[psmith2.0]

Well, we can hope.

It looks stupid and pointless as can be.

Pratt, 42, compared the film to seeing a fireworks finale: "Thirty years in the making — this is the sixth Jurassic film, and it's the end of this franchise." "Is it really the end?" asked Guthrie, 50. "I really do think it's the end, yeah," said Pratt. "You got the legacy cast back — Sam Neill, Laura Dern, Jeff Goldblum — plus the cast of Jurassic World, all our storylines converging in a way that is very much a finale."

Neill, Dern and Goldblum are the Hamill, Fisher and Ford of this franchise...only I assume they don't all die/get killed, bless their hearts. J.J. Abrams didn't work on these movies, did he?

As for it being the end...horseshit. If this thing makes $12 over its production budget, there will indeed be another. It may not have the "legacy" cast (or the inexplicably famous/employed Chris Pratt), but things like Jurassic Park don't quietly end/go away. Like Star Wars and some other properties, they make some time off, years even, but it's silly to think we're seeing the final Jurassic Whatever release. Hollywood doesn't retire/shutter money-printing machines! Even if it turned out to be a complete bomb or totally unwatchable, time heels all wounds. After 1997's Clooney Batman and Robin, WB/DC was back in just eight short years with Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins in 2005, properly de-Schumachered and re-grounded...and they haven't stopped making Batman stuff since!

PS - I can see why they include Pratt's age in the story above, as articles/interviews often do that about their subject. Not sure why they felt they needed to point out that Today reporter/anchor Savannah Guthrie is 50. Who cares, and what bearing does that have on anything?

[psmith2.0]

I think I talked about this upthread a while back, but War Games is currently playing on Sundance.

It still holds up. In some ways, despite the actual dating/aging of the involved hardware and all, it rings as true/unsettling as it did upon release in 1983. I saw this in the theaters with my dad and sister and it was probably the first time I realized computers could "talk to each other" and the like (and what NORAD was). This was likely the first "computer" movie I ever saw. It was still 8-9 years before I ever sat down and actually used one (~1992, in my design/illustration class, a Macintosh IIfx with Aldus Freehand(!) and Photoshop 2.0), but I remember thinking, after the movie ended, "if these things all did get compromised or go sideways, things could get scary real quick".

Uh...yep.

I think we see this on a near-daily basis, in ways big and small. All the hacks, leaks, breaches, lost data, the stolen personal info, etc. This movie was a gazillion years ahead of its time.

It's a great movie, engaging story and solid performances.

"...I'd piss on a spark plug if I thought it would do any good!"

[psmith2.0]

Interesting timing, since I referenced it just over a week ago upthread (as one of the three movies I've never been able to make it through, no matter how hard, or many times, I've tried).

Avatar sequel teaser.

Movie will be called Avatar: The Way of Water and is set for release in mid-December.

Two things:

1) I had no idea it was being made (it's been 13 years since the original movie hit in 2009), and that four sequels total are planned. Ambitious...

2) Strong cast. The leads you'd expect from the original are back, including Sigourney Weaver and Stephen Lang, but appearing, new, in the sequel are Edie Falco (Carmela from The Sopranos, for those living under a rock ), Kate Winslet (who I think might've appeared in another Cameron movie about a big boat or something) and CCH Pounder, a longtime favorite of mine who, alongside Walton Goggins, was the best part of FX's police drama The Shield several years back. Three strong performers who always do solid work.

Cliff Curtis is also part of the new cast, one of those actors you've seen a hundred times in movies and TV shows (lots of genre and action fare, but some other stuff as well), but doesn't have a known, household name (that's the kind of actor you want to be...steadily employed/busy, but not so famous/"A list" that you can't go to Subway or the grocery store without the paparazzi crawling up your butt, night and day). He's good too.

Also, the original movie is being re-released into theaters in late September, to help with the hype/buildup (and refresh people's memories).

No plans to see it, but just thought I'd pass it along because it's still major movie news (despite my inability to get on with it).

