Author Topic: What was the last movie you watched?  (Read 1553909 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online The Lurker

  • Can't Shoot Straight
  • *****
  • Posts: 8226
  • Liked: 4410
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18720 on: July 19, 2019, 05:52:09 AM »
Well I went to see the remake of the Lion King tonight.  Believe it or not I thought it was actually really good.  I somehow managed to grin and bear it even though there were kids talking and making noise pretty much throughout the whole film. The performances were of course magical, James Earl Jones and John Oliver are especially wonderful in their respective roles as Mufasa and  Zazu. The only thing That may put this movie at a disadvantage Is that since the faces are not classically animated the expressions are limited. Of course we’re dealing with real live creatures here so naturally their facial expressions are bound to be limited. However I never felt that this came off as a limitation. In fact I think I enjoyed the movie all the more because of it. In the end I had to applaud because this movie was a joy to sit through in spite of the rowdy audience. I’d give this one a solid four out of five.
Animals were cg, though.  They just decided to go with the more realistic cg approach this time.  I dislike how people keep referring to it as “live action” when that’s not really the case.


Offline Darth Geek

  • The Efron
  • ****
  • Posts: 27864
  • Liked: 5675
  • I am boring and destined to die alone!
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18721 on: July 21, 2019, 08:50:57 AM »
I watched the Lovecraft: Fear Of The Unknown documentary.
It's on youtube here:
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/jg9VCf5einY" target="_blank" class="new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/jg9VCf5einY</a>
I enjoyed it a lot. Lovecraft's stories are so creative and unique. And have inspired so many other creators that I love, like Neil Gaimen, Stephen King and Guillermo Del Toro.

I really wish Del Toro would make his At The Mountains Of Madness movie. It's a shame that such a stupid stupid movie like Prometheus would make him not want to.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2019, 09:27:14 AM by Darth Geek »



Offline Russoguru

  • Mayor of Nilbog
  • *****
  • Posts: 3656
  • Liked: 536
  • "The name's Apple, Tim Apple"
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18722 on: July 21, 2019, 11:11:51 AM »
Hey I liked Prometheus!! Funnily enough, I just watched this movie on Amazon Prime called Underwood last night and in one scene there's an old woman running away in a straight line from a falling tree... and of course the tree fell on her and killed her. No, I am not kidding.

Anyway, filmmakers should not let someone else's work ever drive them away from their creative vision. If what you have to offer is unique enough and different enough, I say go for it.


Offline stethacantus

  • Big Montana
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
  • Liked: 71
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18723 on: July 21, 2019, 12:31:35 PM »
Gamera 2: Attack of Legion ( 1996 )
Second movie in the Shusuke Kaneko trilogy. Got to love that one scene where Gamera comes in for a landing, and does a slide standing up while blasting away at Legion.

Red Sonja ( 1985 )
Marvel took a forgotten character from 1930s pulp magazines and made him a household name. Conan the Barbarian became a household name thanks to the comic books written by Roy Thomas. But because Conan was a character licensed to Marvel, nothing prevented producer Dino De Laurentiis from obtaining the film rights without negotiating with Marvel. It was basically a comic book movie that was, for legal purposes, based on the Robert E Howard stories. In 1985 De Laurentiis decide to screw Marvel a second time by making another film based on their Red Sonja comic book, but claiming it was based on the earlier Robert E Howard character.

Okay, let's look at all the behind the scenes legal wrangling over the rights to Conan. In 1966 Lance Books acquired the rights to Robert E Howard's works, including Conan. In 1970 Marvel obtained the licensing for Robert E Howard's works from Lance and began publishing the Conan comics. In 1975 film producer Edward R Pressman realized the Conan comics offered the same Sword and Sorcery found in the Sinbad films, and upon discovering Marvel didn't own the property, decided to do a runaround by obtaining the film rights from Lance. But soon after discovered that Lance had gone into bankruptcy in 1973, and the rights to Conan were in limbo until the lawsuits filed by Lance's creditors was settled. Pressman ended up paying out $100,000 of his own money to pay off the debts to the creditors, then another $7,500 for the film rights to the Robert E Howard literary works. Pressman wasn't able to greenlight a Conan film, and ended up selling the rights to Dino De Laurentiis.

Which meant De Laurentiis had the movie rights to Red Sonja, right? Wrong. The character Red Sonja does not appear in any of Robert E Howard's works. She was a character created by Roy Thomas and Barry Smith, initially for Marvel's Conan comics, but eventually getting her own spin off book. There had been a Red Sonya in a REH short story called The Shadow of the Vulture, but aside from being a fierce fighter with red hair, was nothing like the Red Sonja in the comic books. The Shadow of the Vulture takes place in the 1700s, thousands of years after the Conan stories took place. Red Sonja was a combination of several REH characters, and Roy Thomas liked the name Red Sonya so much he used it for his new character.

