Amph What was the last movie you saw? (Ver. 2)

They never will get any movie out of the series, if Clive Cussler has anything to say about it. He didn't like "Raise the Titanic", and the production hassles over "Sahara" and the resulting movie were the last straw. He has gone on record that he'll never sell the movie rights to any of his books ever again.

 

Didn't know that. However he is getting on in years (he's 87) and his estate might think otherwise after he passes away. I can see why he didn't like the Titanic film - quite a bit of the book that involves the Russians was left out.

 

At the library where I work, we still get one of his books (albeit co-authored with someone else) every three months or so. Not as high an output as James Patterson, but pretty good.

 

Yeah, the recent books have been co-authored. He probably does the plot but leaves the detail to the other writers. I think that's how Patterson handles it. I tend to pick the new books up when they hit paperback here in the UK.

 

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse

 

raiders is perfect, isn't it? i've always thought so. and i've never been able to put my finger on why, exactly. it just...flows out of eternity and back again, one moment after another...

 

Bao (2018) – Domee Shi

So, this Pixar short played before the Incredibles 2 movie and it’s about an Asian woman who makes a baby out of dumplings and then it comes to life. And that’s when it gets weird. No, but seriously, I really hated this and I kind of hate to get into the middle of all this, because there was backlash surrounding this short being pretty bad and then that got turned into a thing where if you didn’t like the short you were a racist and then it was all about how the short was super deep because it was metaphorical and if you didn’t like it, it was because you didn’t know what a metaphor was and, well, anyway, things got pretty heated. I know, things got heated on the internet. Who saw that coming? Just to be clear. I understand the metaphor of the short; I get that it’s about a mother missing her son. I mean, yes, I understand that, but honestly that just makes it even weirder. I mean, it’s about a woman who subconsciously wants to eat her son because he’s dating a white girl? It would be less weird if it was just randomly about a dumpling that comes to life frankly. I mean, look, it’s Pixar; it has some cute moments in it. But that’s about all? Yeah, that’s about all. Okay, it’s about Asians; that doesn’t make me a racist if I hate it. And it has metaphors; that doesn’t make me an idiot if I hate it. Leave me alone. This short is bad, so cool your jets. 1 star.

tl;dr – absurdly divisive Pixar short has stirred up controversy; at the end of the day, though, it’s just bad. 1 star.

 

I get people may not like Bao, and I'm fine with that. And I don't think you're a racist for not liking Bao.

However, I don't feel like the woman subconsciously ate her son because he's dating a White girl. Being White had nothing to do with it at all. The woman eats her son because she's about to leave her. It's painful for her to lose her son, so it's a metaphor for swallowing her pain.

Remember, at the end of the short, the White girl is sitting with the family making dumplings, and she's better at it than the actual son.

Bao is a metaphor for empty nesters. A universal story; not an exclusively Asian one. This story could be told by using a bagel or apple pie instead of a dumpling and still have the same meaning.

 

Time expired to edit my post, so I'm creating a new post.

Here's a shot of the ending of Bao.



I feel the writer/creator of Bao didn't set out to be controversial in any way. I believe she just wrote the story using Asian cultural elements because that's her, which goes to the old adage of "write what you know." And dumplings are a food staple with Chinese people and other Asian cultures, so it just made sense to use a dumpling as a metaphor for the child. Moreover, making dumplings in the Chinese culture is often a family tradition and way of bonding. (Being Filipino, it was lumpias for my family) There's a scene in Crazy Rich Asians that shows this sentiment. Therefore, using the dumpling in Bao is a layered metaphor for not only a child but also family bonds and traditions. That's why I love the image above where the new wife and the son are at the dinner table with the parents to make dumplings. It's welcoming the new addition (the White gril) to the family and creating new bonds.

I'm sure there's a cooking/food preparing tradition like this in all cultures. To me, Bao is telling the universal story of being an "Empty Nester" but wish an Asian twist.

 

lifeforce. i'd never seen this one before. so bad it's good etc etc!

