Dodd wrote:

DreamyEyes wrote: Extra True.

fixed

fixed

Redsmile wrote:Blade Runner is overrated. Opinion.

I fixed it for you.

BlairCo wrote:

Redsmile wrote:Blade Runner is a brilliant exercise in atmosphere, characterisation and thematic concepts more than it is in actual storytelling. Opinion.

I fixed it for you.

Once more.

ryan4butler wrote:QoS is underrated.

Dodd wrote:Lethal Weapon 4 is the best Lethal Weapon movie.

+1

ArmandFancypants wrote:Lee's Hulk is a very interesting film, quite ambitious in a lot of ways. I don't think it works, but it's streets ahead of Letterier's risible effort.

Well said. IMO, the choice of Lee to direct Hulk was an odd one, but I'm tottally on board with the concept of hiring a director that's not the obvious choice for a genre movie. Overall, I also don't think the movie works, being my main issue the split screen in comics-like pannels (a cheap idea that I first saw back in 1982, in Wes Craven's adaptation of Swamp Thing - it didn't work back then, and it still doesn't work in Hulk). Anyway, Lee's approach is more interesting, the cast is solid, and Elfman does a good job on the score.

I might have already said this in this thread, but here's something that causes me to get things thrown at me by my friends: I like Singer's Superman film more than Donner's.

I can't agree with that. My views regarding Superman 78 may be a bit personal but then again (though the film may feel kinda "campy" today), there's a few aspects that I feel are still worth a lot of credit today: Back then, I dare say that the movie was innovative in a lot of ways while maintaining its appeal to a wide audience. The concept of a comic book character in a big budget production with amazing visuals (for that time) and including Marlon Brando, Gene Hackman, Glenn Ford and Terence Stamp in the cast (and of course, also worth mentioning is the legacy of Christopher Reeves - an eternal Superman), was very bold to say the least. That being said, (though the franchise died with the sequels) I believe the movie opened the door to a kind of "serious", mainstream approach to the genre. As a kid, it was one of my best experiences in a movie theater (and I'm not really a big Superman fan). But I guess most of all (and here I would love to read your opinion, Armand) John William's score is one of the main factors of my love for the movie. IMO, it's one of his best works ever, and I remember an interview where Singer said that the score was one of the main reasons why he wanted to take a shot at Superman.

Though I enjoyed Superman Returns (a very well crafted production), I can't say it has achieved the same emotional effect on me as Donner's. It has some great moments, but they were mostly the ones that pay homage to Donner's (the moment when Superman comes out of the plane in the baseball field and the whole world cheers with William's music, gave me goosebumps). To be tottally honest, I thought it was kinda boring (plot and cast wise). It felt like they gave Singer all the liberty he wanted and that resulted in an "auteur" Superman film (an "arthouse" Superman if you will), original, daring, but not exciting.

dadosaboya wrote:

ArmandFancypants wrote:Lee's Hulk is a very interesting film, quite ambitious in a lot of ways. I don't think it works, but it's streets ahead of Letterier's risible effort.

Well said. IMO, the choice of Lee to direct Hulk was an odd one, but I'm tottally on board with the concept of hiring a director that's not the obvious choice for a genre movie. Overall, I also don't think the movie works, being my main issue the split screen in comics-like pannels (a cheap idea that I first saw back in 1982, in Wes Craven's adaptation of Swamp Thing - it didn't work back then, and it still doesn't work in Hulk). Anyway, Lee's approach is more interesting, the cast is solid, and Elfman does a good job on the score.

I always say that - Ang Lee's Hulk is waay underrated. Letterier's effort is simply an abomination.

m4st4 wrote: Letterier's effort is simply an abomination.

I see what you did there.

dadosaboya wrote:Well said. IMO, the choice of Lee to direct Hulk was an odd one, but I'm tottally on board with the concept of hiring a director that's not the obvious choice for a genre movie. Overall, I also don't think the movie works, being my main issue the split screen in comics-like pannels (a cheap idea that I first saw back in 1982, in Wes Craven's adaptation of Swamp Thing - it didn't work back then, and it still doesn't work in Hulk). Anyway, Lee's approach is more interesting, the cast is solid, and Elfman does a good job on the score.

