Just the strangest movie series to run on apparently forever. It's boxing.
Yeah but they're just nominally about boxing. Spiritually, they're about heart.
Rocky is not at all about boxing, it's about the triumph of will for an underdog to overcome all the odds. Boxing is very much just a background setpiece to the very real drama that is going on (and later movies just kinda ignore that Paulie is an abusive asshole!)
Rocky II is about boxing.
Rocky III is about legacy, about what it means to be a competitor, about confronting hard truths.
Rocky IV is about revenge and beating Communism.
Rocky V is about dogshit.
Balboa is about legacy and your place in history.
Creed is about legacy and how you fit in the world, what makes your family. Boxing is much more a part of this movie than most of the others simply because it's actually smart about the boxing that happens.
I have not seen Creed II yet.
Creed is also about just the inevitability of time and decay
Creed doesn't beat the champ, but the champ is heading off to prison and he knows he'll no longer be in his prime by the time he comes out, his time is done, he's doing one last fight for a big paycheck, to earn financial security for his family.
Creed's girlfriend is a musician who's slowly losing her hearing, and there's nothing that can be done about it, she just has to make the most of the time she has.
All of Rocky's friends are dead, and while Creed ends up getting him to agree to fight the cancer, we're never actually told if he beats it. Rocky's getting old and hurts all the time, and he's just gonna keep getting older.
I really didn’t like that ending. Creed doesn’t have a villain and badgering rocky into fighting time makes creed the bad guy. Everyone in the movie is fighting time and losing and has accepted that except the one guy who isn’t fighting time. It’s incredibly selfish and self centered. And also breaks the theme. Which I suppose would have been “you have to seize your time because time is coming for you”.
Maybe if the movie had been clear that Creed was going to lose the big fight in a way that ends his career in boxing and then to actually have that happen. Then the theme could have been “rage against the dying of the light”. And creed could have righteously asked rocky to walk into that brick wall of pain with him. But as it is Creed is victorious in the movie not by virtue of being the better boxer or more morally right, or mentally put together, but by being a 25 year old male with his best years of boxing ahead of him rather than behind. When the movie goes into the big fight creed has already won by virtue of this while everyone else has lost regardless of whether or not they win their individual fight.
0
Options
Grudgeblessed is the mind too small for doubtRegistered Userregular
I just finished Nightbreed. What an interestingly uneven movie.
More of a makeup showcase than anything, with a refreshingly progressive bent for the time. It still feels incredibly dated and is too long, but love how clearly it hates cops.
"The apocalypse? It's here?"
I love this movie. David Cronenberg plays the evil doctor, which is awesome.
It’s amazing because everybody in the town, with a few exceptions, seems fully aware that these children are evil, but they just let it all happen for unknown and unexplained (or overexplained) reasons. The movie attributes everything that’s happening to, in rough order: white man’s greed, ergot on corn, an ancient American Indian prophecy, and a general spirit of corn-loving malevolent evil. It seems to depend on the scene, but nobody tries very hard to keep things logically consistent.
An allegory for America, huh.
This post was sponsored by Tom Cruise.
+1
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
I don't know if that is by the Miles Morales studio, but if not it looks pretty heavily influenced by it, up to and including the electric powers.
AlphaRomero on
+7
Options
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
Yeah, if that's not the Spiderverse folks, I'll be shocked. It would seem to be the only studio I've ever seen where they can use 3s animation and I go "that looks fucking awesome".
+1
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
Wadsworth in Clue
On youtube it mentions that it's from the creators of the Spiderverse movie
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
+5
Options
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
On youtube it mentions that it's from the creators of the Spiderverse movie
Excellent, I fully anticipate some top-notch animation with an awesome soundtrack then.
+8
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
Wadsworth in Clue
yeah the do some really impressive shit by combining methods and techniques from traditional animation, CGI, and anime
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
Spiderverse convinced me that it was possible for movies related to Marvel to not suck, so I'm automatically interested in whatever that trailer is for.
We must all come together, hands in, and shout, on three, "no more deliberate stutter animation!"
Then the world will find peace.
I'm not sure I understand your meaning. Are you saying you don't like the animation in Spiderverse and that clip because there aren't enough frames per second?
+2
Options
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
Spiderverse convinced me that it was possible for movies related to Marvel to not suck, so I'm automatically interested in whatever that trailer is for.
We must all come together, hands in, and shout, on three, "no more deliberate stutter animation!"
