What's the latest movie you've seen?

[Autbot_Benz]

Justice League Dark Apokolops War. Man this movie is so dark and Violent it would make Zack Snyder blush. Matt Ryan shines as Constantine which was the main reason I bought it. I enjoyed it. I did feel Swamp Thing was wasted as he was in the first JLD movie.

[Leo656]

"The Last Temptation of Christ". That was awesome!

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Watched the original Terminator last night on tv. Edited, of course, but still one of a great scifi flick.

[Leo656]

Finally got around to seeing Goodfellas and The Fifth Element in their entirety. Pretty good!

Also finally got around to watching "Superman: Red Son". I don't think Wonder Woman needed to be an angry, man-hating lesbian in order for the story to work, but everything else was pretty good. I know that everyone was a darker, more cynical version of themselves in this, but it felt very overdone - literally every scene she's in has at least one bit of "All Men Are Pigs" dialog, no exceptions - and I don't remember it being like that in the book, so I didn't think it was in any way necessary. Otherwise it was fine; I don't remember the book incredibly well but I remember a lot of the major beats being very similar. I know there were some deviations but it was worlds ahead of "Hush", where they both ignored AND entirely missed the point of the source material. I'll say this was one of the better DC Animated ones.

[IndigoErth]

Finally caught the "Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark" movie. Not bad, it was kind of fun and mildly creepy. Decent job on translating some of the monster art into CGI.

My only complaint is that I wish the stories it touched on were followed and told a bit more closely to the book rather than taking quite the amount of liberties it did. Especially "Me Tie Dough-Ty Walker," where they missed the true creep factor of that one by skipping everything but the head, adding in the body parts of a separate story ("What Do You Come For?"), then just making the rest of it a generic creepy monster chase that's not in the story.

Some of those stories, including that one, I would pay to see acted out well for the stories they actually are in the books, even just as a collection of shorts rather than trying to weave a total film together.

[Sumac]

Blade Runner 2049.
Beautiful picture, **** and unimaginable story. It could not be more predictable and typical Hollywood action movie, when it comes to a plot if it tried.

[Hamato Yoshi]

Showdown at Equator 4/6 , first lady of Bruce Lee films Nora Miao stars in this , as well as Liang (barely in it) and Lo Lieh as the bad guy. Cop goes undercover to bust up Liehs schemes.

Knight Errant 4/6 , Wang Yu as cab driver and three japanese brothers wanting revenge cuz they blame Yus dad for their fathers suicide.....liked it more than SaE. Also stars Kurata , Fei Lung as two of the bros

[Leo656]

Re-watched "Masters of the Universe" for maybe the thousandth time.

I still like it a lot. After discovering that it was a blatant Kirby homage there's a lot more to see and it's even more fun.

Langella is still incredible. His Skeletor might be my all-time favorite movie villain. He's so, so good.

It's disappointing that Dolph hated making it, though. I honestly thought he did a great job and by all accounts everyone else was having a lot of fun, so I wish he could have, too. I know he felt the role was "beneath" him, but all he'd ever done before was Rocky IV, so... why the ego? It's not like he was a huge star or even a star on the rise... he'd done nothing before and until Expendables, not a lot that was noteworthy afterwards. I'unno, he should've just rolled with it.

Not a movie, but after that I re-watched "The Critic" once again, which is still one of the best shows ever despite its super-short run. It's so easy to forget that Kath Soucie was like 95% of the "supporting cast". Great show, way ahead of its time.

[DarkFell]

I actually didn't know that Blade Runner had a sequel until a few weeks ago. Thanks, Critical Drinker.

As for me, Grumpy Old Men was the latest movie that I watched.

[Whatswiththeheadbands?]

Tried watching the 2008 Dragonlance movie. Made it about 25 minutes in and turned it off.

Kiefer Sutherland as Raistlin was great. Everything else was pretty terrible.

It's a disgrace to the novel (which is really great and worth a read)

[Hamato Yoshi]

According to a MotU doc it was considered beneath an actor to do a role like He-Man/superhero then , thats what Dolph said

What if MotU had come out 1985/86 , would it have been a bigger hit......Dolph might not have done Rocky IV though

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by Hamato Yoshi

According to a MotU doc it was considered beneath an actor to do a role like He-Man/superhero then , thats what Dolph said

What if MotU had come out 1985/86 , would it have been a bigger hit......Dolph might not have done Rocky IV though

It's such a stupid thing to even consider, though. Fantasy films were booming in the 80s, and that's what MotU was. When taken on its own merits it's easily as good and probably MORE entertaining than most of its contemporaries in that era, so it's incredibly strange that anyone had such petty feelings about it being "lowbrow". Because "Legend" and "Willow", by comparison, are "High Art". Good movies, not saying they aren't, I'm just saying the double-standard is pretty prominent.

