Author Topic: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)  (Read 79570 times)

St_Eddie

  • LIKES: Deviled eggs DISLIKES: The Devil & bad eggs
    • St_Eddie's YouTube Channel
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1050 on: July 19, 2018, 11:06:54 PM »
I think if he has any self-awareness at all he's aware that he's not the greatest actor of all time, and has managed something incredibly difficult, going from just being a wrestler to being an A-list actor. Plenty of his contemporaries... are still wrestlers. It's incredible to contemplate what he's accomplished, I can remember when the Rock first appeared in a Star Trek: Voyager episode and we were all sneering at the stunt casting. But he built on those sort of opportunities and made it to the big leagues.

Of course, Arnold Schwarzenegger did it first, with his transition from body builder to A-list actor.  People say that The Rock is the modern equivalent of Schwarzenegger, not just in terms of his career trajectory but also his charisma.  Whilst I can see what they're saying and I like The Rock, I don't think that he has anywhere near the same onscreen presence and charisma as Schwarzenegger at the height of his movie career.

Sin Agog

  • Dogs fucked the pope; no fault of mine
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1051 on: July 19, 2018, 11:19:54 PM »
Shivers.  Always gave it a miss, as I assumed it would be primitive toss by Cronenberg's standards, but it was great.  So many Cronenberg tropes there right from the get-go: evil medical professionals, losing control of your own body, Ballardian influences (High Rise), almost a greater empathy for the disease than the diseased...

Also just saw Eyes Without a Face in full for the first time.  I just don't know how Franju got away with showing that facial transplant in such explicit detail in 1959.  It was behind the hands viewing for me today; I can't even imagine what a furore it must have caused at the time.  That ending with the masked daughter sashaying off into the woods, another freed animal, with the doves clinging to her arms, was majestic.

mothman

  • I don't know why
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1052 on: July 19, 2018, 11:25:36 PM »
Yes, I’m sure Dwayne Johnson curses his stars that he’s not widely known solely for being in just one movie 30 years ago.

Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1053 on: July 19, 2018, 11:53:12 PM »
The Rock can do comedy a fuck load better than Arnie. I have never thought of Arnie as being particularly charismatic either. I would say Johnson is way more charismatic and actually acts like a human being, which Arnie always struggles with

St_Eddie

  • LIKES: Deviled eggs DISLIKES: The Devil & bad eggs
    • St_Eddie's YouTube Channel
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1054 on: July 20, 2018, 12:02:27 AM »
Shivers.  Always gave it a miss, as I assumed it would be primitive toss by Cronenberg's standards, but it was great.  So many Cronenberg tropes there right from the get-go: evil medical professionals, losing control of your own body, Ballardian influences (High Rise), almost a greater empathy for the disease than the diseased...

Shivers is excellent.  The ending in the pool is the stuff of nightmares; utterly hopeless, surrounded and unable to properly move in the water.  Shivers indeed.

Yes, I’m sure Dwayne Johnson curses his stars that he’s not widely known solely for being in just one movie 30 years ago.

Oh, come on.  That's nonsense and you know it.  Arnie's known for way more than just one movie, 30 years ago.  The Terminator, Terminator 2, Predator, Total Recall, The Running Man, Having an Illegitimate Son with His Housekeeper are the big ones but there's plenty of 'lesser' flicks which are noteworthy too.  Your mileage may vary but I'd argue that The Rock's filmography hasn't come close to reaching that level of all time classics, as of yet.

The Rock can do comedy a fuck load better than Arnie. I have never thought of Arnie as being particularly charismatic either. I would say Johnson is way more charismatic and actually acts like a human being, which Arnie always struggles with

I'd agree with that last part but I still think that Arnie has him trumped in the charisma stakes.  Horses for courses though.

mothman

  • I don't know why
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1055 on: July 20, 2018, 08:20:21 AM »
I was referring to the comment about Roddy Piper, not Annie.

zomgmouse

  • I love carrots
    • BEN VOLCHOK DOT COM
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1056 on: July 20, 2018, 08:35:38 AM »

Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1057 on: July 20, 2018, 08:57:52 AM »
Of course, Arnold Schwarzenegger did it first, with his transition from body builder to A-list actor.  People say that The Rock is the modern equivalent of Schwarzenegger, not just in terms of his career trajectory but also his charisma.  Whilst I can see what they're saying and I like The Rock, I don't think that he has anywhere near the same onscreen presence and charisma as Schwarzenegger at the height of his movie career.

