775 replies to this topic

[Loomis]

Harms, I've sent you a PM about it, but you must have not received the notification. So I shall reproduce my advice to you here.

I think you should certainly see this film, because I believe you'd derive a certain amount of enjoyment from it (only in a "fun timekiller" way, of course - definitely nothing more, but then you know that already), but I wonder whether in your case it might be wiser to hold off for the DVD release, as I shall be doing with INCEPTION.

Although there's no similarity in terms of plot (or indeed budget), THE EXPENDABLES kinda struck me as what LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD might have been like had it been good (Willis crams more charisma and badassery into his two minutes as Mr Church than he did in the entirety of his lazy last turn as McClane). It's also, I guess, rather like a less distasteful and more tongue-in-cheek and fun RAMBO (2008) without the intense gore.

And, happily, THE EXPENDABLES is vastly superior to other recent action sequels like the aforementioned DIE HARD 4.0, CRYSTAL SKULL and the last two dire TERMINATOR flicks. It isn't technically a sequel, of course, but it feels like one, and oddly enough that's what makes THE EXPENDABLES work - a huge amount of audience goodwill and character identification seems to be carried over from previous movies featuring Sly, Bruce, Arnie, Li, Statham and co. - these guys may have different character names here, but it feels as though we've known and followed them on many previous adventures, which of course we have, and so there's quite a bit of affection and history there. Had THE EXPENDABLES been made in precisely the same way, but with other actors or unknowns, then it wouldn't work at all. Essentially, it's a nostalgiafest, but a good and entertaining one that very much "does what it says on the tin".

Oh, and rest assured that it's miles better than THE A-TEAM. Not that I imagine you've seen that one, since I doubt it's your cup of tea, but just in case you've seen it, were horrified and are reluctant to subject yourself to more of the same, then fear not.

[Harmsway]

Harms, I've sent you a PM about it, but you must have not received the notification. So I shall reproduce my advice to you here.

Yeah. For whatever reason, I didn't get the notification. Or the PM, actually, since my inbox shows no new message from you.

Had THE EXPENDABLES been made in precisely the same way, but with other actors or unknowns, then it wouldn't work at all. Essentially, it's a nostalgiafest, but a good and entertaining one that very much "does what it says on the tin".

Gotcha.

Oh, and rest assured that it's miles better than THE A-TEAM. Not that I imagine you've seen that one, since I doubt it's your cup of tea, but just in case you've seen it, were horrified and are reluctant to subject yourself to more of the same, then fear not.

Oh, I avoided it, and have no plans to see it in the future. Looked terribly lame.

[Tarl_Cabot]

Harms, I've sent you a PM about it, but you must have not received the notification. So I shall reproduce my advice to you here.

I think you should certainly see this film, because I believe you'd derive a certain amount of enjoyment from it (only in a "fun timekiller" way, of course - definitely nothing more, but then you know that already), but I wonder whether in your case it might be wiser to hold off for the DVD release, as I shall be doing with INCEPTION.

Although there's no similarity in terms of plot (or indeed budget), THE EXPENDABLES kinda struck me as what LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD might have been like had it been good (Willis crams more charisma and badassery into his two minutes as Mr Church than he did in the entirety of his lazy last turn as McClane). It's also, I guess, rather like a less distasteful and more tongue-in-cheek and fun RAMBO (2008) without the intense gore.

And, happily, THE EXPENDABLES is vastly superior to other recent action sequels like the aforementioned DIE HARD 4.0, CRYSTAL SKULL and the last two dire TERMINATOR flicks. It isn't technically a sequel, of course, but it feels like one, and oddly enough that's what makes THE EXPENDABLES work - a huge amount of audience goodwill and character identification seems to be carried over from previous movies featuring Sly, Bruce, Arnie, Li, Statham and co. - these guys may have different character names here, but it feels as though we've known and followed them on many previous adventures, which of course we have, and so there's quite a bit of affection and history there. Had THE EXPENDABLES been made in precisely the same way, but with other actors or unknowns, then it wouldn't work at all. Essentially, it's a nostalgiafest, but a good and entertaining one that very much "does what it says on the tin".

Oh, and rest assured that it's miles better than THE A-TEAM. Not that I imagine you've seen that one, since I doubt it's your cup of tea, but just in case you've seen it, were horrified and are reluctant to subject yourself to more of the same, then fear not.

Aint that the truth! That's his best work since Pulp Fiction. He totally out baddasses Arnold and Sly in that scene!

[Loomis]

Oh, I avoided it, and have no plans to see it in the future. Looked terribly lame.

Basically, it is. If I'd been watching it on DVD I'd have switched off after about fifteen minutes (the opening sequence is truly horrendous - not that the rest of the flick is anything special, but the way it starts is just horrible).