Then the world will find peace.
I'm not sure I understand your meaning. Are you saying you don't like the animation in Spiderverse and that clip because there aren't enough frames per second?
I mean, I normally utterly detest 3s animation because it's virtually always just a company being cheap. I've heard it defended as trying to mimic the "classic style" of older animation, which is utterly absurd to me given that most everything is some version of computer-aided animation these days and rendering extra frames is just a matter of waiting a little longer. Take a look at virtually all the Netflix "exclusive" anime series, which are almost all cheap and almost all use 3s animation to zero benefit.
But this is from the Spiderverse team, who use 3s not only to an acceptable level but somehow make it really really look good and fit the film.
+1
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
Spiderverse convinced me that it was possible for movies related to Marvel to not suck, so I'm automatically interested in whatever that trailer is for.
We must all come together, hands in, and shout, on three, "no more deliberate stutter animation!"
Then the world will find peace.
I'm not sure I understand your meaning. Are you saying you don't like the animation in Spiderverse and that clip because there aren't enough frames per second?
Yes. I liked Spider-verse but it shoots itself in the foot by using that '3s style that my eyes could never adjust to when there's no reason a big budget Sony movie would need to use it. And that goes double for any type of animation that wants to be fight oriented. A lot of animoo gets praise when they actually go hella clean for fights, like One Punch Man or Jujutsu Kaisen or Attack on Titan or Demon Slayer. If you can't do both (which a big studio definitely can) smooth over detail.
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Spiderverse convinced me that it was possible for movies related to Marvel to not suck, so I'm automatically interested in whatever that trailer is for.
We must all come together, hands in, and shout, on three, "no more deliberate stutter animation!"
Then the world will find peace.
I'm not sure I understand your meaning. Are you saying you don't like the animation in Spiderverse and that clip because there aren't enough frames per second?
Yes. I liked Spider-verse but it shoots itself in the foot by using that '3s style that my eyes could never adjust to when there's no reason a big budget Sony movie would need to use it. And that goes double for any type of animation that wants to be fight oriented. A lot of animoo gets praise when they actually go hella clean for fights, like One Punch Man or Jujutsu Kaisen or Attack on Titan or Demon Slayer. If you can't do both (which a big studio definitely can) smooth over detail.
It's pretty clear they used it on purpose for Spider-verse.
Spiderverse convinced me that it was possible for movies related to Marvel to not suck, so I'm automatically interested in whatever that trailer is for.
We must all come together, hands in, and shout, on three, "no more deliberate stutter animation!"
Then the world will find peace.
I'm not sure I understand your meaning. Are you saying you don't like the animation in Spiderverse and that clip because there aren't enough frames per second?
Yes. I liked Spider-verse but it shoots itself in the foot by using that '3s style that my eyes could never adjust to when there's no reason a big budget Sony movie would need to use it. And that goes double for any type of animation that wants to be fight oriented. A lot of animoo gets praise when they actually go hella clean for fights, like One Punch Man or Jujutsu Kaisen or Attack on Titan or Demon Slayer. If you can't do both (which a big studio definitely can) smooth over detail.
It's pretty clear they used it on purpose for Spider-verse.
No only that, they were often using different animation frame rates between characters within a single scene specifically for thematic reasons.
I liked it in Spiderverse, but like Miles not tying his shoe, it's a choice. I'd rather it stayed with that franchise because without highlighting the comic origin or making the multiverse feel off, it's just distracting. It should serve a purpose.
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
I liked it in Spiderverse, but like Miles not tying his shoe, it's a choice. I'd rather it stayed with that franchise because without highlighting the comic origin or making the multiverse feel off, it's just distracting. It should serve a purpose.
I mean, we don't really know anything yet.
It could be that it doesn't happen until after she gets her powers, or something. Kind of displaying an inner turmoil type thing.
Just the strangest movie series to run on apparently forever. It's boxing.
Yeah but they're just nominally about boxing. Spiritually, they're about heart.
Rocky is not at all about boxing, it's about the triumph of will for an underdog to overcome all the odds. Boxing is very much just a background setpiece to the very real drama that is going on (and later movies just kinda ignore that Paulie is an abusive asshole!)
Rocky II is about boxing.
Rocky III is about legacy, about what it means to be a competitor, about confronting hard truths.
Rocky IV is about revenge and beating Communism.
Rocky V is about dogshit.
