Latest Movie That You Watched!

  • This message board permanently closed on June 30th, 2020 at 4PM EDT and is no longer accepting new members.

mjs9153

Peripherally known member..
Nov 21, 2014
3,494
22,165
Saw it at the weekend. It's not overly good but I went in with low expectations so didn't really mind it. The lasting impression of it is that it didn't need to be a Predator movie, and tbh while I know the intention was for it to spawn sequels and re-start the franchise, I honestly don't think it'll happen. Not off the back of this movie, and that means probably never.
Is Predators better? Well, I thought Preds was basically fan-fiction on film, while The Predator isn't. But it's a close-run thing. Very close. My gf actually said she thought the first AvP was better.

I think a review I read had it spot-on, by comparison with the original Predator: "I doubt anyone will be talking about this film in 31 years' time, or even remember it."

I think part of the reason the original was considered so good was the work of the actor playing the Predator,Kevin Peter Hall...Kevin Peter Hall - Wikipedia
Nothing cgi about Mr Hall,he was tall big and ugly in that part..when he finally tracks down Arnold,and begins dropping his gear,stops,issues that godawful roar and spreads his wingspan with the claw tipped hands,you figure even Arnold has bitten off more than he can chew.. read the wiki on him,didn't realize he was the mutant bear in Prophecy and was on Harry and the Hendersons too..
 

mjs9153

Peripherally known member..
Nov 21, 2014
3,494
22,165
The main theme is a variation of Led Zeppelin's The Immigrant Song. Think of the main riff of that song slowed way down and played on a synth. Carpenter says as much in several interviews I've read / seen.
Carpenter was good at those ominous soundtracks..I think Ennio Morricone did the theme for The Thing,but you could argue that Halloween,AOP13,and The Thing were the top 3 most effective story setting horror film soundtracks ever..
 

swiftdog2.0

I tell you one and one makes three...
Mar 16, 2010
7,095
35,344
Macroverse
Carpenter was good at those ominous soundtracks..I think Ennio Morricone did the theme for The Thing,but you could argue that Halloween,AOP13,and The Thing were the top 3 most effective story setting horror film soundtracks ever..

Agreed! The main theme from Halloween is killer (pardon the pun)!

If you haven't already, check out Carpenter's two recent albums Lost Themes . Pretty awesome stuff. Recorded with a full band with Carpenter playing synth.
 

swiftdog2.0

I tell you one and one makes three...
Mar 16, 2010
7,095
35,344
Macroverse
I think part of the reason the original was considered so good was the work of the actor playing the Predator,Kevin Peter Hall...Kevin Peter Hall - Wikipedia
Nothing cgi about Mr Hall,he was tall big and ugly in that part..when he finally tracks down Arnold,and begins dropping his gear,stops,issues that godawful roar and spreads his wingspan with the claw tipped hands,you figure even Arnold has bitten off more than he can chew.. read the wiki on him,didn't realize he was the mutant bear in Prophecy and was on Harry and the Hendersons too..

"Get to the choppa!!"
 

Gerald

Well-Known Member
Sep 8, 2011
2,201
7,168
The Netherlands
Carpenter was good at those ominous soundtracks..I think Ennio Morricone did the theme for The Thing,but you could argue that Halloween,AOP13,and The Thing were the top 3 most effective story setting horror film soundtracks ever..

You could wonder why Carpenter bothered with Morricone, because the music is so close to his own scores. He got Ennio Morricone, one of the best and most beloved soundtrack composers of all time (if not THE most beloved) and he got him to compose a synthesizer score that sounds like he has done it himself.
 

swiftdog2.0

I tell you one and one makes three...
Mar 16, 2010
7,095
35,344
Macroverse
You could wonder why Carpenter bothered with Morricone, because the music is so close to his own scores. He got Ennio Morricone, one of the best and most beloved soundtrack composers of all time (if not THE most beloved) and he got him to compose a synthesizer score that sounds like he has done it himself.

He did it because he wanted to work with Morricone and he had the funds to do so. The Thing would have been a box office smash if it wasn't released two weeks after ET.
 

Gerald

Well-Known Member
Sep 8, 2011
2,201
7,168
The Netherlands
He did it because he wanted to work with Morricone and he had the funds to do so. The Thing would have been a box office smash if it wasn't released two weeks after ET.

