• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot. More details on our policies, especially our Own the Source rule are available here. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Favorite Edit of the Year (FEOTY) Nominations for 2020 are now open! Submit your entries here.

A few reviews

Jrzag42

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
85
Trophy Points
73
I believe I read something about the director of the sequel preferring the theatrical cut of the original, or at least it was the version he was most familiar with. Take that as you will.
 

TM2YC

Well-known member
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
12,940
Reaction score
228
Trophy Points
178
Masirimso17 said:
TM2YC said:
I agree except the exact opposite of everything you both said :D .

So for a first viewing of both the first film and the sequel, which one is the way to go? Theatrical or Final Cut? I know next to nothing about the movies

All the cuts are very, very similar, so it doesn't matter that much which you watch first. None of the three most prominent differences between the cuts (voiceover, unicorn-dream & epilogue) fundamentally change what the film is about.

EDIT: Actually the Workprint is pretty different from the others, with changes to the score and soundFX but again, same story.
 

Last Impressions

Well-known member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
474
Reaction score
56
Trophy Points
48
TM2YC said:
The Outsiders (1983)
The young cast that Francis Ford Coppola assembled for this 1960s teen greaser gang movie is insane. Matt Dillon, C. Thomas Howell, Ralph Macchio, Patrick Swayze, Rob Lowe, Emilio Estevez and Diane Lane are in their earliest roles, including a little known actor called Tom Cruise. Ralph Macchio's next film after this was 'The Karate Kid'. Coppola created the stars of the 80s right here. Sometimes the inexperience of the cast is apparent but mostly they are excellent. This is partly a nostalgic look back to the era of gleaming hot-rods and malt-shacks but from the wrong side of town, where it's all burned-out wrecks, poverty, black engine grease and flick-knives (it's like a film version of a Bruce Springsteen track). The jukebox soundtrack featuring Elvis, Van Morrison, surf music and Rockabilly is amazing. I liked that the movie starts and concludes in such a way that you can watch it on a perpetual loop.

I watched Coppola's "The Complete Novel" extended cut, adding back 22-minutes of footage cut from the theatrical release. Apparently Coppola's granddaughter was studying S. E. Hinton's book in class and they were planning on watching the film. He was a little embarrassed at the prospect of them seeing the hollowed-out 92-minute version, so he quickly put together a longer cut just for them to watch in school. This convinced him to revisit the film and release the 115-minute extended cut. I can't imagine the short release was better, although since it has a different score, it's probably worth checking out.

Rumble Fish (1983)
Francis Ford Coppola shot 'Rumble Fish' back to back with 'The Outsiders' (also based on an S. E. Hinton story) using many of the same cast and crew and released it six-months afterwards. Unusually he chose to do this narratively similar second film in a completely different way. 'The Outsiders' was a nostalgic sunlit evocation of the period in which it was set, with a 50s jukebox soundtrack and a classic film-making style not unlike actual films of the era like 'Rebel Without a Cause'. Where as 'Rumble Fish' is set in some sort of 50s/80s heightened reality, shot in Noir black & white, with extreme expressionist angles, wild editing, R-Rated sex, violence and drug taking, strobe lighting effects, deliberately artificial post-synced sound design, experimental shots and an avant-garde percussive score by The Police's drummer Stewart Copeland. The sequence of Matt Dillon's soul leaving his body and floating across various scenes, real or imaginary, looks extraordinary because it's accomplished in-camera using some kind of crane arm. There are also perfectly executed shots where the actors did their performance in slow motion, so when played back at the correct speed the sky would appear sped up.

The cast is incredible featuring Matt Dillon, Mickey Rourke, Diane Lane, Nicolas Cage, Chris Penn, Laurence Fishburne, Tom Waits and Dennis Hopper... often all in the same scene together. 50% of the words in the script seemed to be people saying "Rusty James" to each other (the name of Dillon's main character). You could accuse the film of being "style over substance", which I suppose it is but when there is this much style packed into every frame, it hardly matters.


^ The period trailer has the same energetic editing of the film.

