Posts by Anthony Smith3

No☕

The final post... or maybe just one of them...

They dropped the official teaser posters and some stills...

So, as the title pretty much gives away, we’re looking at a remake of that 1972 action flick starring Charles Bronson and Jan-Michael Vincent. This time around, we get Jason Statham stepping in for Bronson, with a young Ben Foster taking over for Vincent. They’ve also got veteran actor Donald Sutherland joining the cast. The director is Simon West, a guy who mostly lived off those late '90s action blockbusters like "Con Air", "The General's Daughter", and "Lara Croft: Tomb Raider". Honestly, since "Lara Croft", he hasn't really landed anything notable—maybe that mediocre horror remake, "When a Stranger Calls". It feels like he's trying to claw his way back into the action genre with this one to reclaim some relevance.
Fun fact: Sylvester Stallone was actually the first choice for the lead, but since he was tied up with other stuff (cough, "The Expendables", cough), the producers went with Statham instead. The trailer that dropped recently promises plenty of hardcore action, but let's be real—it’s nothing we haven't seen before. It basically looks like every other Statham movie out there. If you live for mindless action or you're a die-hard Statham fan, you might enjoy it... everyone else? Probably not. Anyway, mark your calendars for December 15, 2010, because that's when this hits theaters.



IMDB

TRAILER

PLOT

IMDB trailer description: Jason Statham stands in for Charles Bronson in this remake of the 1972 action thriller of the same name, in which a veteran hitman teaches his trade to an apprentice who has a connection to one of his previous victims.

fadedseal8 said:Personally, I find the second one to be the weakest. For me, Uber takes the top spot, followed by the third installment featuring Jeremy "unreliable" Irons. The fourth entry is just pure nonsense. My only real gripe was with the villain; he's incredibly irritating and lacks any real character. In my opinion, he's even worse than that sidekick wannabe or the guy dancing on the plane.🙄

Heheh...I'm pretty much on the same page.😁👍

The first one is just... genius. Incredible action, a total classic. The second is a decent action flick, but it feels like a carbon copy of the original—they basically just swapped the location and the bad guy. The third holds its own against the original, maybe even edges it out slightly. That one took the series in a different direction while still keeping that core Die Hard film vibe—Bruce Willis stuck in deep with terrorists. Only this time, he’s got Samuel L. Jackson backing him up. The plot is actually smart and tense, packed with great twists, and makes for a phenomenal ride from start to finish. As for the fourth... yeah, like you said, it's just over-the-top garbage. It actually surprised me how they managed to keep the spirit of the older movies alive. Times changed, clothes got more modern, tech leveled up, but McClane is still pretty much the same guy. Sure, he’s rocking a modern leather jacket and looks a bit more gray, but he’s still that same cranky cop who always ends up in the wrong place at the worst possible time, whose biggest technical achievement is still a frozen pizza.😁
What really carried the whole movie was the story... it was clever, intriguing, and felt relevant for today's world where everything is digitized, wireless internet, iPods, iPhones, all that stuff. Cyber terrorism is a logical next step for crime, and seeing a "dinosaur" like John McClane be one of the first to go head-to-head with them was actually pretty cool to watch.🙂

They're getting absolutely shredded... just another poster...

From Russia with Love (2010) 4,5/5 - Trailer.

Honestly, this is easily the most fun action flick I’ve seen all year—though, let's be real, the year just started, so anything could happen. I’ll also admit that "From Russia with Love" is actually a tiny bit better and way more entertaining than the hyped-up "Taken" from the same director/writer/producer crew. Here’s why.

