Does Shia wreck it? I love old-timey gangster flicks, but am very leery of spending money to see anything with that charisma-less twerp in it.

Monterey Jack wrote:Does Shia wreck it? I love old-timey gangster flicks, but am very leery of spending money to see anything with that charisma-less twerp in it.

He's still the weak link, but because the character is supposed to be a wimpy, timid sort, it worked fine and he was more believable as a result. I wouldn't avoid it just because he's in it.

Does he do that stammering "nonononononono" crap?

Monterey Jack wrote:Does he do that stammering "nonononononono" crap?

No, but the character, if you see the movie, is supposed to be this weak willed, cant-pull-the-trigger type, so it sort of plays to his strengths (what little they are lol). Joanne did not think he was annoying either in this one either -- though, as usual, you could see any number of other actors doing a better job.

Airport (1970) 8.5 of 10

The Blu-Ray looks magnificent and reveals many details I hadn't seen before. My one disappointment was the total lack of bonus content related to the film itself because it merited SOME kind of commentary track or documentary. I think over time as the years go by what makes this film so fascinating is not that it ushered in the era of the disaster film but that it really in a detailed way shows us a picture of what air travel itself was once like that is gone forever in the age of security threats, terrorism etc. The authenticity of shooting at Minneapolis International Airport also lets us hear the ambience of what a modern airport was like in that era with announcements for airlines that have long since vanished into history (Braniff, Eastern, TWA).

Oh and of course the anti-abortion subtext of the film also stands out as refreshing today.

Red Tails: 6.5/10

Truly impressive dogfight sequences manage to buoy a relentlessly cliche-ridden screenplay in this well-intentioned but somewhat dull look at the black experience in WWII. Nice Terence Blanchard score, too, although the hammond organ licks are awfully stereotypical and anachronistic in this 40's setting.

Also chased it with Steven Spielberg's "The Mission" episode from Amazing Stories, which I've loved since I was eleven. If every episode of the show was as good as this one, it might have lasted longer than two seasons on the air...

Island At The Top Of The World (1974) 6 of 10

-In anticipation of the pending arrival of Jarre's score CD with my Intrada order I decided to give the film another look. The score is fine, though not the best Jarre I've heard. The film itself I can still remember seeing when I was five in its pairing with the re-release of "Winnie The Pooh And Tigger Too" and I can recall I think getting impatient with the fact that I was waiting forever to see the cartoon!

The film is a microcosm of the frozen state of the Disney company in the mid-1970s where after Walt's death, they only led by one philosophy "What would Walt do?" That's the reason why this film looks on all levels like a film that was made in 1964 instead of 1974. If one can view it on the same level as an early 60s B-movie in the tradition of say, the Irwin Allen early 60s fluff like "The Lost World" it comes off better.

The one thing that was unfortunate about the film's failure that isn't widely known is that it scuttled some ambitious plans for Disney World where a whole new "Discovery Bay" theme area based around many of the setpieces of "Island" (along with some Verne style trappings) was on the drawing board and represented, according to Disney park historians, some truly ambitious theme ride ideas. But when the film flopped, the Disney management had no desire to see a constant reminder of a financial failure and figured guests wouldn't find the rides appealing based on that so the plans (like so many would-be ideas for the Disney parks) went by the boards.

The Bad And The Beautiful (1952) 8 of 10

First time I'd ever seen this film, and I hadn't realized until last night I had an old TCM recording stashed away that I'd never gotten around to watching! Very well-acted and tightly constructed (though the final Dick Powell segment seems a bit too rushed) and of course I have my first introduction to Raksin's score which prompted me to seek out a used copy of the old Rhino release on Amazon.


The Cincinnati Kid (1965) 7 of 10

Watched the Blu-Ray for the first time. I have to admit the transfer is so good that one thing I forgot was that this film is a period piece set in the 30s, which really doesn't become evident until you see all the old cars and there's never really any direct mention of topical things to ground the story in that decade other than the clothes and cars. McQueen's great as is the rest of the cast and the playout of the story which is basically the Hustler with poker instead of pool works well. Good Schifrin score that I can now enjoy to full effect on the OOP FSM CD set I bought long ago for "rainy day" occasions when I would finally see the movie again and get a chance to better connect with the score.

