YosemiteSam
Unfriendly and Aloof!
- Messages
- 45,858
- Reaction score
- 22,189
I just saw this was the OG thread by WoodysGirl. Does she still mill around this place?
She's a mod.I just saw this was the OG thread by WoodysGirl. Does she still mill around this place?
As a European I wanna ask an honest question: why are there only LA "hood" movies? There are some that take place in NYC, but most seem to happen in LA. Is it simply because Hollywood is there and south central is the closest, or is there anything special about that place compared to other ghettos?Anyone that does a hood classics marathon will always get a like from me but damn Menace getting a 6. That movie is no worse than a 9. I still respect your opinion though.
I think it's more timing than anything. Gangs in the hood have been there since the 60s and 70s in NY, Chicago, Detroit, Philly, etc. You had a movie like 'The Warriors' that was based in NY but the 'boom' of gang activity started in LA in the 80s. Hollywood wanted to capitalize on it with 'Colors' which came out in 1988. That movie sort of captured the hood and gang activity in LA and how the police dealt with it. At that point Hollywood wanted to explore that type of activity in LA by focusing more on the hood in LA. Thus why there were hood movies focused on LA. You still had New Jack City, New Jersey Drive, Above The Rim, King of New York, etc that weren't LA based but what was happening in LA during the 80s along with LA hip hop becoming very popular, that's why Hollywood really honed in on the LA area for 'hood' movies.As a European I wanna ask an honest question: why are there only LA "hood" movies? There are some that take place in NYC, but most seem to happen in LA. Is it simply because Hollywood is there and south central is the closest, or is there anything special about that place compared to other ghettos?
I think a big part of it too, is that it's easier to film in L.A., because the weather doesn't change much.I think it's more timing than anything. Gangs in the hood have been there since the 60s and 70s in NY, Chicago, Detroit, Philly, etc. You had a movie like 'The Warriors' that was based in NY but the 'boom' of gang activity started in LA in the 80s. Hollywood wanted to capitalize on it with 'Colors' which came out in 1988. That movie sort of captured the hood and gang activity in LA and how the police dealt with it. At that point Hollywood wanted to explore that type of activity in LA by focusing more on the hood in LA. Thus why there were hood movies focused on LA. You still had New Jack City, New Jersey Drive, Above The Rim, King of New York, etc that weren't LA based but what was happening in LA during the 80s along with LA hip hop becoming very popular, that's why Hollywood really honed in on the LA area for 'hood' movies.
That and landscapes. You can find pretty much any kind of landscape in and around LA(SoCal).I think a big part of it too, is that it's easier to film in L.A., because the weather doesn't change much.
Wow...I could not make it through the first two. Hard to imagine something being worse.Venom 3 - 3/10. The first two weren't very good, but this one was still a lot worse.
The Substance: 8/10
Great performance from Demi Moore. The trailer tells you the plot, it's pretty straightforward. The movie is a metaphor, not to be taken literally. Probably one of the grossest and goriest movies I have ever seen, even compared to Terrifier 3. It's like someone mixed Requiem for a Dream with The Fly. @BrAinPaiNt would probably like it.
Yeah...I was kind of let down. It was not horrible but is not one of the better in the franchise.Alien: Romulus
Started off slow, but strong. Good story, good acting, very good special effects, and pretty good intensity.
Halfway through, it started getting weird, then eventually it got even weirder than Resurrection. I penalized it 1/2 a point for the gratuitous use of a certain line, then another 2 full points for going over the top, with more "fi" than "sci".
Overall, I'll give it a 6.5, and never watch it again.
I remember seeing the trailer, and thinking, "This looks like a sequel worthy of the original."...I was wrong.Alien: Romulus
I liked it at least as much as I liked any of the movies in the franchise after Aliens, which ranges from sorta ok to fine. When I first heard about it, I was excited. It sounded like an attempt to return to its original beginnings. Then I readand thought, "Aww, crap." So my hopes were dashed. But I was still going to watch it. Specific to the movie, very well done, great set design, etc. Will I watch it again? Maybe once or twice someday. But likely not nearly as much as the first two movies.it ties in with Prometheus