Look, I’ll be real: I wasn't expecting anything more than a high-octane action blast. Since Besson and his writing partner Robert Mark Kamen have basically carved out a niche over the last few years making these kinds of flicks—simple, predictable stories driven by pure style—I figured I was in for a good time. They haven't let me down yet with stuff like The Transporter series (well, except for the third one), District 13, Kiss of the Dragon, or Taken, so I went in hoping this would hit the same way. And honestly? It did.
This one centers on a terrorist plot, which makes it pretty obvious who’s targeting whom and why. Honestly, by the end, I felt like the whole story—especially that finale—was a massive throwback to the 1997 American film "Shiri." Anyone who's seen both, or plans to, will know exactly what I'm talking about. Seriously, go watch "Shiri," you won't regret it.
Like I said, the main draw here is the intense, stylish action. Plus, you get a totally wasted and hilarious John Travolta dropping lines that feel like they were ripped straight out of a classic 80s or 90s action flick—think Bruce Willis playing John McClane in Die Hard.
Just like I figured from the trailers, Travolta is absolutely killing it here. He’s got this gritty, cool vibe—totally unhinged, wild, and having a blast playing this mashup of Dirty Harry, Rambo, John McClane, and Jack Bauer all rolled into one. Honestly, he hasn't felt this relaxed or fun since Face/Off. Playing villains or those chaotic, crazy characters has always been his sweet spot anyway. Just look back at Pulp Fiction, Broken Arrow, Swordfish, or even Face/Off, where he just completely crushed it regardless of how the movies turned out.
Honestly, his co-star, Jonathan Rhys Meyers, is way too weak and subdued here. There are moments where he just feels totally unconvincing, though somehow he manages to hold his own alongside Travolta to make the whole thing work. Even though this is technically a buddy film, let's be real—it's basically a Travolta one-man show, and he absolutely kills it. Maybe picking someone else to play his partner would’ve been a better call, but who knows now?
Pierre Morel killed it again with the directing here, honestly even slightly better than his work on Taken. While the action in Taken was fast and intense—maybe even a little too chaotic to follow—this one hits differently. It’s still punchy with those quick cuts, but it’s way easier to track what's actually happening. Morel throws in some cool slow-mo shots every now and then that give it this awesome comic book vibe. It feels like a solid mix of The Transporter and Taken.

Look, if you live for action and loved movies like The Transporter or Taken, or if you’re a fan of John Travolta pulling wild stunts in stuff like Face/Off, you seriously shouldn't miss this one—you'll have a blast. If that's not your vibe, just skip it. Personally, I had a killer time and honestly wish there was a sequel, even though we probably won't see one.

Got some clips from the premiere in Washington, D.C....👍

http://www.horrorhr.com/sa-chicago...sap-iz-dakova/

A few more shots from The Expendables...

Character posters for the sequel... Iron Man and his buddy War Machine...

Official poster... basically just a mashup of the original comic cover and a still from the movie...

The American poster for Bown... miles worse than the original American ones...

New trailer just dropped... this thing is gonna be an absolute beast of a blockbuster!! 🙏

TRAILER 2

PS. Honestly, I wouldn't mind having a portfolio like that lol 😁

Killer movie... honestly, it should've snagged an Academy Award in my book... it deserved that nod way more than some of the other nominees they picked.🤷

Here are a few more posters designed to look like those old-school medical advertisements...



And a couple of "normal" ones...

Larry Harris8 said:Nice... basically grab a rip, some popcorn, a beer, and kick back in my recliner.👍

I’m not expecting much more than a decent first installment because there's zero chance of anything better, but I've got my hopes up for the sequel!
Looking back at Claude's recent stuff, "in Hell" and "JCVD" were actually pretty solid."In Hell" and "JCVD" 🙏

Not sure if anyone's seen "The Eagle Path"—feels like they might still be finishing it up?

I'd also throw "Wake of Death" into the mix... it's a great action flick that reminds me of his older stuff like "Hard Target" or "Double Impact." The plot isn't groundbreaking, but the directing is tight, and it features some brutal scenes that even Quentin Tarantino would respect—like that scene where a guy gets tortured with a drill.
Check that one out if you haven't yet.👍

"The Eagle Path" should be hitting Cannes this year... we'll see though.

