New! BULLET IN THE HEAD... EXTENDED CUT!

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 24 Oct 2006, 23:11

bradavon wrote:I know :shock: . I can't believe they've still not released the Robocop SE R1 on it's own. I'd buy it if they did.

Robocop 2 is supposed to be okay, with really over-the-top ultra-violent action scenes. I wouldn't mind seeing or owning that, but they can shove that family-friendly piece of shit Robocop 3 up their arses.

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 24 Oct 2006, 23:20

Brad... do yourself a favour and watch BITH now or ASAP. Didn't you regret not having watched "OldBoy" earlier?

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 24 Oct 2006, 23:22

Robocop 2 is pretty nasty and cynical for a mainstream movie, but it's also not very well made, and lacks Verhoeven's flair. Robocop 3 is like the TV-movie version of the story. It probably plays better if you forget about its predecessors and have LOW expectations.

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 25 Oct 2006, 00:23

thelostdragon wrote:Brad... do yourself a favour and watch BITH now or ASAP. Didn't you regret not having watched "OldBoy" earlier?

He still hasn't watched A Better Tomorrow 2, Fallen Angels and Happy Together either.

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 25 Oct 2006, 00:26

Markgway wrote:Robocop 2 is pretty nasty and cynical for a mainstream movie, but it's also not very well made, and lacks Verhoeven's flair.

Thanks for the info. Irvin Kershner must've been kicked in the head by a donkey in the time between Empire and Robocop 2 then.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 25 Oct 2006, 01:00

thelostdragon wrote:Didn't you regret not having watched "OldBoy" earlier?

So what if I did.

EvaUnit02 wrote:He still hasn't watched A Better Tomorrow 2, Fallen Angels and Happy Together either.

Ow look at you all big. Do you write this shit down as people say it?

So fucking what I haven't watched them get off my case. They're my DVDs and I'll watch them whenever I like.

tom2681 · Post by **tom2681** » 25 Oct 2006, 01:29

Watch them now, they're classics.

At least watch Bullet in the Head.
Trust me, it's a true masterpiece.

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 25 Oct 2006, 01:34

bradavon wrote:Ow look at you all big. Do you write this shit down as people say it?

So fucking what I haven't watched them get off my case. They're my DVDs and I'll watch them whenever I like.

Christ, it was just observation, you don't need to throw a tantrum. Calm down and go chew on some hay (or whatever you hippies derive nutrition from).

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 25 Oct 2006, 02:06

I think I'll get some sleep instead.

chenlung · Post by **chenlung** » 25 Oct 2006, 04:44

I don't wanna turn this thread into a debate, but I personally think John Woo is insane. He's obsessed with violence. I also find two of his most celebrated films, probably the worst I've watched ('The Killer' and 'Hard Boiled').

Sure, he's made a few good movies ('Hand of Death' will be laughable choice to the majority here but I loved it, except his wooden lame 'acting') but I think too many people stretch out an event in a film that isn't worth much.

I did like 'Bullet in the Head' as it was totally different from the same '17 shots from a 15 clip when only 7 are needed' theme.

With regards to Waise, I think the problem was him not knowing how to act (expressions-wise) in a certain way and he had problems adjusting to being say... a kid-like character when the 3 of them are jumping about the street in a skipping rope (just false). John could have been lousy in instructing Waise so I wouldn't blame him. He did what he could I think.

BiscLimpkit · Post by **BiscLimpkit** » 25 Oct 2006, 05:55

bradavon wrote: They're my DVDs and I'll watch them whenever I like.

True true... but my advise to you (as a fellow Asian film fan) is to watch BITH asap. I'm very surprised that you've not seen this yet. It is probably the greatest Asian film ever made.

gojensen · Post by **gojensen** » 25 Oct 2006, 06:59

Well ChenLung, John Woo's movies are not about violence - and his hope would be that the audience would be able to look beyond that.

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 25 Oct 2006, 10:03

gojensen wrote:Well ChenLung, John Woo's movies are not about violence - and his hope would be that the audience would be able to look beyond that.

Yeah, it's like "Read between the lines..." even though a typhoon of bullets is blasting into your face. Got it?

gojensen · Post by **gojensen** » 25 Oct 2006, 10:47

It's the ultimate in stress related film watching.

Look, here's this deep meaningful film you have to figure out, but while you are at it we'll bombard you with these bullets and bombs - okay?

Kind of reminds me when I worked for the Airforce and the stress testings done during recruitment for new pilots.

I think of most Woo movies as something WITH action. Say like The Killer, it's a romantic drama WITH action.

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 25 Oct 2006, 11:27

gojensen wrote:I think of most Woo movies as something WITH action. Say like The Killer, it's a romantic drama WITH action.

Exactly. With very well co-ordinated action. Whenever I am asked what my favourite movie is, I say "The Killer". Why? Because it is the first film that springs to my head.

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 25 Oct 2006, 11:37

And brad I was just trying to make you watch a good film.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 25 Oct 2006, 15:02

Remember Chen Lung also thinks Fist of Fury is crap.... so take with pinch of salt, yeah?

I never thought Waise's performance was that bad to be honest. It was something Bey Logan said long ago and everyone has jumped on the bandwagon. Tony and Jacky are better actors, but on his day Waise can be good too. I think the harsh criticisms are unjust.

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 25 Oct 2006, 15:11

Markgway wrote:Remember Chen Lung also thinks Fist of Fury is crap.... so take with pinch of salt, yeah?

FoF's story was rubbish, but the action was awesome. Thank god that Bruce directed the action and not that hack Lo Wei.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 25 Oct 2006, 15:19

Don't you think Waise plays a bit of an OTT cardboard bad guy, compared to the other actors Mark? (Same as in ABT).

Knetan · Post by **Knetan** » 25 Oct 2006, 15:19

hey,

I never thought Waise's performance was that bad to be honest. It was something Bey Logan said long ago and everyone has jumped on the bandwagon. Tony and Jacky are better actors, but on his day Waise can be good too. I think the harsh criticisms are unjust.

Out of the three (or four, counting Simon), Waise is the weakest but I never get detached from the film despite. The film goes seriously intense routes, as does Waise and I'm with it till the end. And he has developed into a solid actor since. One such performance being in Hu Du Men.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 25 Oct 2006, 15:30

EvaUnit02 wrote:FoF's story was rubbish

Classic revenge against the japs.

Thank god that Bruce directed the action and not that hack Lo Wei.

Lo Wei never directed the action for his movies.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 25 Oct 2006, 15:32

grim_tales wrote:Don't you think Waise plays a bit of an OTT cardboard bad guy, compared to the other actors Mark? (Same as in ABT).

As I said, Tony and Jacky give better performances, but I didn't think Waise sucked, which many seem to. Bey went on and on about it in his com track.

Anthony Wong once said he hated working with John Woo because he doesn't know how to direct actors... so make of that what you will.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 25 Oct 2006, 15:33

I think he means Hang Ying Cheh (sp?) - not saying he's a hack of course, the action he directed was just very different from Bruce.
A Touch of Zen has the earlier action style, the "swingy arm/leg" stuff.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 25 Oct 2006, 15:38

I have a lot of respect for Han Ying Chieh.

Knetan · Post by **Knetan** » 25 Oct 2006, 16:05

hey,

yea, his stuff done with and for King Hu definitely seems very in-tune with the vision overall.