- Welcome to Badmovies.org Forum.
Recent posts
#31
Press Releases and Film News / Re: RIP Screaming Mad George
Last post by claws - August 18, 2026, 05:20:42 AMRIP
#32
Press Releases and Film News / RIP Mark Rydell (1929-2926)
Last post by claws - August 18, 2026, 05:19:06 AMMark Rydell was an acclaimed American film director, producer, and actor famous for directing character-driven dramas and earning an Academy Award nomination for Best Director for On Golden Pond (1981). He shaped cinema as an "actor's director" who guided numerous stars to Oscar nominations, and left a lasting cultural footprint as a lifelong acting teacher and artistic director at Actors Studio West.
On Golden Pond: Directed the 1981 blockbuster hit that brought Henry Fonda and Katharine Hepburn together on screen, earning 10 Academy Award nominations.
The Rose: Helmed the 1979 musical drama that secured Bette Midler her breakout, Oscar-nominated film role as a tragic rock star modeled loosely after Janis Joplin.
Notable films including The Fox (1967), The Reivers (1969) with Steve McQueen, and the John Wayne western The Cowboys (1972).
RIP
On Golden Pond: Directed the 1981 blockbuster hit that brought Henry Fonda and Katharine Hepburn together on screen, earning 10 Academy Award nominations.
The Rose: Helmed the 1979 musical drama that secured Bette Midler her breakout, Oscar-nominated film role as a tragic rock star modeled loosely after Janis Joplin.
Notable films including The Fox (1967), The Reivers (1969) with Steve McQueen, and the John Wayne western The Cowboys (1972).
RIP
#33
Press Releases and Film News / RIP Screaming Mad George
Last post by Trevor - August 18, 2026, 03:50:58 AMThe Japanese make up FX artist (born Jojo Tani) has passed away at the age of 69.
RIP sir 😔♥️🌹
RIP sir 😔♥️🌹
#34
Bad Movies / Re: movies that namecheck anot...
Last post by zombie no.one - August 18, 2026, 02:47:45 AMsome of these seem to be crossovers between a character being namechecked, and that character's had a movie named after them therefore it's a 'movie' namecheck... not sure how to deal with that aspect tbh.
Can't think off the top of my head but I'd be surprised if neither SHAUN OF THE DEAD nor HOT FUZZ mentioned a movie (or two)
Can't think off the top of my head but I'd be surprised if neither SHAUN OF THE DEAD nor HOT FUZZ mentioned a movie (or two)
#35
Good Movies / Re: Recent Viewings, Part 2
Last post by Dr. Whom - August 18, 2026, 01:25:24 AMBelphégor (1927)
This is actually a four part movie serial, adapted by the author himself, to coincide with the publication of the novel. I had picked up the book a couple of months ago on a whim.
It is written by the highly prolific Arthur Bernède and can be described as Arsène Lupin meets the Phantom of the Opera. The book is a fine example of the roman-feuilleton that were serialised every day in the newspapers, with secret passages, hidden treasure, disguises all around, a plucky investigative journalist and boneheaded police intent on arresting the wrong persons. As Bernède did the movie tie in himself, it closely follows the book. The movie does lack the frantic pace of the novel. Each chapter had to convince the reader to buy another newspaper next day, so they tend to end if not on a cliffhanger, then at least on some element of mystery. Still, it is pretty watchable (although I must admit I only watched the first two episodes)
There is a version with English subtitles on Youtube.
This is actually a four part movie serial, adapted by the author himself, to coincide with the publication of the novel. I had picked up the book a couple of months ago on a whim.
It is written by the highly prolific Arthur Bernède and can be described as Arsène Lupin meets the Phantom of the Opera. The book is a fine example of the roman-feuilleton that were serialised every day in the newspapers, with secret passages, hidden treasure, disguises all around, a plucky investigative journalist and boneheaded police intent on arresting the wrong persons. As Bernède did the movie tie in himself, it closely follows the book. The movie does lack the frantic pace of the novel. Each chapter had to convince the reader to buy another newspaper next day, so they tend to end if not on a cliffhanger, then at least on some element of mystery. Still, it is pretty watchable (although I must admit I only watched the first two episodes)
There is a version with English subtitles on Youtube.
#36
Bad Movies / Re: movies that namecheck anot...
Last post by Dalmatian Bobby Samaritan - August 17, 2026, 08:54:00 PMQuote from: claws on August 15, 2026, 01:16:39 AMIn Wayne's World 2 (1993), Wayne creeps out Garth by doing a silly, repetitive voice imitating Warwick Davis's titular character from the horror movie Leprechaun (1993), shouting, "I'm the leprechaun!" while Garth begs him to stop.
No one knows the movie where they keep Name checking Harold and Maude? I guess I will just have to keep chanting I'm a Leprechaun, I'm a Leprechaun!..Might jiggle some memory loose. This is actually kind of hard. To think of movies that name check.
#38
Television / Re: What TV Shows Are you Watc...
Last post by lester1/2jr - August 17, 2026, 04:02:26 PMI finished Season 2 of Humans rather quickly. I liked it better than the first season. The synths, as they are known, had more personality and there was even an evil sort of one. There was nothing wrong with her code or whatever, she just had a weird way of viewing the world and forceful personality, like a person might have.
The show is from 2011-13 when a lot of this AI stuff probably seemed ridiculous. It certainly doesn't now. The first season's guest star was William Hurt, the second season's was Carrie Anne Moss from The Matrix.
The show is from 2011-13 when a lot of this AI stuff probably seemed ridiculous. It certainly doesn't now. The first season's guest star was William Hurt, the second season's was Carrie Anne Moss from The Matrix.
#39
Good Movies / Re: Recent Viewings, Part 2
Last post by M.10rda - August 17, 2026, 02:56:27 PMTHE DEVIL WEARS PRADA 2 (2026):
I saw the original once in the theater 20 years and remembering thinking it was surprisingly fine (mostly due to the acting) though as it turns out I remember very little about it beyond the general impressions of the main characters and their relationships. I was in no hurry to see this one but watched it with Madame nonetheless and - I'd say it must be just about what someone who wanted a sequel would want from a sequel.
Meryl Streep is about the same as she was in the first one, giving something close to a real performance in spite of long since joining the ranks of Canonical Great Actors like Robert DeNiro who aren't actually expected to give real performances anymore. Stanley Tucci overdelivers (as he did in the first one), which isn't a criticism, just an acknowledgement of the wonder that is peak Tucci. (More to his credit, he could steal the spotlight more ruthlessly than he does but actually underplays tastefully in his biggest scene.) I was more impressed w/ Emily Blunt in 2006 when she was fresh but she's essentially still Emily Blunt. But then there's Anne Hathaway. I liked Anne Hathaway in BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN, was really taken w/ her performance in RACHEL GETTING MARRIED, and then settled in to a more or less passive appreciation of her in everything since. Here Hathaway demonstrates why she is a credible Movie Star as opposed to just an actress. She carries the movie on the strength of her likeability, charisma, humor, and - well, to employ the film's own cosmetic standards - her size 6 figure and her eyebrows (...both of which the other characters tell us are outre and undesireable)........ all in lieu of actually having a convincing character of depth provided by the screenplay. Anyway, I prefer Hathaway's Movie Stardom to that of Julia Roberts or Nicole Kidman.
Since I've written recently about a couple of early 30s flicks with seemingly unconscious or only semi-conscious politics (and generally can't help but read politics into most of what I watch), I'll mention another small way in which DWP2 surprised me pleasantly. Although the film remains semi-agnostic about corporatism, oligarchy, and Artificial Intelligence, it at least acknowledges (and dedicates several scenes to) the fact that some reasonable people think all three things are incredibly destructive to human life as we know it and will know it in the future. That's not quite activism or enlightenment, but it constitutes more awareness than I tend to expect from major studio IP.
3.5/5 There is at least one scene though where a character texts a lengthy inquiry to another character and receives a comprehensive reply within five seconds of screentime, so, not a perfect film.
I saw the original once in the theater 20 years and remembering thinking it was surprisingly fine (mostly due to the acting) though as it turns out I remember very little about it beyond the general impressions of the main characters and their relationships. I was in no hurry to see this one but watched it with Madame nonetheless and - I'd say it must be just about what someone who wanted a sequel would want from a sequel.
Meryl Streep is about the same as she was in the first one, giving something close to a real performance in spite of long since joining the ranks of Canonical Great Actors like Robert DeNiro who aren't actually expected to give real performances anymore. Stanley Tucci overdelivers (as he did in the first one), which isn't a criticism, just an acknowledgement of the wonder that is peak Tucci. (More to his credit, he could steal the spotlight more ruthlessly than he does but actually underplays tastefully in his biggest scene.) I was more impressed w/ Emily Blunt in 2006 when she was fresh but she's essentially still Emily Blunt. But then there's Anne Hathaway. I liked Anne Hathaway in BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN, was really taken w/ her performance in RACHEL GETTING MARRIED, and then settled in to a more or less passive appreciation of her in everything since. Here Hathaway demonstrates why she is a credible Movie Star as opposed to just an actress. She carries the movie on the strength of her likeability, charisma, humor, and - well, to employ the film's own cosmetic standards - her size 6 figure and her eyebrows (...both of which the other characters tell us are outre and undesireable)........ all in lieu of actually having a convincing character of depth provided by the screenplay. Anyway, I prefer Hathaway's Movie Stardom to that of Julia Roberts or Nicole Kidman.
Since I've written recently about a couple of early 30s flicks with seemingly unconscious or only semi-conscious politics (and generally can't help but read politics into most of what I watch), I'll mention another small way in which DWP2 surprised me pleasantly. Although the film remains semi-agnostic about corporatism, oligarchy, and Artificial Intelligence, it at least acknowledges (and dedicates several scenes to) the fact that some reasonable people think all three things are incredibly destructive to human life as we know it and will know it in the future. That's not quite activism or enlightenment, but it constitutes more awareness than I tend to expect from major studio IP.
3.5/5 There is at least one scene though where a character texts a lengthy inquiry to another character and receives a comprehensive reply within five seconds of screentime, so, not a perfect film.
#40
Bad Movies / Re: RECENT VIEWINGS (Bad Movie...
Last post by M.10rda - August 17, 2026, 12:43:28 PM- - - Shurley MacLuine is the woman who will not be blamed for nothing - - -