The Month in Theaters September 2023

Russell Michaels

Russell is inside his own mind, a comfortable yet silly place. He is also on Twitter.

Related Post Roulette

18 Responses

  1. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    The Lost Boys TOOK OVER in… what would that be? 1989? The aesthetic was *EVERYWHERE*. The soundtrack showed up in everybody’s car as well. Listening to the soundtrack again today, you’re struck by how there is only one “goth” song on there. Huh. We thought it was riding a wave.

    The Rocketeer was slow? Huh. I remember loving it and then loving it more when I rented the tape. Alan Arkin was delightful as the old mentor.

    Stop Making Sense is a delight but you’re in for a treat when you get into the various albums. The best parts of Speaking in Tongues and Remain in Light show up in Stop Making Sense but there are a lot of gems for you to find. Or you could just pick up Sand in the Vaseline and figure “hey, I got it”.

    The trailer for The Creator looked so good! I was having a conversation with myself whether I wanted to risk the theaters for it. When it came out and clanked immediately, I pretty much stopped thinking about it. A movie where they have a guy take the side of The AI over the side of humanity is definitely possible. Heck, you could do it four ways with a simple political compass: whether or not the AI is malicious or benevolent, whether or not the guy is a social misfit or has a good circle of friends (or even just a girlfriend). Heck, they write themselves!

    I’m so pleased that Expendables 4 is good. I loved the first two and found the third a slog. (And I was shocked at how good the first one was. I was expecting a dumb little movie with explosions and nostalgia and I was, instead, crying while listening to Mickey Rourke give a monologue. What the hell?)Report

    • Russell Michaels in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      “The Rocketeer” needed a better actor for the lead. And a better mystery.Report

    • DensityDuck in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      I remember MAD Magazine’s capsule-review/roast of this movie, which has the lines “it’s hard to believe a lot of things in this movie, including the size of Jennifer Connelly’s chest!” and “it’s a movie with nothing for everyone — Forties nostalgia that kids won’t get, and a kiddie plot that adults won’t like!Report

    • Marchmaine in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      for 1987, the Lost Boys soundtrack is a profound, ‘meh’ from me.

      I’m a RED supporter vs. Expendables… if we’re going to have an ensemble cast of aging stars, I prefer camp.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Marchmaine
        Ignored
        says:

        We had no idea what we were doing with non-orchestral soundtracks.

        I mean, seriously… look at this:

        INXS
        Lou Gramm
        ELTON FREAKING JOHN as covered by ROGER FREAKING DALTREY
        THE FREAKING DOORS as covered by… okay, fine. Echo and the Bunnymen. Half a point for this one.
        The Cry Little Sister song. Full point. This one is good.
        Power Play? This is a lounge song. What the hell?
        Timmy Capello. The sexy sax man. I don’t even know how to judge this one. It’s either a full point or it’s a minus point. I don’t know.
        Mummy Calls. Beauty has her way? I have no memory of this song. It’s not bad? The lyrics are good. The song itself kinda sucks. But, yeah, I could see how someone who doesn’t believe in subtext might think this song belonged on the soundtrack over the objections of the guy who said “Let’s have Roger Daltrey cover the Elton John song about sunsets!” Half a point.
        To the Shock of Miss Louise… I don’t remember this song either. No lyrics, I guess. I must have fast forwarded it every time. It actually fits, though. Maybe a quarter point.

        See? No idea what they were doing.

        The Cry Little Sister song was good.Report

        • Marchmaine in reply to Jaybird
          Ignored
          says:

          Pretty in Pink (1986) gave them a false sense of how easy it was going to be…

          Not that it’s that good of a sound track, but if you’re going for an 80s outsider vibe that also has to be Normie-proof… well, that’s what you get.Report

      • DensityDuck in reply to Marchmaine
        Ignored
        says:

        Interesting that you bring up RED, because my feeling about “RED 2” was the same as my feeling about “Greek Wedding 2” — it was basically made for fans of the first movie, and if you liked the first movie then you’ll like the sequel, and if you didn’t like the first movie then the second wasn’t going to change your mind.Report

        • Jaybird in reply to DensityDuck
          Ignored
          says:

          A movie that makes a bajillion dollars off of a $5 million budget is a *WONDERFUL* opportunity to make a sequel that appeals solely to fans of the original.Report

          • DensityDuck in reply to Jaybird
            Ignored
            says:

            Something that occurred to me: RED does what “Hudson Hawk” was trying to do, and actually kind of did do, just twenty years before the audiences were ready for it. “Bruce Willis plays a dude who is incredibly smart and competent and cooler than everybody else in the entire movie, and he knows it, and he’s out of the game and wants to be let alone but people just won’t, so he solves the whole thing with a heist.”Report

        • Marchmaine in reply to DensityDuck
          Ignored
          says:

          Yeah, I think that’s true, but I’d just call that sticking with the concept. I’d say there’s a second component which is getting your character archetypes lined-up and then just running the playbook over and over. If there’s a ‘trick’ to the whole middlebrow endeavor it’s making up a new plot that provides enough lift for the concept and characters to do what they need to do.

          My haut criticism of RED 2 v. MBFGW 2 is that RED 2 was much better… MBFGW fell into the trap of thinking we ‘cared’ about personal growth… we don’t. We want the jungian archetypes turned up to 11.

          I haven’t seen MBFGW 3 yet, but I’m slightly hopeful that ‘rearranging’ the archetypes with a better plot might work. Maybe?

          p.s. As a Greek, I liked #1 and felt it held back too much … Satire has to Love the thing it’s satirizing and #1 showed love in a way that #2 did not. In #1 the subversive elements were checked by the love, so it worked.

          p.p.s. Don’t get me started on the Pitch Perfect cinematic universe…Report

          • DensityDuck in reply to Marchmaine
            Ignored
            says:

            I should point out that I really liked RED, and I also liked RED 2, and I’m actually a little sad they never got to do a “RED / Expendables” crossover film.

            And there have been so many films where the sequels weren’t as good as the first ones that it’s worth noting when they are. You can do worse than “if you liked the first one you’ll like the second”…a lot worse.Report

    • Pinky in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      The Expend1bles and Expend3bles had a bit too much of Stallone being serious. The Expend2bles had a bit too much of Schwarzenegger and Willis being silly. I’ll watch The Expend4bles eventually. Jason Statham is on a short list of actors (him, Simon Pegg, and Scarlett Johansson) who are near-guarantees for me. At least a letter grade boost.Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *