forum which is capable of wonderfully in-depth discussion and then actively avoid saying anything but the briefest summary of your opinion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Sorrow Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Yeah, he straight-up raped Pussy Galore in Goldfinger (although that one almost feels like a sly, bitter self-parody of its own series if you watch it in a certain frame of mind) and there were probably other examples I've forgotten. There's a LOT of really, really hardcore misogyny and racism in many of those Connery Bond flicks. The early series is still highly regarded now mostly to a combination of colorful lead characters, still-admirable sensory craftsmanship with the visuals and soundtracks, and rose-colored nostalgia. A lot of the early Bonds are also really damn slow, too, even by the standards of the time; compare how tightly paced something like North By Northwest is in comparison. I still like them (well, not Thunderball and REALLY not Diamonds Are Forever), but they certainly fit into the category of "guilty pleasure". Armageddon > Deep Impact. By a long, long, long way. Why? Deep Impact had a much smarter script, better acting, and was just all-around a more elegant piece of filmmaking. The cast wasn't quite so much an unbelievable Who's-Who as Armageddon boasted, admittedly, but DI was still working with a pretty deep bench of talent: on the IMDB cast list, you gotta go like thirty names down before you hit Kurtwood Smith and Denise Crosby in tiny parts. And it was 31 minutes shorter, too (I have no idea why Michael Bay keeps insisting on these punishingly long running times for all his movies). It had less action than Armageddon, yeah, but that movie's action was so bombastic and shaky-cam and strobe-light-edited that it was nearly unwatchable. I'm getting tired of constantly repeating "it's okay if you disagree with me, just please put a little effort into explaining the reasons behind your dissenting opinions" only to have people keep dropping their "you're wrong, Movie X sucked" bombs. Keep that shit on Twitter where it belongs. Why do you come to a communication forum which is capable of wonderfully in-depth discussion and then actively avoid saying anything but the briefest summary of your opinion? Because. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwoy2j Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Controversial opinion--ConAir is one of the best action movies of the 90's. If you ignore Nicolas Cage's ridiculous accent, it's great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niners Fan in CT Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 That wouldn't have been a controversial opinion around these parts. I still love Face/Off though. It's stupid as hell but it's a damn fine piece of action. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiller Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Which movie is the best out of Con-Air, Face/Off, and The Rock? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muhammedboehm Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 The Rock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I love Face/Off. But The Rock is definitely better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fowler Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Face/Off by a huge margin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niners Fan in CT Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I can't really choose between The Rock and Face/Off. Gun to my head I want to say The Rock because of Connery's "prom queen" line, William Forsythe and the crazy good performance from Ed Harris. A complex villain? no way.. Vanessa Marcil is just... forget about it.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elsalvajeloco Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I have to show underdog support and go with Con Air just because of Malkovich's performance alone. It seriously rivals his performance in In the Line of Fire. Just brutal and nonchalant. Pinball: You didn't mean that dirty-n***** crackhead shit, did you? Cyrus the Virus: Hell yes, I meant it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingus Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Face/Off by a huge margin. Ditto. This is easily John Woo's best American film, and frankly one of his better films overall. It had a lot of serious emotional drama underneath all the explosions and overacting, and it was beautifully shot, cut, and scored. John Woo's better than Simon West any day, and John Woo's better than Michael Bay EVERY day, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niners Fan in CT Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 See I think The Rock actually had more emotional drama. The duel between Ed Harris and Navy SEAL Team Leader is awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brandonr4s Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 John Belushi didn't make me laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Belushi made me laugh, but Farley didn't. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Posted October 19, 2014 Author Share Posted October 19, 2014 Robert Downey Jr isn't a very good Sherlock Holmes. It's not that he's not trying, or that his delivery is bad or anything...it's just, well, he might be so famous now he can't really play anything but Tony Stark/version of himself. I don't buy him in the role. IMO, Jude Law as John Watson and Stephen Fry as Mycroft is great casting though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odessasteps Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 The Rock, if you choose to follow the premise it's an old James Bond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niners Fan in CT Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 Might as well stay controversial and throw out the idea that Under Siege might actually be better than Con Air as well. I don't mean to pile on Con Air but Casey fucking Ryback, come on! I can't get over how awesome Busey and Jones are in their roles. It's so entertaining. The Last Boy Scout is the best action movie of the 90's though. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now