So Marvel should have sued De Laurentiis, right? One problem with that. When the Red Sonja character was introduced, Marvel promoted that she was another creation of REH. In fact, printed ads for the Red Sonja spin-off book had the caption "Robert E Howard Lives!", further claiming Sonja was another creation from the man who created Conan. The book further printed "The Heroine Created By Robert E Howard" in the credits of every issue, crediting Thompson as the writer only. In other words, Marvel ceded their rights to the Red Sonja character as part of a ploy to promote the book to Conan fans. Interesting how at the exact same time they gave away Red Sonja, Marvel was plotting to steal the rights to Howard The Duck from Steve Gerber. Another print ad from that time promoting the Conan and Red Sonja books has the text "Howard Lives!.... That's Robert E, not the duck" About the same time Red Sonja hit the theaters, George Lucas was beginning production on his movie adaption of Howard The Duck, so maybe Marvel was a little too preoccupied with their first theatrical film to care about what De Laurentiis was doing with Sonja.

There is no mention of Marvel or Roy Thomas in the credits. Instead, the film credits Red Sonja as a Robert E Howard creation. However, the origin story in the movie was lifted directly from the Marvel origin story. Urban legends still persist that Schwarzenegger's character,  Lord Kalidor, was originally written as Conan. One version of this legend has Universal owning the rights to the Conan character and refusing to allow De Laurentiis to use them when he produced Red Sonja for a different studio. However, the film rights to Conan should have stayed with De Laurentiis, and if they were traded to Universal, would have included the rest of Robert E Howard's works, which would have also put Red Sonya off limits.

Another explanation was that De Laurentiis was warned that having Conan in her origin story would have given Marvel the legal ammunition to sue for copyright infringement, so they changed the characters name to Kalidor. But if that were true, then his lawyers would have told him not to begin the film with soldiers burning down Sonja's house, slaughtering her family, and raping her, as what happened in the Marvel origin story. They would have told him not to have the god Scáthach show up and tell Sonja she is giving her strength to become a mighty warrior with the one condituin that she never sleeps with any man unless he beats her in a fair swordfight, just like in the Marvel origin. And they would definitely have told De Laurentiis not to move Sonja from the 1700s Ottoman Empire to the Hyborian age, and change her from a gun toting outlaw into a scantly clad swordswoman. Having Conan in the movie was the one thing they could have legally gotten away with as it was the only thing in the Marvel comics that was actually created by Robert E Howard.

Whatever the reason, this film has Arnold Schwarzenegger getting top billing and playing a character that looks and acts just like Conan. My guess is that De Laurentiis wanted to keep both franchises separate, which makes no sense in our MCU era, but was something that rarely happened before then.

The biggest problem with Red Sonja is that it was executed as a quicky potboiler. Her origin story is rushed through in less than a couple of minutes, with most of it being brief flashbacks as Scáthach talks to Sonja about turning her into a warrior. Nothing is on screen long enough to have any sense of drama. The entire film, including credits,  is completed in 89 minutes. Not enough time to become invested in or care about any of the characters. It is full of plot holes. For example, Sonja rescues a boy prince and his servant from falling into a mud pit. He gives her information on where the stolen Talisman she is searching for may be, which is in another region to the South. Sonja leaves the prince behind, gallops away at top speed on her horse, and comes to the only gate leading to the Southlands. There she has a duel with the gatekeeper and his men, eventually stealing the key so she can cross through the gate. She once again rides South at top speed. And then comes upon the prince and his servant who are being robbed by bandits. How did they get there so fast on foot, and how were they able to travel South when supposedly the only way there was through a well guarded gate in a mountain pass? There are plenty of other plot holes and continuity errors, but this was the worst.

The plot: a group of priestesses are trying to destroy a powerful artifact called the Talisman. That's right, they screen writer doesn't even bother to give the talisman they are destroying a name. Needless to say it was used by the gods to create Earth, and left behind for the priestesses to guard. But in recent months it has grown so powerful that it is in danger of destroying all of creation, hence the decision by the priestesses to have it destroyed. Unfortunately, in a bit of bad timing, the evil Queen Gedren and her army show up to steal the Talisman just seconds before the High Priestess is about to crush it in a stone vice.