EDIT: Apparently CCH Pounder was in the 2009 movie. Looks like she played (mo-cap) one of those blue aliens (so looking nothing like real life), and, having never seen it, it was news to me. Anyway, she's back too. The article I linked to above made it sound like she was new to the franchise (among the cast of "newcomers..."), so that's a bit of lazy, sloppy reporting...

[kscherer]

Hmmm …

I liked the original, but I'm not sure I have enough stomach for much more "us vs. the humans".

[psmith2.0]

I've seen snippets on TV over the years. It looks great (lush and sprawling), but it just never "hooked" me for some reason. Seemed so dense/overwhelming or "took forever". It's the same reason I can't watch big, epic "swords and sorcery" fare; just too far outside my wheelhouse/interest net. I just don't give a shit about spells, quests, dragons, loincloths and all that kind of stuff.

But I imagine the visuals (2022 vs. 2009) will be even more impressive. How could they not?

[psmith2.0]

Just saw a trailer for an upcoming Thor movie, with Natalie Portman back in the cast. Christian Bale is playing the villain, and that got me to thinking how bi-studiol a lot of actors are, drifting between the Marvel and DC movies.

Christian Bale (Batman and whoever the Thor Villain is)
J.K. Simmons (J. Jonah Jameson in the Raimi Spider-Man movies, Commissioner Gordon in Justic League)
Michael Keaton (Batman and the villain in one of those Tom Holland Spidey movies)
Ryan Reynolds (Green Lantern and Deadpool)
Tom Hardy (Venom and Bane)
Willem Dafoe (Aquaman movie and Green Goblin)
Michelle Pfeiffer (Cat Woman and she was in Ant-Man)
Tommy Lee Jones (Two-Face and an army officer in that first Captain America movie)
Larry Fishburne (Perry White in "Man of Steel" and an Ant-Man movie)
Halle Berry (Catwoman and Storm)
Ben Affleck (Daredevil and Batman)

Those are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head, without Googling/help. I assume there are some more.

Where's the loyalty, mannnnnn?



And, yes...I know they're just actors and work is work and it all means nothing to them, big picture. And, yes...they're certainly "allowed" to do so (probably not at the same time, though). So nobody needs to pedantically chime in to say something that obvious/silly. I just think it's interesting, that's all, some of the big names bouncing back and forth between the two major comic/superhero movie outfits.

Had he lived, Christopher Reeve might've shown up as Uncle Ben (Peter Parker's uncle, not the rice guy) in one of those 46 Spider-Man movies. And, who knows, Tom Holland may eventually be the new Robin!

[709]

What's this now? A new Predator movie??? How did I not know this was happening?

[kscherer]

Uh, oh. Looks like they can't use Cowboys and Aliens, anymore, so we got us some Aliens and Indians action, instead.

Because that's important … or something.

Is Abraham Lincoln in this one?

I'm sure it will be fun and all, but … is this important? Why do we always gotta time travel? Couldn't they do this in The Nation? That would at least be up-to-date. All this is going to do is get the "aliens were here hundreds of years ago" conspiracy folks all up in a rage.

[709]

Originally Posted by kscherer All this is going to do is get the "aliens were here hundreds of years ago" conspiracy folks all up in a rage.

Too late:

[psmith2.0]

Originally Posted by 709 What's this now? A new Predator movie??? How did I not know this was happening?

Because there seems to be one, of some sort, about ever four years...how could a normal person with any sort of life keep up with it all?

I love that very first (1987) Predator movie. Saw it in the theater (with an adult, yes) at initial release. And then I've watched it about 765,000 times on cable over the years. It still holds up, it's still exciting, it's one of only about two movies were Schwarzenegger is halfway believable (and doesn't overdo it with the silly quips). He genuinely seems scared/concerned throughout, and actually gets his ass beat a few times.