Meanwhile, you have FRANK LANGELLA - a REAL actor who everyone else on the set would have done well to sit under the Learning Tree and take lessons from - completely understood it and threw himself into it with no ego, even though people would have forgiven him if he looked down on it. This guy's a legend in his craft, he'd already done "Everything" and he's done "Everything" again since.

You mean to tell me that FRANK LANGELLA understood what was going on and embraced it wholeheartedly, and yet, "The Rocky IV guy" who had maybe three lines of dialog in his most famous role, decided that he was gonna be a big shot and have an ego? He can f*ck off with that noise. He did Rocky IV, he did He-Man, and then he did f*cking NOTHING worth remembering until "The Expendables". I guess he thought his terrible "Punisher" movie was also "high art"? Who the f*ck was in his ear? I like Dolph Lundgren, but seriously, F*CK Dolph Lundgren, he's a nice guy by all accounts but as an actor he's a hack who got a lucky break because he had a look. He was the LAST guy on planet Earth who ever should have an ego about his roles.

It's funny, too, because He-Man was probably his "best" role. Sure, Rocky IV was his biggest and most memorable, but "Look big and throw fake punches, look indestructible next to a guy half your size" isn't exactly much by way of "acting", y'know? As He-Man he actually had to carry a leading role AND personify a character who'd quickly become a global icon, and whether he wanted to or not, he did a great job at the job he was tasked with. It's just a shame because if he did such a good job while half-assing it, I'd love to see what would have happened if he'd been 100% into it.

He was a great He-Man. I just wish he'd been wise enough to embrace it, because that and Rocky were the best things he'd ever done, and without either, he'd be a non-entity and nobody would remember him.

Moral of the Story: Don't be a Dolph Lundgren, be a Frank Langella.
-----------------------

People were only pissy because it was a movie based on a toy. That's it, that's all. Taken on its own merits, objectively it's Perfectly Fine and even Really Good. Easily one of the best 80s Fantasy Films if you take it on its own terms.

[Galactus]

Wasn't Dolph tipped to be a big star after Rocky IV? The fact that the best he was offered post that was Masters of the Universe probably was a bit of a blow to the ego.

Fantasy stuff was big in the 80s sure but there is a chasm of difference between the reputation of Conan the Barbarian and He-Man the latter being a cheesy cartoon to sell toys to kids. Unfair perhaps but that's just the way it is. Not to mention that at the time of making the movie was at the tail end of craze when even kids had lost interest. The movie was basically an attempt to breath new life in to the toy line.

From interviews it seems Lundgren looks at the movie more favourably now which is nice although he probably doesn't have much of a choice. He's known for precisely two things; Rocky and MOTU if he starts slagging off one of those what fanbase he has halves.

Anyhoo as a fan of Jack Kirby I appreciate the unsubtle attempt to make a New Gods movie with MOTU characters and it's not exactly unfaithful to MOTU either although at the time I always wished it was set purely on Eternia and resembled the show more.

Not long after I moved to the UK my grandfather put on a skeleton mask, a long coat and used an upside down broomstick as a staff to imitate Skeletor's march into Castle Grayskull. Good times.

[Leo656]

Why would anyone have tasked him as a "Big Star" after Rocky? Maybe someone told HIM that, but the guy didn't even have anything substantial to DO. Three lines of dialog, Add Steroids, there's his "performance". I LOVE that movie and I love him in it but it's hardly a "breakout performance". Any stiff could've done it. Nothing about it whatsoever comes off as, "This guy's gonna be the next Arnold or Stallone."

It's like how Rocky III, by comparison, gave a huge boost to Hogan's wrestling career but nobody (except him) had any notions that he was gonna parlay that into being a "real" actor. And let's be honest... he does a LOT more in his ten minutes on-screen in III than Dolph does with the entire movie in IV. He mostly just stands there and scowls. Hogan's performance on the other hand actually had some layers to it. Not many, but some. He showed an entire range of emotions from Cocky to Angry to Humorous and a little more; Dolph was either Stoic or Angry and that's about it. And yet, nobody in Hollywood looked at Hulk Hogan in 1983 and said "Wow, this guy's the next box office sensation!" nor should they have. He got paid to do One Thing and did it very well. Dolph, same thing.