I remember watching these as a kid and ending up purchasing the Complete Novel cut of Outsiders a couple of years back and it has sat on the shelf ever since. You have given me the push to watch it during lock down. Thanks.

As for Rumble fish i re-watched this again a couple of years ago and it still holds up,  whether i was swayed by nostalgia  or not "i don't know" but i enjoyed it , however i have been tempted to do a small edit of the film called "the Matt Dillon says less Man" edit  :) it really does feel like he says the word "Man" every scene he is in and it just grated on me in the end....maybe i'm just getting old. The score by Copeland is stunning - i haven't heard anything else like it and iv'e heard a lot.
 

TM2YC

Well-known member
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
12,940
Reaction score
228
Trophy Points
178
Last Impressions said:
As for Rumble fish i re-watched this again a couple of years ago and it still holds up,  whether i was swayed by nostalgia  or not "i don't know" but i enjoyed it , however i have been tempted to do a small edit of the film called "the Matt Dillon says less Man" edit  :) it really does feel like he says the word "Man" every scene he is in and it just grated on me in the end....maybe i'm just getting old. The score by Copeland is stunning - i haven't heard anything else like it and iv'e heard a lot.

I didn't notice the over-abundance of "man"s, now you mention it though. A fanedit with less Man and less Rusty James. I did ponder the idea of a fanedit which would Rumble Fish-ify The Outsiders. Change the score, make it b&w, use the longer version but cut it back to about 90-mins by quickening the pace of editing etc.

<hr style="border: 1px solid white;" />

Mirror (1975)
Andrei Tarkovsky's 4th film 'Mirror' ('Zerkalo') has been accused of having an incomprehensible narrative but it was understandable to me and not overly complicated. However, the nonlinear way it's told through dreams, flashbacks/flashforwards and distinct vignettes do invite confusion. The adult and unseen Alexei recalls memories from his death bed about his family life, mainly focusing on three periods: Alexei's mother Maria in his grandfather's pre-war country house, Alexei as a boy training in war time and Alexei's post-war life concerning the breakup of his marriage to Natalia and focusing on his son Ignat. The same actors Ignat Daniltsev and Margarita Terekhova play Alexei/Ignat and Mother/Wife. Terekhova is amazing, her eyes combining both cool defiance and sad resignation. It's all ecstatically beautiful to look at and infused with wintry melancholy. Certain images really linger in the mind, like an impossibly strong wind suddenly sweeping a field, a barn burning in the rain, plaster cascading from a sodden roof, a sweat finger print evaporating, a women floating above her bed, or the final long tracking shot slowly going deeper into a dark forest.


^ Awesome fan trailer, captures the whole feel of the thing in 50-seconds.
 

Last Impressions

Well-known member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
474
Reaction score
56
Trophy Points
48
TM2YC said:
Last Impressions said:
As for Rumble fish i re-watched this again a couple of years ago and it still holds up,  whether i was swayed by nostalgia  or not "i don't know" but i enjoyed it , however i have been tempted to do a small edit of the film called "the Matt Dillon says less Man" edit  :) it really does feel like he says the word "Man" every scene he is in and it just grated on me in the end....maybe i'm just getting old. The score by Copeland is stunning - i haven't heard anything else like it and iv'e heard a lot.

I didn't notice the over-abundance of "man"s, now you mention it though. A fanedit with less Man and less Rusty James. I did ponder the idea of a fanedit which would Rumble Fish-ify The Outsiders. Change the score, make it b&w, use the longer version but cut it back to about 90-mins by quickening the pace of editing etc.

<hr style="border: 1px solid white;" />

Mirror (1975)
Andrei Tarkovsky's 4th film 'Mirror' ('Zerkalo') has been accused of having an incomprehensible narrative but it was understandable to me and not overly complicated. However, the nonlinear way it's told through dreams, flashbacks/flashforwards and distinct vignettes do invite confusion. The adult and unseen Alexei recalls memories from his death bed about his family life, mainly focusing on three periods: Alexei's mother Maria in his grandfather's pre-war country house, Alexei as a boy training in war time and Alexei's post-war life concerning the breakup of his marriage to Natalia and focusing on his son Ignat. The same actors Ignat Daniltsev and Margarita Terekhova play Alexei/Ignat and Mother/Wife. Terekhova is amazing, her eyes combining both cool defiance and sad resignation. It's all ecstatically beautiful to look at and infused with wintry melancholy. Certain images really linger in the mind, like an impossibly strong wind suddenly sweeping a field, a barn burning in the rain, plaster cascading from a sodden roof, a sweat finger print evaporating, a women floating above her bed, or the final long tracking shot slowly going deeper into a dark forest.