 

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom. I think this was a step down even from Jurassic World, but let’s be honest, I barely remember Jurassic World. Bayona has a great eye as a director and the film is full of really good images, great use of lighting. But that’s all it has going for it. The script is terrible, just super bland with no distinctive characters. Even Chris Pratt, a fount of goofy charisma, is totally muted. The action is bifurcated between the first hour of volcanic dinosaur-infested ruins and the second hour of indoraptor mansion mayhem, neither of which feels particularly connected to the other. Both of these are good, solid premises, but the movie gets very little out of them. Some good shots, but no really standout sequences, and nothing that really adds up to anything. Jurassic Park did a great job of capturing the wonder and terror of dinosaurs; this goes for fairly standard action-adventure and mutes any real thrills with violence that’s mostly bloodless and offscreen, making the whole thing feel pretty tame. It had some potential, and Bayona has talent, but it’s a total miss.

 

Mission: Impossible: Fallout. Someday, eventually, once this series has run to twentysomething movies, someone will finally get the idea, “What if we gave Ethan Hunt even the slightest hint of personality?” Until then, the Mission: Impossible films will remain a great big empty stunt delivery mechanism.

The stunts are great, and the film is pretty much nothing but a breakneck series of stunt sequences, so it certainly entertains at that level. But even I, who have a pretty high tolerance for low-fi action-delivery systems, find the MI movies really hollow. Perhaps because they’re such big, polished blockbusters with pretensions to action-movie greatness, they don’t have any of that low-fi charm, no excuses for their failure to be more. Perhaps because they really are genuinely unique in their total failure to make even the slightest effort at giving any of the characters in the film any kind of personality at all. Most films might just stock their cast with cliches, but at least they’re trying to give the audience characters to care about. These movies might as well have casts purely of stuntmen, because there’s absolutely nothing there. The closest thing is putting Simon Pegg onscreen and hoping he’s got so much perconality it’ll bleed through the cipher in the script. The plot is just an excuse to get from stunt to stunt, with the same exact beats we’ve seen in each of these movies — global megaterrorist threat, betrayal, Hunt’s team has to go it alone. There’s literally nothing to these movies except well-filmed stunt sequences, and the whole thing is so slick, so professionally cold and impersonally competent, that it can’t even muster any gritty action B-movie charm. I can apprciate the heck out of the stunts, but frankly the pathetically sad and indifferent attempt to string the most basic excuse for a movie between them just makes it so much worse. This film would be like ten times better if it were just a disconnected series of action sequences, because everything around them is just so offensively lazy and soul-leachingly bland.

I liked Henry Cavill though. I’d watch him as the heavy in, you know, a real movie.

 

Oh yes, how could I forget, the characters are all very interesting. I enjoyed seeing Harry Dean Stanton again. He is so good in Alien. And Kurt Russell is awesome in the movie. I'll look forward to seeing your drawings when you create them.

I guess they shot the movie in St. Louis after a real life fire and the city is an effective character itself. I would not want to be dropped off in that version of Manhattan.

And good point about MJ, I know he also loved An American Werewolf in London, so it's quite possible he liked Escape from New York too.

And I agree about Raiders; one of my all time favs.

 

I never watched it, and after seeing the trailer I have 0 interest in ever watching it. But, Henry Mancini wrote a great rousing theme for the score.

 

Yes, they shot mostly in St. Louis 2-3 years after a fire burned most of downtown. A colleague at my former job told me about that fire. The only NY shots were the back end of the statute of liberty and Tom Atkins walking into the USPF station. Some interiors were shot on California college grounds.

Nope, I wouldn’t want to be in NY Max either.

Kurt Russell brought his A number One game here. He was channeling Eastwood so perfectly (and Lee Van Cleef’s casting completed the spaghetti western homage). Borgnine and Hayes were as much fun as Harry Dean Stanton (who was 55! when they filmed this in 1980).

I keep rewatching the one scene in Hellraiser where Kirsty (not Kristy) solves the Lament Configuration thereby summoning the Cenobites. The animation, lighting, creatures and other things are so great. Then you have that Doug Bradley basso voice.