I kinda think Dolph and his agent were smoking the same kinda crack with Grace Jones at that point in time, if they seriously thought he was gonna be a Big Star based solely on his Rocky IV performance. Not being a dick, just saying. He's a total brick in that!

He had "presence". "Presence" counts for a lot. But it's not everything. Proof of that, he proceeded to do f*ck-all nothing for 20 years. And I kinda doubt that's solely because the MotU movie tanked. Kinda think it has more to do with people waking up and realizing they'd overestimated his upside.

[Galactus]

Well I would have been 3 or 4 years old when Rocky IV was released so I wasn't following entertainment news at the time but that's what I've read. I do remember Rocky IV being a big deal correct me if I'm wrong but I think it's the most successful of the classic Rocky movies so it's not hard to imagine that the people around him thought he'd become a big deal. This is a quote from him about attending the premier ""I walked in to a Westwood movie theater as Grace Jones' boyfriend and walked out ninety minutes later as the movie star Dolph Lundgren. I was shell-shocked for years from the mind-boggling and daunting experience of being a student-athlete from tiny Sweden suddenly having to live up a new action-star persona." I can imagine some in the industry thought the same I mean the guy must have seemed so damn Schwarzeneggery at the time that I can imagine people would just assume he'd have a similar career path. For a time he may have looked at MOTU as the thing that killed his career as opposed to highlighting that you have be able to act just a little to star in movies.

[Leo656]

Rocky IV was the most commercially successful but arguably the "worst" of the bunch of to that point by any objective measure. Every single thing about its success can be attributed to how heavily it panders to "Rah-Rah" patriotism at the tail end of the Cold War. Removed from its original time and place, it's a pretty hokey piece of work. And I say that out of love, by the way; I will absolutely cut throats in my defense of the entire Rocky saga. But when I love something wholeheartedly, that doesn't mean I can't see it for what it is at the same time.

The "It's not a movie, it's a Music Video about Rocky" criticism is so apt that it's not even funny. The soundtrack and the montages do ALL the heavy lifting, and the rest is all American flags and "U-S-A! U-S-A!" It "tricks" you into caring a lot more than you should by piling on the sentiment. That said, it's perfectly understandable why it - and by extension, Dolph Lundgren - got such a huge reaction at Exactly That Time: It and He perfectly epitomizes the "All gloss, no substance" sensibilites that were so prevalent in our culture at Exactly That Moment.

But yeah, it was an overreach. He was fun to watch, as is the movie. He was the perfect guy for that specific job. But absolutely nothing about that movie suggested that he would be a "good" actor... or even, "An Actor", period.

By contrast, he made He-Man look like a total bad-ass in live-action when forced to take on an "actual" role that required him to do more than be a rock. Could've been silly, but he made it work. For that, I give him ALL the credit in the world, and I admire him for fighting to not let them overdub his voice, as the studio wanted to do.

I love Rocky IV and I love him in it, it's just that both he and the film are overrated for what they actually are. By contrast, I also love MotU and his performance in that, and I feel both he and the film are UNDERrated compared to the comparatively vapid and derivative "Rocky IV". Apollo, he wasn't. He wasn't even Clubber Lang. BUT. He was a damn fine He-Man.

I just think it's funny how people gushed about him, then and now, in the role where he had a very simple job to do and performed adequately, versus the role where he was actually given a lot more to do, expected to fail, and outshined expectations. It's just... weird. He actually had to ACT in MotU and he never gets the credit he deserved for it. Not even from himself. And I just find it odd, and more than a little unfortunate.

[Hamato Yoshi]

"From interviews it seems Lundgren looks at the movie more favourably now which is nice although he probably doesn't have much of a choice"

Thats not true , he can say whatever he wants about the movie....it doesnt bother me if an actor dislikes/hates a movie , for example Connery was turned off by the direction of the Bonds when he did YOLT : more gadgets and less plot (of if Ultimate Warrior only did it for the money , i still enjoy the character regardless)

It was the same with Raquel Welch when she was offered "1 mill BC" : "Im trying to have a serious career , sigh"

"that I can imagine people would just assume he'd have a similar career path. For a time he may have looked at MOTU as the thing that killed his career as opposed to highlighting that you have be able to act just a little to star in movies"

if i were a producer back then i mightve thought hed be a new Arnold or Stallone , its plausible after a few films - but it didnt happen for Dolph.

