I can't lie weather I was having problems with my girlfriend or not for free room and board at this place I'll go pretend we have all sorts of problems lol.

I love The Spy Who Loved Me. This film is one I can never get enough of, overtime I think of it or hear of it I want to watch it, it's just that damn good.
This is my brothers favourite Bond film and a number 4 spot on my ranking, The Spy Who Loved Me is nothing but a cinematic masterpiece.

We have here the ultimate 007 film.
This one not only has the aspects that make 007 films great: beautiful scenery, exotic settings, beautiful women, wit, non stop action, adventure, gadgets, etc., but it also has an epic story, the best of all the Bond films.
The story is a woman, who is quite capable, finds out her lover has been killed, and she vows to kill the man who killed her lover, but as the story progresses, she finds out that this man was not the devil she believed.
There is, of course, the other story, of a maniac who murders his employees, and this time it's not the head of Specter.
A lot of the spy work makes little sense, as does the motivation of "Jaws" (Richard Kiel), who became a fan favorite henchman.
But the main story is still the first one, and that holds this together, along with all the non stop action.
There is also a memorable scene where Bond thinks he is going to meet his boss, only to find someone else at the chair.
This is the ultimate Bond film, and I don't believe I am alone in claiming this is the best Bond film ever made, at least up to 2023.

**The Spy Who Loved Me gives Roger Moore the perfect formula to show off his goofy Bond charm with exotic locations, extravagant gadgets, big battle scenes, and a great supporting cast.**
The Spy Who Loved Me is my favorite Roger Moore and one of the best classic Bond films. Live and Let Die was his first and a less conventional Bond movie. Man with the Gold Gun was ok, but The Spy Who Loved Me finally fired on all cylinders for Moore. Beautiful locations, exciting villains, a catastrophic nuclear threat, a strong, capable Bond girl, and a dangerous romance give Moore’s third outing as Bond the edge over his other films. The final battle with various submarine crews fighting an army of villains made for an exciting backdrop as Bond battled to save the world once again. Add to it all some of the coolest gadgets and vehicles of the franchise, one of the most iconic henchmen in Richard Keil’s Jaws, and Barbara Bach’s gorgeous Russian agent Major Amasova and you have one of the best classic spy films ever made.

Now, I am 100% in the "Sean Connery was the greatest Bond and had the greatest 007 movies ever made" camp...
... so take it to heart when I say that this is Roger Moore's greatest outing as 007 and one of the best 007 movies (with one of the best 007 introductory songs) ever made.
This is Roger Moore at his absolute finest in a games bond movie with Barbra Bach being a great female spy with one of the best, most suggestive, Bond Girl names since Honor Blackman's (this review probably won't make it past the censors if I wrote her character's name)... and that, of course, would be Agent Triple X... AKA Anya Amasova.
Anya Amasova.... yeah, we all like calling her Agent Triple X so much more don't we? Honey Ryder is still the quintessential Bond Girl, Honor Blackman still plays the Bond Girl with the best name, but Bach comes in third and we can actually write her joke name.
Anyway, the locations are amazing, and Moore has moments in this where we see the Connery Era cold blooded assassin come out of him, meanwhile the plot is still amazing and over-the-top, we have Jaws, and one of my all time favorite 007 cars ever featured.
The Spy Who Loved Me is one of the epic Bond movies, it is the Best Roger Moore Era 007, and one of the films that should be on everyone's Top 10 007 film lists.

Not my favourite outing for "James Bond" this one, perhaps because the opening snow-scape scenes rely too heavily on green screen - maybe Roger Moore didn't like skiing, or just couldn't get insured - but in any case he certainly never left Pinewood for the first ten minutes here. It then leads into one of the more preposterous stories in which he must team up with the glamorous Soviet agent "Amasova" (Barbara Bach) to track down what has happened to two nuclear submarines that have vanished. It's got the usual travelogue elements - we go via Austria, to Egypt before the high seas where we encounter a sort of ecological megalomaniac in "Stromberg" (Curt Jürgens) who is trying to initiate global armageddon so he can live in his city under the sea. To help him achieve his goals, he has engaged the services of toothy strongman "Jaws" (Richard Kiel) who soon presents the couple with some perilous scenarios as they, of course, start to fall for each other. There is a distinct paucity of gadgets in this film, save for the submersible Lotus; the humour is a bit on the tacky side and I felt that the whole thing dragged a bit towards the end. Jürgens does just enough to get by but is hardly menacing; quite how Bach remains contained in her frock towards the end is astonishing and the denouement, though offering plenty of pyrotechnics, was rather rushed and a bit flat. It's OK, this film - but, sadly, nothing more than that.