^ Awesome fan trailer, captures the whole feel of the thing in 50-seconds.

Now you mention it i think it might be Dillon saying "Rusty James"a lot not Man...it has been a couple of years since i watched it..but i'm definitely tempted to do an edit one day. I have the UK Bluray steelbook edition which is fine  but i am tempted to import the U.S Criterion version as i imagine the picture quality is better. I have a few edits in mind that were influenced by the coloured fish - i have always loved that look - pops of colour on black & white which was later used in Schindler's List.

As for your Outsiders "The Rumblefishfy" edit...go for it. I love the idea. 

You can use some music from Copeland's over soundtrack work like The Equalizer and other cliffhangers...plus this is a good live album to draw inspiration from


I love Tarkovsky's Mirror...its my third favourite of his films after Solaris & Stalker which i suppose are more accessible . I feel with Tarkovsky as with Malick & Werner Herzog i have to set the mood to fully immerse myself into them for a few hours -they are like meditation pieces.....jeez i sound like a woman sitting in a bubble bath with candles.
 

Gaith

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
5,461
Reaction score
41
Trophy Points
88
Love & Friendship (2016)  (US Amazon Prime)

unnamed.jpg

 
Vultural said:
Flawed, yet enjoyable adaptation of obscure Jane Austen novella. [...]
Lady Susan, an unscrupulous widow sets out to find rich, easy to control husbands for herself and her daughter.
She flirts, conducts affairs, oppresses her daughter, imposes on her relations.
A right piece of work.
Costumes, set design, photography are all excellent.  Acting, top rate.
The pacing if off, however.  Too modern.  The story rushes at top speed throughout.
Numerous characters introduced, yet several are underutilized.  Stephen Fry = 2 brief scenes.
More air, a longer cut would help immeasurably.
Amusing entertainment, nevertheless, and Austen fans will find this irresistible.

I also quite liked this flick, though I didn't feel any desire to spend more time with the characters. I did think the ending was jarringly abrupt, but I suppose the story didn't have anywhere else to go without significant deviation from the text. Also, the lighting is almost distractingly bright at times, but that's a minor quibble. Definitely worth a watch for anyone who loves any version of Pride and Prejudice.

Grade: B+
 

mnkykungfu

Well-known member
Donor
Messages
1,012
Reaction score
60
Trophy Points
58
Masirimso17 said:
TM2YC said:
I agree except the exact opposite of everything you both said :D .

So for a first viewing of both the first film and the sequel, which one is the way to go? Theatrical or Final Cut? I know next to nothing about the movies

Watch the Final Cut cold so that you can settle a bet between me and TM2YC! I'm betting you'll find it pretty slow and to not have a whole lot to the story.  You'll think it was "good..." but not get why it has such rabid fans.  TM2YC, take me up on it?   :cool:
 
Last Impressions said:
Now you mention it i think it might be Dillon saying "Rusty James"a lot not Man...

That's it, for sure.  That movie is like 45% people saying "Rusty James", particularly Dillon.  It bugged the crap out of me.  I was waiting for Rourke to start talking in 3rd person just so they could work a few more in.  "Rusty James isn't down with that."  "Hey kid, get Rusty James a brewski."  "Rusty James has taken a vow of celibacy." etc.
 

Masirimso17

Well-known member
Faneditor
Cover Artist
Messages
1,860
Reaction score
4
Trophy Points
68
mnkykungfu said:
Watch the Final Cut cold so that you can settle a bet between me and @"TM2YC"! I'm betting you'll find it pretty slow and to not have a whole lot to the story.  You'll think it was "good..." but not get why it has such rabid fans.

