No, not seen that one mate.
Black Sunday ( 1977 ) is another good one with Dern in, and his performance is pretty unhinged.
I continued working my way though this list[url]http://www.imdb.com/list/7xdzgV9lZSc/[/url] and watched April Foolās Day. Pretty cool movie, and really not what I was expecting.
[quote=āPhil H, post:3681, topic:1923ā]No, not seen that one mate.[/quote]Itās not bad, worth a watch Iād say. Not far behind Pelham and Charley Varrick for Matthau 70ās thrillers 
Convoyā¦ watched the widescreen version, I had very low expectations and I have to say, I find it very underrated ā¦ even though the story is pretty silly, this is one hell of an action movie, really.
[quote=āPhil H, post:3679, topic:1923ā]Had myself a little Bruce Dern fest. That weasely faced toothy grin of his should be available on prescription as far as Iām concerned. Never fails to make me feel good just watching him.
Anyhow, started off with some Silent Running which Iām pleased to report is as good as it has ever been. I was worried it might have aged badly but nothing of the sort. Still a perfect example of a great little story with a whopping great backdrop.
Finished up with a revisit to Into the Badlands which was a made for TV movie I think but none the worse for that and highly recommended if you like westerns and spooky stories combined. Does Bruce Dern have a star on Hollywood Boulevard? Thereāll be no justice till he does as far as Iām concerned. 8)[/quote]
I like that sci-fi flick, where he acts most of the time only with robots, he plays a botanist or something similar to that, canāt remember the name of the film, got a cool Joan Baez soundtrack
Thatās Silent Running.
the Book of Eli - 2009 Albert Hughes, Allen Hughes
Saw this one yesterday, pretty lousy film if you my ask me
Washington and Oldman normal good performances canāt take this one out of the relegation zone for me, I think itās the first time I see a film with Tom Waits that I do not like.
Contrary to many I do not think itās a religion/evangelist propaganda film, (too much violence for that), religion as been the main theme of many films including westernās where the directorās took much influence for this project, of course there are so many religions that some of the film ambitious turn out to be quite redundant or ambiguous.
The action scenes are well done also the photography work, but the plot is thin as paper, so the film fails to deliver in that major issue, for an action packed film itās too pretentious, also quite unbelievable if you ask me, most of you already seen it, but without giving away the ending the final ātwistā only if we where blind.
On the same level of waterworld but i think even worst, at least that one got some skin to show, and Hopper doing is thing.
2 stars one for show and other for Tom
[size=12pt]MƤn som hater Kvinnor[/size] (Millennium 1)
The first part of the Millennium trilogy, based on Stieg Larssonās immensely popular novels
The first novel is actually the only one I read, which made it a bit difficult to judge the movie, after all itās a thriller
I wasnāt too fond of the novel, although I admit itās a cleverly plotted thriller with the triple-s ingredients: sex, sentimentality and social comment. Clever because we all love sex, the average reader loves sentimentality, and critics love social comment. Apart from all this Larsson knows how to tell a story - a quality many other contemporary writers lack - but heās not my kind of writer, itās all too easy, too smooth, too superficial.
The film is a little like the book, a good time filler, but not much more than that
If it were a spaghetti, Iād say it was a solid 3 star effort, so:
3 out of 5
The films are shown on Dutch TV these days, and Iāll probably watch Millennium 2 tonight
Yep. Thatās the one all right.
Love the bit where he teaches the droids to play poker and they start cheating. ;D
[quote=āscherpschutter, post:3689, topic:1923ā][size=12pt]MƤn som hater Kvinnor[/size] (Millennium 1)
The first part of the Millennium trilogy, based on Stieg Larssonās immensely popular novels
The first novel is actually the only one I read, which made it a bit difficult to judge the movie, after all itās a thriller
I wasnāt too fond of the novel, although I admit itās a cleverly plotted thriller with the triple-s ingredients: sex, sentimentality and social comment. Clever because we all love sex, the average reader loves sentimentality, and critics love social comment. Apart from all this Larsson knows how to tell a story - a quality many other contemporary writers lack - but heās not my kind of writer, itās all too easy, too smooth, too superficial.
The film is a little like the book, a good time filler, but not much more than that
If it were a spaghetti, Iād say it was a solid 3 star effort, so:
3 out of 5
The films are shown on Dutch TV these days, and Iāll probably watch Millennium 2 tonight[/quote]
I liked the girl in the film, very good role. She was so cool and hot!
I liked the film otherwise (though I didnāt see it from the start) but the story was quite laughable if you think about it. So many similar murders over the years and no-one saw the connection. It was fun to see Peter Haber from Beck series playing something completely different.
Another eighties movie tonight, and this time it was The Ice Pirates. Dumb sci-fi comedy, but I really enjoyed it. Great to see appearances from Angelica Huston and Ron Perlman as well. Just thoroughly absorbing nonsense.