Commander James Bond, recruited to the British Secret Service from the Royal Navy. License to kill and has done so on numerous occasions.
The Spy Who Loved Me is directed by Lewis Gilbert and adapted to screenplay by Christopher Wood and Richard Maibaum from the novel written by Ian Fleming. It stars Roger Moore, Barbara Bach, Curt Jurgens, Richard Kiel and Walter Gotell. Music is scored by Marvin Hamlisch and cinematography by Claude Renoir.
Bond 10. Allied and Soviet nuclear submarines are mysteriously disappearing from the waters and causing friction between the nations. MI6 and the KGB have a notion that a third party is responsible and stirring up trouble for their own nefarious means. 007 is partnered with Soviet spy Major Anya Amasova (Agent XXX) and the pair are tasked with getting to the bottom of the plot before the crisis escalates.
During the whole run of the James Bond franchise there have been a few occasions when it was felt it had run out of steam. 1977 and on the back of the mediocre reception and by Bond standards the poor box office return of The Man with the Golden Gun, now was one such time. With producer Albert Broccoli striking out on his own, the stakes were high, but with a determined vision forming in his head and a near $14 million budget to work from courtesy of United Artists, Broccoli went big, and it worked magnificently. The Spy Who Loved Me is Moore's best Bond film, not necessarily his best Bond performance, but as a movie it's near faultless, it gets all the main ingredients right. Gadgets and humour were previously uneasy accompaniments to James Bond as a man, but here they serve to enhance his persona, never taking away his tough bastard edge. The suspense and high drama is back, for the first time in a Roger Moore Bond film things are played right, we don't think we are watching an action comedy, but an action adventure movie, what little lines of humour are here are subtle, not overt and taking away from the dramatic thrust.
For production value it's one of the best. Brocoli instructed the great Ken Adam to go build the 007 Stage at Pinewood so as to achieve their vision for The Spy Who Loved Me. At the time it became the biggest sound stage in the world. With such space to work from, Adam excels himself to produce the interior of the Liparus Supertanker, the home for a brilliant battle in the final quarter. Vehicles feature prominently, the amphibious Lotus Esprit moved quickly into Bond folklore, rocket firing bikes and mini-subs, helicopter, speedboat, escape pod, wet-bike and on it goes. Then there's Stromberg's Atlantis home, a wonderfully War of the Worlds type design for the outer, an underwater aquarium for the inner. Glorious locations are key, also, Egypt, Sardinia, Scotland and the Bahamas are colourful treats courtesy of Renoir's photography. Underwater scenes also grabbing the attention with some conviction.
The film also features a great cast that are led by a handsome, and in great shape, Moore. Barbara Bach (Triple X) is not only one of the most beautiful Bond girls ever, she's expertly portraying a femme of substance, intelligent, brave and committed to the cause, she is very much an equal to Bond, and we like that. The accent may be a shaky, but it's forgivable when judging Bach's impact on the picture. Jurgens as Stromberg is a witty villain, but he oozes despotic badness, sitting there in his underwater lair deliciously planning to start a new underwater world. Kiel as Jaws, the man with metal teeth, he too moved into Bond folklore, a scary creation clinically realised by the hulking Kiel. Gotell as Gogol is a presence and Caroline Munro as Naomi is memorable, while Bernard Lee's M and Desmond Llewelyn's Q get wonderful scenes of worth. They forgot to give poor Moneypenney something to chew on, but in the main it comes over that the makers were reawakened to what made Bond films great in the first place. There's even a candidate for best title song as well, Nobody Does it Better, delivered so magically by Carly Simon.
The grand vision paid off, handsomely. It raked in just over $185 million at the world box office, some $87 million more than The Man with the Golden Gun. Not bad considering it was up against a record breaking Star Wars. Critics and fans, too, were pleased. It's not perfect. It's ironic that director Lewis Gilbert returned for his second Bond assignment, because this does feel like a rehash of his first, You Only Live Twice, only bigger and better. Hamlisch underscores it at times and John Barry's absence is felt there. While if we are being particularly harsh? Then Stromberg could perhaps have been a more pro-active villain? He makes a telling mark, we know he's a mad dastard, but he only really sits around giving orders and pushing death dealing buttons. But small complaints that fail to stop this Bond from being one of the best. Hey, we even get an acknowledgement that Bond was once married, and the response from Bond is respectful to that dramatic part of his past. 9/10

