Not only my favorite sports film ever, but also one of the greatest comedies, and best movies ever, period. The film is astonishingly good, and represents everything great about George Roy Hill's talents as a director. Yes, it's a masterpiece of a comedy, with brilliant and unforgettable characters and performances. However, it's also a nearly perfect representation of small town life, its denizens, and the road trips and personalities of a sports team, all done with exceptional humor and outstanding editing and pacing. As with all George Roy Hill films, you can sit back and enjoy it as a wonderful comedy. However, without ever being pretentious, it's an astonishingly deep, realistic drama about growing old and the drudgery of the small-time. Also, it has possibly the greatest opening scene to a movie ever. (Edit-Which I had in my favorites, but has now been blocked by fucking NBC) Seriously, I can't say enough good things about the film. Anyone who hasn't seen it is doing themselves a disservice.
I just watched Tucker and Dale vs. Evil and laughed my fucking ass off. It's a comedy/horror in the vein of Shaun of the Dead. Watch it on Netflix immediately.
+1 The moment I knew I was gonna get along with my girl is when she asked if I had seen this movie. So good.
Layer Cake (2004) I just watched this flick for the first time the other night and I was surprised how entertaining it was. It's a great crime saga about a London mid-level cocaine trafficker (Daniel Craig, who is excellent) who always upholds caution and a low profile who finds himself fucked over six ways from sunday the day before he plans on retiring comftorably. Then he must scramble quickly using every resource he has left. The movie is fast, interesting, quirky and very funny-- directed with brio by Matthew Vaughn, and peppered with a peerless British cast. Colm Meany is dynamic as a feared hood, and Tom Hardy has a good small role as one of Craig's associates, and Sienna Miller, Jesus Christ she re-wrote the book on sultry-hot in this. In fact, there are no weak players in this film. Also, the soundtrack and music score is fantastic (I'll never think of Duran Duran the same way again) However, the film gels so well thanks to fanatastic and hilarious dialogue, a serpentine and unpredictable plot, and a great way the characters really make you believe they have known each other for years. There's also a menacing aura of suspense thoughout, despite the black humour trappings. Only complaints: it treads a familiar pattern seen in other films, and the very final scene I could have done without completely. Other than that, I will soon own this film. One I could watch multiple times. 8/10
About a month ago, I decided to watch a heartwarming Danish animated film with my girlfriend! Princess (2006) "Princess", a top Danish pornstar, dies of a drug overdose at 29, leaving her 4 year-old daughter Mia to the care of her older brother August, who leaves the priesthood to adopt her. In addition to the painful memories that both have suffered, everywhere August turns, he sees evidence of Mia's mother's career in porn. Finally, August can take no more, and decides to change this. And that's when things get REALLY fucked-up... This is one of the most stylish films ever. While the present-day action is done in a gritty-looking animation, August's memories are live action footage, with the two blending together perfectly. The surrealist scenes with the stuffed bunny rabbit "Multi", the dreams of the beach, and August's haunted suffering are all tantalizingly beautiful. And I have to single out the montage of people August guns down in the diner as one of the coolest scenes I have ever seen. Brutal violence and fucked-up tragedy, with just the right touch of humor mixed in. An all-time great picture. 80/100 Cool trailer; Spoiler
Die Hard(1988) Infinitely imitated but never equalled slam-bang actioner changed the Hollywood formula, shucking the one-man-army plots setting: of film past and giving us John McClane, an ordinary, profane, chain-smoking cop trapped in a skyscraper with a dozen murderous thieves. The cat-and-mouse between Bruce Willis and Alan Rickman plays off beautifully, with fantastic special effects from Richard Edlund directed by searing intensity by John McTiernan. Possibly the best American action film ever made, the one and only complaint is that it has too many irritatingly stupid supporting characters. 9/10 Die Hard 2 (1990) Every bit as entertaining as the first, the action is turned up to James Bond-level as Willis fights home-grown terrorist trying to spring a Noreaga-like general from an Airport. Stunts and action galore, with a much colder and nastier edge than the first (and even more violent) but non-stop entertainment. Logic and motivation take a back seat, but nobody will care once the thrill ride gets going. 9/10 Die Hard with a Vengeance (1995) Formula changes gears to a less claustrophobic setting: on location in New York City, teaming McClane with a hostile Harlem shopkeeper (Samuel L. Jackson) and throwing in the tired "brother wants revenge" plot device. That doesn't matter, since this high-tech saturday matinee never stops from that incredible opening explosion to the end at... at a Quebec truck stop. Throws in everything but the kitchen sink for the sake of an entertaining show. 8/10