Fearless Fuzz
-Stelvio Massiās crime film with Maurizio Merli and Joan Collins. More lighthearted than usual Merli films, didnāt like it that much but you can see Joan Collins in two nude scenes.
Two Mrs. Carrols 1947
A nice little noir with Bogart playing a rare villain role.
[size=12pt]Flickan som lekte med Elden[/size] (Millennium 2)
The second part of the trilogy is better paced, but less atmospheric than part One.
Noomi Rapace jumps and races around, on high heels, in a borrowed car, on a stolen motor bike (stolen from a Hellās Angel she gave just desserts - sheās an ace at kick boxing too!). The girl almost single-handedly saves a movie which is otherwise mere average in all departments.
More and more the story slides off to soap opera level, and itās also getting more unbelievable by the minute. In this part Salander is the main suspect in a murder case and itās known that she has a psychiatric past, and yet nobody has the brilliant idea to investigate this past a little more thoroughly (of course: if someone had, he would have found the right link immediately!)
But, as said (by others too), the girl is great
And ā¦ she has an almost pornographic sex scene (a lesbian sex scene, though ā¦)
By the way: her real name, Rapace, means bird of prey in French!
[quote=āBill san Antonio, post:3693, topic:1923ā]Fearless Fuzz
ā¦ but you can see Joan Collins in two nude scenes.[/quote]
Youād have to be fearless for that fuzz if she did a remake.
Ha, haā¦indeed 
.
[size=14pt]Beatrice Cenci[/size] 1969 Lucio Fulci
Some say this is Lucio Fulci best film, maybe the ones who do not like terror films. I wouldnāt say that itās his best film, but is surprising seeing Fulci directing a period dramatic film, even more a based in real events one,in any case Fulci was such a talented director that he could cope with any style and still be able do a great job.
Itās certainly the case here, although the film itās not without its faults, in visual terms itās pure beauty, I got a give to Fulci, he was a real craftsman behind the camera, every frame every camera movement its masterfully well done, any actor even bad ones benefits from the fact of being directed by such a talent.
Talking about the actors we got some surprises on a not so usual cast with some not so usual French actors, Tomas Millian is OK, for those who could not stand the guy I recommend the film, letās say he gets The Four of the Apocalypse treatment but medieval style, his acting in the film is a little bit more restrained that usual with little show-off, he reaaly tries to look good in the picture, the main actress Adrienne Larussa is a stunning beauty, with a similar face to Soledad Miranda, but itās a weak point in the film, she struggles the all film just to act, a bad thing when youāre an actress, maybe thatās why I never heard much of the lovely girl. The main surprise in the acting department was French actor George Wilson (father of Lambert Wilson) and what an actor the man was, he steals the entire show as the bad guy, really bad guy, an unusual cast but an effective one, thereās another French actor, and the rest of the cast are usual in Italian films, including Ignazio Spalla the fat guy from the Sabata films.
The story its based in real events and itās sort of known even outside Italy, a despot father that hates is sons cause they spend theyāre money, even gives parties when two of them died, well wont be a surprised if the rest of the siblings plot to kill him, of course thereās also some money and real estate that could end up in the hands of the church.
In my view the story and the way Fulci choose to expose it, is the weak points of the film, I can understand why the film unfolds in a Flashback mode, in Italy the Beatrice Cenci story was well known from the public so starting by the end was not an issue, the problem is that it turned the film very in a much simple one, almost plot less (almost) based only in the strong scenes and excellent dialogue work, only spoiled by Adrienne Larussa lack of acting talent.
In the end I can say that we are not talking of an average 3 stars project, thereās fantastic cinematography some very good acting work even if not from ll actors, the film itās well balance and structured, but got almost no plot land lacks some real depth, but in my opinion it survives that fact, and can be considered a good film from the master Fulci
4 stars
Revisited QTās Inglourious Basterds.
Still great and I feel it is QTās best work.
[quote=āEl Topo, post:3698, topic:1923ā][size=14pt]Beatrice Cenci[/size] 1969 Lucio Fulci
Some say this is Lucio Fulci best film, maybe the ones who do not like terror films. I wouldnāt say that itās his best film, but is surprising seeing Fulci directing a period dramatic film, even more a based in real events one,in any case Fulci was such a talented director that he could cope with any style and still be able do a great job.
Itās certainly the case here, although the film itās not without its faults, in visual terms itās pure beauty, I got a give to Fulci, he was a real craftsman behind the camera, every frame every camera movement its masterfully well done, any actor even bad ones benefits from the fact of being directed by such a talent.[/quote]
I donāt remember who it was, some sw star I think, who said that Fulci was one of the most talented director in Italy, as good as Fellini. But the guy was just tooā¦ I dunno, too fucked up or something, too sadistic to make films for wider audience.