Planet Of The Apes (2001): 7/10

I think this might be the only forum in the world I feel safe in admitting I actually like Tim Burton's wacky, underrated riff on the Apes franchise. True, it's not nearly as good as last year's terrific Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes...there's no deep emotional connection to any of the characters, and Mark Wahlberg is gravely miscast (dude always sounds out of breath). Plus, it's the least "Burtonian" thing Burton has ever made, but considering how his "auteur" style has become a trap of self-parody over his last few films, that's actually sort of refreshing. No Johnny Depp mugging! No pale faces with dark-ringed eyes! No charcoal-grey color schemes! And Danny Elfman's throbbing score is fantastic. Even the insane, WTF? ending I kind of dig...just a shame we never got a sequel to explore what the hell Burton and his screenwriters were smoking when they concocted it. Anyways, this ranks with Spider-Man 3 as the kind of flawed-yet-compelling genre film that you're likely to get skinned alive if you mention you like it on the majority of film discussion message boards.

Eric Paddon wrote:The Bad And The Beautiful (1952) 8 of 10

First time I'd ever seen this film, and I hadn't realized until last night I had an old TCM recording stashed away that I'd never gotten around to watching! Very well-acted and tightly constructed (though the final Dick Powell segment seems a bit too rushed) and of course I have my first introduction to Raksin's score which prompted me to seek out a used copy of the old Rhino release on Amazon.

I love that movie...excellent all the way around, including Raksin's score. Didn't see the sequel though.

Monterey Jack wrote:Planet Of The Apes (2001): 7/10

I think this might be the only forum in the world I feel safe in admitting I actually like Tim Burton's wacky, underrated riff on the Apes franchise. True, it's not nearly as good as last year's terrific Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes...there's no deep emotional connection to any of the characters, and Mark Wahlberg is gravely miscast (dude always sounds out of breath). Plus, it's the least "Burtonian" thing Burton has ever made, but considering how his "auteur" style has become a trap of self-parody over his last few films, that's actually sort of refreshing. No Johnny Depp mugging! No pale faces with dark-ringed eyes! No charcoal-grey color schemes! And Danny Elfman's throbbing score is fantastic. Even the insane, WTF? ending I kind of dig...just a shame we never got a sequel to explore what the hell Burton and his screenwriters were smoking when they concocted it. Anyways, this ranks with Spider-Man 3 as the kind of flawed-yet-compelling genre film that you're likely to get skinned alive if you mention you like it on the majority of film discussion message boards.

Now you've made me want to grab my Blu-Ray and watch this again...damn you MJ, I've got other crap I have to throw on first!! lol

You nailed it -- I always loved that opening credits sequence with Elfman's score -- and the film is problematic (and Wahlberg was obviously choice #12 on the list), but it's got a lot of good things going for it. People acted like it bombed, and it didn't -- almost $180 million domestic in 2001 was nothing to sneeze at. But, I think it was sort of a Superman Returns like deal where even though it recouped the budget, the problems they had making it combined with what they felt was lackluster public reaction made them freeze when it came to keeping the series going.

AndyDursin wrote:People acted like it bombed, and it didn't -- almost $180 million domestic in 2001 was nothing to sneeze at. But, I think it was sort of a Superman Returns like deal where even though it recouped the budget, the problems they had making it combined with what they felt was lackluster public reaction made them freeze when it came to keeping the series going.

At least POTA made an actual profit...$380 million worldwide on a $100 million budget (unlike Superman Returns' $200 million U.S. take on a $250+ million budget). And as far as not making a sequel due to "lackluster public reaction", since when has that ever made a difference to Hollywood bean counters? Have you EVER met anyone who liked any of those horrible Transformers movies? Yet each one made about a billion worldwide, so they keep cranking them out, despite the poisonous reviews and "meh" reactions from viewers. I honestly don't know where the hell the storyline would have went from the ending of the first, but you would have thought that Fox would have franchised the HELL out of that film, considering they milked the original Apes for every last drop of profits (four sequels and two different TV shows, plus merchandizing up the wazoo). At least Rise Of... was well-received enough -- both commercially and critically -- to get a sequel greenlit. It's just an interesting facet of today's ridiculously bloated budgets when even a film as profitable of Burton's POTA can't get a sequel off the ground...unless you make Transformers or Pirates Of The Caribbean money (or are a dirt-cheap franchise to begin with...what Resident Evil movie are we up to now, five? ), it seems more difficult that ever to keep a franchise started these days. Nowadays, they'll just let a potential franchise wither on the vine and die, then "reboot" it half-a-decade later, a la the totally unneccesary Amazing Spider-Man. Then again, this practice led to Rise Of..., so it occasionally turns out okay.