Great Globe-Trotting, Spectacular Locations, thrilling action and fun vibe
Roger Moore did more official James Bond films as secret agent 007 than any other actor. He started the role when he was almost 45 years-old and ended his 7-film stint at 57. His third Bond film was “The Spy Who Loved Me” released in 1977 and it’s one of the most entertaining movies in the series.
The plot revolves around 007 teaming up with female Russian agent XXX (yeah right) to prevent world-hating Karl Stromberg (Curd Jürgens) from starting World War III by stealing nuclear subs. Stromberg doesn't care if the world kills itself because he lives as a mad recluse on a crab-like submersible dream home called "Atlantis." The giant steel-toothed Jaws assists Stromberg along with the beautiful raven-haired Naomi.
The top item I demand in any Bond flick is exciting globe-trotting and, consequently, great locations. “The Spy Who Loved Me” delivers on this front in spades. Right out of the gate there’s a rousing ski chase that culminates in a spectacular jump from Baffin Island's Mt. Asgard (Canada), substituting for the Austrian Alps. It’s an incredible stunt and easily one of the best openings in the franchise. From there we get the Sahara desert, Cairo, the Nile River and the great pyramids of Giza, as well as the Italian Mediterranean island of Sardinia, Scotland (Royal Naval base) and the waters of the Bahamas. These are all fabulous locations to say the least.
Richard Kiel as the 7’2” Jaws is both intimidating and amusing. The on-going joke is that NOTHING can stop or kill him.
Barbara Bach is good as Agent XXX and certainly possesses an exotic beauty, similar to Britt Ekland from the previous movie, but watch her get blown out of the water by the stunning Caroline Munro when she’s introduced as Naomi. Many cite Ursula Andress' coming out of the water in a white bikini in “Dr. No” (1962) as the ultimate ‘Bond girl’ moment but Caroline's introduction here is a serious rival; it's, at least, the second best one. The only problem is that Caroline's role is too brief. Check her out in “The Golden Voyage of Sinbad” (1974) to see her in a more prominent part. Some editions of the DVD include an over 40-minute documentary that includes an interview with Ms. Munro. She was still beautiful over 25 years after the movie was released.
Another great aspect of “The Spy Who Loved Me” is that the fun, adventurous vibe and globe-trotting sequences give it an undeniable Indiana Jones feel, even though it was made four years before the first Indiana Jones flick. WATCH OUT for the great sequence where Bond's car morphs into a submarine as he attempts to flee Naomi in a helicopter.
Many compositions in Bond films are relatively timeless, like “For Your Eyes Only” from 1981, but the disco elements in the score for “The Spy Who Loved Me” are horribly dated. This doesn't bug me that much. I can live with it; others can't.
As for Roger Moore's take on Bond, I guess you either like him or you don't. I do. Regardless of his age Moore always looked great and was perfectly convincing as 007 throughout his run.
IMHO Moore's seven films are the most consistently entertaining. Yes, Sean Connery is great and his stint is generally more serious (albeit with the typical Bond cheese), but who can deny the color and vibrancy of the Moore films? All of his pictures are very entertaining and were hugely successful at the box office. Even the heavily maligned “Moonraker” (1979) and “A View to a Kill” (1985) are great. They may have more goofy or amusing elements, which are actually funny by the way, but they remain essentially serious stories; they rarely go overboard into the rut of parody or camp. Seriously, I weary of hearing all the complaints about Moore's stint in the series. All of his films are quality Bond adventures. There's not a dud in the bunch.
The movie runs 2 hours, 5 minutes.
GRADE: A-

