Cinematic masochist Film Brain takes a look at all the films you can handle in a variety of formats, with snarky but thorough and insightful commentary, including behind the scenes info! Strap in, hold on tight and embrace the SYMBOLISM!
just because a story line is bizarre doesn't mean that audiences won't be interested. For me the problem was that it took itself too seriously and was clearly expecting to be the start of some epic franchise. It is an audience who will decide if a story is a franchise. Film makers shouldn't take an audience for granted.
Wimmer and Ayer and Statham. To be fair, it probably shouldn't have worked the way it did. But then I remembered that wimmer and ayer were Writer/Director together in Street Kings. So, it can be pulled off. Then I remembered that Street Kings was also written by Ayer fresh after Training Day, so.... thanks for the help?
I can’t hate this film. When I saw it, my friends and I had so much fun laughing at how dumb it is and how funny the characters are at not behaving like actual humans, it was beautiful. I’ll always be grateful for this stupid stupid movie
Yeah its like the director of this movie never watch any of the previous die hard movies and John Mcclaine in this version is a total Beep, and simpy i see no trace of him, give die hard 4.0 credit at least he was all mclaine.
Breaking news: Brad Pitt's gonna redo this kind of movie with F1. Sylvester Stallone was rejected for being too old being in the early 50's. Brad Pitt was reaching 60 when he made the F1 movie.
I actually thought these two Crowe films were the same film just titled slightly differently for different regions/countries. Absolutely terrible idea to market them so similarly in style and release, just my opinion 🤷
Given 'The Pope's Exorcist' made $77 million on a $18 million budget, I actually don't blame the filmmakers to 'piggy back' off it to get a similar audience [maybe making people think this is a follow up], especially given the troubled production on the film even if that's hardly honest.
It's interesting how you mentioned that they're essentially remaking The Exorcist, and there's the angle of showing the film from the perspective of someone who has a parent in the public eye. The director of this film, Joshua John Miller, is the son of Jason Miller, who played Father Damien Karras in the original Exorcist (and sorta reprised the role in the third film). Miller Sr. had sort of a mixed film career after his turn in the original Exorcist, sticking more to theatre work before his death from a heart attack at age 62. Part of me wonders if Miller Jr. drew some inspiration from his own life in this movie.
The original premiise seemed promising, especially as the director is the son of Jason Miller from the original movie, and the addiction elements and estranged relationship were true aspects of that premise. Adding the production issues on the original movie, the supposed "curse," and it could have been a way to tell a personal story while being an allegory for how difficult filmmaking really is. I don't iknow but I'm hoping just like with The Snowman, the director ironically had studio interference affect his production and that he couldn't do everything he wanted and was not granted time and money enough to fix it on his own, leading to this mess.
I watched this last night literally up to the point when you said tou would have walked out. 😂. I ran 🏃♂️ straight to youtube just to hear people tear this "film" apart 😂😂😂
What is it with Russell Crowe and exorcism movies? Anyway, thanks for the new Projector review. I'm having a rough time, and it's like a reward after a hard day. Makes me feel just a tiny bit better.
Sorry for the spotty uploads of late, hope this video makes up for that somewhat. This is the first full video to feature the new lens I bought recently, and I think there is a big improvement. If you've been distracted the background pulsing in some of my videos (focus breathing), that appears to have been almost totally eliminated.
24:14: I really don't think that its fair to blame Steven E. de Suza and his script for a lion's share of the problems with "Beverly Hills Cop III" because what he had originally written wasn't in the finished product. And if you don't believe me, I would advise you to check out an interview that Steven E. de Zuza did here on RU-vid entitled "UNFINISHED BUSINESS INTERVIEW - Steven E. de Souza 2 (Street Fighter, Beverly Hills Cop III, & more)" from the channel UnfinishedB1. Like I said, the original draft that de Zuza wrote from July 1992 was absolutely different than the on that was in the final product. This particular draft actually had John Ashton's Taggert in it and it would've focused on Axel Foley taking his niece to the WonderWorld theme park. The climax would've had Axel in an old south setting at WonderWorld, where all of these clichés and racist tropes would've been blown up. Also, Orrin Sanderson, the John Saxon character, would've been the main villain in de Suza's original draft. Keep in mind that according to de Zuza, Eddie Murphy himself, loved his original draft, which was going to be a whole mockery on the Disney culture. The Uncle Dave character was originally intended to go to Dick Van Dyke, who rejected it because how found the idea of playing a pastiche of Walt Disney, who knew and worked with in real life, to be disrespectful and insulting.
I think I only appreciated how varied a career Bernard Hill had after his passing [I mostly remembered him from 'Boys from the Black Stuff]. Good so see him in a film one last time.
Nearly 2 hours is far too long for this sort of film when 80-90 is ideal [similar to comedies when those Apatow films would feel really baggy at over 2 hours].
I remember when the trailer came out I went to tell my dad I told him "Hey you know Independence Day?" His eyes lit up he was engaged and let out an energetic "Yeah?" then I told him that they're making a sequel and all the life all the life and interest faded from his face and he just went "oh" and went back to reading the newspaper
I think Dementus's incompetence has been a little oversold. He's fairly efficient at leading small groups, taking over enemy motorcycle gangs and attracting followers. He rolls up to the Citadel with like a thousand bikers. He knew Joe would kill him if he showed up at their original meet so he sets up a contigency plan. Later, he lures the Bullet Farm leader out to the Citadel by arranging a fake meeting, so he briefly has control over two of the three fortresses. Yeah, he's pretty shit at organization and management (do we even know if the riots at Gastown were real or were they faked to draw out a meeting?), but if he had someone to manage the day-to-day and prevent uprisings, he's one Praetorian Jack and Furiosa away from having immense leverage against the Citadel and may end up having all 3. Despite clearly hating what he's become. Yeah, we see him fail ultimately but the idea he's some circus clown is I think a little unfair.
What's really frustrating is that of the typical kinds of organizations for action flicks, law enforcement is the most likely to have nonlethal equipment, and there could be some really distinct fight scenes if you leaned into the narratively established need to incapacitate instead of kill.
