Bullets 'n' Babes

bradavon wrote:Clearly Lucas had a big hand in making this as there is SO much CGI it's ridiculous.

Bring back the 80s, wait just employ Stallone to film every 80s follow up.

I'm eagerly anticipating COBRA II - HIS GUN IS EVEN BIGGER!

Karen Allen has had some major plastic surgery, yuck. She was a attractive woman back in the day.

Yeah, she was quite porkable in RAIDERS.

This is definitely Indiana Jones for the Die Hard 4 generation, it felt very similar indeed.

Hmm... I really enjoyed DH4. 8)

Shing, I'm afraid my using dorama/boyband to wind you up is inextricably tied into their practical usefulness to sum up a lot of Japanese films I don't like.

The Forbidden Kingdom - 4/5
I liked this movie a lot. Kung fu scenes are very well choreographed and nicely shot and edited. The SFX are good. The kid actor is also quite good. I notice Jackie and Jet are heavily doubled but at their age, you kinda expect it. Still, it's easily the best Hollywood film from both Jackie or Jet.

Lourdes wrote:Shing, I'm afraid my using dorama/boyband to wind you up is inextricably tied into their practical usefulness to sum up a lot of Japanese films I don't like.

That's fair enough.

Markgway wrote:Hmm... I really enjoyed DH4. 8)

So did I, although I'd say I "enjoyed" not "really enjoyed" Die Hard 4. I'm sure you'd agree it feels nothing like a Die Hard film, or at least barely anything like a Die Hard film.

The same goes for Indy 4. It feels nothing like an Indiana Jones film. Both share a similar CGI look and MTV style shooting, for want of a better phrase. Seeing as we're on the subject I'd re-watch Die Hard 4 but I wouldn't Indy 4. Neither are keepers.

Markgway wrote:I'm eagerly anticipating COBRA II - HIS GUN IS EVEN BIGGER!

It won't happen but I'd like to see a Cliffhanger follow up, IF Stallone directs.

Markgway wrote:Well, Die Hard 4 and Rambo 4 worked for me, I hope Indy 4 completes the lucky trio.

I bet you can guess which I think is the worst of the "lucky trio" .

It turns out I was pretty right when I said:

bradavon wrote:I have a feeling they're trying to fit an 80s type film into a 2008 style of film-making. Rambo 4 was a rarity in actually working today.

Hung is also spot on in his review too:

https://www.bulletsnbabesdvd.com/forums/ ... 813#113813

bradavon wrote:The same goes for Indy 4. It feels nothing like an Indiana Jones film. Both share a similar CGI look and MTV style editing

I recall Indy 4 having unusually long takes, actually.

I should've said MTV style shooting sorry. I didn't really mean in the quick cutting but more the MTV style of film-making.

You are forgiven

bradavon wrote:I'm sure you'd agree it feels nothing like a Die Hard film, or at least barely anything like a Die Hard film.

It's... different. But I was just so happy to see Bruce back in action I didn't even care. I was thrilled that it was so good when I expected it to be a lot less so. It's not a classic like the original... but did ANYONE honestly expect it to be??

The same goes for Indy 4. It feels nothing like an Indiana Jones film. Both share a similar CGI look and MTV style shooting, for want of a better phrase.

I should be seeing it tomorrow so I'll offer my two cents then...

Seeing as we're on the subject I'd re-watch Die Hard 4 but I wouldn't Indy 4. Neither are keepers.

I'd buy RAIDERS, THE LAST CRUSADE and all of the DIE HARDs on Blu-Ray (assuming they ever release the unrated DH4.0 on that format).

It won't happen but I'd like to see a Cliffhanger follow up, IF Stallone directs.

Lol, I didn't imagine it would. I picked the Stallone (action) film least likely to get a sequel. I'd still go see it though... and CLIFFHANGER's one of his best so I'd pay to see a Part II also. It's not like Renny Harlin's been busy lately.

but did ANYONE honestly expect it to be??

Certainly not me. Die Hard is in another league to any of the sequels. I did expect it to "feel" like a Die Hard film. I do agree it's still enjoyable though.

Scarface: The TV version featurette from the DVD

Very funny!!

I cant believe a guy was hired to prepoare this laugh-athon edited version of the film In the beginning 'What you been doing, eatin' pussy?' is changed to 'What you been doing, eatin' pineapple?'

Shrooms blu-ray 1/5

Shit horror hokum set in Ireland inexplicably got a fairly large nationwide cinema release and even more unbelievably i traded stuff for the blu-ray 6 stoners go camping in the irish countryside in search of magic mushrooms then things take a bad turn....this is just poor all round,bland,no-name cast,extremely tame scares (this is the unseen edition apparently). it gets 1 star for the nice irish location.