It seems he was just a fan of Morricone indeed and it was an excuse to work with a hero. E.T. certainly had to do with The Thing's failure at the box office, but it was also panned by critics and horrorfans alike at first, according to Carpenter. I think it didn't have to tank because of E.T. alone, after all they're films for different audiences: one is a family film, the other a horror/sci-fi. But the horror community felt the film was a disgrace to the classic Howard Hawks/Christian Nyby film.
He talks about it early on in this:

 

Gerald

Well-Known Member
Sep 8, 2011
2,201
7,168
The Netherlands
When you look at his filmography the flop of The Thing didn't really seem to hurt Carpenter too much. He was fired from doing Firestarter, but nevertheless continued with another SK adaptation, Christine. Probably it's because he already had a solid record before The Thing that it didn't stop him in his tracks.
Even though The Thing didn't do well, I remember there certainly was an awareness of it. I remember being in a cinema for another film at the time and hearing people behind me talk about the scene where the severed head is walking away on spiderlegs. I was too young to be able to see it then, but it certainly played here.
 

kingricefan

All-being, keeper of Space, Time & Dimension.
Jul 11, 2006
30,011
127,446
Spokane, WA
It seems he was just a fan of Morricone indeed and it was an excuse to work with a hero. E.T. certainly had to do with The Thing's failure at the box office, but it was also panned by critics and horrorfans alike at first, according to Carpenter. I think it didn't have to tank because of E.T. alone, after all they're films for different audiences: one is a family film, the other a horror/sci-fi. But the horror community felt the film was a disgrace to the classic Howard Hawks/Christian Nyby film.
He talks about it early on in this:

Another reason The Thing tanked is because (and this was intentional) it lacks 'heart'. There's really no characters that the audience is given the chance to care about at all. You're simply thrust into the situation, which plays out on the screen. Sure, by the end of the movie you do hope that Kurt Russell will beat the odds and survive somehow, but other than that there's really no other characters that leave an impression. The reason I believe that the lack of 'heart' is intentional is that it adds to the 'coldness' of the landscape and atmosphere.
 

mjs9153

Peripherally known member..
Nov 21, 2014
3,494
22,165
I saw The Thing a few weeks ago, and just like every time I see it, I wonder at the end if Kurt Russell or Keith David are infected. They passed a few words together, and then Kurt says well why don't we just wait here for a while and see what happens. He gives David the bottle of whiskey, and just as David drinks from it the soundtrack starts up again doom doom, doomdoom... And Kurt just gives a little chuckle.. Makes me think that Kurt was infected and he wanted David to be infected as well so there's a better chance that one of them survived being frozen and unthawed when a rescue team arrives, or that David was infected and he was passing along the cells into the bottle.. open ended question...
 

Gerald

Well-Known Member
Sep 8, 2011
2,201
7,168
The Netherlands
Another reason The Thing tanked is because (and this was intentional) it lacks 'heart'. There's really no characters that the audience is given the chance to care about at all. You're simply thrust into the situation, which plays out on the screen. Sure, by the end of the movie you do hope that Kurt Russell will beat the odds and survive somehow, but other than that there's really no other characters that leave an impression. The reason I believe that the lack of 'heart' is intentional is that it adds to the 'coldness' of the landscape and atmosphere.

I think it's also done to add to the atmosphere of paranoia and suspicion. Everyone is potentially an enemy. Apart from Russell and Wilford Brimley the cast is also mostly unknown, but I do think at least these two actors bring some heart to it.

I wonder if it isn't also due to the ending that it flopped. It gives a rather unresolved feeling and is very downbeat. In most monstermovies (like Alien just a few years earlier) you know at least the monster is destroyed, here you know nothing really.
 

ghost19

"Have I run too far to get home?"
Sep 25, 2011
8,926
56,578
51
Arkansas
Saw it at the weekend. It's not overly good but I went in with low expectations so didn't really mind it. The lasting impression of it is that it didn't need to be a Predator movie, and tbh while I know the intention was for it to spawn sequels and re-start the franchise, I honestly don't think it'll happen. Not off the back of this movie, and that means probably never.
Is Predators better? Well, I thought Preds was basically fan-fiction on film, while The Predator isn't. But it's a close-run thing. Very close. My gf actually said she thought the first AvP was better.

I think a review I read had it spot-on, by comparison with the original Predator: "I doubt anyone will be talking about this film in 31 years' time, or even remember it."
Thanks for the info. I liked "Predators" with Adrien Brody, thought the story line was pretty decent and there was a lot of good action. The previews for the new one had me worried, didn't look that great.