General Films thread
3 February 2016 at 00:31 #50783
@jimthefish We got Paddington when my 7 year old grandaughter was here and we all enjoyed it. Peter was very funny. A few tears were shed here as I love a happy ending. My grandaughter did the “hard stare” at anyone she thought was rude for weeks after we watched it.3 February 2016 at 00:44 #50784
Today I watched a very sweet movie called Cuban Fury. Two of the stars were Nick Frost and Olivia Colman , well known to us in Whoville. The movie was made in 2014 and is the story of a Salsa dancer (Nick Frost) who comes to back to the dance after years of absence. If you like underdog stories or Salsa music and dancing this movie is for you. Nick and Olivia have some hot dance moves. Chris O’Dowd and Rashida Jones also dance their way through the movie.3 February 2016 at 02:07 #50788Anonymous @
Ah, yes Constant Gardener: I agree entirely. Certainly I watched A Most Wanted Man knowing Seymour Hoffman had left us and I was in a state of sadness consequently -it didn’t entirely mash together as a piece. But I loved it -f0r him, I think.
Mmm. yes, I don’t know about the Steve Job’s film either -having said that there were reasons why I liked The Social Network and why many didn’t -the characters were pretty unappealing.
Asked ‘why do you only write characters who are inherently loved?” perhaps Sorkin’s response was to present a good film where the characters were devoid of anything except ‘ambition.’
I don’t know Paddington at all -I see @winston has mentioned it over the page so I will go see….
Puro3 February 2016 at 09:54 #50795JimTheFish @jimthefishTime Lord
@winston — as someone brought up on the old FilmFair Paddingtons, I’ve been trying to perfect the ‘hard stare’ for years to frankly dismal failure….
I was very surprised at just how enjoyable the Paddington film was. I didn’t expect that much but it attained an almost Ealing-esque quality at times… and I love Sally Hawkins. She would be pretty high up on my list for a female Doctor.4 February 2016 at 03:04 #50813
@jimthefish Oh yes , Sally Hawkins would make a great Doctor. A kind and compassionate one I would think.
The grandkid was a lttle too good at the “hard stare” we had to make her stop. She really liked the movie.4 February 2016 at 11:11 #50817
I have yet to watch Paddington. Back when the boys were young we used to watch the FilmFair Paddingtons. I had no idea how old they were at the time. They must have been on their tenth repeat at least. It was one of those kids’ series that transcended age.
Definitely won’t be watching the Steve Jobs film. I am rather tired of the hero worship of people simply because they succeed in making lots of money. Did enjoy Pirates of Silicon Valley though when I watched it at 2.00am one holiday a few years ago after a good many glasses of wine. Certainly had a “made for TV” vibe but was none the worse for that.
Janette4 February 2016 at 18:36 #50824
@janetteb Definitely won’t be watching the Steve Jobs film. I am rather tired of the hero worship of people simply because they succeed in making lots of money.
I have a similar aversion; will wait to see it on TV sometime, maybe. I’d rather see Kung Fu Panda 3, and in fact am going to do so this weekend — good animated films (“The Book of Life”, “Up”) are great palette cleansers, I find, maybe just for the step-back (is it, really?) to a whole different perceptual filter, the wide-open and delight-prone one of a much younger, less darkened self, maybe.26 June 2016 at 12:43 #52921TheDentistOfDavros @thedentistofdavros
So I’ve just watched the new Dad’s Army film and despite my worries it actually wasn’t half bad! I really enjoyed most of it and found that the majority of the cast were up to scratch (still can’t compare with the originals!). It was an entertaining plot that I could definitely see happening in the old series (apart from the major action sequences) and there was plenty of opportunities for a good laugh. The best actors were Gambon as Godfrey (excellent portrayal), Toby Jones as Mainwaring (again brilliant) and Daniel Mays as Walker (great as well). Fraser played by Bill Paterson was good but I felt he needed more screen time as he was probably the least involved of the characters, Pike as well was good but not excellent. This is all just my opinion so what do you guys think?