The performances are quite fun, though, although I still maintain that Mr. T ought to have been retained as B.A. (hey, like Stallone he still looks in terrific shape, and besides he's only the same age as Liam Neeson) - the new Baracus is woeful. I have a feeling you'd enjoy Sharlto Copley as Murdock, though - he's pretty good value, and there's an amusing (possible) DISTRICT 9 in-joke.

[Harmsway]

Basically, it is. If I'd been watching it on DVD I'd have switched off after about fifteen minutes (the opening sequence is truly horrendous - not that the rest of the flick is anything special, but the way it starts is just horrible).

So you saw THE A-TEAM "in theaters," and you won't pay the say respect to either INCEPTION or I AM LOVE, two films certain to benefit from the "big screen experience"? Color me slightly disappointed, Loomster.

[Loomis]

Basically, it is. If I'd been watching it on DVD I'd have switched off after about fifteen minutes (the opening sequence is truly horrendous - not that the rest of the flick is anything special, but the way it starts is just horrible).

So you saw THE A-TEAM "in theaters," and you won't pay the say respect to either INCEPTION or I AM LOVE, two films certain to benefit from the "big screen experience"? Color me slightly disappointed, Loomster.

In my defence, I got dragged to THE A-TEAM. Wouldn't have bothered otherwise.

[Safari Suit]

I must admit there were times in the first half of the film when I feared the "haters" or whatever they're called these days had a point (some of the stuff with Statham's on again-off-again girlfriend and cliched a-hole other boyfriend in particular was a bit embarassing) but in the second half I was with this thing all the way. Personally when I see Randy Couture (whoever he is) decides a man being on fire isn't punishment enough, he needs a smackdown too, or C-list 90s action star Gary Daniels

Spoiler

have his neck snapped by a particuarly skillful roundhouse kick

I feel like I've seen something a bit special. It's not the kind of film which redifines the action genre like a few in the oeuvre of the film's cast, but I can easily see it being a Commando-esque cult classic. Couture even has a Vernon Wells sneer.
Oh, and it's nothing like a DTV Seagal etc. flick. Trust me, I've done the research.

[Loomis]

I must admit there were times in the first half of the film when I feared the "haters" or whatever they're called these days had a point (some of the stuff with Statham's on again-off-again girlfriend and cliched a-hole other boyfriend in particular was a bit embarassing) but in the second half I was with this thing all the way.

Y'know, I much preferred the first half to the second. I didn't mind the stuff with Statham and his girlfriend, and I loved Mickey Rourke, the Schwarzenegger/Willis scene, Sly taking the piss out of Jet Li.... Call me completely insane, but, for me, all that "character stuff" *cough* truly worked, whereas the much-vaunted action scenes were, well, a bit "meh". In my book, the scene of Lundgren threatening Stallone in the garage packed more punch than any of the scenes in which punches were actually thrown.

I know this sounds like I've finally flipped my lid, but, honestly, I think that, far from dragging THE EXPENDABLES down, the performances and character relationships are what make the movie. By contrast, the "thrills" aren't really all that great, by and large.

Anyway, it seems that THE EXPENDABLES' box office has tailed off significantly in its second week. Is it now unlikely to gross as much as $100 million in the United States?

[Harmsway]

I know this sounds like I've finally flipped my lid

Loomis, we all know you flipped your lid ages ago.

[Tarl_Cabot]

http://boxofficemojo.../weekend/chart/

Still # 1.

Scott Pilgrim really tanked...so much for the "youth appeal".

[Loomis]

I know this sounds like I've finally flipped my lid

Loomis, we all know you flipped your lid ages ago.

[Mr. Blofeld]

In that one scene on the plane to the island, Terry Crews OWNED this movie; the man should get more serious roles.

Also, anyone else notice the "teal and orange" tinting during the scene where Tool recalls his experience in Bosnia? Took me out of the movie, a bit...

[Mr Teddy Bear]

I wasn't expecting much, but THE EXPENDABLES was still a let down. I appreciate what it tried, but the action scenes just aren't engaging or memorable in any way, nor is there any wit in any of the lines or brief exchanges between the charters.

At the risk of offending, I found DIE HARD 4.0, TERMINATOR SALVATION and THE A-TEAM were much better recent action films. In terms of dullness and lack of wit, this movie reminds me of COLLATERAL DAMAGE.

It'd like Sly to take another crack with a sequel, because the concept is awesome, but this film just didn't work for me

[dodge]

I must admit there were times in the first half of the film when I feared the "haters" or whatever they're called these days had a point (some of the stuff with Statham's on again-off-again girlfriend and cliched a-hole other boyfriend in particular was a bit embarassing) but in the second half I was with this thing all the way.