Live Free or Die Hard aka Die Hard 4.0 (2007) Unnecessary fourth chapter has a now bald McClane basically trying to save America from high-tech computer masterminds (lead by Timothy Olyphant in a thankless, charisma-free performance). Making the theatrical version of this PG-13 was a catatrophic mistake, but the action scenes are confidently directed by Len Wiseman, known for directing the first two boring Underworld movies. That aside, the dorky and obnoxious characters played by Justin Long and Kevin Smith stink up this series entirely, and throwing McClane's daughter into the mix is contrived to say the least. Still lots of fun to watch, with a couple of climaxes too many. PG-13 version: 4/10 R version: 6.5/10 It's funny how three of the four films in this series are actually based on novels: Die Hard- Nothing Lasts Forever by Roderick Thorpe Die hard 2- 58 Minutes by Walter Wager (author of Mission: Impossible and I Spy) Die Hard 4- A Farwell To Arms (!?!!!)
I think he did two too many. 2 and 4 do not exist in the same universe as 1 and 3. Two was over the top Renny Harlin vehicle. Four was an outright abortion. My question is, and maybe a good thread topic. Which movie is the better action flick, Die Hard 1 or Terminator 2? Thus being the best action film of all time.
Terminator 2. Neither is the absolute best ever, but Terminator 2 is definitely in the discussion, as well as being a true masterpiece. (Die Hard is an excellent film, too.) The difference for me was that Die Hard was essentially a Westernized version of a very good 80's Hong Kong cop/gangster film. Better in some ways (acting and characters), worse in others (violence and action), but not original. Terminator 2 was something completely original that no one had ever done up until then, and which hundreds of films have tried to (poorly) imitate afterwards. By the way Crown, I like Die Hard 2 and think it gets more flack than it deserves, but even I wouldn't go so far as calling it as good as the original.
Terminator 2 is my all-time favorite movie, so I'm probably naturally biased towards that one. But as KIMaster pointed out, it was way ahead of its time. Even the action scenes and CGI are still one-of-kind and hold up well over 20 years later. Forget Titantic, I still think T2 is James Camerons masterpiece. The crowning achievement of that movie isn't the story or even the action though, it's the character relationships and it's not only something the subsequent Terminator movies missed, but 95% of all movies miss.
I'll also mention that while T2 is an incredible masterpiece, I actually prefer the original Terminator by a little bit. The latter was an absolutely perfect movie for its particular genre and style.
I think the first Terminator is THE touchstone modern action film, and the best Hollywood action film. It is incredibly influential on the modern formula and still is, and considering it had a one million dolllar budget only adds to it's awesome vibes. T2 had action and special effects to knock your socks off, but trying to give it a much more human touch took away from the raw, cold power of the original. Still an awesome movie, but the first one stands alone in my books. Hollywood had three truly marvelous 1980's action films: Terminator, Die Hard, and Robocop. The question is: how do they stack up against Mad Max 2 (The Road Warrior) or The Killer? And for those of you who haven't seen The Raid : Redemption, when you do you may have a new favourite action movie of all time. It's THAT good.
The Terminators budget was more than a million dollars. It might be influential but T2 I think is the pinnacle of action films taking all the influence of movies action movies up to that point and executing perfectly. It still stands up just as well today as it did when it first came out. I can't really say the same about the original. Shit is DATED, the music, the cyberpunk 80'sness of it, which some might enjoy but I don't. It has some awesome aspects and classic scenes, still not better than 2. The point I will give you is that the human touch to the script is I think it's only weakness and why I think it's good for a debate next to Die Hard. It isn't a terrible flaw but it's kind of lame for a hardcore action movie about unstoppable robot assassins from the future.