Balboa is about legacy and your place in history.
Creed is about legacy and how you fit in the world, what makes your family. Boxing is much more a part of this movie than most of the others simply because it's actually smart about the boxing that happens.
I have not seen Creed II yet.
Creed is also about just the inevitability of time and decay
Having recently did a run the series of Rocky, I can't say that I agree that the series forgets that Paulie is the worst. It's always there. Like the only one who likes him is Rocky and even Rocky (who is not a smart man and doesn't have a lot of friends) has sort of a "come on man stop saying shitty things" attitude about him. Everyone else just treats him like a shitty coward.
0
Options
knitdanIn ur baseKillin ur guysRegistered Userregular
Cardinal Richelieu in The Three Musketeers
I wonder if anyone has ever done a deep dive into how Rocky has incredibly low self-esteem and that’s part of why a guy like Paulie is his best friend in the whole world.
“I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Didn't Rocky have a problematic dating history with Adrienne?
Their first date was because Paulie threw her Thanksgiving dinner at the wall and forced her to go out with Rocky who had been awkwardly hitting on her at her job for ages
Rocky then physically bars her from leaving his apartment until she agrees to kiss him and possibly sleep with him, I don't remember the details
It's fucked up
[Muffled sounds of gorilla violence]
+7
Options
knitdanIn ur baseKillin ur guysRegistered Userregular
Cardinal Richelieu in The Three Musketeers
They don’t have a dating history prior to the events of the movie.
In the movie there are consent and boundary issues which magically go away as soon as they actually kiss.
“I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Children of the Corn marathon continued, I am running low on positives.
Children of the Corn IV: The Gathering, is arguably not even a Children of the Corn movie. No mention of familiar locales like Gatlin, no Isaac, no hammy child preacher (instead we’ve got a ghost in bad makeup that the camera is embarrassed to linger on). It’s straightforward and grounded and boring as fuck, but still ultimately incoherent and full of convenient bullshit.
At the same time, this is undoubtedly the best made movie in the series. Cinematography is actually trying something, the main character (Naomi Watts doing a fine job in a terrible movie) has an arc. It’s a real movie! But it’s boring and I hate it. I think the plan was to try and bring some ‘science’ to the series, downplay the magical aspects, etc. It was a really bad idea for a series that is only enjoyable for its goofiness. Positive note, there’s more than a single Children in this movie.
Random note: The movie never mentions He Who Walks Behind the Rows, but apparently it gets name dropped in a deleted scene. This would have been the only connection to the series aside from the presence of corn.
Children of the Corn V: Fields of Terror is a much worse movie and vastly more watchable, but mostly feels like a retread with 90s aesthetics (which is sufficient for me, apparently). Child preacher is back and, while not the worst, is generally lacking in gravitas or pomposity. David Carradine is in the movie and I’m thinking he was on set for a day, because he never leaves a specific set and only barely leaves his chair.
There’s one absolutely fantastic and utterly stupid practical effect where a head splits open, a flamethrower(??) emerges, and the flamethrower carves a perfect hole in another person’s head. Unfortunately that’s about it on the special effects side, because these budgets are getting tight.
Mother-in-Law left town, so we’ll be away from these movies for a while, but the next one is promising that the original Isaac is back, which I’m sure is handled as deftly as everything else in this series.
Random notes:
1. The environmental message just kind of vanished after III.
2. These movies really hinge on having a strong lead kid to bring the menace or the camp, and that’s an incredible rarity.
3. A surprisingly small number of adults have attempted the largely successful, “Punch the small children to escape” tactic.
Children of the Corn marathon continued, I am running low on positives.
Children of the Corn IV: The Gathering, is arguably not even a Children of the Corn movie. No mention of familiar locales like Gatlin, no Isaac, no hammy child preacher (instead we’ve got a ghost in bad makeup that the camera is embarrassed to linger on). It’s straightforward and grounded and boring as fuck, but still ultimately incoherent and full of convenient bullshit.
At the same time, this is undoubtedly the best made movie in the series. Cinematography is actually trying something, the main character (Naomi Watts doing a fine job in a terrible movie) has an arc. It’s a real movie! But it’s boring and I hate it. I think the plan was to try and bring some ‘science’ to the series, downplay the magical aspects, etc. It was a really bad idea for a series that is only enjoyable for its goofiness. Positive note, there’s more than a single Children in this movie.