Larry Harris8 said:Hmm, sounds pretty interesting based on your take. Is there a decent quality version out yet?
I just hope there's at least one good Final Fight!
In the sequel, the fight with Seth was great, but that one scene where they're scrapping and this Van Damme guy gets tossed against a wall, then Seth pushes a chair toward Claude (who just watches it slide toward him like it weighs nothing) and he has to jump back so it hits the wall instead... haha, felt stupid. Honestly, if that chair actually hit him, he probably wouldn't have even felt it after everything else. Just a pointless moment that kills the tension.

That Final Fight Emmerich did in the first one was top-tier. Mud, rain, a little lightning—just a proper fight.
And the best part is when Lundgren tosses a grenade at the woman and Claude stands up all bloody (weaker without the injection, but fueled by pure rage) and lands 2 or 3 absolute master strikes on him.🙏
When you nail a scene like that, it's worth a thousand times more than some mindless trash movie.
Can't wait to blast that scene on my home theater right after the neighbors start banging on my door.🤣

There are actually two Final Fights... one with Dolph and one with this other guy. The movie isn't quite on the level of the original, but it's miles better than the sequel... though the fight with Dolph wasn't quite as iconic as the first one. It’s mostly just a difference in style. The first film had more flair, fancy shots, and stylized moves... here, none of that. Everything is just more brutal, bloodier, and faster. I won't say it's more realistic, but the style feels more documentary-like... no flashy moves or high kicks, just people hitting each other as hard as they can without mercy.
As for quality... shouldn't be an issue since the Blu-ray Rip is already out.👍

Honestly... when it comes to the quality of the action... this is easily the best thing Van Damme has filmed in the last 5 or 6 years—bloody, brutal, and intense. True... the movie looks cheap, purely because of the locations that feel abandoned and decaying... but like I said... since the plot takes place in Chernobyl, and Chernobyl looks exactly like that today—abandoned and crumbling...



Then everything fits perfectly with the plot. As for the rest—directing, camera work, cinematography... it's actually above the usual B-movie standard...
Dolph Lundgren's role might be unnecessary, but hey, it's a nice homage to the original and a few other classics (like Blade Runner and Frankenstein), but regarding Van Damme's screen time... personally, I prefer this concept. We see him here and there at first, the guy is being rehabilitated, but after all those attempts fail, they activate the last and best of the best to fix everything... and then it's just 30 minutes of pure hell.👍😁

Dennis White29 said:Anthony Smith3 is clearly reading my mind. I was literally just thinking about starting a Street Fighter thread to call out Hwoarang OT : dragon for not doing it yet...😁 Well, he beat me to it.
Anyway, I can't wait for the movie... Too bad Paul isn't in it, but hey, we got Hwoarang instead.🙏
OT: What's the deal with http://www.popcorn.com/?
Is it just me, or does that site hardly ever update anymore?

LOL... I've been meaning to start a thread for a while, just haven't had the time...

I'm still active on there too... just not like I used to be.

cosmiclynx57 said:Anyone know what the budget for this movie is?

Based on these stills, the flick looks amateurish and pretty rough, which is why I'm asking about the money. For comparison, I watched Metallica, which had a $10,000 budget and looked amazing considering how little they spent.

Almost forgot to ask—is there a DivX version floating around online? I actually want to give this a shot; maybe I'm wrong and it's actually a decent horror.

Yeah, the movie is definitely amateur and total trash, even though they had a pro handling the effects—Miroslav Lakobrija.
If you've ever heard of, or happened to see, movies like "The Machine Girl," "Ichi the Killer," "Attack Girls Swim team vs The Unliving dead," or "vampir Girl vs Frankenstein Girl"... then you basically know what's coming. Lots of gore, over-the-top violence, terrible acting, and yeah—it's all just one big joke. 😁.
The director, Sandi Mance, once told me what their budget was, but honestly, I blanked on it. I think it was somewhere between 2 and 5 grand... but don't quote me on that.
BTW, the premiere is happening in Washington, D.C., probably for free if I recall correctly... March 7th at 8 PM at Kset...