U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > Movies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-03-2018, 11:00 AM
 
2,093 posts, read 679,653 times
Reputation: 2377

Advertisements

CWO was an awesome movie, even better to watch as a young teen in the mid 80s. good thing to have VHS and view some classics. that movie was in line with other greats , like the Warriors, Death Wish #1, Deathrace 2000, even I Spit On Your Grave !

pure grittiness , pure violence, the bad guys always gets it eventually. push the boundaries, I am all for it, but not pushed way over board like the human centipede.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-03-2018, 11:25 AM
 
4,262 posts, read 1,648,324 times
Reputation: 2432
Quote:
Originally Posted by kapikap View Post
CWO was an awesome movie, even better to watch as a young teen in the mid 80s. good thing to have VHS and view some classics. that movie was in line with other greats , like the Warriors, Death Wish #1, Deathrace 2000, even I Spit On Your Grave !

pure grittiness , pure violence, the bad guys always gets it eventually. push the boundaries, I am all for it, but not pushed way over board like the human centipede.
I can't believe they remade that. The original is something else. What could they have possibly added to make it "more shocking"? Severed appendages flying across the screen?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2018, 11:30 AM
 
1,404 posts, read 492,735 times
Reputation: 371
I haven't seen Deathrace 2000, but I didn't like The Warriors or I Spit On Your Grave. Death Wish 1 was so-so.

I also felt like CWO, those movies have plots that recycle themselves as well. Can't comment on Deathrace 2000 though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2018, 11:49 AM
 
Location: Grosse Ile Michigan
21,940 posts, read 55,406,099 times
Reputation: 21833
There are a lot of those cult or classic type movies that were a big deal in their time but actually not that good when you watch them now. Look at The Blues Brothers, 16 candles, Breakfast club, Warriors, Animal house, Better off Dead, Star Wars, Rocky Horror, Mars Attacks, many many more were movies you were super excited about, used quotes from, saw a dozen times. . . however they may not have been all that great or at least are not compared to some peoples standards of today. They may have just been fresh or trendy, or timely for the period. I once thought Adventure in Babysitting was one of the best movies ever. Saw it recently, while still a very entertaining movie, it is nowhere near the overwhelming awesomeness I saw it as at the time it came out.

One easy solution to re-invigor you love for some of these classics that are actually not as great as you remember them: go watch the last jedi, then watch any of these movies. You will see these as awesome classics once again.

HEck if you go back and watch many of the awesome TV shows, you will find them boring or totally stupid now. Try Dukes of Hazzard, Magnum PI, or BJ McCabe and the Bear.

part of all of it is you need to put it in context of what people were concerned about, happy about interested in at the time. Unless you can put yourself into those concerns interests or happys from then, you will not understand a lot of what the movies are about.

Many movies do not matter in that way. they are just entertainment - comedy, action or violence. Terminator may be such an example. It is going to be lived or hated by any generation. Clockwork Orange, Apocalypse now, many others will not be understood or appreciated by those who cannot remember the time when they were made.

If you have not, at least 1000 times, gotten into a car, said "We are *** miles from ***, we have half a tank of gas, it is dark and we are wearing sunglasses" then had your friend say "Hit it" as you peel out - well you just are not going to appreciate Blues Brothers quite as much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2018, 11:51 AM
 
Location: State of Transition
65,746 posts, read 56,109,465 times
Reputation: 58258
IDK, I hated it, OP. Well-loved? I've never heard that. I don't know anyone who liked it, and I know some people who avoided it altogether.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2018, 02:35 AM
 
Location: San Francisco
2,141 posts, read 1,206,227 times
Reputation: 3539
... the Durango 95!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2018, 09:18 AM
 
Location: Texas Hill Country
7,436 posts, read 3,923,426 times
Reputation: 6743
Well, let's see, famous actors, just uppitance to the crooks, terrific violence, crazy cat ladies, a little porn, a great sound track, and wonderful early DARTH VADER!

Not only that, but it gave us wonderful, peaceful ways to express the nasty, such as "the ole in out".

It has a wonderful villain and a movie, no matter how bad it is, can go a very long way with a great baddie. Just look at "Deathstalker II" with John Lazar.

Now, a little bit more down to Earth, one has to realize the times when movies are made and that those times may not be the same if they are watching movies now. Take where movies were in 1971, that is just a year before "Deep Throat" and of course, none of those latter movies are anything like such "movies" now. Back then, they made those movies with a plot.

Then, there is the point about ultra violence. "Innocent Bystanders" was a 1972 flick and is considered part of the ultra violence spy era (to best the 007 franchise then, it was either spoof it or be more violent). I suppose in consideration to the SAW flicks, which I don't watch, that's nothing, but back then, when all we had were the movie houses and TV, it was all we had.

So then we had the "Orange" which is much more violent than that of then and a bit more sex than just the suggestions of other flicks. I suppose in a way that it fed to us like the ancient Greek Plays in that we could watch people do terrible things, for the Gods to reign down justice, and us for to go home with our carnal urges satisfied.......but that's a classical major, me, talking. I'd be surprised if the masses saw flicks that way.