I'd say the real difference is that Arnold had a much wider "charisma range", could play the pitiless killer and the goofball.

Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1058 on: July 20, 2018, 09:24:17 AM »
I'd say the real difference is that Arnold had a much wider "charisma range", could play the pitiless killer and the goofball.

I think the Rock can do both those things, and can do the latter a lot better than Arnie.

I would go as far as to say that "charisma" isn't something I have ever thought of in relation to Arnie. I would say "presence" is a better word

Sin Agog

  • Dogs fucked the pope; no fault of mine
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1059 on: July 20, 2018, 09:36:34 AM »
Shivers is excellent.  The ending in the pool is the stuff of nightmares; utterly hopeless, surrounded and unable to properly move in the water.  Shivers indeed.

I've been hurtling through a bunch of those Director on Director books lately, and in Cronenberg on Cronenberg he says Shivers has one of his happiest endings.  Before the glutinous crawling penis thing infected everyone, they were living staid, ineffective Canadian lives in some sterile gated community, but afterwards they were doing all the things they never had the cojones to do- well...mostly making pan-sexual love with anyone around.  But then, like I said, he also said he related to the squelchy detached penis monster more than the human characters.  Makes me wonder how differently some classic movies would play out if we watch them from a completely different perspective.  Alien through the eyes of the poor, extroverted xenomorph who only wants to breed some friends so she doesn't have to feel so very alone.

Blumf

  • Not long now
    • IGNORE ME!!!
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1060 on: July 20, 2018, 10:07:18 AM »
Makes me wonder how differently some classic movies would play out if we watch them from a completely different perspective.  Alien through the eyes of the poor, extroverted xenomorph who only wants to breed some friends so she doesn't have to feel so very alone.

Isn't there a book based on The Thing that shows the alien as some kind of pan-galactic ambassador trying to make first contact, but being stymied by the damaged it received in the crash.

Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1061 on: July 20, 2018, 10:18:15 AM »
I was referring to the comment about Roddy Piper, not Annie.

By your logic Dwayne Johnson (116 acting credits) is 'better' than Humphrey Bogart (86).

Plus he was in Hell Comes to Frogtown

magval

  • Magnum Valentino
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1062 on: July 20, 2018, 10:46:47 AM »
Adding to the discussion of The Rock, it's interesting (I think, anyway) to note that as an actor, he failed. Completely. He had a couple high profile projects straight out the door (The Rundown, Welcome to the Jungle) and then it was straight to largely forgettable roles in completely forgettable kids films. I don't mean 'failed' like the Internet Kids say, just that his trajectory was strictly downwards the first few years of his career.

Then, all of a sudden, he was the biggest movie star in the world. I think it was Fast and Furious that did it for him, followed by GI Joe and then UBIQUITY, but there's no doubt about it, for a time the Rock was fair game for being mocked by his detractors on WWE TV. You simply couldn't do that now. He's properly made it.

Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1063 on: July 20, 2018, 10:51:57 AM »
I think even in those failures though he was praised as being the best thing in them. He was the highlight of Be Cool, the rubbish Get Shorty sequel.

Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1064 on: July 20, 2018, 11:10:28 AM »
Adding to the discussion of The Rock, it's interesting (I think, anyway) to note that as an actor, he failed. Completely. He had a couple high profile projects straight out the door (The Rundown, Welcome to the Jungle) and then it was straight to largely forgettable roles in completely forgettable kids films. I don't mean 'failed' like the Internet Kids say, just that his trajectory was strictly downwards the first few years of his career.

