Posts by Richard Hernandez13

Time magazine didn't hold back at all when they slapped it with the title of 'worst movie of the year.'

The whole copyright situation is still such a mess right now, so I honestly can't say for sure whether they'll even move forward with filming the project.

NO!

my🙂

This movie is nothing more than a pure, concentrated exercise in style. It feels like Tarantino is just trying to exorcise all those lingering demons from the nineties out of his system.

driftingorca24 said:I’m totally on board with this idea, but I do have one little question—who exactly is going to be stepping up as the moderators?

Well, anyone who wants to join the team will need to tackle a pretty intense Star Wars Trivia Quiz, and honestly, whoever comes out on top gets the moderator spot.😁

Alright, I’ve gone ahead and pinned this as a top topic while the Jedi Council handles the moderator deciding process. 😁

It’s honestly such a shame because this is easily one of the most underrated films of the year.

To really wrap your head around it and get the full experience, you probably need a little bit of background context—kind of like how you'd approach watching Adaptation or Far from Paradise.

Nicole Morgan55 said:Hold on just a second there! Are you actually saying you ripped that track straight from the movie soundtrack, or did you just hunt down an MP3 online? Or is it something else entirely? 🤔

Think about the musical notes, though! He actually taught her how to play them!

Honestly, you internet-reliant generations are something else. 1😁😛 😉

I was just reading an article in Roger Ebert's column about how theater owners down in the South are also cutting corners at the audience's expense—apparently, it's become a common tactic to just dim the projector bulb to save a few bucks. Sure, they might get a slightly lower utility bill from Exelon, but the movies end up being almost unwatchable because of it.

....

Gregory Green32, it’s great that The New York Times published a Letter to the editor regarding this -> but I honestly worry that we're looking at special interest lobbying here rather than anyone actually caring about the moviegoers or the quality of the experience. The New York Times generally prides itself on its 'independence' and 'objectivity.' 😢

Donna Nelson23 said:I am seriously looking forward to this movie, especially since it looks like most of the cast will be British actors and there’s even talk about bringing in some folks from Monty Python.

Actually, Terry Jones from Python was such a close friend of Adams.

To be honest, this whole project has been stuck in pre-production for what feels like forever; Adams spent years tinkering away at a script that just never seemed to make it past the starting line.

melloweagle26 said:When you think about truly unique phenomena in the world of film scoring, the James Bond series definitely stands in a league of its own.

I mean, just look at John Barry—this guy had such a massive, undeniable impact on nineties pop music. Whether people were performing tributes to his work, sampling his iconic sounds, or just straight-up lifting his melodies (some might say there isn't much difference between the two 😁), his influence was everywhere.

Alright, we’ve finally rounded up all the suggestions and narrowed them down to our finalists.

Now, the ball is officially in your court.

The choice is yours!

cosmictrucker132 said:👍

Oh man, yeah... you definitely had a moment back in the old signature days when you used to go with that "your mother ate my dog" line... 😁 I think that was from way back then, wasn't it?

👍

I actually picked up this movie on a disc once... and the cover specifically said "Braindead," but then the actual movie starts and says it's titled "Dead Alive"... does anyone know why?

Well, "Dead Alive" was just the title used for the US release—apparently, there was already a movie called "Braindead" out here at the time.

I honestly fell in love with Jackson's style the very first time I saw "Heavenly Creature" at the American Film Institute about seven or eight years ago; it’s easily one of the best films from the nineties.

fadedsailor932 said:...There’s enough here for one solid Hollywood blockbuster😁

...actually, maybe even a whole franchise. 😁

I actually thought the movie was pretty good.

It’s living proof that a great film doesn't necessarily need a solid plot. Honestly, it’s more like proof that a great movie doesn't even have to have a story at all. Rodriguez seems to be having more fun than he ever has before—it would be almost impossible for anyone to take this flick seriously. Even the version of Mexico he shows us isn't the actual Mexico we know; it feels more like some sort of parallel dimension (think Quentin Tarantino). It’s basically Rodriguez’s own personal spin on a modern-day Wild West.

BTW, did anyone else catch that the whole thing was shot on a digital video camera?

silentpilot6 said:Here’s a second example for you. Take a seasoned pro like James Cameron. I’m not sure if any of you have actually sat down and watched his Ghost of Mars 🤮 🙂

It was John Carpenter, not Cameron.

Ghost of Mars is really his best of work—it was intentionally crafted with that trashy, campy vibe (plus some great old-school metal 😁), mostly because here in the States, people tend to view Carpenter as a bit of a washed-up figure. Honestly, though, the French absolutely adore him. 😁

Ghost of Mars acts more like a tribute to B-horror, B-westerns, and the classic John Carpenter style.

silentpilot6 said:The question is actually pretty straightforward. If, say, 99% of the audience and 99% of the critics all agree that a movie is total garbage, how is it possible that the director or the screenwriter doesn't see it, or just doesn't care? That's what I'm asking.

Well, the thing is, art doesn't truly exist until someone actually watches, listens to, or reads it—so that feeling of whether something is "trash" or "masterpiece" is entirely about subjective impression. What we generally label as a masterpiece is usually just a matter of a larger or smaller consensus.
For instance, if you personally think those Lord of the Rings movies are absolute junk (and let's not get into why 😉), you're going up against the fact that 99% of audiences and critics consider them top-tier cinematic achievements.

So, who's actually wrong in that scenario? You, or them?

Eric Jackson43 said:If 80% of people can point out all the flaws in some total piece of junk, why can't someone just do the same for the director before the movie even hits theaters? (I know that's supposed to happen, but we still end up with garbage and movies that get ruined by stupid little details).

Are you talking about test screenings?
The whole point of those is usually just to sand down any unique edges until the potential audience becomes one giant, boring consensus—that’s how movies turn into pure mediocrity.

The real issue here is that directors spend way more time actually making a movie than the audience spends watching it. When you’re grinding away at a project for three or four years, you completely lose your ability to judge quality objectively. You end up with movies that look absolutely terrible on paper but turn out to be gems, while other projects look perfect in theory and end up being total disasters.

...I was actually just diving into the special features for the Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King Extended Edition, and there’s this one moment where Andrew Jackson expresses this hilarious desire to be hypnotized once the whole trilogy is finished. He basically wants someone to wipe his memory so he can forget he spent eight years working on them and forget he ever even saw them—that way, he could sit down in a theater like a regular viewer who has no idea what's coming and finally judge the work based solely on what works and what doesn't.

My take on George Lucas is a bit different; I think it really comes down to the massive expectations set by the fanbase. They’ve placed the Star Wars trilogy on such a high pedestal, calling it the greatest story ever told, that they were essentially expecting the cinematic equivalent of a 'second coming of Jesus Christ' from any new installment 😕.
As for George Lucas, he just made the kind of movie he wanted to make—something fun and breezy for a Saturday afternoon, which is exactly what the originals felt like to me.

Danny Elfman is basically Tim Burton's go-to composer. Honestly, even when Howard Shore was working on the score for "Ed Wood," he pretty much had to lean into that signature Elfmanesque style to get it right.
Lately, it feels like he’s being tapped for every single comic book adaptation or graphic novel movie out there—think "Hulk," "Spider-Man," or "Men in Black"—and I guess it makes sense, since "comic book-ish" is probably the very first thing that pops into your head when you hear his score.

...and let's not forget, the guy is also the mastermind behind the main title theme for "The Simpsons." 👍

...

...and hey, we shouldn't overlook the fact that his niece-in-law is quite a looker, too. 😁