The sequels/reboots, however, have all been shit on a hot stick. This could go either way. Might be neat to see it set back in time to where only the predator aliens have tech. Shades of the Empire vs. the Ewoks...all that tech and armor ultimately bested by bow and arrows, slings, spears, spiked pits, trip-wire snares and other primitive weaponry/traps.

$50 says the final scene, mirroring Apocalypto, will be the surviving characters watching, all silent and grim-faced, English settlers arriving on ships and/or wagons.

*subtitles: "True predator now arrive..." <fade to black/roll credits>





You're grinning because you know it's true. Go ahead, it's okay. I promise.

[kscherer]

Originally Posted by 709 Too late:

🖕

[Ryan]

The Bob's Burgers Movie is an excellent dose of very silly escapism.

[psmith2.0]

I can't think of anything the world needs more. I don't even know what it is, but I love/support silly in all its forms.

Speaking of silly, I keep seeing Mike Myers popping up a bit lately. He has a new show on Netflix, I believe?

For years I've wanted to see a new Austin Powers. I'm hoping he works his way around to that at some point.

If they can bring back Tom Cruise's Maverick after 36 years, I don't think it's too much to ask that Austin 'Danger' Powers can show up after 20. The were the silliest movies of all, but I laughed then and I laugh when I see any of them now (they'll pop up on cable occasionally).

The comedy gold to mine - someone like Powers in a hyper-PC, post-#MeToo world, with all the modern spy tech and action to spoof (the more recent Bond flicks, along with the Bourne-isms). A slightly greyer Powers, but still totally out of his time (and mind). It would also be a spoof on the whole Harrison Ford thing, bringing back characters from decades ago for "one last go around" (Ford's been on his victory/farewell lap in recent years, with Solo, Deckard and Dr. Jones, so there's comedic jabs to be found there, for sure...scenes of obvious, blatant stuntmen doing any/all action sequences (including just getting up quickly from a chair ), some sort of "it's not the years, baby, it's the mileage..." riff, Viagra jokes (a scene where he inadvertently takes one and has about a 3-4 hour rod in the most embarrassing/inappropriate of situations..."It won't go down, baby...apparently we can shag now, and later!"), etc.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by psmith2.0 I can't think of anything the world needs more. I don't even know what it is, but I love/support silly in all its forms.

One of the characters spends half the movie running around wearing a burger costume with a bikini strapped on top.



Even if you haven't seen the TV show, they've done a good job of making the movie accessible for newcomers. Certainly there are some cameos and references that won't be as funny but they're all extras. Production quality is a noticeable step up from the show.

Ultimately it's about a family trying to save their restaurant from the bank and hilarity ensues. The movie quickly crescendos into a fast-paced chaotic free-for-all with the occasional musical number for good measure and finishes with a happy ending for all.

Gary Cole and Zach Galifianakis both provide hilarious supporting roles, plus Kevin Kline as the eccentric landlord complete with cape and eye patch.

[turtle]

I haven't seen Top Gun Maverick yet, but this totally makes me want to watch it now!

[psmith2.0]

Little Davey is a hoot. I've been a fan for well over 30 years, ever since I saw him on some cable standup comedian show in the late-ish 80's. It isn't deep and he's not looking to solve the world. Just a silly little smart-ass who knows his strengths.

Google his childhood rattlesnake/stepdad story (I think it's on YouTube...someone animated it, making it even funnier).

Ah, here you go! It's the middle segment/story.

[turtle]

That was funny!

[psmith2.0]

Hard to believe!

'Morbius' Theatrical Re-release Made Only $300K USD This Weekend in Another Box Office Flop

This thing looked like shit on two biscuits from the get-go. Nobody ever has, or ever will, go see a movie because Jared Leto is the lead. At some point Hollywood will realize this and save some money.

He's good at the quirky co-star/ensemble thing, sure. But I don't think he'll ever be seen as leading man material. Seems it would've happened by now. He's been on the scene for 30 years, after all. That's usually more than enough to make your mark. He's more Tom Sizemore than Tom Hanks. And that's fine...quirky character actors are needed and certainly make their mark. But nobody bases an entire movie around Tom Sizemore...