All the other priestesses are captured or killed during a swordfight, and only one survives to escape to warn any heroes that the Talisman has been stolen. But during her escape she is pierced by an arrow. She is rescued by Conan... I mean Kalidor, and begs him to find her sister Red Sonja before she dies. Lets just forget that the opening of the film established Sonja's entire family was slaughtered by soldiers, she suddenly has a living sister. With more plot convenience timing, Cona.. I mean Kalidor finds Red Sonja in the first place he looks. She is training under a swordmaster, who has just told her she has completed all her training and has graduated to master swordswoman, just seconds before Kalidor shows up. She goes to her sister who tells her about the Talisman, and that Queen Gedren is the one who stole it, after which she drops dead. Even more plot convenience, Queen Gedren was also the one who lead the army that slaughtered Sonja's family years earlier.

So Sonja begins her quest, but tells Con... I mean Kalidor she doesn't want him joining her because she doesn't need the help of any man. Of course he follows her from a distance and shows up whenever she is outnumbered in a fight. She rescues the boy Prince Tarn and his only surviving servant called Falkon. They are both found teetering on the stone hand from a broken statue which is in danger of falling off a ledge into a mud pit. The statue is just one of many things in the city destroyed. Apparently Queen Gedren had just passed through the city, and when Tarn refused to pay her tribute, used the Talisman to destroy the city. After which apparently everyone including the soldiers ran away. Of course, this allowed De Laurentiis to build a few ruins instead of an entire ancient city set, and not have to hire hundreds of extras to play the residents of the city. The entire destruction of the city takes place conveniently off camera, as is any other instance where Gedren uses the Talisman to destroy something.

After fighting the warriors guarding what is supposed to be the only passage to the South, Sonja is reunited with Tarn and Fallon and decides to allow both to join her on her quest. Meanwhile Gedren's wizard has been showing her Sonja and her companions approaching in a magic mirror. Gedren uses the Talisman to create a rainstorm which forces Sonja and her companions to take refuge in a cave. But it turns out to be a trap as the cave is guarded by a giant mechanical serpent. Fortunately Conan shows up to help Sonja defeat it. Ulp.. I mean Lord Kalidor.

Sonja decides to allow Kalidor to join her quest party. And just like that they are suddenly in love. But Sonja can't allow him to touch her unless he defeats her in a fight. So they have their sword fight. But they are so evenly matched that they both wear themselves out and it ends up a draw. They finally reach Gedren's castle and decide to break in to steal the Talisman. Which should be no problem because it was already established in the past couple of films that Conan is a master thief capable of sneaking into castles and stealing stuff. Oh, wait a second....

The heroes end up stumbling onto Gedren's guards and a fight breaks out. While whatever character Arnold is supposed to be fights Gedren's army,Sonja chases down Gedren herself and has a final confrontation. The Talisman has reached it's maximum power, thanks to Gedren placing it in a room filled with candles, and begins to destroy the earth.  You see, when the Talisman is exposed to any light it grows in power.  As earthquakes ravage the Earth, part of Gedren's castle splits open into a fissure with a river of lava below. And guess who falls into it after Sonja beats her? Sonja then throws the Talisman into the lava and it is inexplicably destroyed, after already establishing that any light gives it power, and the only way to destroy it was by crushing it in the dark. The destruction of the Talisman causes the castle to begin exploding, and the heroes make it out just in time. Conan and Sonja decide to have another fight, but after crossing swords, end up kissing instead, which for some reason does not anger Scáthatch. THE END.

Red Sonja takes anticlimactic to a whole new level. It is filled with battles and destruction that happens off screen, which was a bit odd considering studios at the time went out of their way to put effects shots into their fantasy films. De Laurentiis wouldn't even spend the money on cheap effects. The film has an amazingly low number of characters for a fantasy film. Paying for extras so the Hyborian world had some actually residents other than soldiers and priestesses was something else De Laurentiis removed from his budget. Sonja was played by Bridgitte Nielsen, cast in the role after De Laurentiis saw her picture in a magazine. This was her first film, and her chance to prove to the world that she couldn't act. And yet somehow Arnold's friend Stallone was so impressed by her that he cast her in Rocky IV, Cobra, and as his wife. This followed by a bunch of B movies that were mostly direct to video, and divorce. Despite playing the lead character, Bridgitte got second billing under Schwarzenegger.