Monterey Jack wrote:

AndyDursin wrote:People acted like it bombed, and it didn't -- almost $180 million domestic in 2001 was nothing to sneeze at. But, I think it was sort of a Superman Returns like deal where even though it recouped the budget, the problems they had making it combined with what they felt was lackluster public reaction made them freeze when it came to keeping the series going.

At least POTA made an actual profit...$380 million worldwide on a $100 million budget (unlike Superman Returns' $200 million U.S. take on a $250+ million budget). And as far as not making a sequel due to "lackluster public reaction", since when has that ever made a difference to Hollywood bean counters? Have you EVER met anyone who liked any of those horrible Transformers movies? Yet each one made about a billion worldwide, so they keep cranking them out, despite the poisonous reviews and "meh" reactions from viewers. I honestly don't know where the hell the storyline would have went from the ending of the first, but you would have thought that Fox would have franchised the HELL out of that film, considering they milked the original Apes for every last drop of profits (four sequels and two different TV shows, plus merchandizing up the wazoo). At least Rise Of... was well-received enough -- both commercially and critically -- to get a sequel greenlit. It's just an interesting facet of today's ridiculously bloated budgets when even a film as profitable of Burton's POTA can't get a sequel off the ground...unless you make Transformers or Pirates Of The Caribbean money (or are a dirt-cheap franchise to begin with...what Resident Evil movie are we up to now, five? ), it seems more difficult that ever to keep a franchise started these days. Nowadays, they'll just let a potential franchise wither on the vine and die, then "reboot" it half-a-decade later, a la the totally unneccesary Amazing Spider-Man. Then again, this practice led to Rise Of..., so it occasionally turns out okay.

Yeah, it's all about expectations and cost. You're right, SUPERMAN RETURNS had a higher budget and turned less of a profit. I guess my thought is that both that, and the Burton APES, were costly productions with very high expectations. I don't know what Fox was hoping the Burton APES would do, but I think the project was something of a headache for them, and while it made money, I guess they felt it was more trouble than it was worth going forward. The Transformers films were all crap, you're right -- but they made INSANE amounts of money. They can blow huge budgets on those when the films are close to generating a billion worldwide per installment (at least the last one was). The return on the Burton Apes (under $400 mil worldwide) was a bit under expectations and I'm guessing after it faded after the opening week -- and probably got low audience scores and the like -- they figured it wasn't worth continuing. Has Burton ever spoken a lot about it? Maybe he had no interest in going forward too, which might've been a factor for them. (As much as I liked it, I still would've LOVED to have seen the Cameron/Schwarzenegger planned take).

RISE... was like the total reverse of the Burton film: opened well, but kept on going from word of mouth. Even though "it only did $176 million," it was also produced on a smaller budget than the Burton Apes ($100 mil in 2001 vs. a $93 mil budget 10 years later means it was significantly lower when inflation is factored in). Plus, I think they know people liked it -- a lot -- and that's something they CAN tell from the word of mouth it generated, plus audience scores, critic reviews, video sales, etc. They also probably figure they're going to hit paydirt with the sequel in 2014 and I guarantee it'll end up doing even better than RISE did because this movie had to generate a whole new base of fans on its own terms, separated from the Burton movie and the old series. Now that they've got it established again, it'll be interesting to see how well the sequel does (I'm going to wager very well indeed, especially if the film is as good as RISE was).

Of course, will Fox give them a bigger budget this time out? I'm going to imagine they will, because the storyline might warrant it, and certainly the product was worth it on the prior picture. But with that comes more expectations for the film to perform.

All I know is this --Keep the budget in check and keep making money, and you'll be fine. These Resident Evil flicks have funded Milla Jovovich's vacation homes all over the planet lol

mkaroly wrote:I love that movie...excellent all the way around, including Raksin's score. Didn't see the sequel though.

"Two Weeks In Another Town" (which ironically, I'd already seen in order to have a reason to get the FSM CD before it was sold out) isn't a sequel, it's just a similarly themed film that used Douglas again and also Minelli directing again and Raksin scoring again.

Eric Paddon wrote:

mkaroly wrote:I love that movie...excellent all the way around, including Raksin's score. Didn't see the sequel though.

"Two Weeks In Another Town" (which ironically, I'd already seen in order to have a reason to get the FSM CD before it was sold out) isn't a sequel, it's just a similarly themed film that used Douglas again and also Minelli directing again and Raksin scoring again.

I remember getting the FSM CD when one of my local Tower Records was closing down. $4.99, what a bargain!