Now onto the bad stuff, although I said it was entertaining it didn’t have as many jokes or one-liners as I thought there would be and at times it could go up to five minutes without any actual effort at comedy, I really liked the cast but thought that Tom Courtenay as Jones was not very good, Jones is a larger than life character and I thought he played it to quiet and didn’t get the mannerisms spot on, Bill Nighy didn’t impress me either as Wilson but I can’t quite put my finger on why?
I did think overall that it was good enough to deserve another go at, I would love another Dad’s Army movie, the characters are just too good to leave alone! Anyone else see it?3 July 2016 at 13:44 #53055
@thedentistofdavros I have yet to see it but is on my wish list. I loved Dad’s Army when I was a kid and naturally introduced it to my sons when they were growing up. Have you seen the TV Drama about the making of it, We’re Doomed the Dads’ Army Story? I suspect it was inspired by An Adventure in Time and Space. It was also very well done. I feel somewhat ambiguous about the movie as the original actors were the characters. I think I would have preferred a Blackadder Home Guard series, (which was being planned but did not eventuate).
Janette4 July 2016 at 18:39 #53090TheDentistOfDavros @thedentistofdavros
I did indeed watch We’re Doomed and thoroughly enjoyed it! I do remember noting at the time the similarities between it and An Adventure in Space and Time though I think I enjoyed the latter more.
I highly recommend the film and I believe you won’t find it a disappointment but it isn’t as good as the old TV series.7 July 2016 at 10:14 #531521997whovian @1997whovian
I recently watched Pride and Prejudice and Zombies but it wasn’t amazingly good. Matt Smith is the best bit of it.21 July 2016 at 15:02 #53383
Just saw the new Star Trek Movie. I enjoyed it rather more than expected. I have always been rather lukewarm about Star Trek and considerably less than lukewarm about Hollywood movies in general. There were numerous moments when I was reminded of Galaxy Quest but the script was sharp enough, (maybe kudos to Simon Pegg) and the characters engaging. The space scenery is very impressive on big screen. The story was very stock sci fi but thankfully the action scenes, though massively overdone, were not overlong. I was only tempted to pull out my phone once to check on the time. It had the feel of a rather expensive Star Trek episode which isn’t entirely a bad thing.
Janette30 September 2016 at 15:36 #54051Cath Annabel @cathannabel
I’ve been making the most of my membership at the local arthouse cinema in recent weeks, and have had an excellent run of movies:
Two quite dark films:
Childhood of a Leader – (see also comments on the Music thread) – really interesting and powerful but loses its way (IMO) in the final act. It’s a debut for the director, so will watch future films with interest.
Anthropoid – about the Czech resistance, the attack on Heydrich and its aftermath. Grim, but v well done.
Two rather delightful films:
Captain Fantastic – not, as one of my friends assumed, part of the Marvel cinematic universe, but a very funny and touching study in parenting, starring Viggo Mortensen. A lovely film, some elements of the plot perhaps a bit too easy to foresee, but beautifully played and life-affirming.
Hunt for the Wilderpeople – directed by the guy who did the mock-doc What we do in the shadows. This is a delight, v funny and again life affirming, everyone came out of the cinema grinning from ear to ear. However, the slogan ‘No child left behind’ will never sound quite right to you again.
And one exceedingly French film:
Things to come – stars Isabelle Huppert as a philosophy professor reevaluating her life. I would suggest a drinking game relating to any references to philosophers or philosophy texts, but I fear anyone attempting it would be comatose within half an hour or less. However, I do like enigmatic, intellectual French films where v little actually happens, so if you do too, this could be for you.
Enjoy!1 October 2016 at 01:58 #54053Anonymous @
yep, VPN is the way to go -that, or wait it out. 🙂
I know Anthropoid. Would you believe that my Czech 2nd cousin worked on the film?