 

Hotel Artemis. This one came and went without much attention, which is a pity, because it was a blast. It’s a grimy pressure-cooker B-movie about a bunch of criminals locked up in an underground clinic on the night all the clinic’s careful rules fall apart. Of course, it’s the modern kind of B-movie with top-notch talent and production values — great cinematography, a Cliff Martinez score, a sharp script, and a ridiculously talented cast (among which Dave Bautista is the unlikely standout). It’s fun, energetic, and atmospheric, exactly the kind of original film we should be seeing more of.

 

it's definitely a trip. the makeup, practical and visual effects are all great. i especially like that sort of wavy beam of light effect that is often used in movies of this period that involve some supernatural element. disquieting and beautiful. not sure how that trick is done but it isn't used at all anymore as far as i can tell.

i also like that the story allows for london's utter destruction before the film's "resolution". not just like big ben or something. total. devastation. wonderful!

 

oh Lifeforce is enormous fun ! must admit I hadn't realised Mancini did the score , an unusual choice .

 

Oh, that's interesting. The one shot of the statue of liberty did look legit.

I did notice KR was channeling Clint there a few times. The movie definitely has a Western vibe to it.
And Cabbie is the best. "I've been driving this cab for 30 years!"
*throws a molotov cocktail*
The Duke is cool too. Man does he get it from the President in the end. Wowsers.

And yeah, the scene from Hellraiser when Kirsty solves the LC is well done. The Cenobites are the best part, imo. Excellent design. Great voice indeed.

 

Saw both Aquaman and Into the Spider-Verse today, I liked them both. If you like superhero movies that don't take themselves to serious I recommend them both.

Maybe because they had top men working on it? Top. Men.

 

what? top ramen?

 

Just some film that’s celebrating its 1 year anniversary this weekend. After the the fifth viewing I still like it......very very very much

 

My favorite was a Pitbull song released in 2012 being featured in a scene that took place in 1985

 

Incredibles 2 (2018) – Brad Bird

Wait, I thought you renounced superheros.

Well, I renounce my renouncement.

For a while there, I would typically say The Incredibles was my favorite Pixar film whenever anyone asked. Even back when I was saying it, it was stupid to say I had a favorite, but I’ve given up on that now for sure. There’s no way to have a favorite when you’re confronted with the incredible riches Pixar has given us over the years. Inside Out, though. It’s my favorite now. Still, I was beyond hyped to see the Incredibles return to movie screens and Incredibles 2 does a pretty great job at delivering. The character work is still great and the humor flows out of those personal dynamics as much as it does out of slapstick or punchlines. The movie introduces a boatload of new characters, including a fun roster of supers with bizarre abilities; it’s fun when we get to see them trot out their abilities late in the film. I suppose the real star here is Jack-Jack who is a real handful to say the least. Basically every time he’s on screen I had a huge smile on my face and was laughing a lot. An astonishing backyard smackdown between Jack-Jack and a prowling raccoon is one of the best scenes of the entire year, a beautifully staged action scene and a hilarious slapstick romp rolling into one. It should be said that the action here is tremendously well done. I’ve always said over the years that one of the things that really elevated The Incredibles was just how great the action; it was kind of an action movie as much as it was anything and that holds true here. A scene of Elastigirl going up against a runaway train is pulse-pounding and gripping in the way you’d expect a big budget Marvel action scene to be. I will admit to having some problems with the story. The mystery villain is obvious from the get-go and once said villain just starts taking over everyone in the movie, things got a little dull for me. At just a couple of minutes shy of two hours, it’s a bit long, I think. It’s cool that the opening sequence picks right up where the first movie left off, but that action sequence, in my opinion, could stand a trim. But these are pretty minor complains all things considered. It’s not better than the first film, not even as good I’d say. But when it’s firing on all cylinders, it’s magnificently entertaining. For a sequel coming fourteen years later . . . well, that’s incredible. 3 ½ stars.

tl;dr – not quite to the standard of the first film, this belated sequel has a few issues, but not that many really and when this movie works, it’s phenomenally. 3 ½ stars.