Joshua Kern said:For anyone out there who lives for a good action saga, I’d suggest checking out two relatively recent entries: Marine and Rounds. Both series were produced by the WWE, and what's interesting is that they swap out the lead actor in every single installment—though, naturally, they're all wrestlers. In the first film of both franchises, you get to see the famous wrestler and occasional actor John Cena taking center stage. They are quite decent, really solid, old-school action movies if you're looking for that specific vibe.
Ugh, I happened to catch some of that... honestly, it's pretty bad trash, even by old-school standards.
Maybe I should have voted for some alternative pick, but since I just went with the options provided, Dirty Harry is the only one that truly hits the mark for me. Die Hard, for instance, falls into that category of terrible flicks where they feel forced to inject comedic relief through Bruce Willis’s clownish outbursts—it’s exhausting. And every sequel just seems to be more about smashing as much property as possible. LW is actually watchable for the first two installments, while Mission: Impossible feels like nothing more than overstuffed, forced adrenaline rushes. Bourne is just okay, though I suppose Matt Damon is a solid actor. James Bond drags on far too long, and Rambo... well, that's just background noise while you're dusting off your bookshelves.
northerncobra31 said:Maybe some Bulgarian studios should try making a movie like that; then you'd get to sit through all that over-the-top Bulgarian melodrama, Jesus...
🤦 Honestly, Americans have plenty of much better movies than Armageddon—and they come with way less cheesy sentimentality, jeez.
"Miss Stamper? Colonel Willie Sharp, United States Air Force, ma'am. Requesting permission to shake the hand of the daughter of the bravest man I've ever met."
That part gets me every single time—always a little tear in my eye. 🍿
Honestly, it’s easily Bayev's best work—just two and a half hours of pure, mindless fun. 😁 The highlight isn't even just the movie itself, but that gorgeous Criterion release. 😵
🤣 It’s almost enough to make you laugh—that typical, over-the-top American "we're-saving-the-world" kind of pathetic sentimentality.
A total classic... few movies capture that specific essence of being young quite this well—without falling into that overly sentimental, sappy crap that plagues most modern films. It’s been a while since I last sat down with it, but man, I could really go for a rewatch right now.
I rewatched that movie yesterday. When I first saw it—back when it actually debuted—I thought it was quite a solid piece of work; Ridley was clearly in top form. But looking at it now? Not so much. These two women carry this sense of tragedy, this rebellious streak, even a hint of charisma, but it all feels incredibly hollow. Especially during that scene where she’s gripping the steering wheel, acting all like, "God, we're so free, we're totally wild, we're just living our best lives." Some people criticize the film for its feminism. Honestly, that didn't bother me, but everything feels so shallow today, peppered with dialogue that is just... well, frankly, stupid. All in all, I think time has simply swallowed it whole... though, I suppose I'd still rather watch this than those four cows from New York... since we're on the subject of female-led stories...
What would you even ask him? Like, seriously—what were you actually taking while you were filming? Do you still have some left? What’s the damage on the price tag? And where can a guy actually get his hands on it? It's just questions like 😁
Anthony Ortiz said:I really love this director—his unique approach to filmmaking and his specific style are just captivating. He has this clever way of slipping a massive twist in during those final few minutes (well, maybe not in every single one!). 👍
I’ll try to rank his films from best to worst (though, full disclosure, I haven't seen them all):
1. The Sixth Sense 2. Signs 3. Unbreakable 4. The Village 5. The Happening
It’s honestly so cunning and unexpected that you can almost feel a twist coming—even if you know it's there. Still, I think I personally prefer movies with a bit more swing to them. 🙂
A reboot is nothing more than a cash grab—period. Any other theory is just some pseudo-intellectual nonsense from people who don't actually care about cinema, or perhaps they're just too busy rushing through the runtime while stuffing their faces with popcorn or a burger.
Bradley Wood43 said:I see we’ve started a debate about soap operas... so let's actually define what makes a show a "soap." I'm obviously not talking about those endless Mexican or Turkish daytime dramas designed for bored retirees...
Honestly, a soap opera is anything that drags on through endless seasons—just stretching a single premise until it loses all meaning, for God's sake. But that's just the reality of the average TV viewer... they get hooked on something, and even if the show turns into total Shit after two seasons (maybe that's the "tourist phase"?), why would they bother looking for something else? It takes effort, you know? It’s like reading books—someone might finish a whole series by Jo Nesbo and then immediately go hunting for "something similar"... but man, it really comes down to intellectual laziness.
James Garcia50 Asks: No. Whether you look at it from an artistic perspective or just judge it by common sense—a plagiarist is essentially stealing chunks of someone else's hard work and stuffing them into their own worthless content—all while shamelessly signing their name as the sole creator. It’s just dishonest. A director working on a remake of an existing masterpiece is essentially in the same position as a theater director—we have seen hundreds of productions of Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, or King Lear, yet every single director brings their own unique vision to that same literary foundation. It’s a fascinating challenge, really. Even Arthur Miller found inspiration in Hamlet when he penned his successful stage drama and screenplay. The Hamlet play in Small town USA—specifically within the district of Small town USA.. Is this anything more than just some kind of remake?There is simply no such thing as a "legal nature" within the realm of art.
Look, I have to say—you’ve actually missed the mark this time. You really got it wrong.
Today's shows are just a letdown. They either aim for mindless entertainment or try way too hard to hit you with some kind of moral lesson—or some sort of shock factor, I guess (thinking of those typical American series) 🤣 Ajeto mentioned Claudius... and man, that was a hell of a series. For me, nothing quite touches the one and only New York City... though that Russian series, tih don, was also absolutely brilliant.
Zachary Nguyen2 said:Fixing a series is easy, but fixing a movie is tough. You've only got an hour or two with a film, while a series gives you over 20 hours to work with.
Honestly, waiting around for a show to "get better" is pure masochism.🤣
Noah Harris50 said:So you don't actually get film or TV as an art form? You're just looking for a plot that could've been told in an hour?
😵 What on earth does one have to do with the other? And "dark art" in TV series? Please—there are very few exceptions to that rule. It's just season after season after season because people watch them, which brings in the ratings and the money—it isn't about art... No, no, I don't watch shows just for the plot or some specific setting... and I don't watch movies based on the plot either (good grief)—I watch to see if they're actually good or not... Taylor, you've got the wrong person here.
James Garcia50 said:Sure you can, but why would you? Almost every series nails the pilot just to see if they can actually stick the landing or if they're headed for a crash. A movie is just what it is—no second chances, no post-mortem.
Why even bother wasting your precious time on pilots? TV series, in my humble opinion, are generally just a massive time sink. It doesn't matter if it's some soap opera, those mindless trashy police procedurals like CSI, or even a "masterpiece" like... well, you know. The plot just drags on and on and on... until it eventually goes nowhere fast. That's also why I'm not particularly fond of movie franchises—those endless sequels. Sure, there are a few exceptions, But honestly? I'd much rather curl up with a good book, catch a standalone film, or just grab a beer than waste my life following a TV show—whether it's on HBO, Apple TV+, or FOX.