There's a reason this guy isn't in the Leo/Brad/Hugh/Tom/Keanu/Dwayne club. I don't know what it is, but there's a reason.

[turtle]

Black Adam trailer looks pretty good. Sure it is another superhero movie, but it doesn't have the same DC sucks vibe like most of the other DC movies so that is a plus.

This one actually looks entertaining and relatively enjoyable. Not go watch it in a theater enjoyable, but still worth watching at least!

[kscherer]

Top Gun: Maverick



Fantastic movie, edge-of-the-seat, and arial cinematography will never be the same.

Tom Cruise pulled out all the stops, pulled all the strings, got all the ducks lined up, and pulled off a brilliant sequel.

- I love that Maverick began with the same soundtrack, the same visuals, and in the same manner, just 36 years later! Those fun, Top Gun bells followed straight away by Kenny Logins' Danger Zone right up front; the carrier launches; the deck crew going about their business. What a great, nostalgic bit of cinema. Hell, it even ended with a nice barrel roll — albeit in a P-51 Mustang, but I can dig that just as well. - Tom Cruise, love him or hate him, was very Pete Mitchell in this film. That's hard to do after 36 years and a zillion rolls, but he pulled it off. From the white t-shirt and blue jeans, the glasses, the aviator jacket, the motorcycle, the attitude, all of it. - I absolutely loved that Val Kilmer made an appearance. Val has been fighting throat cancer and its repercussions, and they used that in the movie to reflect the ailing health of Ice Man. Maverick and Ice have had a very good relationship since 1986, and it was a bit of a tear-jerker the way they put it together. - Nostalgia is difficult with fan-favorite movies, and Top Gun is not only a fan-favorite, but one of my favorite movies. I remember going with my dad in 1986 (dad was a pilot) and walking out of that theater just high as a kite, and suddenly the F-14 Tomcat was etched into my life forever. That nostalgia requires careful nurturing, and Tom Cruise and crew mastered it in this. From the music to the call-signs, to the memory of Goose and how his death has been tearing at Maverick all these years. I never felt like anything was stuffed in just for the fans. Rather, I felt like the script was prepared in such a way that nostalgia was just a natural flow, and it came across that way. Many elements were tossed in that were never a part of the original film, but they felt as though they were a natural extension and seemed so very obvious, like, "Duh, of course I remember that … thing that I … don't … remember." - Edge of the seat action in this one. I can't remember being that glued to a screen in a very long time, and my butt kept finding itself leaning on the railing (we were in the balcony) and thinking, now, that is some serious flying! - Which brings us to: Arial cinematography on steroids! Tom Cruise was interviewed years ago about a Top Gun sequel and he said he wouldn't do it until they could actually get into real jets and film the real thing. That took a lot of patience; it took Tom Cruise building his career; it took years of negotiations and trust-building; it took a ton of work to design and develop the camera system; it took months of physical preparation for all of the "pilots"; it took months of choreography with real pilots and training actors how to direct themselves. The effort that went into it is just mind boggling! And the results were phenomenal! I found myself ducking, rolling, and diving in my seat, and flashbacks of Top Gun kept dancing through my brain. Which is funny, because Top Gun was just a tad corny, and the arial shots were nothing more exotic than Navy footage combined with Hollywood cockpit shots that were bad going on "Holy cow, dad, did you see that?" The quality of this film vs. the original are stark contrasts, and demonstrate the evolution of fighter effects and the maturing of Tom Cruise and company. - CGI. Believe it or not, the enemy "5th-generation fighters" are modeled on the real thing. Yet, they appeared as real as real in the movie. Considering the J-20 is still in development and there aren't any to play with, making them appear so realistic in the movie added a great deal of flare. And, yes, those things could kick the crap out of an F-14 or an F-18, and I'm glad Tom Cruise and company knew enough that they didn't make some great, make-believe showing of American aircraft superiority. Also, yes, those crazy 5th-gen maneuvers are real as hell. 5th-generations fighters can do some crazy stuff. - Great comedic timing. Maverick was not trying to be nostalgic, nor was it trying to be funny. Yet, like the nostalgia, the comedy was very natural and unforced. George Lucas was not involved in the making of this movie! - The low-level shots were awe-inspiring. - Dude's getting the g's kicked out of them are real shots. High g-loads will kick your ass, and that shit is real! - Ah, the F-14. Although I was a bit skeptical of the manner in which Maverick and Rooster acquired their 'Cat, no sooner did that thing show up than the old folks in the theater began hollering and hooting like the clowns that we are! There was some fun comical bits during the acquisition, followed by more delightful moments as Rooster learned to do what his dad did all those years ago. You have to remember that the F-14 was designed in the 1960's and was a top-of-the-line 3rd-generation fighter in the seventies and eighties. With all its mechanical bits and pieces and those circuit breakers and the archaic cockpit. Oh, what a sweet, sweet beauty she is! Put those wings back and let 'em have it!