Good stuff!
'The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent' is what I expected it to be. A breezy, comedic and extremely meta story with Nicolas Cage - sorry, I meant: Nick ... f*cking ... Whoa! Cage! Talking of whom, it's amusing seeing two Cages, especially the de-aged one!
Cage is great throughout. Away from him, Pedro Pascal is good value too. Overall, it's not a film to be taken serious - the opposite, in fact - but I had a positive time watching it. The calls to Cage's prior work, e.g. 'Con Air', is fun.

The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent is the Nicholas Cage show that I wanted but didn't fully know I needed.
This movie is fun, zany, witty, and just pure entertainment. I had a smile on my face for the entire movie. It doesn't take itself or the persona of Nicholas Cage very seriously. Often times poking fun at the career of Cage and the multitude of movies he has been, while simultaneously painting him as an absent and poor father. This is no easy task for an actor to face, but he does it excellently and really embraces his faults.
The plot is no cinematic masterpiece but it doesn't have to be. The best points in the is movie is the chemistry between Nick Cage and Pedro Pascal. They were beautifully synergized on screen and carried this movie to conclusion. It was so much fun seeing them develop a bromance that often times I found myself forgetting he was even suppose to be a villain.
It is not often you find a movie that is so self aware of what it is trying to be, but this movie tackles that so effectively creating a fun experience that any audience can enjoy.
Score: 78%
Verdict: Great

**Nic Cage proves himself a classy, good-natured, down-to-earth star by poking fun at himself and his career while making a delightfully funny film.**
The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent is a hilarious meta ride filled with goofy charm and outrageous comedy. Nic Cage made this movie possible and wonderful - both because the movie is a parody of his career and because he was willing to be a good sport and play an exaggerated crazier version of himself. The story bears some similarities to Hot Fuzz as characters unknowingly discuss upcoming plot points that come later in the film. The whole thing is bonkers, entertaining, good-hearted, and silly. Pedro Pascal expands his acting range by playing an obsessed Nic Cage fan that boosts the comedy further by matching Cage's manic craze with sincere adoration and enthusiasm. As a Nic Cage fan, I laughed out loud repeatedly. As an action-comedy fan, it's a pretty funny and enjoyable way to spend an hour.

Full review: open.spotify.com/episode/5cQovXzt5NNCQZr8ooTeow?siid80cd4b8744aca
To keep it brief, this movie lives in my head rent free. I truely enjoyed everything about this unique movie and I just cant speak highly enough about it. The way it's written was absolutely amazing, and to put something like this together is just special and unique. I can't thank the directors, writers, co-stars and everyone involved to put together this somewhat of a tribute movie, and do it so well. Easily one of favourite movies of the year, and probably one of favourite of recent times.

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://www.msbreviews.com/movie-reviews/unbearable-weight-massive-talent-spoiler-free-review
"The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent is an admirable tribute to one of the most iconic actors of his generation: Nicolas Cage. A hilariously insane, absurd journey through a career filled with unforgettable gems, equally ridiculous and without any creative constraints.
From the hundreds of delicious references to past works and characters to the phenomenal chemistry between Pedro Pascal and Cage, it will be more complicated for viewers unfamiliar with the latter's life and filmography to get carried away by the chaotic, naturally exaggerated atmosphere.
Regardless, witnessing Cage play himself is worth any ticket. Endless entertainment for fans of a pure talent that deserves much, much more acclaim."
Rating: B+

