Watching the Nicolas Cage and Jerry Bruckheimerremake made me extremely curious to see the original Gone in 60 Seconds. And let me tell you that, the film is impressive when it comes to the shier production value H. B. Halicki ( writer, producer, director and star ) put into this film. But on the other hand the film is very hard to follow.
I heard bad things about Martin Campbell's 2025 film Cleaner starring Daisy Ridley. People found this movie dull or whatever. And then I found out that the director was indeed Martin Campbell, the guy who brought us films like Mask of Zorro and a some of the good James Bond films, like Casino Royal ( arguably the best film in the 007 franchise ). The bad things people say and the director's reputation didn't make sense together. I had to see for myself what the fuss is all about.
In Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning the mission is so impossible that there is a possibility that either Tom Cruise's Ethan Hunt, the entire world, or both will die. Not to mention that Tom Cruise himself can die. Because in this one he climbs from one plane to another mid flight.
Imagine being born in the year 1930, starring in films since the 1950s and yet in 2024 ( at the age of 94 ) releasing a movie you directed. If you want to talk anti-ageism Clint Eastwood is the motherfucker you point to. Hell he even made a movie about anti-ageism in the early 2000s, called Space Cowboys which is a light rip-off of Armageddon. This time thought he swings at us with a great rip-off of a 1957 Sidney Lumet classic 12 Angry Men.
A lot of people have a mixed bag of feelings when it comes to Steven Spielberg's 2018 masterpiece Ready Player One. They dislike the nostalgia bait, and the countless references. They poke fun at logical inconsistencies. Yet nobody can deny the fact that Spielberg apparently is incapable of making a terrible movie. Still, how many of you actually looked at Ready Player One seriously? How many of you thought about it's messaging? How many noticed the politics that Spielberg is hiding in plain sight?
It is rumored that Michael Bay's Armageddon is shown periodically at NASA to the people working there as a test of how much inaccuracies they can spot. The movie is fucking stupid if you want to think about anything remotely realistic. The science... what science? The film has never heard of it. The characters are fucking degenerates. The lack of tone is only rivaled by Nicolas Winding Refn interviews. And yet somehow I cannot find myself hating on this movie.
Conceptually the film is very much like Stanley Kubrick's "The Shinning". It deals with a parent going slowly insane and becoming a threat to the children. Both movies suggest a possibility of a supernatural explanation of the insanity. But the movies are made in such a smart way where there is enough doubt in those supernatural occurrences that you can read it as psychological deterioration only. Which is a very interesting challenge to a filmmaker. And young Spielberg pulled it off.
Team Of LiViT and Space Chabad are perhaps the stupidest epic idea I ever had in mind as a movie project. And which taught me a great bunch of things. This is why I want to write about the expenses of these projects.
When you make a film, you tent to seek inspiration and advice from those who make good films. Before September my main activities were my job and the articles I write. I did some programming on the side. Like the infamous FastLBRY LBRY client. But that was it.