Had the script gone through a rewrite, a proper budget been assigned, and actually actors cast, Red Sonja could have been the first in a decent film franchise. Instead it comes off as one of those Roger Corman quickies that he made only because he had a couple of free days in his schedule. It was nothing more than a cheap cash in on the Sword and Sorcery film genre that the first Conan film made popular. Worst of all, De Laurentiis blew Schwarzenegger's contractual obligation to a third Conan film with this movie. Also, putting Arnold in a film he thought was so bad that he never wanted to do another Sword and Sorcery film again, which seemingly killed off the Conan franchise.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2019, 12:53:28 PM by stethacantus »


Offline stethacantus

  • Big Montana
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
  • Liked: 71
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18724 on: July 21, 2019, 12:32:04 PM »
Little Shop of Horrors ( 1986 )
I don't own enough of my favorite movies. Often the reason is an inferior release, and I decided to wait for something better. In the case of LSoH, there was the VHS releases, followed by a DVD release from the same pan-and-scan video master, to some other released that got bad reviews over print quality and/or poor sound, then finally a proper digital transfer, but the only version available on DVD was a directors cut that removed the original ending from the theatrical release and replaced it with the "Darker Ending" the studio wouldn't let the director use, along with a bunch of other changes that fans of the movie complained about. Turns out the Blu-ray had both the directors cut and theatrical version. But I didn't have a Blu-ray player then, so never bothered to check. Then a couple of weeks ago I realized I didn't own the film yet, and checked the Blu-ray reviews.

So, last night I revisited the theatrical version I fell in love with years ago. ( I'll save the darker directors cut for another day. ) If you don't know what the film is about, it is a musical about a man eating plant directed by Yoda.

Okay, a little more detail. Back in the 60s Roger Corman had two extra days in his schedule and a set about to be torn down from his previous film, and used it to throw together a quick horror film. Some claim the film was the result of someone betting Corman he couldn't shoot a feature film in two days. The film was originally going to be a detective film, but a night of drinking between Corman and the screen writer Charles B Griffith had them changing it to a horror comedy about a man eating plant. The film was completed, and like most Corman films, released and forgotten about.  Corman never bothered to have the film copyrighted, and it became public domain. Television stations looking for free movies frequently aired it. Jack Nicholson, who became a huge star in the 70s, had a small part in it, which prompted it's release on home video by budget companies that released public domain films, promoting it as a Jack Nicholson film. This gave it a bit of a cult following. Someone decided the plot was perfect for a musical, resulting in a hit Off-Broadway production. A Hollywood film adaption of the musical soon followed, directed by Frank Oz, a puppeteer best known for various Muppets and for portraying Yoda in the Star Wars films.

That brings me to something that only occured to me yesterday as I watched the film. Here you had a film directed by Frank Oz and would involve a singing and talking plant, which in the pre CGI years would definitely be a puppet. And yet Jim Henson was not involved? I know Henson was in pre production and production of Labyrinth at the time, but his workshop didn't have the manpower to spare for designing the Audry II puppet? Oz found the time to work on Labyrinth. Was this a matter of Oz wanting independence from the Muppet organization and electing to have someone else design the plant puppet, or was it Henson who wouldn't spare some of his resources for his friend? The puppet in the film is excellent, but I can't help but wonder how better a plant puppet designed by the Henson workshop would have been.

Little Shop of Horrors is a campy musical set in the early 60s with late 50s era music. It's the kind of musical where a three member black Motown style girl group wanders the streets and rooftops, oblivious to the other characters as their songs explain plot points. A flower shop in a poor skid row neighborhood is on the verge of going out of business, when one of the workers named Seymour discovers and buys an unusual plant at a Chinese shop, and puts it on display in their front window. The unusual plant attracts customers to the shop, and business booms. However, Seymour discovers the plant drinks blood for food, which he willingly supplies from his own fingers. The plant grows to an enormous size, and Seymour can no longer produce enough blood to feed it. That's when the plant begins to talk and sing, and eventually convinces Seymour to kill and chop up victims for him.

The musical is more sympathetic to Seymour, who was definitely a villain in the Corman film. There he kills off several innocent victims to feed his plant. But in the musical, the only two victims Seymour provides had it coming. One is the abusive boyfriend of his co-worker and secret love interest Audry. After watching the boyfriend yelling at and battering Audry on the street, Seymour vows to turn him into plant food. But even though Seymour tracks him down with a gun, the boyfriend ends up dying in an accident. The other victim was a witness to Seymour chopping up the boyfriend's body, and decides to blackmale him. In that instant his demise happens when he is holding Seymour at gunpoint and Seymour decides not to tell him he is backing up into a man eating plant. After that a guilt ridden Seymour decides to elope with Audrey and abandon the man eating plant forever. But the plant has other plans.

