Movies You've Seen Recently

[Raithe]

One thing to take into consideration, it's basically the launch film for the "Dark Monster Universe" franchise, or whatever they're calling it. So they'll be doing updated reboots of Frankenstein, Werewolf, etc and they'll all be part and parcel of the same world and connected together. One of the reasons they have the "secret monster/evil hunting society" is to help establish it all.

[Hurlshort]

One thing to take into consideration, it's basically the launch film for the "Dark Monster Universe" franchise, or whatever they're calling it. So they'll be doing updated reboots of Frankenstein, Werewolf, etc and they'll all be part and parcel of the same world and connected together. One of the reasons they have the "secret monster/evil hunting society" is to help establish it all.

 

Really? That makes it sound way more interesting than the trailers.

[Amentep]

The Monster Hunting society is who Dr. Henry Jekyll (Russell Crowe) is working for...

 

Bride of Frankenstein is the next movie up in the shared universe.

[Gromnir]

The Monster Hunting society is who Dr. Henry Jekyll (Russell Crowe) is working for...

 

Bride of Frankenstein is the next movie up in the shared universe.

am wondering what global threat the bride will represent.

 

btw, we recent read jewel from stoker.  no such explicit global threat from the mummy, and the cataclysm implied were metaphorical at that.  the queen/mummy from stoker weren't exhibiting ww kinda super powers.  weren't raining down biblical plagues on modern cities.  weren't some kinda plan for global domination on the part o' the antagonist.  the queen's supernatural powers were subtle (save for immortality) and largely implied.  the cataclysm her existence and resurrection represented were not literal.  as a display o' the vitality and power o' the egyptian gods, her existence would possible shatter faith in modern notions o' science and christianity.

 

old monster films did rely on more psychological terrors o far more limited scope than am seeing from most cinema today. more adventure. more grandiose scope. get further removed from the nameless thing lurking in the closet or the creature under the bed. is not jungian archetypes or metaphors for sin. modern mummies is ww3 or global biological pandemic or brexit.  universal gonna need their own Justice League Dark to combat monsters who seems more akin to recent comic movie supervillains than the fare from stoker's story.

 

is nothing inherent wrong with a modern studio desiring to utilize a global threat approach to monsters. 21st century problems is bigger. monsters tend to be an embodiment o' the great threats to society and perhaps sin just don't make the cut.  nevertheless, we weep a bit at the loss.   

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited June 8, 2017 by Gromnir

[Blarghagh]

To be fair, none of those old monster movies are scary either.

[algroth]

I've always been more interested in the tragic element behind so many of the classic monsters than the 'scary' elements, myself.

[injurai]

To think Marvel still hasn't put out a movie with a female lead, and the flood wall shows no sign of breaking any time soon. I'm left impressed by WW.

[Hurlshort]

Well, Marvel did put out Elektra.

[Gromnir]

To think Marvel still hasn't put out a movie with a female lead, and the flood wall shows no sign of breaking any time soon. I'm left impressed by WW.

as hurl mentions, elektra were an eponymous lead.  there has also been more than a few female characters in marvel films who deserve co-lead status in ensemble cast.  captain marvel is also in the works.

 

also, while weren't a marvel films release, 'cause marvel films didn't exist at the time, we will observe red sonja were 1985, and the movie protagonist were clear based 'pon the marvel comics character rather than red sonya from a robert e. howard story, a flintlock wielding polish lass with red hair and a temper to match.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[algroth]

I reckon a lot of people speak of the MCU and DCEU specifically when saying Marvel or DC (for example I hear people hating on DC all the while Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy arguably still remain the superhero films to beat), in which case it's true that for all of Disney's inclusive approach they've yet to deliver on a female-led superhero film, be it a full Black Widow film, or a Ms. Marvel/Scarlet Witch for that matter. Following Wonder Woman's success I don't doubt they are right now looking for their own stab at it.

[injurai]

Elektra isn't new marvel, I don't count it.