INDY 4 2 or 2.5/5

A disappointment. Temple of Doom is no longer the series' weakest link. All the good will in the world can't make up for a paper thin story - that seems ill-thought out - and a lack of wit or purpose. By the end I didn't really know or care what was happening or why? Ford can still cut it, but poor writing is a harsher enemy than age, and his whip seems a bit limper than before. Blanchett did her best with a one-dimensional villain, and she was actually kinda sexy which was unexpected. Maybe I just like bob-haired Ruskies? Nice to see Allen back: she's still got the spunk, and that winning smile. Hurt: WTF? What a waste of a character. Winstone: Ah, I'd rather have had John-Rhys Davies return, at least HE was charming. And if they make a Part 5 with LeBeouf in the lead I WON'T be going to see it. Where's the charisma? The only similarities to Brando were the outfit and rotten diction. Came to life for me during the chase thru the jungle - even if the entire scene looked like a matte painting - but too much of it smacked of rehashing stuff that was done better before. I'm glad it's been a massive success to prove that these old heroes can still cut it, but next time a better story and script please.

I liked Winstone but agreed John Rhys-Davies is great too.

The only similarities to Brando were the outfit and rotten diction.

You spotted the homage to a Brando film right?

I'm glad it's been a massive success to prove that these old heroes can still cut it, but next time a better story and script please.

The script clearly felt like it had had massive re-writes over the years. So many reviews have been giving it 4 out of 5/5 out of 5. I cannot for the life of me see why.

bradavon wrote:I liked Winstone but agreed John Rhys-Davies is great too.

Never been a fan of his. Not quite sure why he's done so well in Hollywood.

You spotted the homage to a Brando film right?

The Wild One. Lol, it wasn't subtle.

So many reviews have been giving it 4 out of 5/5 out of 5. I cannot for the life of me see why.

Nostalgia.

Markgway wrote:Never been a fan of his. Not quite sure why he's done so well in Hollywood.

Because he's a brilliant actor.

Check out "Nil by Mouth" and "The Proposition" for proof of that. The former more so, as he has a much bigger part.

The War of the Roses: 3.5/5

I quite like Danny DeVito's style, this film was pretty fun, reminded me of The Money Pit. Michael Douglas always annoys me, though.

Brilliant? Well, I haven't seen Nil By Mouth so I'll defer. But The Proposition was fairly boring as I recall. Ponderous and pretentious, so I wiped out most of it from my mind. Not saying Winstone's a bad actor, just not sure why he's so popular. He's neither handsome nor charismatic, so what made Hollywood think "hey, we'll hire this guy instead of some local"?

The War of the Roses is a neat black comedy, but if anything, too restrained. DeVito has a gift for the genre, but I think the funniest extremes were curbed. Maybe by the studio? It's pretty tame for an R-rated film, and I expect it was meant as a PG-13. I think Douglas is one of the most underrated stars/actors in Hollywood.

I'd say he's charismatic and he's a bloody good actor, you cannot ignore that fact. Plus he's English (important distinction from British), which the Yanks love.

Douglas, underrated! Are you sure? He was huge in the 80s.

bradavon wrote: Plus he's English (important distinction from British), which the Yanks love.

You do talk pure shit.

Coming from the Bullshit-Meister that doesn't mean much

Besides how is that talking shit? He is English and most Americans do love an English accent.

You really do not see hundreds of people pissing on your comments on soo many forums do you. You are so blind.

I guess that's your way of saying "you realise you were talking shit"? . You do that all the time when you realise you were wrong, you completely evade the question.

Of course I realise some users dislike me, you'd have to be demented and buried in a grave to not notice. It was VERY obvious on this very forum a few months back, you do have a short memory.

Besides like I've said before there are lots who have no love for you either. That's a very rich comment if there ever was one.

bradavon wrote:Douglas, underrated! Are you sure? He was huge in the 80s.

As an actor. yes. I'm not talking about popularity. I don't think I've seen him give a bad performance, and in Falling Down he was terrific, but didn't get an Oscar nom. His consistancy is taken for granted.

SCARY MOVIE 3

Plenty laughs, no consistancy. Just what you'd expect, really. Always good to see Leslie Neilsen, and Anna Faris is cute. Thought Charlie Sheen was a bit wasted though. I see even after 20+ years the Airplane boys are still putting paedophile gags in PG-13-level movies. The rule is: throw a thousand gags at the screen and pray half of them stick. Which is fine, because about half did.

Anyone know what's different about the unrated 3.5 version?