Then, all of a sudden, he was the biggest movie star in the world. I think it was Fast and Furious that did it for him, followed by GI Joe and then UBIQUITY, but there's no doubt about it, for a time the Rock was fair game for being mocked by his detractors on WWE TV. You simply couldn't do that now. He's properly made it.
Yes. It's kind of odd seeing the Fast and Furious become one of the biggest film series around, when its stars are all a bunch of b-list types from the early noughties.

Sin Agog

  • Dogs fucked the pope; no fault of mine
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1065 on: July 20, 2018, 11:46:52 AM »
I think even in those failures though he was praised as being the best thing in them. He was the highlight of Be Cool, the rubbish Get Shorty sequel.

Interestingly, the only film where he actually looked black, rather than sorta race-neutral. I hear he refuses to let-on about what political party he supports, either.  Neutrality seems to be one of the keys to his wide appeal.

Z

  • The movie, not the TV series, or the book
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1066 on: July 20, 2018, 12:51:49 PM »
Then, all of a sudden, he was the biggest movie star in the world. I think it was Fast and Furious that did it for him, followed by GI Joe and then UBIQUITY
It was his return to WWE tbh. Fast and Furious 5 (and to a lesser extent 6) were a super refreshing kind of great dumb action films followng the rise of Marvel bullshit and Michael Bay dominance, but the Rock regained an absolute fuckton of core support via his return to wrestling and the confidence boost that came with it helped too.
Fast Five came out directly after his big WWE return, GI Joe 2 was delayed extremely late on (wasn't it like 3 weeks before it's original release date) to come out at roughly the exact same time as he was busy promoting the fuck out of a match at Wrestlemania.

He's not as smart of a guy as Arnie and he's a total weirdo. I expect him to try a political run (Republican) and for it to go extremely badly, leaving him as a total fringe player in the aftermath.

magval

  • Magnum Valentino
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1067 on: July 20, 2018, 01:32:40 PM »
Him and Cena's run up to that match had some of the best acting I've ever seen from him. He convincingly played it like he'd lost a step, and was very gracious to Cena with the material he allowed him to use to get ahead.

Agreed about him shining in Be Cool. I'm not sure he's ever been better than in that film (outside of the pre-Wrestlemania X7 sit-down with Austin and Jim Ross). Even now, I can't take him seriously when he's playing straight, though he can be excellent in comedies.

In interviews though, like press junket shit and the wacky things they get up to on Radio 1 and This Morning, he's a total phony. He's a master of 'generous perfect American movie star' but dead behind the eyes.

Shameless Custard

  • PAUSE FOR THE JET
    • My RUBBISH
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1068 on: July 20, 2018, 03:14:54 PM »
Woah, got a bit harsh at the end there!

I used to think he was a bit phony too, but apparently he's genuinely like that, with everyone!

magval

  • Magnum Valentino
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1069 on: July 20, 2018, 03:27:02 PM »
It does seem a bit harsh, sorry The Rock, but I'll stand by it.

You know the way Tom Cruise is? Tom seems to excel at that sort of 'best person in the room' schtick.

I think with Dwayne, he only excels at that in front of thousands and thousands of people. It seems like when he's expected to be Instagram Rock in a closed-room, handful-of-people situation, he's just going through the motions.

I will love him forever for his promo at Fully Loaded 1999 alone, but I don't buy his constant social media enthusiasm and projected relatability.

St_Eddie

  • LIKES: Deviled eggs DISLIKES: The Devil & bad eggs
    • St_Eddie's YouTube Channel
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1070 on: July 20, 2018, 04:32:21 PM »
I think that it's fair enough to be somewhat skeptical of The Rock's media persona, dare I even say healthy.  Maybe he's a genuinely nice guy, maybe not.  Who knows but I'm not willing to fully buy into it myself.  I wouldn't completely dismiss it either, of course.

Phoenix Lazarus

  • Why bother writing stuff below your avatar?
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1071 on: July 20, 2018, 04:36:53 PM »
Shockingly offensive Polanski joke there rightly deleted.