No-one could ever accuse Nicolas Cage of not having a sense of humour. He plays himself for most of this, depicting a somewhat fallen star whose agent (Neil Patrick Harris) finds him a gig for $1m to go to the birthday party of his wealthy Mallorcan superman "Javi" (Pedro Pascal). Lack of options force him to travel and he quite quickly befriends his adulatory, spring screenplay writer, amigo. Snag - well Tiffany Haddish ("Vivan") is the CIA on the island, and she tries to co-opt him onto a cunning plan to trap "Javi" - whom she believes to be a criminal kingpin behind the kidnap of the daughter of a politician. What now ensue are some quite fun escapades as the actor has to turn his hand to skills he would do off pat if he were in front of a camera, but not so readily in "real life" - and it turns out that he isn't half bad, either. Is "Javi" really the baddie? Will Cage rise to the challenge? All is revealed in this amiable parody of not just many of his own films, but of espionage and action drama in general. It's got some car chases, fancy locations, power boats and a room with a waxwork that would not have looked out of place with Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee. A bit ripe at times, the dialogue is peppered with plenty of wittiness and Cage plays the exasperated, then terrified, then motivated actor with aplomb and with his tongue in his cheek. Pascal makes for a fun foil keeping the bromance bubbling along nicely, and with Sharon Horgan delivering well as his long-suffering ex-wife ("Olivia") this is a well paced and enjoyable adventure romp.

It certainly seems like _The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent_ will have a deeper impact on you if you’re at least somewhat of a fan of Nicolas Cage’s work, but could also be amusing for fans of absurd adult comedies. Pedro Pascal is the humorous wingman we all wish we could have; soft-spoken and yet a priceless factor in the overall ludicrous nature of the film. Meanwhile, Nicolas Cage continues to reign supreme as a talented lunatic at the top of his game. _The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent_ is an outrageous and uproarious expedition into hilarity and absurdity. Nicolas Cage and Pedro Pascal are an unlikely yet brilliant comical duo that will have you rolling on the sticky movie theater floor with laughter.
**Full review:** https://hubpages.com/entertainment/The-Unbearable-Weight-of-Massive-Talent-2022-Review-The-R-Rated-Action-Comedy-of-a-Lifetime

**Christine**
**USA | Date | ★★★★**
**John Carpenter | Columbia Pictures & Polar Film | #26 of #150Moviesof1983**
Christine is an American horror movie from legendary filmmaker John Carpenter. With a screenplay from Stephen King and Bill Phillips. It’s based on a Stephen King novel of the same name. The film was produced by Mark Tarlov, Richard Kobritz, and Kirby McCauley with Columbia Pictures and Polar Film. It stars Keith Gordon, John Stockwell, and Alexandra Paul. It was released in North America, Canada, and apparently Turkey, on December 9th, 1983.
Arnie is a nerdy teenager. Bullied but finds refuge in his lone friend Dennis. That is until Arnie becomes obsessed with his possessed car, an evil 1958 Plymouth Fury named Christine. Now, those that are close to him are worried. They see a change. Then people turn up dead. Could Arnie be off-in the people that are wronging him or, is the car doing it?
It’s confusing to know what or how Christine works. She has been possessed. But she can also affect people in a telepathic way. At the Drive-In, Christine makes Arnie’s date, Leigh, choke on a hamburger. It closes her throat or something. Music gets louder. Lights on the dashboard brighten. Doors lock. But that’s what’s scary. The ignorance. You never know. And Christine is such a devoted killer. She will destroy herself for bloodlust. She knows she can come back. It’s a car that's an unrelenting killer.
Christine is a perfect movie for this time of year. It’s so dark, moody and dreary. Early John Carpenter films are so damn good. Even movies made during this low period. The Thing had just failed at the box office and he didn’t want to make this picture but ultimately came around. And it is a solid choice for satisfying that stray fear craving. The scenery and world that Carpenter had created is so detailed. So alive. It’s complemented with an amazing soundtrack of these creepy fifties tunes and Carpenter’s signature synth. The cast is fantastic. Keith Gordon is our lead, Arnie. At first I wrote him off as a stereotypical nerd. Gordon made it much more. John Stockwell is with him as always, Dennis. Jim to his Marlin Perkins. Harry Dean Stanton, Alexandra Paul, Robert Prosky and William Ostrander are all great too. Harry Dean Stanton is great as the detective. I love his slyness. Rest in Peace, Mr. Stanton.
I cannot suggest Christine more. It’s a Stephen King feature by John Carpenter. This has gone down as one of the better King adaptations. Even though it veered. Carpenter may not look at the film positively, but it is more than just a JOB piece. This movie is good. If you don’t find it frightening, then I think you might still find it entertaining.
**#1983 #150Moviesof1983 #80s #80sMovie #Movies #Movie #Film #Films #MovieReviews #RottenPopReviews #RottenPop #Reviews #StephenKing #JohnCarpenter #OldCars #Christine #Adaptation #Soundtrack #Carpenter #80sHorror #Horror #Terror #Thriller #Cars #PlymouthFury**