Random note: The movie never mentions He Who Walks Behind the Rows, but apparently it gets name dropped in a deleted scene. This would have been the only connection to the series aside from the presence of corn.
Children of the Corn V: Fields of Terror is a much worse movie and vastly more watchable, but mostly feels like a retread with 90s aesthetics (which is sufficient for me, apparently). Child preacher is back and, while not the worst, is generally lacking in gravitas or pomposity. David Carradine is in the movie and I’m thinking he was on set for a day, because he never leaves a specific set and only barely leaves his chair.
There’s one absolutely fantastic and utterly stupid practical effect where a head splits open, a flamethrower(??) emerges, and the flamethrower carves a perfect hole in another person’s head. Unfortunately that’s about it on the special effects side, because these budgets are getting tight.
Mother-in-Law left town, so we’ll be away from these movies for a while, but the next one is promising that the original Isaac is back, which I’m sure is handled as deftly as everything else in this series.
Random notes:
1. The environmental message just kind of vanished after III.
2. These movies really hinge on having a strong lead kid to bring the menace or the camp, and that’s an incredible rarity.
3. A surprisingly small number of adults have attempted the largely successful, “Punch the small children to escape” tactic.
So caught the 3rd movie in the Skyline Trilogy. Which apparently is a Trilogy now, maybe even a franchise. Who saw that coming after watching the original 10 years ago? The Battle LA producers must be kicking themselves. Turns out you don't need a huge investment in Special effects, Location shooting and the ever present Involvement of the US Department of Defense's Hollywood office. You just need some decent Martial artist and creature effects.
The third movie lacks Frank Grillo, but does have Rhona Mitra and Alexander Siddig, so you can have the Doomsday reunion that nobody asked for(they don't share scenes unfortunately).
The sky was full of stars, every star an exploding ship. One of ours.
0
Options
KetarCome on upstairswe're having a partyRegistered Userregular
So caught the 3rd movie in the Skyline Trilogy. Which apparently is a Trilogy now, maybe even a franchise. Who saw that coming after watching the original 10 years ago? The Battle LA producers must be kicking themselves. Turns out you don't need a huge investment in Special effects, Location shooting and the ever present Involvement of the US Department of Defense's Hollywood office. You just need some decent Martial artist and creature effects.
The third movie lacks Frank Grillo, but does have Rhona Mitra and Alexander Siddig, so you can have the Doomsday reunion that nobody asked for(they don't share scenes unfortunately).
Skylin3s was an ok watch, but a bit of a letdown after Beyond Skyline - which I actually enjoyed a lot. It felt like the story and writing had taken a step back, and the action was disappointing by comparison.
0
Options
knitdanIn ur baseKillin ur guysRegistered Userregular
Posts
I really didn’t like that ending. Creed doesn’t have a villain and badgering rocky into fighting time makes creed the bad guy. Everyone in the movie is fighting time and losing and has accepted that except the one guy who isn’t fighting time. It’s incredibly selfish and self centered. And also breaks the theme. Which I suppose would have been “you have to seize your time because time is coming for you”.
Maybe if the movie had been clear that Creed was going to lose the big fight in a way that ends his career in boxing and then to actually have that happen. Then the theme could have been “rage against the dying of the light”. And creed could have righteously asked rocky to walk into that brick wall of pain with him. But as it is Creed is victorious in the movie not by virtue of being the better boxer or more morally right, or mentally put together, but by being a 25 year old male with his best years of boxing ahead of him rather than behind. When the movie goes into the big fight creed has already won by virtue of this while everyone else has lost regardless of whether or not they win their individual fight.
"The apocalypse? It's here?"
I love this movie. David Cronenberg plays the evil doctor, which is awesome.
An allegory for America, huh.
The animation looks amazing!
You're already on the cutting edge of this news!
Also yes that looked great
Then the world will find peace.
Sneakers no socks? Gross :P
MWO: Adamski
I think that's the Spiderverse people.
I don't know if that is by the Miles Morales studio, but if not it looks pretty heavily influenced by it, up to and including the electric powers.
Excellent, I fully anticipate some top-notch animation with an awesome soundtrack then.
I'm not sure I understand your meaning. Are you saying you don't like the animation in Spiderverse and that clip because there aren't enough frames per second?
