The Commentary Monthly Mondays Thread -- Submit Your Picks

[NewFun#6]

[Fanboyimus Prime]

Guyver 2 Dark Hero.

Though given I discussed it with Scott...it'd probably take some effort to get him to watch it.

[Hair-Metal Hero]

I want to see these done as commentaries:

and

[Mercury083]

I throw in another vote for Ghostbusters and throw in Condorman for consideration.

Dave

[ljacone]

CONDORMAN!

A perennial favorite of my youth!

[APLUK]

[Gridley1701A]

how about Popeye ? I don't think that film was discussed on any specific show. it would be the first musical to get a commentary.

[Hair-Metal Hero]

Movie Posters did used to be good, now its too time consuming and expensive to do, or too old fashioned(supposedly, whatever), especially when one of the plebs in marketing can sit down and photoshop some generic piece of poo.

Struzan's art for Hellboy 2 are the last great posters I can think of for genre stuff.

[Dave Z]

I would have loved to have seen this in theaters.

[Arthur Ratnik]

[JonathanCrites]

You're description is apt - I love the Alan Moore books and completely ignored this movie. I have it on my watch list on the HBO GO app on my 360; I may watch it tonight before listening to the episode.

[Dave Z]

I watched it the other day. Didn't dig it. I don't know why but I just couldn't get into it. There's some good stuff there, like Hyde and Tom Sawyer, but I just didn't like it.

[Fanboyimus Prime]

I remember when I first watched this movie. Christmas Eve 2004, and it was a blast.

Then again I've also in my mind made the foe of the film to of the McCullan clan from GiJoe. Basically a steampunkish Destro the team is crossing swords with. Then again he has tanks, and at one point wears a metal mask, plus has a company that would profit from war.

All traits of the McCullan family aka Destro's family.

[RHagen]

*sighs* My issues with the film stem from all of the bits they added, like Mina having 'vampire' powers and Tom Sawyer (who should be in 60's considering that the Twain stories were set pre-Civil War, likely in the 1840's). Say what you will about the Alan Moore comics, he made a conscious effort to stick as close a possible to the source materials he drew his characters from. If folks were active in decade earlier, they appeared to be their proper age.

That said, folks are free to enjoy the movie.

[NewFun#6]

[RobAlloyIV]

I like this movie much better than the graphic novel by Alan Moore because it has elements of fun embedded in it that are entirely missing from the works of Moore & O'Neill. Lets be honest in that graphic novel is full of violence and sex and fascist imperialism where the so called heroes are dark and no better than the people they are set up to oppose. Is that a movie people will pay to see if it could avoid the X or R rating it would require if they had slavishly followed the Graphic Novel ?

This idea that they owed Moore blind obedience for characters he didn't create to start with and tinkered with to make his versions is remarkable silly. That's like saying Nemo couldn't build an 'automobile' because there is no way the guy who builds a 'fully functioning submarine' could ever come up with such a concept..

I never fell into the trap of 'established' vampire lore because if you look world wide it's entirely different based on region so there is nothing really established except the various movies and books which contradict each other. So staking a vampire doesn't kill in one version while in another it kills them and they turn to ashes. In one version sunlight just robs them of some of their powers while in others it destroys them.

I think one of your impressions that Connery was just having fun is something I din't perceive in either the Theater version or my DVD version. I got the impression he really didn't want to be there at all which helped his performance because the character he was playing didn't want to be there either..

Best performance goes to the man who wasn't there an Invisible Man with Dorian Gray coming in second in my opinion.

The reason League of EXG is considered a failure is because it was suppose to be the Harry Potter of that time which it failed to do. The question is now what would they do if they decided to try a remake and who would show up in the movie?

[Rob Boswell]

[Gridley1701A]

looking forward to listening to the League commentary. I really like this film and hate that its so unfairly maligned. People just have to separate it from the Moore books and look at it as its own separate thing. and I enjoyed the first two Moore series, the subsequent volumes though, not so much.

I remember seeing the movie opening weekend to a fairly packed crowd that seemed to like it. don't know how many people there knew about the comics. I also remember this asshole critic in the N.Y Post giving a negative review and spoiling the ending in the review ! couldn't believe that. it was the last time i ever read a print review of movies.

I own the dvd and watch the movie whenever its on HBO.

Weird that none of the actors became big stars or at least bigger than when they made the movie as they all did a great job. at least Peta Wilson (Mina Harker) did Playboy after that

[Hair-Metal Hero]

OK, here's my history with LXG. Read the first trade, thought it was a great idea, but the art and story were "Meh." Saw the ad for the movie, said, looks ok, saw it, and it really didn't strike a chord for me. Listened to the commentary and enjoyed the discussion. Rewatched it and like the comics, I think its a great idea with poor execution, but it is light years better than the source material. I don't have a visceral hate for it, its just doesn't tickle my balls the way other stuff does. I'm glad that it has a following though, its a hell of a lot more inventive than a lot of crap that was coming out at the time.

[Lomax]