 

Yeah MCU/DCEU is more apt, those are the media empires that are micromanaged. Which is different from licensing/auteur work like Sony Spiderman or the Nolan-verse.

 

In fact Marvel has seemingly written some of it's best female characters out of prominent roles that would mature with their current runaway power-level problem. Captain Marvel right now is their only hope, and even that film was planned 3 years ago now.

[Hurlshort]

I'm glad WW turned out great, but DC had a series of duds compared to Marvel recently. That certainly doesn't take away from the excellent Nolan trilogy, but they've struggled to counter Marvel's recent success. Heck, they can't even claim to be the more mature universe, what with Logan and Deadpool but going dark in very different ways. 

 

One of the big issues I see is that doing a serious film is tougher than a lighthearted adventure. Then you throw in superheroes, which are a bit silly to begin with, and you get an even more difficult formula. It only seems to work when you get a really stellar performance from an actor, like in The Dark Knight and Logan.

[Volourn]

Pretty much all the Marvel Universe films are duds. All the DC universe films are awesome entertainment. All their films have made tons of money and all their franchises 9including WW0 have out performed many of the Marvel ones  first time through.

 

Bottom line; DC > MARVEL.

 

 

Period.

[ShadySands]

I guess I'm the only one who didn't like the Nolan Batmans

[algroth]

One of the big issues I see is that doing a serious film is tougher than a lighthearted adventure. Then you throw in superheroes, which are a bit silly to begin with, and you get an even more difficult formula. It only seems to work when you get a really stellar performance from an actor, like in The Dark Knight and Logan.

Or a good director, like Nolan and Mangold.

[algroth]

I guess I'm the only one who didn't like the Nolan Batmans

Certainly not the only one, but I for one think they're great. Then again, personally I've found every Nolan film great so far.

[Amentep]

btw, we recent read jewel from stoker.  no such explicit global threat from the mummy, and the cataclysm implied were metaphorical at that.  the queen/mummy from stoker weren't exhibiting ww kinda super powers.  weren't raining down biblical plagues on modern cities.  weren't some kinda plan for global domination on the part o' the antagonist.  the queen's supernatural powers were subtle (save for immortality) and largely implied.  the cataclysm her existence and resurrection represented were not literal.  as a display o' the vitality and power o' the egyptian gods, her existence would possible shatter faith in modern notions o' science and christianity.

Been a couple of decades since I read it; my memory was that there was implication of great powers if not demonstration of such (but again, the memory cheats, if not outright lies at times).

[Gromnir]

 

btw, we recent read jewel from stoker.  no such explicit global threat from the mummy, and the cataclysm implied were metaphorical at that.  the queen/mummy from stoker weren't exhibiting ww kinda super powers.  weren't raining down biblical plagues on modern cities.  weren't some kinda plan for global domination on the part o' the antagonist.  the queen's supernatural powers were subtle (save for immortality) and largely implied.  the cataclysm her existence and resurrection represented were not literal.  as a display o' the vitality and power o' the egyptian gods, her existence would possible shatter faith in modern notions o' science and christianity.

Been a couple of decades since I read it; my memory was that there was implication of great powers if not demonstration of such (but again, the memory cheats, if not outright lies at times).

 

as we noted, there were indeed implication o' some kinda vague supernatural power, but nothing to suggest anything even remote akin to the recent mummy films. leave to reader's imagination. however, cataclysm were actual addressed.  if the queen had biblical plague kinda power, am sure the nature o' the potential cataclysm woulda been described different.  the looming catastrophe were seen as resulting from the queen's existence and resurrection as such were proof of the vitality o' the egyptian gods in a world which had dismissed such stuff as akin to fairy tales.  old world mysticism and new world science come into conflict were nature o' the apocalypse and not rain of fire and rivers of blood.  