I recommend this film to anyone, and especially to Top Gun fans, although you need no invitation. I do recommend a re-watch of the original at least a few days prior. I introduced my daughter to Top Gun a couple years ago when Maverick was first announced and I got all excited and she was, like, . But, she wound up liking Top Gun, even though she rolled her eyes a few times. And she loved Top Gun: Maverick. Which makes me happy. She's a SW/Trek nerd, and if she can get down with this masterpiece, then so can you.

[psmith2.0]

I've heard all good things about it, to varying levels. No real outright pans, professional or otherwise. That's pretty rare. I won't see it at the multiplex (that's reserved solely for Mission: Impossible flicks at this point), but I look forward to watching it once it comes to a format I can watch in my living room in my flannel pants (and affordable popcorn).

I keep hearing how the visuals and flying sequences are really something to see. Kinda starting to believe that must be true.

[turtle]

Nice, I didn't read the spoilers because I do intend to see it once it is available at home.

[Matsu]

It's already available at home

I thought Maverick was kinda ho-hum... It's basically the same plot all over again, though lovingly crafted, as a photo nerd I appreciate the technical achievements, but the story is bland... It can be watched just for the visuals, and I am guilty of watching a lot of cinema just for that reason, so in the end I'm not sure what I think of it. I'm sure army recruiters are happy...

[turtle]

Army? He changed branches?

[Matsu]

Army Navy, recruiters like...

[turtle]

Heh. Can't give Army a leg up as a sailor.

[psmith2.0]

‘Joker’ Sequel A Go; Todd Phillips Posts Script Cover, Joaquin Phoenix Nearing Deal To Reprise Arthur Fleck

Awesome...more nihilistic, hyper-violent horseshit. Exactly what the world needs more of!

I can't wait to not see it.

This stupid movie is irrefutable proof that some projects/actors/properties absolutely get graded on a curve. Hands down the most hateful, pointless and endlessly-voyeuristic-wallowing-in-the-misery-of-others movie I've ever sat through.

[drewprops]

Wow, I thought Joker was actually a really good descent into madness, and had hoped for a next step in the series.


...

[drewprops]

Tonight I finished watching Futureworld, a sequel to the original Westworld film. It was interesting for a while, but 70s films had their limits. They were still inventing techniques we now consider fundamental, so it's impossible to watch films from this era with fresh eyes.

I have enjoyed the modern HBO series, but I can't remember all the twists and turns at this point.
...

[Brad]

Originally Posted by drewprops Wow, I thought Joker was actually a really good descent into madness, and had hoped for a next step in the series. ...

I also enjoyed Joker, though I don't see it as "a Batman/DCEU movie", and I mentally categorized it as a what-if sort of one-off. I certainly never expected it to get a sequel. I rather liked the idea that the whole story and its ending were deliberately ambiguous. How much actually happened? How much was all in his head? I'm afraid that churning out a sequel will erase or retcon that ambiguity and turn it into something else entirely.