Im not sure he thought MotU killed his career , i think he got over it pretty quick and onto the next movie. But , to use a cliche , its tough to get to the top and you have to have certain degree of luck as well.

[Hamato Yoshi]

Secret Rivals 4/6 (John Liu , Don Wong & HJL as Silver Fox. The heroes bicker over a woman and Lius character wants revenge on SF)

Heroic Ones '78......4/6 (Angela Mao and John Liu....bad guys wants a list of rebels. I believe theres another movie with similar title)

John Liu in Paris 2/6 (boring , only positive is Paris' locations. Plot is about Liu's gf being killed by mobsters or something)

[Galactus]

Sadly I can't agree that Dolph's performance in MOTU is underrated. The director has stated many times he could see early on that Dolph would not be able to carry the movie so centered the whole thing around Skeletor were the true acting talent was. Even in scenes with heroic warriors it's Man at Arms, Teela and Gwildor and the various humans they interact with carries those scenes. Lundgren does successfully sell the action which is what he was cast for.

Lundgren has done better performances in other movies but sad as it is I always thought those 80s action stars were on borrowed time. That's why so many of them had a problem with the molded plastic muscles that became a thing when Michael Keaton had them in Batman '89. Suddenly you could get 'real' actors and make look like well built action heroes. Then Hollywood perfected the art of getting fairly fit actors and making them ripped quickly made them even more irrelevant.

As for why Lundgren has a change of heart I was being somewhat flippant. Many actors who grew to dislike their most iconic roles have a turnaround in their later years and even embrace them. Look at Leonard Nimoy or Adam West both of whom for a time blamed Star Trek and Batman for why they were typecast and their careers didn't take off but when a generation that grew up on those shows became part of the industry they became stars all over again.

[Leo656]

All that is fair, but I maintain his performance in that movie was underrated because it's not like he just stood there. It's obvious he wasn't the one carrying the picture but he wasn't a block of wood, either. He definitely sold a few of the bigger moments where he had to actually emote and project. "Underrated" doesn't mean he stole the show - he didn't, and he never could, not with who he was playing against - but rather, it means it was altogether better than he's ever gotten credit for.

I always thought the entire cast did a great job, frankly. I don't know who could ever be a better Man-At-Arms than Jon Cypher. And Chelsea Field looked nothing like Teela but she made the role entirely her own. Billy Barty's just great at everything. Anthony De Longis as "Blade" really had the time of his life, and it shows. I was so not surprised to read around and find out that everybody (minus Dolph) had done a million things before and after because they're all really, really good.

It just always felt to me like there were two camps of people who went into the movie with their fists up and refused to ever take it on its own merits: Snobs who dismissed it as a toy commercial before it ever even came out and thus were never going to be objective, and fans of the cartoon who were never going to accept it because it wasn't the movie they wanted to see. It's not "Citizen Kane" by any stretch, but 17% on RT is a goddamn joke. For comparison, "Cyborg", the scrapped sequel to MotU that was refurbished into a sh*tty Van Damme vehicle, is rated 20%, which tells you everything about why that system of "grading" movies simply doesn't work. Good luck finding even one person nowadays who thinks THAT piece of sh*t is actually better than MotU.

Sometimes I just feel like the whole world judges things more on what they'd rather have than what's actually there, and thus they fail to see the good in things because they're too busy pining for something else. Happens with a lot of things. Makes me sad. With regard to that movie, at least, it feels like MOST people who watch it nowadays get a kick out of it. Sometimes it takes 30 years for people to smarten up.
----------------

Serendipitously, given our earlier discussion, there's a Rocky marathon on MTV2 today! Christ, Stallone must've been eating 'roids three meals a day between Rocky II and Rocky III. Whenever you watch them back-to-back it's really obvious what the deal was. Yeeesh!

Also, Christ Hogan was fast before his left knee went bad. That always blows my mind. He was legit about 320 when he did that movie, by all accounts, and he was still 6'8 way back before his spine got all J-curved. Guys that big usually can't move that fast. That's such a fun scene, it's no wonder he practically stole the whole movie.

Kinda makes you wonder what would've happened if "No Holds Barred" became a series. But only for a second.