Thanks Thanks:  0
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 30 of 30
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    South-West England
    Posts
    2,765
    Credits
    1,075
    But today...
    Pitch: "I wanna remake Gone With The Wind"
    Exec: "I don't know..."
    Pitch: "I'll have nothing to do with the original but be a great film, nonetheless"
    Exec: "Sold!"

    Pitch: "I have an idea to do a comic book movie -"
    Exec: "Sold! We'll put our entire publicity machine behind it!"

    Pitch: "I want to do a film about giant demonic bunny rabbits"
    Exec: "Get out! Before I turn YOU into a rabbit!"

    Water49, I agree with you.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1,694
    Credits
    1,085
    Everyone talks about the 80's like they were the epitome of movie making. 80's action films were all the same, Arnold or some copy cat spouts a few one liners and blows stuff up. Arnie wasn't even particularly good, he simply relied on his Mr. Universe body, while Bruce Willis is forgotten by to many even though he actually had a talent for the wise cracks. Classic 80's action movies would be Die Hard and Predator ect... However there was far more crap, Commando, The Running Man (yes they were both horrible, just as bad if not worse than XXX) and 90% of the stuff made by Arnold back then. Sure we have crap now, but we also have some very good action movies. The Matrix, Face Off and films of that calibre. Sure there's not many original action movies, but, I wouldn't call Back To The Future and Ghostbusters as action. Recently we have had films like Adaption (a film about a man wriuting a film that's about nothing), or Memento, a film that tells a backwards story, literally. That's some pretty unique stuff. Overall I'd say that while the real golden age of cinema that I know of both the good and bad was the 70's, the generation of The Godfather 1+2, (I also like the 40's which brought both Casablanca and Citizen Kane, but I know not of the crap from the era) but generally films are better off than they were during the 80's which were, let's just say, mostly embarrasing.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    52
    Credits
    1,065
    Since you're categorizing movies by the decade then matrix and face-off don't count because they were both released in the 90's. But alas, after much thinking I realized that I had forgotten about the movie "The Rundown". It fits the classic 80's action formula in which it has a macho man, classic pyrotechnics instead of CG, one-liners(I think), and it's modern day instead of fantasy or sci-fi.

    But I don't think it's up there with die hard or true lies because I don't remember the body count being too high.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1,694
    Credits
    1,085
    I was talking about recent action movies. Who cares whether Matrix was made in 1999 or 2000 it's still a recent film. We are only in 2003 and it's a little unfair to be comparing what we have from the last 3 years, to what all of the 80's offered, which IMO is still better off.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    39
    Credits
    1,105

    I'm not saying that '80s movies were all fantastic, but they were

    generally more fun! Universal, Paramount, Fox, Columbia, New Line, MGM and Warner weren't afraid to put their money on the line and take chances. This allowed Speilberg, Lucas, Zemeckis and others to make radical and and entertaining big budget films as well as the quirky high-school comedies from John Hughes!

    A lot of the '80s movies WERE trash, but the people behind them at least had style and vision and the execs had BALLS

    If you want another example of how Hollywood is soft today, who remembers in the '70s, the Kubricks, Friedkins and other directors (the others' names escape me - my shame!) terrorized the movie execs with their demands - more budgets, longer shoots and bigger pay - but BETTER movies!

    Now, we've got music video guys doing movies - fine if it's people like Michael Bay, but not McG with his vacuous Charlie's Angels movies. These movies have no plot or script, just a series of fight scenes intercut with dancing!?? This suits Hollywood execs now because this generation of directors are used to working with a low budget in a short time, but they've only really worked on videos and commercials from 30 seconds to 6 minutes! How can they handle a 2 hour film?
    Last edited by water49; 11-25-2003 at 09:53 AM.
    ...like I give a fk

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    NYC, USA
    Posts
    2,380
    Credits
    1,105
    I agree, movies from the past 5 years have too much CG, too little originality, and concepts that take 2 movies to understand. Movies fromt he 80s and early 90s were just pure fun

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1,694
    Credits
    1,085
    How can people complain about Charlies Angels ect... and complain that movies aren't enough fun. If I want fun that's where I'll look, albeit rarely actually picking up Charlies Angels, but the films that are light hearted and don't take themselves seriously. There's nothing worse than a cheesey blockbuster that plays itself completely straight faced, as most 80's action movies did. There was just no fun, in American cinema at least, but foreign cinema is still producing genuinely fun films, so they don't count.

    movies from the past 5 years have too much CG, too little originality
    didn't you call Bay your favourite director?