"It's going to suck, let's watch something else.... It's going to suck, let's watch something else.... King Adaptations always suck, let's watch something else."
"You realize it's John Carpenter right?"
"Oh, let's rent Christine."
That is honestly how the conversation went when I was in High School.... and I am glad I gave it a chance. It's actually one of the better adaptations of a King novel, and, really, this was CLASSIC King.
Carpenter did a great job of cutting away the fat and making a screen adaptation of a King novel that still held true to the spirit of the novel.
I was surprised, but, then, Carpenter is really great at that sort of thing.

“She’s a killer!” Said one of the promotional posters for John Carpenter’s feature film, based on the homonymous best-selling novel by famous writer Stephen King. Since its 1983 release, the movie has become a cult-classic, especially for gearheads and horror fans, thanks to its premise.
But is the movie a killer thriller or just a clunker 1980s film? For this reviewer, it is an absolutely enjoyable, fun to watch deep character study. Carpenter turns his wrenches on King’s over the top supernatural material, and polishes it into a clearer, more relatable version of the horror romance.
The plot is intriguing to say the least. In the 1980s, a young, bullied nerd, Arnold “Arnie” Cunningham, buys a trashed red 1957 Plymouth Fury (named Christine by its previous owner) purely by impulse, as if he had fallen in love at first sight. He becomes obsessed with restoring the automobile to its former glory. His personality begins to change after that, as noticed by his best friend, Dennis, and his brand new girlfriend, Leigh. The car does share Arnie’s feelings, and will do anything to protect him… Even from his loved ones. An interesting take on an unhealthy romance, in which the parties are jealous and obsessed with one another, differing from King’s book, that used tropes such as possession to dictate the supernatural elements of the story.
If there was one person to be able to make a film of this sort, it had to be John Carpenter. Coming out of what would be (years later) considered one of his most important works, The Thing, one year prior, he took the director’s chair for the Christine project. Despite also being known for adventure thrillers (like Escape From New York and Assault on Precinct 13) and satirical takes on other genres (Dark Star being an example), he is considered one of the masters of the horror cinema, and it is not for no reason, as he had vast experience in the genre, with all time classics such as Halloween (1978), The Fog (1980) and the aforementioned The Thing (1982) already under his belt. After Christine, his horror resumé would only expand, with the additions of They Live (1988) and Blood River (1991).
Even though Carpenter is greatly responsible for the success of Christine, he says it was one of his easiest works, which leads us to the reason he affirms such a thing: the phenomenal acting by rising star Keith Gordon.
Gordon was an eager-to-learn filmmaker aspirant by that time, but also a rising name on the acting scene. Despite being more concentrated on plays at the moment, he took the part and made a good team with the director. Bringing creative elements such as changing his hairstyle when his personality would change, he took the challenge of a (as he described) Jekyll-and-Hyde, rangy type of character surprisingly well, having a noticeable division between the Arnie of the beginning and the Arnie of the ending. Alexandra Paul did a great job bringing the element of the worried lady in Leigh. John Stockwell played Dennis, the jock, the successful best friend of the loser. Despite being fun to watch,Stockwell was playing a stereotype, so his acting was what needed to be expected from the 80s hero. It wasn’t bland, in no way, but not outstanding. Stockwell would go on to retire from acting and become a filmmaker. But what is interesting about the casting choices in Christine is that the producer, Richard Kobritz, and the director agreed on having less human star power to its cast, to give the spotlight to the real star of the film: The 1957 Plymouth Fury, Christine herself.
The soundtrack is something to behold. The incredible 1980s electro-style original compositions blend so well into their scenes, because they were made by no other than John Carpenter himself, in his long time collaboration with Alan Howarth. The two composers also worked together in They Live, The Thing, Halloween and many others. When the one who is guiding the scenes makes the pieces who will accompany them, the two things become intrinsically related, assuring a good completion between the two. But something not to be overlooked is the amazing selection of 1950s songs, through which Christine “communicates”. They are a key element coming from the book itself (every chapter starts with a 50s Rock ‘n’ Roll quote), and represent Stephen King’s love for that time period. The rockabilly selection includes Buddy Holly’s Not Fade Away, Dion and the Belmonts’ I Wonder Why, and Danny and the Juniors’ Rock and Roll is Here to Stay. This blends not only with Christine’s communication, but also with Arnie becoming more “1950s” as the movie progresses, influenced by his obsession with his beloved car. And, of course, there needs to be an honorable mention to George Thorogood and the Destroyers’ Bad to the Bone, that features in a chilling opening.
Visually, the film is quite smart, especially for a time in which virtually no special effects were available. Using practical effects, such as recording a car being smashed in reverse, to create the effect of it rebuilding itself, the creativity is what pays off for a film that won’t look visually dated, even well over three and a half decades since its first release.
At the end of the road, Christine is a V8 powered monster movie thrill ride, with some old fashioned scares, a banger soundtrack, an acting with little turbo lag, visual effects that corner like they were on rails, and a pace that doesn’t run out of steam. Despite the premise being considered “silly”, the result can appeal to regular horror fans and gearheads alike… And she is ready to show you why.