Unlike my cousin (her father) who is a born again capitalist (takes pictures of the cash he puts under the Christmas tree every year) and her brother (youngest man on the board of directors of a particular Czech company) my 2nd cousin, Mertel, hasn’t had much interest in following in their footsteps.
She did a ‘beauty degree’ which quickly became ‘beauty school drop out,’ turned nanny in the UK and eventually fell into some volunteer work on a variety of Slovakian and Romanian movie productions. She then landed the job of makeup artist for pennies -but loved it.
I know someone in the ‘movies’ (well, sort of)!
Still, I haven’t actually seen the film yet although I did hear, during long, late night phone conversations on her new smartphone (before this she didn’t have a cent to rub with a dime), about some of the fun pranks they played and the typical gag reels.
I expect it will arrive in Brisbane by way of Dendy cinemas for a miserable fortnight. 🙂
Glad to hear you’re well and enjoying some cinema adventures during the extended Who vacation: wondering how plans are going for next year’s university weekend long lecture? What I saw on the internet with regards to topics and ideas was amazing -had I been able to, I would have been there in a second!
PuroSolo2 October 2016 at 08:04 #54081
@cathannabel Thanks for the recce — saw the Wilderpeople and enjoyed it very much, but I hadn’t heard of the Huppert film. Is it a new-ish one of hers? She’s always in interesting movies, though sometimes a tad too rarified for me. This one sounds attractive, though.10 November 2016 at 08:37 #54654
I went to see “Dr. Strange” on Monday, wondering what Cumberbatch would bring to this Marvel Comic story. My verdict: the movie is very pretty to look at, especially through 3D “glasses” — very detailed and impressive CGI. The acting is — appropriate. But it’s really no more than just what it purports to be — a filmed comic book. Where “superheroes” are concerned, that generally means shallow characters, predictable plot, nearly non-stop hyped up violence that has no particular effect apart from knocking over unimportant game pieces, and written in dialog balloons (not much room for words, but that’s okay — not much to say, either). The music is completely forgettable, like most of the story (and it’s a *very* basic story).
One very odd thing, though, really jumped out at me: Strange has a brief confrontation with the Big Bad in which he gets killed, magically comes back and is killed again, over and over maybe 5-6 times, and then [solution by talking, though in this case zipped past so fast you could almost miss it] happens. Very “Heaven Sent”, only soooo *not* . . .
I saw a quote from Cumberbatch, in answer to why he took the job (which probably entails a three-film contract at least), something like: “They backed up a truck full of money to my house; I’m not made of stone!”
Pity. I’ve been hoping he would age up into an interesting actor; maybe he will, but looks like it will be the long way round now. Well, good luck to him; nobody says you *have* to see this generic “origin” story or the inevitable sequels trailing off into infinity.14 November 2016 at 16:47 #54738
Yeah, I’m pretty tired of superhero movies myself @ichabod. One reason I’m really looking forward to “The Return of Doctor Mysterio” is because it’s intriguing to ponder the Doctor, especially the Twelfth Doctor, in that kind of an environment. Maybe it would help if those and other “franchise” films weren’t the only movies out there in wide release these days! When I went to Wizard World Chicago in August, there was an all-trailer panel (which included the Doctor Strange trailer), and aside from the clip for Don’t Breathe (a horror film), all of them were franchise movies and they started blurring together after a while. The most distinct one of the bunch was The Lego Batman Movie, which looks like a lot of fun. 😀
Speaking of franchises and generic stuff…the full-length trailer for Disney’s live-action Beauty and the Beast remake, which opens in March, dropped today. Beauty is my favorite of the Disney animated features, and nothing about this remake is getting me particularly excited…
Also, headed out to see the “Power of the Daleks” reconstruction tonight! But I guess that technically isn’t a movie is it? 😉17 January 2017 at 18:44 #55157
Mark Kermode has said a few words about William Peter Blatty who died last week. He was the writer of ‘The Exorcist’, which Mark thinks is the greatest film ever made – Dr Kermode’s PhD is in horror movies (that is not a joke).22 January 2017 at 04:30 #55181
@ichabod: First time I’ve visited this thread.