I mean, I normally utterly detest 3s animation because it's virtually always just a company being cheap. I've heard it defended as trying to mimic the "classic style" of older animation, which is utterly absurd to me given that most everything is some version of computer-aided animation these days and rendering extra frames is just a matter of waiting a little longer. Take a look at virtually all the Netflix "exclusive" anime series, which are almost all cheap and almost all use 3s animation to zero benefit.
But this is from the Spiderverse team, who use 3s not only to an acceptable level but somehow make it really really look good and fit the film.
Yes. I liked Spider-verse but it shoots itself in the foot by using that '3s style that my eyes could never adjust to when there's no reason a big budget Sony movie would need to use it. And that goes double for any type of animation that wants to be fight oriented. A lot of animoo gets praise when they actually go hella clean for fights, like One Punch Man or Jujutsu Kaisen or Attack on Titan or Demon Slayer. If you can't do both (which a big studio definitely can) smooth over detail.
It's pretty clear they used it on purpose for Spider-verse.
No only that, they were often using different animation frame rates between characters within a single scene specifically for thematic reasons.
I mean, we don't really know anything yet.
It could be that it doesn't happen until after she gets her powers, or something. Kind of displaying an inner turmoil type thing.
No but please tell me more
Romancing the Stone and Jewel of the Nile are imho as perfect a pair of movies as ever were made
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Their first date was because Paulie threw her Thanksgiving dinner at the wall and forced her to go out with Rocky who had been awkwardly hitting on her at her job for ages
Rocky then physically bars her from leaving his apartment until she agrees to kiss him and possibly sleep with him, I don't remember the details
It's fucked up
In the movie there are consent and boundary issues which magically go away as soon as they actually kiss.
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
pleasepaypreacher.net
Children of the Corn IV: The Gathering, is arguably not even a Children of the Corn movie. No mention of familiar locales like Gatlin, no Isaac, no hammy child preacher (instead we’ve got a ghost in bad makeup that the camera is embarrassed to linger on). It’s straightforward and grounded and boring as fuck, but still ultimately incoherent and full of convenient bullshit.
At the same time, this is undoubtedly the best made movie in the series. Cinematography is actually trying something, the main character (Naomi Watts doing a fine job in a terrible movie) has an arc. It’s a real movie! But it’s boring and I hate it. I think the plan was to try and bring some ‘science’ to the series, downplay the magical aspects, etc. It was a really bad idea for a series that is only enjoyable for its goofiness. Positive note, there’s more than a single Children in this movie.
Random note: The movie never mentions He Who Walks Behind the Rows, but apparently it gets name dropped in a deleted scene. This would have been the only connection to the series aside from the presence of corn.
Children of the Corn V: Fields of Terror is a much worse movie and vastly more watchable, but mostly feels like a retread with 90s aesthetics (which is sufficient for me, apparently). Child preacher is back and, while not the worst, is generally lacking in gravitas or pomposity. David Carradine is in the movie and I’m thinking he was on set for a day, because he never leaves a specific set and only barely leaves his chair.
There’s one absolutely fantastic and utterly stupid practical effect where a head splits open, a flamethrower(??) emerges, and the flamethrower carves a perfect hole in another person’s head. Unfortunately that’s about it on the special effects side, because these budgets are getting tight.
Mother-in-Law left town, so we’ll be away from these movies for a while, but the next one is promising that the original Isaac is back, which I’m sure is handled as deftly as everything else in this series.
Random notes:
1. The environmental message just kind of vanished after III.
2. These movies really hinge on having a strong lead kid to bring the menace or the camp, and that’s an incredible rarity.
3. A surprisingly small number of adults have attempted the largely successful, “Punch the small children to escape” tactic.
When you first met how long until you did "Yo, Adrienne!"
Well I first met her at work, so not initially but yes first date and yes she hit me in the arm in anger.
pleasepaypreacher.net
You didn’t do that in your first work meeting in front of everyone way before you had any personal attachment to her?
You make me sick.
The last sentence is going in my signature
The third movie lacks Frank Grillo, but does have Rhona Mitra and Alexander Siddig, so you can have the Doomsday reunion that nobody asked for(they don't share scenes unfortunately).
Skylin3s was an ok watch, but a bit of a letdown after Beyond Skyline - which I actually enjoyed a lot. It felt like the story and writing had taken a step back, and the action was disappointing by comparison.
Let me tell you about growing up in the 80s while every jokester you meet calls you “Daniel-san” in an exaggerated Japanese accent.
Surely it got better in the 90s you might think. Not so. That’s when I became “Looootenant Day-un”
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades