Your Favorite Action Movies

Flashy

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Posts
7,901
Media
0
Likes
27
Points
183
Location
at home
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Resevoir Dogs is raw - I had never seen anything like it when I first saw it - that is why I still love it. Pulp fiction is classy and very smooth.

I have since seen a lot of the movies that influenced Tarantino direction and scene specific minutiae - and most of them are better - but they don't change the effect RD specifically had on me.

Kill Bill is ridiculous overblown 'aren't I clever' posturing - it is poorly acted (unlike the other two), poorly written, lazily directed. Actually, if it mocked itself a little more it might be funny - but it doesn't, so it isn't.



Entitled - but wrong :wink:



Entitled and right :biggrin1:

Yes - we all have different tastes - mine are clearly better :biggrin1::biggrin1::tongue: (j/k)

hee hee. I always say that too. LOL

I agree on Reservoir Dogs...i still LOVE that film, what makes it great is it is gritty and the lack of big stars.

Still to this day, as much as i like Pulp Fiction, i say it is a tribute to just how gooda film it truly is, because even John travolta could not ruin it...that is saying something...when Travolta can be in a film, not ruin it, and it can still be brilliiant...

i mean honestly...in that whole film, Travolta was wearing a ridiculous type of wig...he doesn't smoke, and in the scenes where he had to smoke, he was not inhaling, which made it look stupid, and you know he just figured he would try to work in a gimmicky thing with his smoking so it looked like he was an experienced smoker, so he kept doing this annoying little thing with his fingers that were holding the cigarette in the scene at Jack Rabbit Slims...when he takes a big drag on his cigarette, and you can see him holding it in his mouth it is absurd...and throughout the entire film, he tries to use this absurd accent, that goes in and out from scene to scene.

I will never forgive Tarantino for bringing Travolta back. :mad:
 

Flashy

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Posts
7,901
Media
0
Likes
27
Points
183
Location
at home
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
So in fact we can say that a lot of movies can be categorized in more than one genre. Like what they do on imdb.com.

example, Aliens: Aliens (1986)

Action/Horror/SF/Thriller

true, that is what i was saying a post or two up, with the Buddy-Action-Comedy.

the genres are expanding, but if you had to pick just one genre, for example, and you had Aliens, you would probably select Sci-Fi.

If you had Heat, you'd say Crime
Apocalypse NOw, you'd say War

etc.
 

mista geechee

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Posts
1,076
Media
1
Likes
12
Points
183
Location
charleston, south carolina
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Resevoir Dogs is Quentin's best movie, hands down.
Pulp Fiction is neck and neck.
I watch them in that order.

Pretty Much. The combination of Keitel and/or Tarentino and/or Jackson is unbeatable.

Michael Bay is good too. I was rather young when I saw the first Bad Boys and for a split second, I actually wanted to be a cop. That was short lived but I still love that movie.

" I'm Mike Laaaah-wry"


YouTube - Bad Boys - I'm Mike... Lowrey
 
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Posts
122
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
101
About Pulp Fiction: I believe somewhere in the movie Samuel L Jackson says that French Fries are from Belgium not from France, and that they put mayonaise on their fries.

Well, as I am a Belgian, I can totally confirm that. It's true, fries originally are from Belgium and effectively, we put mayonaise on them :tongue:

Update:
Just watched the scene, it was Travolta who was saying it, but he's talking about Holland, okay, people do it there too, that's true, hehe, but fries are from Belgium.
 
Last edited:

Flashy

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Posts
7,901
Media
0
Likes
27
Points
183
Location
at home
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Well through the scope of deductive reasoning, an action movie is a dry piece of shit. But an action movie is whatever one wishes it to be. Besides, there are so many sub-genres it's impossible to say what is definitively what. So I guess it's just a matter of personal opinion. But I don't see how you don't classify the scenes in Gladiator as action. Every "action" movie is basically a good guy vs. a bad guy with some sort of violence. Heat isn't any different. Every "action" movie is part crime film. If not, it wouldn't have any action.

Suprisingly, I personally find Stallone and Schwarzeneggar (sp?) to be two of the cheesiest. Except for First Blood, it was classic. Even The Departed can be considered action depending on how the viewer interprets it.

But like Apollo312 so eloquently put it, this place would be a shithole if we all had the same taste.


well i cannot agree at all on Heat and the Departed being considered "action" in anyway, and if the viewer interprets them that way, than they really do not know much about film. they are clearly crime films. Same with Goodfellas.

On the other hand, you can easily interchange crime with drama. One could much more comfortably say that Heat, Departed and Goodfellas are dramas than they are actioners.

Action has a far different connotation.

As for Gladiator, i am not saying there is not action in the scenes, but the action is not there for action's sake...it is nothing that is out of place in a historical drama, which is what Gladiator should be considered.

There is a scene of warfare in the beginning...and there are relatively accurate scenes of what used to happen in the gladiatorial arts, if altered to fit the story a bit. Gladiators fight in the arena, that is what they do...

they don't hijack planes or hang onto the wings, or switch faces to infiltrate a prison.


there is action that is relevant to a story, and action that is the story.
 

Flashy

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Posts
7,901
Media
0
Likes
27
Points
183
Location
at home
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male

mista geechee

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Posts
1,076
Media
1
Likes
12
Points
183
Location
charleston, south carolina
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Well that's the beauty of it. Connotation changes rapidly from person to person. Saying otherwise is like saying that an opinion is wrong, which is a borderline paradox.

Example, your definition is a movie with action for action's sake while mine as anything that gets my blood pumping and gets me hype like I'm at a football game.
 

erratic

Loved Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Posts
4,289
Media
0
Likes
509
Points
333
Sexuality
No Response
Aliens is clearly an action movie. So what if it's sci fi? The last forty minutes of that movie comprise one big action sequence. It has handguns, machine guns,flame throwers, jets, grenades, grenade launchers, noble self-sacrifice, bad guys and good guys getting mowed down left right and centre, hero/villain stare-downs, a countdown to destruction, giant machines, smack downs, call-outs, a hero/villain brawl and a thermonuclear frikking explosion. What more do you bloody want? The movie has ambushes, shit-talking, tanks, marines, plane crashes...I mean, with this movie and Terminator 2 James Cameron basically redesigned and perfected the modern Western action movie. I mean, industry people have been playing catch-up with these films ever since.

Okay, enough with my tirade.

Obviously Aliens and T2 are on my list. I'd also include:

Hot Fuzz (for both roasting and also being better than all the movies it roasts)
The Dark Knight
The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (another example of films people have been trying to catch up to ever since)
Die Hard (obviously)
The Killer
Hard Boiled
The Empire Strikes Back
 

Flashy

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Posts
7,901
Media
0
Likes
27
Points
183
Location
at home
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Really ? Maybe in YOUR eyes, but how so ?

You mean to tell me that Bad Boys 1 and 2, The Island, Transformers, Pearl Harbor, Armageddon, and The Rock weren't good films ?

no, they were awful.

the only good thing i can think of about any of those movies was Scarlett Johansson looking gorgeous in The Island.

they are all excellent examples of bad movie-making,and everything that is wrong with Hollywood. Michael Bay is the Anti-Christ in film terms.
 

mista geechee

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Posts
1,076
Media
1
Likes
12
Points
183
Location
charleston, south carolina
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
no, they were awful.

the only good thing i can think of about any of those movies was Scarlett Johansson looking gorgeous in The Island.

they are all excellent examples of bad movie-making,and everything that is wrong with Hollywood. Michael Bay is the Anti-Christ in film terms.

Now you're just speaking balderdash. But then again, it's all opinion.
 

Flashy

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Posts
7,901
Media
0
Likes
27
Points
183
Location
at home
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Now you're just speaking balderdash. But then again, it's all opinion.

balderdash? As in nonsense?

sorry, anyone that considers Armageddon, Pearl Harbor, BAd Boys 1 AND 2 etc. etc. to be great films should not be accusing people of talking nonsense.

Opinions don't change a bad film into a good one, it just means you have a lower threshold for appreciating quality in cinema.

Armageddon is in fact a silly and stupid film...the fact that you think it is great, and like it, does not make it a great film. It means you require less from films to consider yourself entertained or titillated than some others do.

It is your opinion what you like or not, but to say something is great, when in fact the majority of critical opinion is against a film-maker and is average at best and horrific at worst, work (in the case of BAy) is in fact not true.

It is just that you like it.

I like the New York Knicks...but they still suck.
 

mista geechee

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Posts
1,076
Media
1
Likes
12
Points
183
Location
charleston, south carolina
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
So opinions don't make a film great but critical reception (opinions) make Michael Bay average ? There's that paradox I was suspecting.

So, your reasong is that, since I may not like the same films you like, I can't appreciate "good" cinema ? There's more of your trademark " anyone who doesn't see it like me doesn't know jack " additude. Trying to make your opinion fact.

Funny you mention reception and success since Michael Bay has had a hand in some of the most popular films of the 90's and 00's. So, right there, you put your own foot in your mouth. He's part of some of the most recent high grossing films, which by you logic, makes them good films. Therefore, you are saying that the opinions of many make something great or not, yet I'm the one talking nonsense.....hmm.........

Oh, and I never said Armageddon and tho others were GREAT. I said they were good. Except Bad Boys. That was great. But it doesn't fit in your opinion of good film so I guess it's not. And if I did think it was "great" , again, by your own logic, the fact that you think it is "silly and stupid" does not make it so.
 

ManlyBanisters

Sexy Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2007
Posts
12,253
Media
0
Likes
58
Points
183
Really ? Maybe in YOUR eyes, but how so ?

You mean to tell me that Bad Boys 1 and 2, The Island, Transformers, Pearl Harbor, Armageddon, and The Rock weren't good films ?

Absolutely not! Not good films at all. They are bubble-gum of the highest order.

no, they were awful.

the only good thing i can think of about any of those movies was Scarlett Johansson looking gorgeous in The Island.

they are all excellent examples of bad movie-making,and everything that is wrong with Hollywood. Michael Bay is the Anti-Christ in film terms.

Well - that's a little strong and I have read the posts below these quoted - I have to say I agree with Flashy again. These Michael Bay movies are really weak. The writing is poor - poor characters, poor plots, poor story progression but jam pack full of flash-bang whollop - which is fun and easy to watch. The way he does suspense sucks because you know exactly what is going to happen he just strings it out.

I enjoyed Armageddon and the Rock - I will even rewatch them if I see them on TV, but they are not good movies - they are a means to stringing action sequences together. The plots are beyond ridiculous and even when he has good actors like Cage and Connery he makes them look bad. You have to completely suspend disbelief to enjoy a Michael Bay movie - they really are 'check your brain in at the door' affairs. Which is fine and dandy - but not to be mistaken for 'good'.