It was $6.5 million. Which is still really fucking incredible for what it accomplished. Yeah, the retro cyberpunk vibe of Terminator is a huge part of the appeal, but really, it's just a perfect dark, gritty, 80's action sci-fi film. You literally cannot make a better movie in that genre and style. And your criticism equally applies to the sequel; T2 is ALSO dated if you consider the music, camera lenses, and yes, even some of the CGI. It's been 20 years, after all. The effects and action scenes were better, but it didn't quite capture its vibe as perfectly, and suffered a bit from being PG-13 instead of R. (In part because, as you mentioned, the "robot having human feelings" subplot could have been handled slightly better) It's still a masterpiece and one of the best action films, but a bit worse than the original.
Sorry, I could not disagree with you more here. First dated camera lenses? What does that even mean? The production design in T2 is flawless, the color pallet sets the tone of the movie perfectly. They used the same cinematic camera lenses any other movie does, the results blow the originals away, given they had a much bigger budget to get it right. You could argue the shoe string budget helped create the gritty feel of the first but I'd still say T2 has the edge. The score also is leaps and bounds better than the original, dark and forbidding without 80s synth bullshit. It was done more traditionally and as a result made more timeless, undatedable, why it still holds up perfectly. Also, it is rated R not PG-13. And the effects. Are the originals not dated 10x worse? Stop motion robot? I guess the CGI doesn't compare to todays levels but it was used so sparingly and in such cool and creative ways I don't think it is dated at all. Since it was limited and expensive it forced them to make something interesting instead of vomiting out what ever their minds come up with (see Terminator 3/4) Cameron says in his commentary there was only a total of something like 2 and a half minutes of CGI scenes in the film. Shits sick son. You couldn't make the helicopter chase scene or Arnie climbing on the hood of a semi blasting a liquid metal robot point blank with an M16 any cooler than todays CGI. The original is fun. Maybe top three 80's action films, I still think Aliens and Die Hard are better over all than The Terminator.
It means that even the most state-of-the-art cameras 20 years ago are absolute junk compared to what they have today. Camera technology has improved enormously over the last couple of decades, to where even films from the early 90's have a "dated" look to them. I don't give a shit about any of that since I've never been into pixel counts and all that fluff, but since you criticized that about the original Terminator, it bears pointing out that it's true (to a smaller degree, obviously) of T2. I agree. Yeah, T2 is a prettier movie than T1, and has a more advanced use of special effects. I mentioned as much in my last post. The point you're missing is that T1's old-school, retro look and special effect (animatronics included) are part of what give it that dark, gritty flavor and charm. And that there's way more than just visual flair to an action film, even a sci-fi one. T1 had a fast-paced, dark, exciting story and presentation to it. It was the ultimate low-budget sci-fi action movie. T2 was a lavishly budgeted, gorgeous effects-driven film with better action scenes, but a less menacing and memorable Arnie, less of that delicious dark retro feel, and a plot that occasionally bordered on the side of melodramatic and eye-rolling (by your own admission, too). Both are masterpieces, but I prefer the original.
They are very different movies. I'd almost consider T1 as treading the line of a horror movie, while T2 was a lot closer to the big budget sci-fi action movies that sprang up later in the 90s. But I didn't think T1 had a big sci-fi aspect to it aside from the future war scenes and the end scene with the endo-skeleton. T2 dealt more with time travel, Skynet design, and 2 robots beating the shit out of each other. Id agree that T1 is much darker than 2. If I had to guess, T1 is as gritty as it is because it's on part from a dream that James Cameron had where as T2 is an extension of that.
There's two other films that could not be any more different from each other. The original Alien was a scary, tense suspense-horror, while Aliens is non-stop terror, and mayhem with no let-up (in the mould of the original Terminator). Aliens is a timeless movie, and hasn't lost a bit of its power.