One of the most intriguing coming-of-age stories in cinema, and this tends to be overlooked, both as a Stephen King story and horror film, in place of the more sensationalized frolic and mayhem of works such as 'The Shining', 'Carrie', 'Misery' and 'The Shawshank Redemption', which is a crying shame, because: a) John Carpenter is probably the finest director (at least Top 3) ever involved with King adaptations; and b) it perfectly conceptualizes, like earlier short experimental films by the likes of Kenneth Anger, the downright uncomfortable sleaziness and fetishism that has existed, mainly in America, between men and their cars.
Keith Gordon does some really fine acting here (as he did previously for Brian De Palma in 'Dressed to Kill') as all possible dynamics along the range from nerd to psycho. It's impressive that, while growing up in film, he obviously learned some of the tricks of the trade from such cinematic greats (at least of American film of the past 50 years) and ended up becoming a decent film helmer himself.
9/10 for me; Grade A Carpenter. It simply isn't top-tier for me, of his oeuvre, because I know he, like Sir Alfred Hitchcock, De Palma and other greats, is capable of cinematic perfection (Halloween, The Thing, etc.).

Christine
No Strawberry Girl, She’s Plymouth Fury. CQB 241.
Christine is directed by John Carpenter and adapted to screenplay by Bill Phillips from the novel of the same name written by Stephen King. It stars Keith Gordon, John Stockwell, Alexandra Paul, Robert Prosky and Harry Dean Stanton. Music is by Carpenter and Alan Howarth and cinematography is by Donald M. Morgan.
How Do You Kill Something That Can’t Possibly Be Alive?
1983 was a busy year for Stephen King adaptations to the screen, along with Christine there was also Cujo and The Dead Zone, so for fans of the legendary author there was plenty to chew on. Christine tells the story of a possessed car that takes over the life of the school nerd, with devastating consequences. As a story that’s pretty much all there is to it, the beauty of the pic is how Carpenter ensures the car really does have a malevolent life of its own. The theme at work such as automobile obsession and the bonkers love story at the narrative heart, are not sacrificed for cheap shocks and gimmickry, but Carpenter rightly made the car the star and she doesn’t disappoint.
Christine’s move from being a knackered old banger to super shiny speedster runs concurrent with Arnie Cunningham’s (Gordon) transformation. Where once was the misfit being bullied, is now a supremely confident dude, he even dates one of the school babes. But with Christine’s love and protection comes great danger, and this lets Carpenter craft some super scenes. From self healing to fiery vengeance, the director brings his lensing skills to the party. Music, unsurprisingly for Carpenter, plays a key part as well. A ream of 50s Rock “n” Roll tunes play out of Christine’s radio to align with what is unfolding on screen, while the score is distinctly Carpenteresque.
Cast are very good in their efforts, though more of the wonderful H. D. Stanton should have been a requisite. Unfortunately the screenplay doesn’t afford many character instances to run smoothly, it sometimes feels like the studio demanded that Carpenter hurry up to the next Christine is evil scene instead of building the character bridges! However, it’s a film that may be undeniably 80s in tone of film making, but it has aged surprisingly well. Suspenseful, exciting and devilishly playful, this is another Carpenter movie worthy of re-evaluation. 8/10