Y'know, I much preferred the first half to the second. I didn't mind the stuff with Statham and his girlfriend, and I loved Mickey Rourke, the Schwarzenegger/Willis scene, Sly taking the piss out of Jet Li.... Call me completely insane, but, for me, all that "character stuff" *cough* truly worked, whereas the much-vaunted action scenes were, well, a bit "meh". In my book, the scene of Lundgren threatening Stallone in the garage packed more punch than any of the scenes in which punches were actually thrown.

I know this sounds like I've finally flipped my lid, but, honestly, I think that, far from dragging THE EXPENDABLES down, the performances and character relationships are what make the movie. By contrast, the "thrills" aren't really all that great, by and large.

Anyway, it seems that THE EXPENDABLES' box office has tailed off significantly in its second week. Is it now unlikely to gross as much as $100 million in the United States?

Unclear, I'm afraid. I can see it battling on and just-topping the 100 mil mark. But I'm not sure that'll be enough for the studio biggies who are now saying that nothing's been decided yet.

[Jim]

It does all sound so very deliciously plebian. I may yet venture to see it and commune with the below-stairs classes.

[The Shark]

It does all sound so very deliciously plebian. I may yet venture to see it and commune with the below-stairs classes.

I think some flogging is in order. You're growing soft, old Jimbo.

[Jim]

It does all sound so very deliciously plebian. I may yet venture to see it and commune with the below-stairs classes.

I think some flogging is in order. You're growing soft, old Jimbo.

A good flogging is unlikely to make me soft.

[Loomis]

I suspect that there won't be an EXPENDABLES 2 (unless it's done without Stallone as a straight-to-DVD - or almost-straight-to-DVD - affair).

I'm sure that even if THE EXPENDABLES fails to make so much as one more cent at the Stateside box office, it'll still do more than well enough "internationally" to "warrant" a followup. However, I can't picture Arnie, Bruce, Mickey or anyone "exciting" being up for a second helping of this fare.

[Harmsway]

Jet Li has stated he only did THE EXPENDABLES for the money, so I suspect he won't be back. He's been trying to get away from action films for a while.

[Tarl_Cabot]

I suspect that there won't be an EXPENDABLES 2 (unless it's done without Stallone as a straight-to-DVD - or almost-straight-to-DVD - affair).

I'm sure that even if THE EXPENDABLES fails to make so much as one more cent at the Stateside box office, it'll still do more than well enough "internationally" to "warrant" a followup. However, I can't picture Arnie, Bruce, Mickey or anyone "exciting" being up for a second helping of this fare.

I'd like to see another Ex movie...I'd really like it if Sly transfered his Rambo V Mexico setting story to the Expendables 2.

A few changes:

Dump Jet Li and try to get Tony Jaa(who retired to become a monk! ) or boxer Manny Pacquao. I'm a fan of Li but he wasn't a strong member of the cast. Randy Couture is also expendable. I'd invite Vin Diesel to join the cast.

Bring back Bruce Willis and Arnold in majorly expanded roles and make Bruce and "his men" a major obsticle for the team.

[Loomis]

I'd like to see another Ex movie...I'd really like it if Sly transfered his Rambo V Mexico setting story to the Expendables 2.

I'd prefer him to resurrect RAMBO V and transfer to it any decent EXPENDABLES 2 ideas he has.

Bring back Bruce Willis and Arnold in majorly expanded roles and make Bruce and "his men" a major obsticle for the team.

Well, that would be absolutely wonderful, but I think there's zero chance of it happening. About as much chance of Connery doing another Bond flick, frankly. I believe Schwarzenegger and Willis did their cameos for free and purely as a one-off favour to their old Planet Hollywood colleague.

I honestly don't see either of them signing on for a larger role in a sequel, especially as THE EXPENDABLES has largely been roasted by the critics (as well as largely roasted by the fanboys, come to that) and looks set to end up as only a middling hit at the U.S. box office. Really, what would be in it for them? They don't need the money and it would just look as though they were blatantly bailing out Sly, who can't carry an EXPENDABLES flick on his own. And could the Stallone ego take it, knowing that people were beating a path to cinemas mainly to see Arnie and Bruce and not him?

And to have another one-scene cameo from Arnie and Bruce, while certainly very doable compared to persuading them to do expanded roles, would just look like an act of utter desperation on Stallone's part.

I also see problems in getting other actors to sign on for a sequel. If Seagal or Jaa or Diesel or whoever were to board EXPENDABLES 2, it'd sort of be an admission of has-been status. The conceit of getting a bunch of ageing action stars in the same movie has worked well enough, if you ask me, and almost certainly accounts for a very large chunk of THE EXPENDABLES' box office haul, but it's a gag that I think would wear thin pretty quickly.