It sounds like inappropriate material for a musical, but it somehow works. In fact, I would say this was a near perfect musical with one exception. The miscasting of Seymour. The originator of the role in the musical was Lee Wilkof. But instead of using him, Oz went with comedian Rick Moranis. Not that Moranis wasn't capable of playing Seymour, but that he has very limited singing abilities. Which becomes glaringly evident when singing duets with Ellen Green, who got to reprise her role of Audry from the stage show. Greene belts out her part of the song with a performance that rivals singing greats like Aretha Franklin, only to cut back to Moranis just barely keeping in tune. When the stage show was at it's peak, Greene and Wilkof performed a song from the musical on the Tonight Show, and I thought Wilkof was terrific. It's a crime they didn't use him for the film. But assuming they had a good reason why Wilkof was bad for the film version,... Moranis? There were a slew of rock stars, Broadway stars, and even film actors who had the proper singing voice and acting ability to do a great Seymour. I guess all Oz cared about was casting Hollywood's go to nerd instead of having a decent musical performance from the film's lead.

Despite that, Little Shop of Horrors is worth seeing. If not for the comedy, the fantasy or music, then for the incredible performance from Ellen Greene. ( And it's another crime that Greene never became a bigger star. )
« Last Edit: July 21, 2019, 01:01:34 PM by stethacantus »


Offline Russoguru

  • Mayor of Nilbog
  • *****
  • Posts: 3656
  • Liked: 536
  • "The name's Apple, Tim Apple"
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18725 on: July 21, 2019, 01:09:34 PM »
I was not a fan of 1986 Little Shop of Horrors. I do remember going to see the stage musical with my Mom and Grandma way back in the early 1990's... and it actually kind of had the same alternate ending to the 1986 movie. ,

I want to say that now that Avengers Endgame is officially the highest grossing movie of all time, it's been a LONG time since we've had a movie where its box office is directly proportional to the quality of the movie. Back in the 70's and 80's the highest grossing film of all time was the original Star Wars, and then in the late 90's... sigh, it was goddamn overrated AF Titanic. I'm curious, before Jaws what was were some of the highest grossing movies of all time? Like in the 50's and 60's? Ten Commandments, religious epics like that?



Offline stethacantus

  • Big Montana
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
  • Liked: 71
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18726 on: July 21, 2019, 03:38:42 PM »
I'm curious, before Jaws what was were some of the highest grossing movies of all time? Like in the 50's and 60's? Ten Commandments, religious epics like that?
 

I know that The Great Train Robbery ( 1903 ) was the first film to make enough money for anyone to begin keeping track of the all time highest grossing box office film. I know that King Kong ( 1933 ) and Snow White And The Seven Dwarfs ( 1937 ) were both the highest grossing movies of all time when they were released. The Jazz Singe ( 1927 ) must have also been among the highest grossing movies for Hollywood to have switched to sound. I remember seeing somewhere a list of top grossing films where each passed the torch to the next, for example, Jaws surpassed by Star Wars, and Star Wars surpassed by E.T. The Extra Terrestrial.  But that list doesn't seem to be on Wikipedia or IMDb.



Offline Darth Geek

  • The Efron
  • ****
  • Posts: 27864
  • Liked: 5675
  • I am boring and destined to die alone!
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18727 on: July 22, 2019, 06:04:49 AM »
I remember hearing once that Gone With The Wind is supposed to be the highest grossing film ever when you adjust for inflation.



Offline Pak-Man

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 17231
  • Liked: 3142
  • Insert $0.25 to Play!
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18728 on: July 22, 2019, 07:34:32 AM »
I remember hearing once that Gone With The Wind is supposed to be the highest grossing film ever when you adjust for inflation.

Yup, Gone with the Wind is still sitting pretty, at least domestically. Worldwide, Endgame has its adjusted gross beat by a billion dollars. Not sure where the worldwide record adjusted for inflation sits.
https://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm


Offline Johnny Unusual

  • The Efron
  • ****
  • Posts: 26059
  • Liked: 5115
  • Mr. Robot
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18729 on: July 22, 2019, 07:57:00 AM »
The Innkeepers

A neat and very low-key horror film.  It's really more of a drama with light horror touches until the last act, which I'm pretty cool with.  It's about a supposedly haunted hotel in the middle of a town/city (it isn't entirely clear) on the last weekend before it closes.  They both seem to believe it is actually haunted and are interested in testing that before it closes.  There are very few guests so with only recurring complaints about towels, they have a run of the place.  But as the weekend continues, one of them thinks she's seen supernatural occurrences.  Its a nice story and if you are after scare after scare, this won't be for you.  But there is a slow burn, creeping sense of dread that builds pretty well.  I will say we do see
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
  Definitely check this one out.



