State your unpopular film related opinion - Part 8

[hammerhedd11]

Originally Posted by bullets

I just prefer one approach over the other.

Oh, well yeah that's totally valid and I agree. I enjoyed The Hunger Games, but LOVE Battle Royale, as you can tell from my avatar. I just don't think it's really valid or fair to compare the two just because they have entirely different things they're trying to say and are two wildly different films. It'd be like comparing Saving Private Ryan to The Thin Red Line. They both share the WWII setting but other than that, are wildly different in what stories they are trying to tell.

I guess I just don't see the point in comparing two wildly different approaches to a semi-similar story, I mean, you don't see people comparing Melancholia to Armageddon. Obviously one approach will appeal more to someone, but it's ultimately a fruitless comparison.

[hammerhedd11]

Originally Posted by Rowsdower!

Yeah, I love Bean, but he'll pretty much sign onto anything.

Just as long as he gets to die in it.

[gwynplaine]

Originally Posted by hammerhedd11

Oh, well yeah that's totally valid and I agree. I enjoyed The Hunger Games, but LOVE Battle Royale, as you can tell from my avatar. I just don't think it's really valid or fair to compare the two just because they have entirely different things they're trying to say and are two wildly different films. It'd be like comparing Saving Private Ryan to The Thin Red Line. They both share the WWII setting but other than that, are wildly different in what stories they are trying to tell.

I guess I just don't see the point in comparing two wildly different approaches to a semi-similar story, I mean, you don't see people comparing Melancholia to Armageddon. Obviously one approach will appeal more to someone, but it's ultimately a fruitless comparison.

My point was not just that both films share similar story lines but also more that one feels more like the work of a true "Auteur" (Battle Royale), where the other one (The Hunger Games) feels more generic and not really with a strong vision or style. Hence why I prefer one over the other.
Now someone needs to do "Running Man" right, just like the book and not at all like the previous film.

[Parker Wayne]

I still haven't seen Battle Royale, but I felt The Hunger Games was pretty good, but I couldn't call it great. It had it's positives, but the ending I was pretty disappointed by.

[gwynplaine]

Originally Posted by Parker Wayne

I still haven't seen Battle Royale, but I felt The Hunger Games was pretty good, but I couldn't call it great. It had it's positives, but the ending I was pretty disappointed by.

Yeah I agree and overall I thought it was ok, and it's also true that it could have probably been much worse. But I preferred the book and like I said before I would have also preferred a director with a stronger vision, personality and style than Gary Ross.

[gwynplaine]

Originally Posted by The Morningstar

Anyway, through a careful series of deliberations after re-visiting The Hitcher, I have come to the conclusion that Rutgar Hauer's John Ryder is the most terrifying screen villain ever. No other villain has unsettled me as much as that guy.

Oh and that film is just brilliant anyway, more people should hunt it down and check it out. It's one of those movies, along with The Thing and Blade Runner, where i look at what the critics had to say when it first came out and scratch my head at their idiocy.

Certainly one of the greatest. This movie is a classic. I didn't even bother watching the remake.
Funnily enough the other day I was reading Ebert's critic of Carpenter's The Thing when it came out. Obviously he didn't like it or get it or whatever, but it was indeed pretty idiotic Oh, and I didn't bother watching the remake either.
Not that I'm necessarily against remakes in general (Carpenter's The Thing is a good example and one of my favorite films), but some movies just can't be topped and should just be left alone.

[Jordacar]

I hope Jon Hamm never plays a superhero.

[Majik1387]

[Mario_Galaxy]

Someone suggested him in the Fantastic Four thread as Reed, which I think is pretty inspired. The Superman boat has certainly sailed though, although I think he would've been excellent.

[Majik1387]

He's perfect for older Batman as well. I probably only see him as Batman and Mr. Fantastic to be fair.

[Parker Wayne]

Hamm I think is too old for Reed, and I won't lose sleep if he never plays a superhero.

[Parker Wayne]

Originally Posted by gwynplaine

Yeah I agree and overall I thought it was ok, and it's also true that it could have probably been much worse. But I preferred the book and like I said before I would have also preferred a director with a stronger vision, personality and style than Gary Ross.

You know how I feel about comparing adaptations to the source material.

I find it unfair.

[EML420]

Jon Hamm is perfect for The Punisher him and Cronenberg directing a dream.

[Majik1387]

Na, he's above the Punisher.

[EML420]

If marvel gets there crack at it any thing can happen let me dream.

[gwynplaine]

Originally Posted by Parker Wayne

You know how I feel about comparing adaptations to the source material.

I find it unfair.

Yeah, true. But I love both King's The Shining and Kubrick's The Shining. But once again probably unfair since no one is as good as Kubrick


And for Jon Hamm I could probably see him as Mandrake the Magician or maybe even Dr. Strange. (who is kinda like the psychedelic version of Mandrake, come to think of it)

[Drizzle]

I don't see the point in waiting until the credits start to show a film's title.

[DarkSovereignty]

ending credits or the beginning credits?

[Drizzle]

End credits (The Dark Knight, Avatar, Thor, Captain America, etc.)

[DarkSovereignty]

the most annoying case was john carter. you see, he coudln't get a decent title until he as a character had EARNED it, too bad nobody was interested in seeing it as a result.

[gwynplaine]

I didn't love it, but I really liked John Carter and think it might be rediscovered somewhere down the line in the future.

Just watched Scorsese's "Cape Fear" again recently. I love the original of course, but what an awesome remake and fantastic film! I might be wrong but I believe it's underrated and I don't hear people mentionning it that often.
Coming after Mitchum and creating a villain as iconic, memorable and scary as the one he portrayed in the original film, now that takes talent.
Maybe De Niro's truly last great performance, as well as Scorsese's last masterpiece. And Nick Nolte in the less flashy role is equally awesome.

[Rowsdower!]

Turning things back to Jon Hamm for a moment... I personally don't care if he ever plays a superhero. I just wish he'd get more solid film work. Aside from Stolen (a great film that no one saw) and The Town, he's been relegated to backup duty in multiple films that featured inferior talent in larger roles. It leaves me scratching my head.

[EML420]

Jon Hamm did an interview (on a podcast) and he said that he doesnt want the pressure of being the lead because if the tanks for what ever reasons its put on the lead has there fault.

[gwynplaine]

Also there are not that many great roles as Don Draper out there. This character really allows Hamm to show the full range of his talent.
I also love every time he shows up on SNL, great comedic timing.

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

I think Hamm would be a cool Mr. Fantastic.