Sure, I guess it wouldn't take all that much arm-twisting to secure the return of people like Lundgren - these guys don't exactly seem super-choosy about their projects. But if Jet Li is already making statements to the effect of "Oh, I did it purely for the money and want to put these ghastly action films behind me", then one wonders whether any camaraderie that once prevailed on the set of THE EXPENDABLES has evaporated.

Certainly, I don't think you could do The Same Again™ with EXPENDABLES 2. Logistically, it would probably be impossible, and also I don't see much viewer appetite for it. You'd need to go in quite a bold new direction. Indeed, Stallone has been teasing interviewers with mutterings of "a radical idea" for EXPENDABLES 2, but I'm guessing that whatever it is (an all-female team?) it'll never come to pass.

I may be wrong, but I reckon we've seen the last of Sly and his Expendables. With hindsight, delaying the film's release by a few months (it's been finished for ages and was originally scheduled for late 2009/early 2010, I believe) was a mistake. A year ago, the online buzz for it was extraordinary - there was a lot of goodwill and anticipation for it, but, bafflingly, it wasn't released at a time when the filmmakers could have taken advantage of the hype. Instead, THE EXPENDABLES was held back and just sorta crept out at the end of summer. Granted, it seems to have done pretty well at the box office, but I wonder whether it would have done much better had it hit cinemas when people were really gagging for it.

[dodge]

It does all sound so very deliciously plebian. I may yet venture to see it and commune with the below-stairs classes.

I think some flogging is in order. You're growing soft, old Jimbo.

A good flogging is unlikely to make me soft.

Well, it's definitely for those who'd rather watch Randy Couture than his evil brother Haute.

[Jim]

Upon reflection I have decided not to subject myself to this, having concluded that I am insufficiently vermin-featured and too well deoderised.

[dodge]

No guarantees, but the film has now earned about $85 million Stateside...and may actually limp past the $100 million mark. fingers crossed.

[dinovelvet]

No guarantees, but the film has now earned about $85 million Stateside...and may actually limp past the $100 million mark. fingers crossed.

Yes I'm sure it will hit the magic $100 mil mark, its a holiday weekend coming up which should push it into the mid 90s and it'll nudge past the finish line soon after that. It'll be interesting to see its foreign box office take too, which I imagine will be much bigger than the US, as Sly's movies typically are

Anyway, it seems that Sly is gung-ho about making an Expendables 2. At twitter.com/theslystallone , he's proposing Bruce Willis as the villain and pondering "dangerous" locations to shoot, as well as apparently goading Jean Claude van Damme into signing up.

[Loomis]

No guarantees, but the film has now earned about $85 million Stateside...and may actually limp past the $100 million mark. fingers crossed.

Well, "limp" is right. What's wrong with you Americans and your failure to appreciate Sylvester Stallone? Is patriotism dead?

[dodge]

No guarantees, but the film has now earned about $85 million Stateside...and may actually limp past the $100 million mark. fingers crossed.

Well, "limp" is right. What's wrong with you Americans and your failure to appreciate Sylvester Stallone? Is patriotism dead?

No, patriotism isn't dead. But Harmsway's lofty disapproval seems to have frightened millions of American Real Men at Heart from daring to set foot in theaters. Apparently, Harms' influence is far greater than I'd suspected--or dreaded--in my wildest dreams.

[dodge]

It will be interesting to see what sort of B.O. is rustled up by MACHETE, which serves up some impressive stunt casting of its own. You mgiht want to check out the full review from which these excerpts are taken:

In some ways, Machete is what The Expendables would have been if The Expendables had been written and directed by someone with a sense of humor, i.e., not Sylvester Stallone. Both films are self-conscious throwbacks to bygone genres; part of the problem with Stallone's movie is that it wasn't self-conscious enough. I loved what Anthony Lane said about it in The New Yorker: "You might expect, given the title, a few shafts of irony or pathos to be leveled at this symposium of has-beens, but ... Stallone seems genuinely to believe that he is dealing in still-cans."

It's impressive that Rodriguez and company keep this from turning into a one-joke affair. The outlandish violence is a constant (including an intestine-based stunt that I know I've seen in an Itchy & Scratchy cartoon), but that's buoyed by political satire, politically incorrect satire, and general comic mania. Like last year's tragically under-seen Black Dynamite, which it resembles, Machete is brimming with infectious energy -- a well-made movie in the style of poorly made movies.

Grade: B+
Source: http://www.seattlepi...lm40416513.html

[Harmsway]

The article references last year's BLACK DYNAMITE, which made for a better trailer than it did a feature-length film. I suspect the same is true of MACHETE.

[Safari Suit]

I'd be very surprised if Machete did particularly well. I mean it's a spin-off from a film that was one of the biggest flops of the last decade! Looking forward to it though.