Offline stansimpson

  • Climbed El Capitan
  • *******
  • Posts: 5068
  • Liked: 379
  • Show yourself! Otherwise, we'll kill some diffrum!
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18730 on: July 22, 2019, 08:11:37 AM »
Came so close several times to watching The Innkeepers, because I really liked House of the Devil (same director).  Innkeepers has a pretty low IMDb score (my preferred ranking) which is why I haven't yet. Maybe I still should.

Regarding all the box office record talk... I'm quite the box office junkie. Happy to answer all your questions!

it's been a LONG time since we've had a movie where its box office is directly proportional to the quality of the movie. ... before Jaws what was were some of the highest grossing movies of all time? Like in the 50's and 60's? Ten Commandments, religious epics like that?

The box office game officially changed in the early 80s when Entertainment Tonight started reporting on box office income like sports records. The Godfather was the highest grossing film of all time just a few years before (Star Wars was the reigning champ; the term "blockbuster" was invented only 2 years prior with Jaws). No way anything like The Godfather could do that again now. The culture has changed too much. As far as quality vs. box office intake, just spending 15mins on BoxOfficeMojo.com will prove it's just as hit and miss then as it is now. Unfortunately, yearly records only start at 1980. But, yes, generally speaking, epics like Lawrence of Arabia and Doctor Zhivago were the typical high grossers.

I remember hearing once that Gone With The Wind is supposed to be the highest grossing film ever when you adjust for inflation.
Yes, Gone With the Wind is #1 adjusted for inflation. Check out Box Office Mojo's list for the full rundown:
https://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm

One big reason why we don't follow adjusted for inflation much is because theatrical release styles have changed so much. Before streaming, dvd, vhs, even TV, Gone With the Wind *had* to only be seen in the theaters. Or take for example the 1980s, where movies like Beverly Hills Cop, Back To the Future, Ghostbusters, Crocodile Dundee, and (record holder) E.T. spent anywhere between 9 and 16 weeks at #1. Full list here:
https://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/bestranked.htm?page=WKNDSAT1&p=.htm).

Perhaps a bigger reason? It's not as headline grabbing as non-adjusted.

I've had trouble finding the All Time Champs in chronological order. Best I could find is this:

Birth of a Nation
Gone with the Wind
The Sound of Music
The Godfather
Jaws
Star Wars: A New Hope
E.T.
Jurassic Park
Titanic
Avatar
Avengers Endgame

If you're interested in more records, here is the end-all, be-all list of records page:
https://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/
Interestingly, The Lion King remake is (not surprisingly) breaking records too. Pundits have been more or less wondering notsomuch which records but by how much. It's being overshadowed right now by Endgame beating Avatar though because this particular record only happens once in 10-20 years.

To go back on topic, watched Indiana Jones & The Crystal Skull because my wife (who's a big Indy fan) had never seen it because she only heard terrible things. She loved it. I'll say it's absolutely flawed, but if you like Indiana Jones movies, there's a good one buried in there to enjoy. You just have to get through some troublesome parts. I'm really itching to rewatch with RiffTrax though.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2019, 08:13:49 AM by stansimpson »


Offline Edward J Grug III

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16163
  • Liked: 2618
  • Forum Tokens Collected: 5000
    • Glorious Bounty
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18731 on: July 23, 2019, 05:21:16 PM »
The Innkeepers

A neat and very low-key horror film.  It's really more of a drama with light horror touches until the last act, which I'm pretty cool with.  It's about a supposedly haunted hotel in the middle of a town/city (it isn't entirely clear) on the last weekend before it closes.  They both seem to believe it is actually haunted and are interested in testing that before it closes.  There are very few guests so with only recurring complaints about towels, they have a run of the place.  But as the weekend continues, one of them thinks she's seen supernatural occurrences.  Its a nice story and if you are after scare after scare, this won't be for you.  But there is a slow burn, creeping sense of dread that builds pretty well.  I will say we do see
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
  Definitely check this one out.

The Innkeepers is good, but The House of the Devil is Ti West's best by a long shot, IMO. Check it out if you can!