 

there were "it was a dark and stormy night" kinda divine warning weather, but such were described as Powers angered by the queen's impending resurrection and not brought 'bout by the queen herself. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Raithe]

Tor - Heart and Humor made the Brendan Fraser Mummy movies great

 

For some selected quotes...

 

It’s not even that there isn’t a damsel in distress—it’s that sometimes that damsel is Evie, and sometimes it’s Rick.

***

Those four characters are so fundamentally charming, and so banged-up, bloody-knuckled, and crumpled from their adventures that you can’t help but root for them. They’re the key to the series’ success, although Arnold Vosloo’s tragic and monstrous Imhotep is also impressive. Together, they give the Mummy movies an emotional core that’s sweet, funny, and tough. And that’s what makes these films so much fun to watch, even now.

***

There’s plenty of hints in 2008’s Tomb of the Dragon Emperor, for example, that she and Rick (oh, we’ll get to Rick) worked special intelligence missions during the war. (In my mind they did this with Atomic Robo, Doctor Henry Jones Junior, and, on occasion, Hellboy.)

***

And that’s what these characters are. Even with Evie’s Egyptian princess ninja skills cropping up in the later movies there’s no hint, at any point, of these folks being unkillable or a sure bet to win. They all screw up, they all make truly spectacular mistakes, and they all take their lumps getting to the end of the movie. That doesn’t just make them relatable, it makes them sympathetic—and that may be the key factor that the new version of The Mummy hasn’t carried through.

[injurai]

I don't even need to see the new mummy to know it's bad. The OG is basically the inspiration for Nathan Drake. Even the Mummy 2 was pretty charming in the character department, despite the obviously worse villain plot.

 

Hollywood is basically in "see what sticks" mode these days.

[Tale]

Perfect Blue

 

It's a movie I was sure I saw once before, right up until I actually started watching it. Nothing like I thought it would be. It's just a great psychological thriller, where I was expecting aliens or monsters or something.

[algroth]

Perfect Blue

 

It's a movie I was sure I saw once before, right up until I actually started watching it. Nothing like I thought it would be. It's just a great psychological thriller, where I was expecting aliens or monsters or something.

I usually enjoy that sort of film (the psychological melodrama involving women and the role they play - see The Red Shoes, Suspiria, Inland Empire as other examples), but this one left me pretty cold. I felt the aesthetic tropes by which it tried to capture a cracked psyche were all pretty standard for the genre and I ultimately had a bit of a "seen it all already" feel with it. In terms of Satoshi Kon films I think it's the weakest of the four I've seen (the only four he released, I think?) - however, if you enjoyed it I would eagerly recommend his follow-up Millennium Actress, a superb trip through the golden decades of Japanese cinema. Tokyo Godfathers is also great.

[Gfted1]

Bad Moms

 

Average with a few laugh out loud moments.

[Raithe]

I knew they'd established that for the Dark Universe that they would be doing The Invisible Man and Frankenstein, but I hadn't realised they had already cast Johnny Depp as The Invisible Man, Javier Bardem as Frankenstein's Monster, and that they'll have Annabelle Wallis' archaeologist making an appearance in all of them.

[Tale]

 

Perfect Blue

 

It's a movie I was sure I saw once before, right up until I actually started watching it. Nothing like I thought it would be. It's just a great psychological thriller, where I was expecting aliens or monsters or something.

I usually enjoy that sort of film (the psychological melodrama involving women and the role they play - see The Red Shoes, Suspiria, Inland Empire as other examples), but this one left me pretty cold. I felt the aesthetic tropes by which it tried to capture a cracked psyche were all pretty standard for the genre and I ultimately had a bit of a "seen it all already" feel with it. In terms of Satoshi Kon films I think it's the weakest of the four I've seen (the only four he released, I think?) - however, if you enjoyed it I would eagerly recommend his follow-up Millennium Actress, a superb trip through the golden decades of Japanese cinema. Tokyo Godfathers is also great.

 

Thanks! I'll have to check it out. And maybe those other movies you mentioned to.