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Ljubljana, Slovenia
    Posts
    38
    Credits
    1,105

    Arrow

    A bit of nostalgya and not so mainstreem hollywood stuff.
    Does someone remember <A href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000901/">Jean-Paul Belmondo</a>, or maybe a bit more familiar
    <A href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0817881/">Bud Spencer</a> and his pair <A href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0817881/">Terrence Hill</a>?

    That's just a few I remember. Go ahead, refresh my memory whit more such movies!
    Live long and prosper
    Terraner

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,512
    Credits
    1,065
    doesn't anyone think The Rock is a great action star? He replaced Schwarzenegger so we will still get some cool feeling from watching action movies starring The Rock. He is gonna be our next model of "something"... like terminator..

    anyhoo-- I agree with those of ya'll that said we next new action stars. No more sequels cuz it will ruin the first one. Bad Boys 2 ruined the first Bad Boys. No Die Hard 4 cuz he is too old to be a cool action star. Schwarzenegger barely got away with making T3..

    "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn."

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    766
    Credits
    1,053
    Bruce Willis too old?!? Was Sean Connery too old for The Rock!?!
    ( Speed is my favourite action film )
    Sgt. Johnny Beaufort: He says, "The Apaches are a great race," sir. "They've never been conquered. But it is not well for a nation to be always at war. The young men die... the women sing sad songs... and the old ones are hungry in the winter."
    Fort Apache

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    India
    Posts
    302
    Credits
    1,085
    i think john mclane should return in die hard 4 he was a real tough action-hero!!i heard rumors that britney was going to be his daughter in dh4, what happened to that?

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    No place like 127.0.0.1
    Posts
    1,401
    Credits
    1,102
    yes and hulk hogan should be the baddie!


    [My Top 20 Movies@Ymdb] - ([)(]) Dolby Digital the choice of ML's - [~My Place ~]

    {Drag The Sunrise Down: You know the light can hypnotise, so shut it out and close your eyes - Rooster}

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    India
    Posts
    302
    Credits
    1,085
    are u being sarcastic or what? anyways, i think mcclane should be pitted against some hong kong or japanese high-kicking martial arts crime lord. like donnie yen or takeshi kaneshiro!!

    P.S. : if u buy dvd's from hkl, pls read my post in general chatter movie related section!!

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    South-West England
    Posts
    2,765
    Credits
    1,075
    Britney is not in Die Hard 4, thank God. The offical title of the movie "Die Hard 4: Die Harder". The plot revolves around McClane his daughter on a luxury holiday and it gets taken over by terrorists. Am I the only one think this sounds like "Speed 2"?

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    766
    Credits
    1,053
    uh oh
    thats too close to Die Hard 1!
    They should have done DIE HARD 4 IN A ROW BOAT
    It Started Off As A Normal Fishing Trip....
    It Ended In Blood shed...
    YIPPIE KI YAY MOTHER FISHER

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Looney Tunes: Back in Action (10 QT clips)
    By ZUBi in forum Movie News
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-15-2003, 03:59 AM
  2. Looney Tunes: Back in Action (trailer & posters)
    By ZUBi in forum Trailer News
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-10-2003, 01:44 AM
  3. Looney Tunes: Back In Action teaser poster
    By trailergod in forum Movie News
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-08-2003, 02:35 PM
  4. Really Really Violent Action Movies
    By Movieman in forum General Chatter - Movie Related
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 10-02-2003, 07:47 PM
  5. new action movies?
    By GloryGirl in forum Movie News
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 02-10-2003, 01:32 PM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •