denniseagle
ding dong the witch is dead
Crispy said:
ROFPMSL..................
Please tell me you dont include Die hard 4.0 in your comparison???
Complete piss take from start to finish .
Con Air
- Thread starter zoltan
- Start date
ROFPMSL..................
Please tell me you dont include Die hard 4.0 in your comparison???
Complete piss take from start to finish .
Cid
Proper break this time
DotCommunist said:
Innit, first two DVDs I ever bought (the old double sided ones)... Have provided untold amounts of stoned entertainment.
Cyrus Grissom: I despise rapists. For me, they're somewhere between a cockroach and that white stuff that accumulates at the corners of your mouth when you're really thirsty. But, in your case, I'll make an exception.
Garland Greene: He's a fountain of misplaced rage. Name your cliche; Mother held him too much or not enough, last picked at kickball, late night sneaky uncle, whatever. Now he's so angry that moments of levity actually cause him pain; give him headaches. Happiness, for that gentleman, hurts.
Vince Larkin: Cyrus, where are you taking my plane?
Cyrus Grissom: We're going to Disney Land.
Vince Larkin: You're lying, Cyrus.
Cyrus Grissom: So are you, Vince.
[singing mockingly]
Cyrus Grissom: Ohh... nothing makes me sadder than the agent lost his blader in the... aaaiirrrplane
[throws the headset he's using]
I think Buscemi should be given an award for highest proportion of quotable lines in a film, 100% - hard to beat.
5t3IIa
Registered User
Crispy said:
Single-location actioners or actioners in general?
[I'm now going to say that Die Hard is a masterpiece with a straight face and I'm not sorry.]
I agree that Die Hard is a masterpiece in terms of action movies but does it stand alone against the likes of The Rock and Predator?
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
5t3IIa said:
It's up there. But the location is what makes die hard great. It all ties together, and you get a real sense of what the building is like and where the constraints are. Predator isn't single location, it keeps moving through different bits of jungle. I haven't seen the rock in aaages, so will reserve comment on that.
Idaho
continuity character
It's total balls. Tedious nonsense. And another car crash, and another chase, etc, etc, on and on. I recall willing the damn thing to end.
Also I would like to register my hatred for the expression "tongue in cheek", and even greater hatred for "tongue firmly in cheek".
Also I would like to register my hatred for the expression "tongue in cheek", and even greater hatred for "tongue firmly in cheek".
bouncer_the_dog
Well-Known Member
Crispy said:
There would be no con air without die hard...
..that might look good on a T-Shirt
QueenOfGoths
Fuck you Dave!
bouncer_the_dog said:
I'd buy one!
Just in case anyone hasn't seen it, it's on BBC1 now. Again!
Steel Icarus
an attempt was made
weltweit
Well-Known Member
Yes, I liked that quote, and it should make you think ....
great moviecool as shit
nothing wrong with 'die hard' either imho
imposs1904
Thread Killa'
and ?
so whats your point??
so whats your point??
Reno
The In Kraut
That the sequels are shit, I'd guess.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
not all bad. The aeroplane one was quite good
'Its too bad mclane, we could have been friends'
'I gotta enough friends'
*lights the trail of hi octane plane fuel*
'Its too bad mclane, we could have been friends'
'I gotta enough friends'
*lights the trail of hi octane plane fuel*
Reno
The In Kraut
Did you see them as they came out ? All Die Hard 2 did as repeat the first film, but make everything bigger, without ever approach the sense of a situation escalating where one set piece and peril consistently outdoes the last one. Die Hard's biggest asset was that as a thriller/action film it was perfectly structured. Die Hard 2 wasn't nearly as skilfully done and was on the level of many substandard imitations. The first one is a genuinely great film, the sequels are at best mediocre.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
I wasn't allowed to watch violent films as a kid and even if I were they are a little before my time.
Die Hard the first is great though, really tight, really 80s
Reno
The In Kraut
I think when you see films as they come out you get a different perspective on them. Die Hard deservedly was a game changer when it came to action films, a stone cold classic. To anybody who experienced them then, the sequels were lame, because all they did was to go over familiar ground to less effect. Someone who discovers the film later, on the telly and not in the right order would already have seen films that imitated the original, so I think it doesn't have the same impact.
It's the same with other films like Carpenter's Halloween. I still think its a classic, but I can understand why people who weren't around then wouldn't understand why, because it has been imitated endlessly since. Then you add to that people who weren't around then discovered the film on TV where its elegant widescreen compositions were ruined by pan& scan jobs and the tenstion ruined by ad breaks and censorship and what was a revelation on its release in the cinema, becomes a mess on the telly.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
perhaps, but quality stands on its own legs and doesn't need the context of the time. I discovered that the mrs had not seen Silence of The Lambs before the other day, and immediately had to have it as our evenings film- I was not allowed to watch that as a kid either but its stone cold classic. I hadn't watched it in years. Not all the oft quoted lines, fava beans etc. Some of the nastier bits like 'nutrition has lengthened the bones but you are still two generations removed from po' white trash'
A similar thing with directors cuts for me- depending on the film- it doesn't matter that you didn't see it on big screen when it was current. The film stands. Wicker Man and Bladerunner are examples of what I mean.
What's wrong with 2? It's great fun.
Similar threads