(The Sacrament is also really good, and The Roost is a lot of fun. I've not seen In a Valley of Violence, but I hear not great things about it.)
FINE


Offline stethacantus

  • Big Montana
  • *****
  • Posts: 730
  • Liked: 71
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18732 on: July 28, 2019, 06:49:47 PM »
Gamera 3: The Revenge of Iris ( 1999 )
The third of the Gamera trilogy. For those of you who think that Zack Snyder and David S Goyer's take on Superman and other superheroes causing too much collateral damage is something original, it was already examined by Kazunori Ito in the Gamera films. Although considered a hero for stopping destructive monsters from destroying the planet, this movie points out that there are thousands of casualties when giant monsters have their battles. In one scene Gamera is so busy trying to defeat a flock of Gyaos that he doesn't notice some of the balls of fire he is shooting at the Gyaos are causing explosions that send thousands of people flying through the air from the blasts, or that thousands more are either being trampled, or are in buildings he knocks over. So much death and destruction is caused by Gamera that  the army, who considered Gamera an ally at the end of the previous film, once again consider him a threat that needs to be destroyed. The story centers around a teenage girl named Ayana who in a flashback to the first film, watches helplessly as the building her parents are in is crushed by Gamera while he is fighting a Gyaos. Orphaned, she is now living with relatives in a remote village. There Ayana discovers a local legend that a monster has been sleeping in the cave for thousands of years, only trapped there by a mystic stone that shouldn't be removed.  So Ayana moves the stone, and an egg appears. She helps it hatch, an a baby monster is born who Ayana names Iris. Her goal is to raise Iris to adulthood so it will take revenge for her and kill Gamera. Meanwhile, more Gyaos begin hatching across the globe, which keeps Gamera busy each time they attack a city.

The only thing no one is happy about with this film is the way it ends. Gamera finally has a fight with the full grown Iris, but it has resulted in him taking a lot of heavy injuries including having an arm severed. Meanwhile the head of the armed forces has been alerted that a swarm of Gyaos is converging on Japan, followed by a brief shot of thousands of Gyaos flying through the sky. Gamera stares up at the sky and roars, while his human friend says she knows that Gamera will never give up and will fight to the end to protect the planet. Her other companions say that gamera is not alone, and although the odds are against them, they will help Gamera fight.  The final shot is of  Gamera in the center of a burning city awaiting the arrival of the Gyaos. Then suddenly the English caption "Gamera 1999: Ultimate Guardian of the Universe" appears on screen before the fade out into the ending credits. Basically a cliffhanger when there was no film to follow. While the caption suggested there was a film called Ultimate Guardian of the Universe that would be released at a later date, this was how the trilogy was planned to end, with no resolution other than the heroes are all f&#ked. Otherwise, this is another great Gamera movie.


Kull the Conqueror ( 1997 )
This is the final film in the Conan trilogy. Just replace Kull with Conan, and Kevin Sorbo with Arnold Schwarzenegger and this is about what you would have seen if a third Conan movie was made. Once again the back story: Arnold had signed a three picture deal to play Conan, but Dino De Laurentiis used the third picture to make Red Sonja, which was suppose to have Conan in it, but instead renamed Arnold's character to something else, perhaps for legal reasons as Red Sonja was basically an unauthorized adaption of a Marvel comic book. De Laurentiis was taking the gamble that Schwarzenegger would do the final film in the Conan trilogy where he becomes king, as teased in the two previous films, because he was a starving actor who needed the work. But then came a string of hit films, and when Arnold was presented with the script for Conan the Conqueror, he said "No!" After about a decade of trying to get Arnold back, Dino gave the rights to his daughter Rafaella who then decided screw Schwarzenegger, we'll recast Conan. She wanted Kevin Sorbo, but Sorbo apparently refused to do the movie unless they changed the hero. He didn't want to do Conan, but he was willing to do a Kull film. So screw it, the character is now Kull.

So, those of you who were waiting years to see how Conan becomes the king, here it is: In the first few minutes of the film, Kull happens to be in a throne room where a crazy king is busy slaughtering his family. Kull tries to stop him, the king attempts to stab Kull, Kul counters and fatally stabs the crazy king, and the crazy king announces that his successor will be Kull and hands him his crown before he dies. So basically Conan/Kull becomes king by accident. The rest of the film; a witch uses a spell to make Kull fall in love with her and become the Queen, then she usurps the thrown and Kull has to go on a quest to find the Breath of Valka so he can defeat the witch and get this throne back. Oh, and prevent her from opening up hell and allowing the demons to destroy Earth. Nice of her to wait until Kull gets back with the only thing that can kill her before she attempts to open the gates of Hell.

Kull the Conqueror is sort of boring. That's all I can say about it.