I enjoyed Doctor Strange, mostly because I felt the whole thing was done with tongue in cheek and because I’m an admirer fo BC.
The thing about him, is that he likes to try lots of different genres. We have Hamlet, Richard III, Doctor Strange, Sherlock, Startrek, Third Star, Hawking and The imitation Game to name a few. If you can get a truck load of money for making Marvel films, it means being able to pick and choose what you want to do next. As you say, good luck to him.
We are off to see LION on Wednesday, looks very good.
Missy26 January 2017 at 03:28 #55232
We were not disappointed last night. LION was a wonderful film. Dev Patel and Sunny Pawar were supurb.
Why it didn’t get an Oscar is beyond me, but then I haven’t seen, neither do I like musicals.14 February 2017 at 14:19 #55541
I saw The Lego Batman Movie this past weekend. It was a great deal of fun, with surprisingly great action sequences and a more interesting storyline than a lot of “straight” superhero movies. It’s a well-worn basic plot — the lone wolf hero realizes he has to connect with others, despite the risks — but its willingness to play the concept for lots and lots of laughs as well as heart freshens it up considerably. It would make a good double feature with “The Return of Doctor Mysterio”, actually!14 February 2017 at 20:14 #55542
Why it didn’t get an Oscar is beyond me
Probably because they haven’t been dished out yet.
It is nominated for Best Pic, Dev Patel for best supporting actor and Nicole Kidman for best supporting actress,and the film for cinematography, adapted screenplay and music.17 February 2017 at 06:20 #5556722 February 2017 at 19:10 #55634
Rummaged through the DVD collection last night and found an old favourite, “Frankenstein Unbound”, directed by Roger Cormam and starring John Hurt.
The story concerns Hurt as a scientist from the 21st century whose experiments take him (and his car!) back in time to 1817 in Switzerland where he meets Frankenstein’s monster. Trust me, it really is much better than that summary made it sound.
It was only on re-watching that I realized it’s resonance with both the time travel paradoxes of Who (when Who is being thoughtful) and the philosophical issues of the new Battlestar Galactica (which will only become clear if you watch the movie). I recommend you do. It is an enjoyable guilty pleasure. Here is a clip (and apologies for the fact that the dialogue is out of sync; but in a funny way that plays into the themes it deals with).22 February 2017 at 19:28 #55635
Rummaged through the DVD collection last night and watched an old favourite, “Frankenstein Unbound”, directed by Roger Corman and starring John Hurt.
In the story Hurt plays a scientist from the 21st century whose experiments accidentally open up a rift in time where he is transported (along with his car!) back to 1817 in Switzerland where he meets Frankenstein’s monster. Trust me, it is much better than that summary probably made it sound!
It was only on re-watching it that I realized it’s resonance with both the time travel paradoxes and ethical issues of Who (when Who is being thoughtful) and the philosophical issues of the new version of Battlestar Galactica (which will become clear if you watch the movie). I recommend you do. It is an enjoyable guilty pleasure. Here is a clip (and apologies for the fact that the dialogue is out of sync–but in a funny way that plays into the themes of the movie).18 March 2017 at 12:03 #55824
I saw Disney’s much-hyped Beauty and the Beast remake yesterday morning. Oof, it was bad.
I was 13 when the original animated movie came out and it’s my favorite Disney film, and one of my favorite movies period. I watched it again a few weeks ago, and it more than holds up — just 84 minutes with credits, but it’s alive with joy, melodrama, and humor.
This remake is 129 minutes with credits, but not only is little of substance added (who wants to hear about Belle AND the Beast’s deceased mums?), even when it’s just sticking to near-recreations of the original’s songs and setpieces, it’s lifeless. There’s no building of tension or atmosphere; a comparison I’ve heard (the Chicago Tribune pan) is to a stage musical that’s on its second national tour and 300th performance, when everybody’s just going through the motions. There are some intentionally funny moments and good supporting performances, but the leads are flat (it doesn’t help that this is one of the least-beastly Beasts ever), the singing is serviceable, and much of the knockabout humor of the original is gone. This should be a tearjerking melodrama to the nth degree, but my eyes were dry except for about 30 seconds involving Belle’s mum’s backstory, which was expertly handled.
I will admit that the half-full audience around me, mostly women around my age, loved this film. I felt bad for not being able to be swept up in it all.
I do have to wonder how much better this film could have been if Rachel Talalay directed it! She knows a thing or two about mysterious castles and broody heroes. 😉
Who-connection — the Great Intelligence of “The Snowmen”, Sir Ian McKellan, plays Cogsworth the clock here.21 March 2017 at 04:56 #55839
@missrori Thanks for the review. Sounds about as expected, unfortunately. Yesterday’s NYT had a long article on a new musical being planned for Broadway — a musical version of the film “Groundhog Day”. Well . . . who knows, I guess. IMO, the best movie ever made about reincarnation. I don’t give much for its chances on a stage.21 March 2017 at 17:28 #55840
@ichabod I’m a theatre buff too, and I’ve heard a lot about the Groundhog Day musical from its original run in Stratford-on-Avon. (The creative team was responsible for the very much loved stage version of Roald Dahl’s Matilda, so there was a lot of advance hope and hype for this one.) Some people who have seen it there or in previews in N.Y.C. love it, but others think it just doesn’t translate to stage musical terms.
Mainstream musical theatre has been big on adapting movies to the stage for the past two decades or so. Disney has made beaucoup bucks with such productions (Frozen arrives next spring), and alongside Groundhog Day Broadway’s about to see stage versions of Amelie and the non-Disney animated feature Anastasia this spring alone!
Also another spring entry, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, is technically an adaptation of Dahl’s most famous children’s novel rather than either of its film adaptations, but they’re working a bunch of songs from the famous 1971 film into an otherwise new score. I saw that show in the West End in 2014, and at that point it only incorporated one old song and was a fabulous, fresh adaptation of the book. But apparently that’s not good enough for audiences who prefer reheated leftovers. Which is a good way to describe that Beauty and the Beast remake: Reheated leftovers, stretched out with some starchy filler.25 March 2017 at 23:29 #55861
If you have yet to see it, then stop whatever you are doing and watch Arrival. The most intelligent and thoughtful SF I have seen for ages. It is very much about language, how it is constructed and how it constructs. You will never look at palindromes in quite the same way again.26 March 2017 at 13:39 #55862
@pedant I saw Arrival twice when it came out and thought it should win all the Oscars. Is a piece of brilliance. Got it on DVD on Frday and watched it again yesterday. It really is something else. Can’t believe it hasn’t got more praise.
The extras on the DVD are pretty good too.27 March 2017 at 06:04 #55867
Re- Beauty and the Beast. Damn, my husband and I are going to see this.
We are talking about the same film aren’t we? Richard. E. Grant played The Great Intelligence in The Snowmen.
Missy27 March 2017 at 17:07 #55871
@missy Well, they both played the Intelligence, after a fashion. McKellan provided the voice of its disembodied form in “The Snowmen” only, while Grant played its physical host/form in it and later appearances. 🙂
As for Beauty and the Beast, a lot of people seem to love it, so maybe you and your husband will too. Takes all kinds, and I am often the odd person out, emphasis on odd.27 March 2017 at 17:12 #55872
@craig and @pedant I suppose I’ll have to catch up with Arrival sometime. I’ve heard almost nothing but great things, and how it’s a movie we need right now. As for the awards groups, well, they rarely ever appreciate science fiction and fantasy as they should. Look how they’ve been passing over Doctor Who lately! 😉28 March 2017 at 04:05 #55888
Ah, I thought you meant the actual actor who played the part of TGI., so point taken.
Missy9 May 2017 at 20:19 #57315
For those of a certain age, there has been a trailer released for the sequel to Bladerunner. Ryan Gosling takes the lead this time but Harrison Ford is in there too (which might not mean he’s a replicant after all – maybe). It’s directed by Denis Villeneuve who, I think, has been the stand-out film director of recent years with “Sicario” and “Arrival”. I have high hopes.9 May 2017 at 20:46 #57316
I’ve seen things you people wouldn’t believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.
I don’t know, @craig. That was one the most brilliant endings ever (I see Rutger Hauer’s death as the real ending of the story). I too, have high hopes, but I wonder if we really need a sequel, if you know what I mean.9 May 2017 at 21:07 #57317
@blenkinsopthebrave It could be bad, but Villeneuve has shown he can direct well in multiple genres, and Ridley Scott is involved too. Like you I hope it doesn’t tarnish the original. But if they found a story that works, why not? And we get Roger Deakins photography, just for that it may almost be worth it. It’s like an update on the Eighties style of the original, including old Atari logos. And the score is also a throw back to Vangelis (not sure if it’s by him or not). If nothing else it’s already a nice homage.9 May 2017 at 21:24 #57318
Of course I agree with everything you say. And I will be watching it for all your reasons. It is just that there was something left unknowable about the original (the 1982 version, not the Director’s cuts) that I hope they do not provide answers to. I remember great conversations in the share house I was in at the time (with wood lice as well, actually) and we discussed whether Deckard was himself a replicant. And the beauty of the movie was that it was mysterious on a number of levels. I am all in favour of retaining the mystery.
A bit like the original Alien. What was that gigantic creature seemingly welded into the seat in the spaceship that they discovered? It was the mystery of not knowing that added to the grandeur of the movie. I don’t really want a sequel or prequel that explains it all. Prometheus tried to explain it, and it lessened its impact. Now we are promised even more explanations in Covenant that the alien isn’t even alien. Sometimes, less is more.9 May 2017 at 21:27 #57319Mudlark @mudlark
I wonder if we really need a sequel, if you know what I mean.
My first reaction also. The original set the standard by which I judge all subsequent SF films and it isn’t often that sequels live up to the original. On the other hand @craig is right: with the people involved it is unlikely to be a complete dud, and judging by the trailer they have captured at least something of the look and tone of the original.9 May 2017 at 21:49 #57321
@blenkinsopthebrave @mudlark I have to admit that Prometheus left me feeling that Scott may have lost his way (like you am not that keen on the next Alien movie either). What gives me hope is that he has handed over to Villeneuve.
I had this conversation last night on Twitter with a huge Blade Runner fan in L.A. who was a little disappointed in the trailer. The visuals, the soundtrack, the atmosphere all seem to be perfect, but in the end it will be down to the script. Prometheus had a flawed (I’m being polite) script. But I hope Villeneuve will have had the clout to make it his way.9 May 2017 at 22:09 #57323
@blenkinsopthebrave @mudlark I should’ve added that I think Villeneuve is one of the most high profile ambiguous film makers around today. Arrival has confused a lot of people (although I think I get it, he says, probably overly smugly), and Sicario is a bit like No Country For Old Men, in which the main character isn’t really the main character by the end of the movie (sorry if that’s a spoiler).
I think we’re probably in good hands. It is not going to be an obvious narrative.9 May 2017 at 22:29 #57324
I highly recommend the story upon which “Arrival” is based. “story of your life” by Ted Chiang. Can probably be found for free on the web. Only about 50 pages long. A brilliant science fiction story. They had to change it a bit for the movie, and perhaps the brilliance of the story’s construction doesn’t work as well on screen, but I agree that he is a talented filmmaker. Apparently, he may be going to make “Dune” as well.9 May 2017 at 22:30 #57325
And it comes out the day before my birthday.
Arrival is a work of genius. If it has only essence of that invention, it will be fine. But I suspect it will have more.
I always feel that Sean Young never quite gets the credit she should for Rachael. A study in prissy condescension gradual dismantled. Also, best introductory line ever.