I'm just so intrigued as to what could be deemed 'shockingly offensive,' here, given some of the stuff that gets posted and isn't deleted.

mothman

  • I don't know why
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1072 on: July 20, 2018, 04:37:46 PM »
By your logic Dwayne Johnson (116 acting credits) is 'better' than Humphrey Bogart (86).

Plus he was in Hell Comes to Frogtown

Don't be daft, that's not what I said at all. I said "KNOWN for." Or would you simultaneously have us believe that Roddy Piper (158 credits) is better that Dwayne Johnson (116 credits) who isn't as good as Humphrey Bogart (86 credits)?

Z

  • The movie, not the TV series, or the book
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1073 on: July 20, 2018, 04:56:09 PM »
I used to think he was a bit phony too, but apparently he's genuinely like that, with everyone!
There's aspects that are real (he's definitely a mentalist motivational speaker type who buys his own speeches), but he's also very very much always playing a political game and his ego can be bruised pretty easily. He's a thin skinned guy that no one (as of yet) has had much need to lay into his extremely guarded personality and beliefs.

For a guy who was always extremely reluctant to take any bumps himself, he treated other people's bodies like total shit if he felt it'd get him over and didn't express much in the way of gratitude that guys like Foley let him do that.

magval

  • Magnum Valentino
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1074 on: July 20, 2018, 05:33:31 PM »
I have a theory about that.

It's clear that the Rock moved above and way, way beyond Foley as 1999 went on, and taking the time out to indulge Rock and Sock was his way of paying him back for the level he took him to with those winter hardcore matches. He didn't need any of that tag team nonsense. Could easily have been in the main event picture that whole time, but put a pause on it for a prolonged period of tag team faffery (undeniably entertaining though it was) which also fit in with Foley's determination to distance himself from the one thing that had made him successful: his disregard for his health.

I've only recently come to that conclusion but I feel it's something that, although neither man has ever really acknowledged it, seems reasonably obvious in retrospect.

Shit Good Nose

  • Several bags of balls
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1075 on: July 20, 2018, 05:47:29 PM »
Please don't turn this into the wrestling thread!!


By your logic Dwayne Johnson (116 acting credits) is 'better' than Humphrey Bogart (86).

Plus he was in Hell Comes to Frogtown

Yes, Bogie was amazing in that - "of all the swamps in the world", "here's looking at you toad", etc.

magval

  • Magnum Valentino
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1076 on: July 20, 2018, 05:56:58 PM »
Back on track - I watched Quatermass and the Pit last night. Great film. Really hard to describe to someone though.

Some men and women find an ape, only it's a martian, but it's from a class of persecuted martians, and the negative vibes involved in their genocide millions of years ago make the devil appear above London in modern day London.

Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1077 on: July 20, 2018, 06:18:52 PM »
I think the Rock can do both those things, and can do the latter a lot better than Arnie.

I would go as far as to say that "charisma" isn't something I have ever thought of in relation to Arnie. I would say "presence" is a better word

The comedy side perhaps but I cannot imagine him in a role like Terminator or even Commando.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2018, 06:38:32 PM by greenman »

St_Eddie

  • LIKES: Deviled eggs DISLIKES: The Devil & bad eggs
    • St_Eddie's YouTube Channel
Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1078 on: July 20, 2018, 06:45:28 PM »
The comedy side perhaps but I cannot imagine him in a role like Terminator or even Commando.

Exactly.  There's not many people who fondly remember The Rock for his role as The Scorpion King.

Re: What Non-New Films Have You Seen? (2018 Edition)
« Reply #1079 on: July 20, 2018, 06:56:09 PM »
Don't be daft, that's not what I said at all. I said "KNOWN for." Or would you simultaneously have us believe that Roddy Piper (158 credits) is better that Dwayne Johnson (116 credits) who isn't as good as Humphrey Bogart (86 credits)?

They're your rules.

Personally I wouldn't include Piper's wrestling matches in the title count.