Comic Book: The Movie ( 2004 )
Since I was collecting superhero movies, this sort of is part of the genre, but not really.  So just to be a completest, I got it. That and it is about Comic-Con, and all the hoopla over last week's Comic-Con got me in the mood to see this, and there it was, a new copy in Best Buy in the $5 DVD bin.  So what can I say about this film? It was a mockumentary made by Mark Hamell a few years back that is somewhere between This Is Spinal Tap ( 1984 ) and An Alan Smithee Film: Burn Hollywood Burn ( 1997 ). Not really funny, but what did you expect from the comedic talents of Luke Skywalker? And to be fair, I have been re-watching a lot of Laurel and Hardy films this week, so my comedy bar is once again set pretty high. Pretty much the only thing funny about this film is that it was shot during a Comic-Con event with Hamell playing the lead character, and no one there seems to recognize him. I mean, if Chris Pratt went onto the Comic-Con floor wearing a Spiderman mask, it would only take a few minutes for the nerd there to somehow recognize him and swarm him. The only thing disguising Hamell was a beard, and no one turned their heads and noticed this guy being followed by a camera was from Star Wars?  Something I was reminded about a lot when watching this film ( well, not film. It was shot on 3:3 VHS ) was a lot of the participants are no longer living. Hugh Hefner, Stan Lee, Ray Harryhausen, Peter Mayhew, Sid Caesar and Johnathan Winters to name a few. The plot: Hamell plays a comic book geek who writes a comic book fanzine, who is also the ultimate authority of a comic book character from the Golden Age called Commander Courage. Recently the company that owns the character revamped him as a violent Punisher style hero called Codename Courage, and it is the revamped hero that a movie studio wants to turn into a movie. They hire Hamell as a technical advisor, mostly just to get him to endorse the film, and have invited him to Comic-Con where they plan to hold a panel where they will announce the Codename Courage film. But Hamell, a fan of the original Captain Courage, decides to make a documentary of his involvement with the film, and secretly hopes to convince the movie executives to use Captain Courage in their film instead of Codename Courage. Much of the film takes place on the floor of Comic-Con with Hamell interviewing different comic book writers and celebrities, all who play along and pretend Captain Courage was a real character. The closest thing to an amusing performance is from Daran Norris who plays an actor named Bruce Easly who Hamell hires to join him at Comic-Con and cosplay wearing a Golden Age era Commander Courage costume. If there is any highlight, it has to be when Donna D'errico shows up wearing a tight latex catsuit to cosplay Codename Courage's  new sidekick Liberty Lass. She doesn't show up until the film is more than halfway over ( despite getting second billing ) but watching her in that outfit sort of made seeing this movie worth it.

###########################

On the topic of biggest box office, forget about not adjusting the films for inflation. No one has adjusted them for population. For example, there are 130 million more people living in the United States today than there were in the 70s, more than that worldwide. Also not adjusted is how China and Russia and the countries they controlled were not allowing American films to be imported until the past couple of decades, so the world market is a lot larger than it was in the 70s.


Online The Lurker

  • Can't Shoot Straight
  • *****
  • Posts: 8226
  • Liked: 4410
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18733 on: July 28, 2019, 07:34:40 PM »
Gamera the Brave does seem to pick up after the 3rd movie.


Offline stansimpson

  • Climbed El Capitan
  • *******
  • Posts: 5068
  • Liked: 379
  • Show yourself! Otherwise, we'll kill some diffrum!
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #18734 on: July 29, 2019, 08:24:44 AM »
The Innkeepers

A neat and very low-key horror film.  It's really more of a drama with light horror touches until the last act, which I'm pretty cool with.  It's about a supposedly haunted hotel in the middle of a town/city (it isn't entirely clear) on the last weekend before it closes.  They both seem to believe it is actually haunted and are interested in testing that before it closes.  There are very few guests so with only recurring complaints about towels, they have a run of the place.  But as the weekend continues, one of them thinks she's seen supernatural occurrences.  Its a nice story and if you are after scare after scare, this won't be for you.  But there is a slow burn, creeping sense of dread that builds pretty well.  I will say we do see
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
  Definitely check this one out.

The Innkeepers is good, but The House of the Devil is Ti West's best by a long shot, IMO. Check it out if you can!

(The Sacrament is also really good, and The Roost is a lot of fun. I've not seen In a Valley of Violence, but I hear not great things about it.)

Finally decided to watch The Innkeepers too, because I really liked House of the Devil. I was surprised how much I liked it. Definitely not as good but still very good. I like that it has a very small cast, and it's mostly the two male & female leads who have some really good chemistry. I was surprised by the amount of humor in it too which perfectly balances the horror elements. I was creeped out a lot. And I actually cared for the characters. Definitely a slow burn. But I really like that too. And there's only a handful of jump scares mostly from the last act. So much so that I watched the trailer afterwards and was surprised they gave away all but one and even managed to turn a non-scary moment into a super creepy one. lol In any case, yeah, glad I watched it. Don't watch the trailer if you plan on seeing it.

I'm now interested in more Ti West movies, so I may check out The Sacrament the next time I'm looking for a good horror movie.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2019, 08:26:25 AM by stansimpson »