Further, "Orange" wasn't the first movie like that. I grew up, such a young impressionable mind, on a lot of Roger Corman and the like flicks, Vincent Price, torture chambers, Christopher Lee, and such. Certainly the violence was there with things like Dr. Phibes, so what was the difference?

I suspect two things. First of all, perhaps the studio making it. Where does AFI standup to Warner Brothers, from the eyes of the audience. Secondly, perhaps, is that they are not in the same category, that of horror vs, what, mainstream?

On those two notes, who knows, perhaps the "Orange" just had one heck of a distribution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by majoun View Post
........Much like SSRIs
What is that? A mission designation (Strategic Strike, Reconnaissance, Intercept) they gave to try to save the TSR-2? Something like the RS-70?

Okay, I know, drugs, but that type of question could be an example of the world back then, of once being a great power and then spiraling out of control. Such as with the, years earlier, Skybolt missile.

One has to appreciate the eras when movies are made.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clark Fork Fantast View Post
.......But the ending? Alex is right back where he started, with the blessings of the government. Very funny. But that wasn't the original ending! The movie is of course based on Anthony Burgess' book from 1962. But when Burgess (who apparently hadn't been consulted by Kubrick) saw the movie, he was perplexed, because he thought the ending was missing. .....
That's movie making for one.

I read "Red Alert" in 6th grade and loved it. For years as an adult, I tried to find the book with no luck, tried to find the "Alabama Angel".

Of course, I did eventually find out that a movie was made of it but.............................

Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
You can't watch old movies and judge them on your 2017 movie values. In its day, Clockwork Orange was original. You have been numbed by movie violence since 1971. It's no longer edgy.

I really liked the book Salem's Lot by Stephen King when I read it when it first came out in 1975. A gazillion vampire books by a whole bunch of authors since then and maybe Salem's Lot would be ho hum if I read it today.
A TV movie from back then that people love to rake over the coals now is "The Stranger" (Glen Corbett). I remember seeing that movie when it came on TV back in the 70s. I knew nothing about it and I was watching it from being a child then and living in that era.

So the entire concept of people watching him behind mirrors matched exactly the kind of world with the Cold War that I knew.

These days, however, that isn't the world, and often, people know the first quarter of the movie before they even start. It's like trying to pick up a copy of, the movie that they say it was copied from (let's hear it for the works of Glen Larson for is it that uncommon),
Spoiler

"Journey to the Far Side of the Sun" for the box summary gives away the first half of the movie! But, then again, so does the original title of that flick.


After all, would "Alien" be terrifying if you knew how they made first contact ahead of time?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldjensens View Post
There are a lot of those cult or classic type movies that were a big deal in their time but actually not that good when you watch them now. Look at The Blues Brothers, 16 candles, Breakfast club, Warriors, Animal house, Better off Dead, Star Wars, Rocky Horror, Mars Attacks, many many more were movies you were super excited about, used quotes from, saw a dozen times. . . however they may not have been all that great or at least are not compared to some peoples standards of today. They may have just been fresh or trendy, or timely for the period. I once thought Adventure in Babysitting was one of the best movies ever. Saw it recently, while still a very entertaining movie, it is nowhere near the overwhelming awesomeness I saw it as at the time it came out.
I think part of it is that we know more having grown up.

Back to Roger Corman. Movies that had me with my tongue to the edge of my top teeth in anticipation of such excitements of the flesh are now, of course, not the same for I know otherwise.

Quote:
...HEck if you go back and watch many of the awesome TV shows, you will find them boring or totally stupid now. Try Dukes of Hazzard, Magnum PI, or BJ McCabe and the Bear.
That may be because of the times of then and now, or because of the amount of media blitz between then and now, or.................that they have been so doggone edited!

I would watch Magnum P I on A&E's "Daybreaks" and found it incredibly boring but I suspect the reason was because it had been edited for commercials and quite frankly, watered down.

I learned this after watching "Kolchak: The Night Stalker" from what Sci Fi Channel showed once on Friday night and then watching the unedited on tapes. The latter had been edited to tell the story, yes, but they cut out all the tension building scenes.

Quote:
...
Many movies do not matter in that way. they are just entertainment - comedy, action or violence. Terminator may be such an example. It is going to be lived or hated by any generation. Clockwork Orange, Apocalypse now, many others will not be understood or appreciated by those who cannot remember the time when they were made.
Yes, that scene of "I'm not going! I'm not going---" in APN.

Last edited by TamaraSavannah; 01-06-2018 at 09:58 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2018, 10:43 PM
 
Location: PNW
1,462 posts, read 446,221 times
Reputation: 4456
I watched this movie back in the 80's and despised it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2018, 05:56 PM
 
Location: kind of North of the middle of nowhere, FL
4,229 posts, read 3,388,019 times
Reputation: 3455
Of course the final chapter in Burgess` writing was omitted

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Cl..._Orange_(novel)
That being said, looking at film as art, Clockwork Orange succeeds as art on many levels

My experience has been that most people love or loathe the film, few are indifferent

I do likevit for what itbis.... a gritty gutsy film that does not skimp on raw emotions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2018, 02:15 AM
 
1,404 posts, read 492,735 times
Reputation: 371
I might be one of those few that are indifferent though cause I don't love or loathe it, it was just okay with some weaknesses for me, but not enough to loathe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > Movies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top