Sure, but I may not look at it like the average reviewer. We’ll see haha
 

Masirimso17

Well-known member
Faneditor
Cover Artist
Messages
1,860
Reaction score
4
Trophy Points
68
Ok why am I only seeing “Click to edit” for my above post?
 

TM2YC

Well-known member
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
12,940
Reaction score
228
Trophy Points
178
mnkykungfu said:
Masirimso17 said:
TM2YC said:
I agree except the exact opposite of everything you both said :D .

So for a first viewing of both the first film and the sequel, which one is the way to go? Theatrical or Final Cut? I know next to nothing about the movies

Watch the Final Cut cold so that you can settle a bet between me and TM2YC! I'm betting you'll find it pretty slow and to not have a whole lot to the story.  You'll think it was "good..." but not get why it has such rabid fans.  TM2YC, take me up on it?   :cool:

It's true that many do find it slow and find the story lacking but those people are wrong ;) .

<hr style="border: 1px solid white;" />

Never Surrender: A Galaxy Quest Documentary (2019)
This was like a lovely warm hug, ahhhhh remember the days when even parodies of Star Trek felt like they really got Star Trek. The Documentary credits much of the success to Director Dean Parisot for getting the subtleties of the tone right. Also Enrico Colantoni for inventing the Thermians' behaviour and voice. It was a masterstroke to make them act like good natured, Pop-Culture obsessed, socially awkward Trekkies turned up to "eleventy stupid". The Doc manages the rare feat of getting everybody involved in the making of the film to appear on camera (if they were alive)... there's usually one or two killjoys who won't cooperate. If I was nit picking, the doc is maybe a bit over cozy, avoiding delving too deeply into any controversial areas, like why Harold Ramis left the project, or some hinted at tensions between the cast.

 

Gaith

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
5,461
Reaction score
41
Trophy Points
88
The Phantom (1996)    (US Amazon Prime)


Much like Escape from New York, The Phantom kinda sucks. The characters are one-dimensional, the dialogue is often laughable, and the story feels like a kid's brainstorm, full of baffling plot points and nonsensical geography. As for The Phantom himself, as game and muscular as Billy Zane is, he's rarely an imposing fighter at all, at one point attacking two thugs by squeezing their necks between his legs, causing his spandex'd butt to awkwardly wriggle on the right side of the screen. The whole thing is hopelessly childish.

And yet... that's why it works as well as it does. The music is stirring, the location shooting and sets are spectacular, the action is coherent, and the overall photography, while not quite inspired, is solid. Zane's extra-wide smile is a great fit for his ludicrous costume, Treat Williams is a hoot as the gleeful villain, and the pace never lets up. What's more, there's barely any noticeable CG; as an atmospheric piece alone, the movie succeeds. (It's almost, but not quite, enough to forgive director Simon Wincer for setting the climax in an underground aquatic lair with canals and submarines, yet inexplicably failing to soak Catherine Zeta-Jones' and Kristy Swanson's clothes!) I'll take a Phantom flick that lives up to the character's exceedingly low promise over a disappointing Indiana Jones sequel (which is all of them) just about every day. Anyhow, serious fans of Indy, The Mummy '99, or modern retro-pulp films in general should give this a spin - they almost certainly won't hate it , and just might love it.

Grade: B-

 

mnkykungfu

Well-known member
Donor
Messages
1,012
Reaction score
60
Trophy Points
58
^Sorry, I'm one "serious fan of Indy" who pretty much hated that.  For me, films begin and end with the script.  A good script will shine through no matter what else screws it up, whereas you can put all the window dressing you want on a bad script, it'll still be a dumb movie.
 

Gaith

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
5,461
Reaction score
41
Trophy Points
88
mnkykungfu said:
^Sorry, I'm one "serious fan of Indy" who pretty much hated that.  For me, films begin and end with the script.  A good script will shine through no matter what else screws it up, whereas you can put all the window dressing you want on a bad script, it'll still be a dumb movie.

I certainly respect that view, but my thoughts on Indy are that Raiders has an excellent script, Crusade has a decent one, Skull has a cluster-mess of one and Temple barely has a script at all. (Haven't seen the TV series.) So, I too call myself a "serious Indy fan" in that I love Raiders, but if "serious Indy fan" means considering the film franchise to be at least 50% good, well, count me out. :p
 

TM2YC

Well-known member
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
12,940
Reaction score
228
Trophy Points
178
I loved 'Phantom' as a teen, it had one of 1985's 'Defenders of the Earth' in it after all :) :


I liked the simplicity of the costume. One of the few films that actually looks like a comic (OG Superman included) and doesn't try to make it look like armour. I'd be interested to see if the film holds up at all one of these days.
 

skyled

Well-known member
Messages
189
Reaction score
1
Trophy Points
23
The Phantom is just good swashbuckling fun. Great music, great location shots, not too serious but not overly campy. I especially love the end credits shots and music.

Check out Bionicbob's The Phantom Strikes also, even though he cut out the entire end credits and cut the music short, a note that I complained about in my review :mad:
https://ifdb.fanedit.org/the-phantom-strikes/
 

mnkykungfu

Well-known member
Donor
Messages
1,012
Reaction score
60
Trophy Points
58
TM2YC said:
I loved 'Phantom' as a teen, it had one of 1985's 'Defenders of the Earth' in it after all :) :

What a coincidence... I loved Defenders of the Earth as an almost-teen.  ;)

I've come to realize that I think there are people who are looking for pure escapism from their superhero films, and they tend to be much kinder of shortcomings in the plot or character.  And then there are people like me who think the best comic book films pull them into a world that seems almost plausible.  Maybe a good example would be like Burton's Batman vs Nolan's.

The Phantom is definitely in that first camp, for what that's worth.
 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
2,299
Reaction score
53
Trophy Points
48
mnkykungfu said:
TM2YC said:
I loved 'Phantom' as a teen, it had one of 1985's 'Defenders of the Earth' in it after all :) :

What a coincidence... I loved Defenders of the Earth as an almost-teen.  ;)

I've come to realize that I think there are people who are looking for pure escapism from their superhero films, and they tend to be much kinder of shortcomings in the plot or character.  And then there are people like me who think the best comic book films pull them into a world that seems almost plausible.  Maybe a good example would be like Burton's Batman vs Nolan's.

The Phantom is definitely in that first camp, for what that's worth.

It’s good to hear that you’re not kind to Nolan’s many shortcomings in plot and character. :p
 

TM2YC

Well-known member
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
12,940
Reaction score
228
Trophy Points
178
Mid90s (2018)
Jonah Hill makes his assured directing debut (also writing and producing) in this skateboarding coming-of-age gem. The 4:3 16mm sun-bleached LA cinematography is beautiful and helps evoke the era. 12-year old Sunny Suljic is incredible in the lead role, he matches any seasoned older actor. The skate gang were in danger of being irritating "bros" but then the story goes deep on why they are all the way they are. It's often harrowing and bleak but life affirming too. I look forward to more films directed by Hill.

 

mnkykungfu

Well-known member
Donor
Messages
1,012
Reaction score
60
Trophy Points
58
Moe_Syzlak said:
It’s good to hear that you’re not kind to Nolan’s many shortcomings in plot and character. :p

I refuse to take the bait on that.  Though if you want to talk about how all that falls apart in the third act of Interstellar, I'm on board.  :)
 

Masirimso17

Well-known member
Faneditor
Cover Artist
Messages
1,860
Reaction score
4
Trophy Points
68
TM2YC said:
Mid90s (2018)
Jonah Hill makes his assured directing debut (also writing and producing) in this skateboarding coming-of-age gem. The 4:3 16mm sun-bleached LA cinematography is beautiful and helps evoke the era. 12-year old Sunny Suljic is incredible in the lead role, he matches any seasoned older actor. The skate gang were in danger of being irritating "bros" but then the story goes deep on why they are all the way they are. It's often harrowing and bleak but life affirming too. I look forward to more films directed by Hill.


Mid90s was pretty great. Good job Jonah Hill
 
Top Bottom