The problem with the split screen is not only that it looks cheap (and sometimes in an unintentionally hilarious way, like when Talbot dies and the screen freezes I've see cartoons less egregious than that), in my opinion it resides in the fact that it's very distracting. I would have minded that during an action sequence, when maybe there are lots of things to look in the screen, but you see Banner preparing the Gamma Machine and it looks like they are two guys and a girl across the world hacking into the Pentagon.

dadosaboya wrote:But I guess most of all (and here I would love to read your opinion, Armand) John William's score is one of the main factors of my love for the movie. IMO, it's one of his best works ever, and I remember an interview where Singer said that the score was one of the main reasons why he wanted to take a shot at Superman.

The thing about the Superman theme is that it trascended the franchise itself and became iconically and intrensically connected with the character. When I see Superman, what comes into my mind is him doing his magic along with that music. Not only suits the character perfectly but it enhances it, I bet they could make Superman writing an articl look epic if they accompanied such an scene with this music. Personally I'm quite upset they're not even referencing it in the reboot.

dadosaboya wrote:Though I enjoyed Superman Returns (a very well crafted production), I can't say it has achieved the same emotional effect on me as Donner's. It has some great moments, but they were mostly the ones that pay homage to Donner's (the moment when Superman comes out of the plane in the baseball field and the whole world cheers with William's music, gave me goosebumps). To be tottally honest, I thought it was kinda boring (plot and cast wise). It felt like they gave Singer all the liberty he wanted and that resulted in an "auteur" Superman film (an "arthouse" Superman if you will), original, daring, but not exciting.

My problem with Returns is that it tried to much to be an homage for the original franchise, instead of trying to be it's own film. I have no problem with self-referencing (it produced one of my favorite scenes in this movie), but the plot was to similar, Rough was casted because he looked like Reeve more than anything else...

m4st4 wrote:I always say that - Ang Lee's Hulk is waay underrated. Letterier's effort is simply an abomination.

I see what you did there.

Personally, I don't think it's that bad because for me Norton was amzing and kinda saved it and set it just above watchable. But it's true that it was a smashfest.

Apparently, Universal was afraid that Lee's 'too talky' approach would hurt the box-office again so they took the cuting scissors on the editing room. This summer I watched a rough cut of the original 'Norton' version (it basically has a darker opening and more scenes with characterization and Norton) with it's deleted footage (it's about 40 minutes longer if I recall correctly) and it's quite interesting (although it's obviously unfinished, just shows it had potential to be good).

didich wrote:The problem with the split screen is not only that it looks cheap (and sometimes in an unintentionally hilarious way, like when Talbot dies and the screen freezes I've see cartoons less egregious than that), in my opinion it resides in the fact that it's very distracting. I would have minded that during an action sequence, when maybe there are lots of things to look in the screen, but you see Banner preparing the Gamma Machine and it looks like they are two guys and a girl across the world hacking into the Pentagon.

The split screen language can (and has been) used successfully and elegantly in other films of different genres. That I can recall now, Woodstock (1970) and Grand Prix (1966) make excellent use of it. The thing here is that, obviously, it's used in a attempt to make some kind of connection with the comics media, and IMO, that's an old and cheap shot.

The thing about the Superman theme is that it trascended the franchise itself and became iconically and intrensically connected with the character. When I see Superman, what comes into my mind is him doing his magic along with that music. Not only suits the character perfectly but it enhances it, I bet they could make Superman writing an articl look epic if they accompanied such an scene with this music.

Yes, William's Superman theme has become iconic, but I was reffering to the whole soundtrack. The music of the first act is simply masterful. Following the main theme, we have such amazing music like "The Planet Krypton", "Destruction of Krypton", "The Trip to Earth", "Growing Up", "Leaving Home" and "The Fortress of Solitude". These tracks alone (plus the "Love Theme From Superman") make this, a classic soundtrack.

Personally I'm quite upset they're not even referencing it in the reboot.

To be honest, I'm not. Singer already did it, so I think it's time for something new.

My problem with Returns is that it tried to much to be an homage for the original franchise, instead of trying to be it's own film. I have no problem with self-referencing (it produced one of my favorite scenes in this movie), but the plot was to similar

I guess it tried to be both (an homage to the original and it's own film at the same time) and it kinda failed.