Do you like our owl?9 May 2017 at 22:47 #57326
@blenkinsopthebrave I’ve read it, but thanks. And when the DVD was realeased in the UK they gave away a free copy of the book of his short stories. All of them are really good.
Yes, I’ve heard the rumour Villeneuve is doing Dune next. I have to say, he doesn’t do things by half! I’d be petrified by a Blade Runner sequel and probably rather die than tackle the monsterous Dune. If I was of Italian origin I’d probably say he has big balls. (apologies to the easily offended).
@pedant Completely agree re Arrival. Check out Sicario too if you haven’t already.9 May 2017 at 22:57 #57327JimTheFish @jimthefishTime Lord
The trailer looks promising and (to echo the above) Arrival was excellent. I do worry that it might fall into the current trend of movies brilliantly recreating the style and look of the originals but failing to to pay due attention to the substance. The Force Awakens was guilty of this (and by the looks of it Alien Covenant is too).
I agree with @blenkinsopthebrave (I too prefer the original cut btw) that if it can add the Blade Runner world without tampering with the ambiguity of the original then it could be great. Treading a more Rogue One than Force Awakens line, if you like. (Or indeed AG Who.)11 May 2017 at 12:48 #57353
@jimthefish and others, the early reviews for Alien: Covenant have been dreadful, alas.
As for the trend you mention Jim the Fish, this is all too true, and not just with belated sequels. The Beauty and the Beast remake was, in many ways, slavishly faithful to the original film even as it translated the look of a cel-animated feature into a different medium — much dialogue used verbatim, similar staging in some of the musical numbers, etc. But it added next to nothing of substance in its additional 40 minutes of screentime.29 May 2017 at 21:40 #58228wolfweed @wolfweed
What happens if you find the Doctor’s shades?29 May 2017 at 23:01 #58233lisa @lisa
Love this movie! Thought about this last season when the Doctor first started wearing
the glasses. I was wondering if an homage would happen? There are
some parallels . Now the Doctor has to figure out how to ‘cut the broadcasted/ televised/
webcasted / signals” like Nada did in “They Live”. I think that the sunglasses
will reveal the truth for the Doctor to help him fight against the Monks enslavement .
I’ve been stuck on the pyramid. It seems the source of power for the Monks. Possibly as an
emitter/projector sending out the simulation signals. This episode was I think another simulation.
They cured the Doctors blindness with a ‘magic trick’ which is why I think that.
So if the pyramid is a great big projector machine it shouldn’t be too hard to find
the off switch?30 May 2017 at 01:43 #58238
Another post gone walkabout – some time after @wolfweeds #58228, and I’m sure it initially posted (did you get a notification, wolfweed?) Nothing consequential in the post, but strays are worth noting.21 August 2017 at 20:29 #61768
Watching all the people in the US on the news, staring at the sky and watching the eclipse, suddenly reminded me of “Night of the Comet”. It’s on NetFlix and also I think on YouTube (illegally, but, y’know).
It’s a cheesy, 80s B-Movie, and the acting is pretty bad, but it’s brilliant. A must see – especially if you remember the 80s, and it has one of the best uses of “Girls Just Wanna Have Fun” ever. From Wikipedia:
Vincent Canby of The New York Times called it “a good-natured, end-of-the-world B-movie” whose “humor augments rather than upstages the mechanics of the melodrama”. Author Neil Gaiman wrote in 1985 that the film was “one of the most amusing, witty, imaginative, and thought-provoking films I’ve seen that was made with no budget and is also cheap exploitation.”
It has since become a cult film. Keith Phipps of The Dissolve wrote that the film’s cult following comes from how matter-of-factly it treats its weird premise. The film was voted number 10 in Bloody Disgusting’s Top 10 Doomsday Horror Films in 2009. Maroney’s character was an influence on Joss Whedon when he created Buffy Summers of Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
How could you not want to watch a movie that helped inspire Buffy? Plus, we might be nearing the end of the world – get in training! 🙂
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.