Fantastic watch, will watch again, and can recommend if you're okay with on screen death and philosophical debate or game theory.
(Think "Saw 2" with no gore.)
It is always impressive when someone creates a good movie that occurs in a single location.
Under the premise of alleged aliens abducting group of people forced to play a death game, we get to see what humans intend to do without authority in a structured environment. This movie is very "Twilight Zone".
It's hard to cast for 50 "leads", and the "leads" kind of shift and rotate about during the game as people become targeted, but most of the actors in the game give a serviceable delivery in their roles, and while the production value is definitely there, you can tell that there just wasn't much necessary past the set and the kill mechanism. Hell, this looks so affordable, you could probably turn it into a regular show: there are party games with similar concepts.
There isn't much to say without spoiling other than this is a lot of talking: literally discussing who should live and who should die.
While I find such things fascinating, other people may want to watch romance or explosions, and there are plenty of those movies out there too.

**About a man who has nothing to lose and a man who can't afford another failure!**
It was based on the book of the same name, which was originally inspired by the real events. But there's a striking resemblance between this and the Truman Capote story. About a man who is serving in prison for slaying a family and his encounter with a reporter/writer. And so their relationship strengthens as they sit together to discuss about each others life event. That is the main film, which covers the majority of the film, but feels like they revealed nothing much, particularly for our convince, yet the story moved forward.
For the Truman Capote, there are two films, including the one I liked 'Infamous' and the other one is 'Capote'. Besides these two, there's another title called 'In Cold Blood' that reveals the other side of the event, before Truman enters the scene. So that's what I'm interested after watching this film. Because right now they preferred to portray a struggling writer and the crime parts were not given any importance. That means it is basically about a reporter/writer doing a story/book.
If they decide to make that one with the same cast as a prequel, then James Franco gets into an action which probably would give a good reason behind such crime where in this film the viewers can't end watching surely what really happened. Both, Jonah Hill and James Franco was really impressive in this. Felicity Jones had the small presence, but was in a main role. It was a feature film debut for the director and he was well managed to make it decently. Overall, for me, it was a good film, not the best, but can be watched once.
_6/10_

James Franco delivers a good performance but the story is disconnected and doesn't explain the evolution of Hill's character. The problem is the script and the directing. You don't get to understand where the movie is leading to or why and how are the troubles of Michael Finkel.
The actual happenings give a good chance of telling an interesting story but this movie fails to do so.

Mary and Max- Am I sad or happy? Am I philosopher?
It's hard to understand weird people. Oh, actually, I'm weird. It's hard to understand normal people. I've been depressed for a great deal of time. Not depressed like: ”oh, I'm not feeling okay now. But everything is okay”. It's something like: “I'm feeling very bad, and sad; probably I'm considered as I am freak. But I consider others as being freaks. I'm not depressed because of weirdness – it's because of life, as it is”. Uncertainly, I'm both Mary and Max.
The first – my state of mind.
Unbearable pressure in head, which I almost can't put literally vertical on my head. It's pretty hard, considering it's mass. I feel like an invisible ghost pushes my head and makes my eyes falling down. Teeth and jaw are stiff. I'm going to sleep. It's the most comfortable way to make reality become unreal and relaxing. I'm crying when the story of the sense of life is being said. I'm smiling when there are people around me. It's a spontaneous reaction. Probably because I'm Max in my mind, Mary in my soul.
People probably wrongly understand depression; or more precisely – they have no idea how actually it functions for real, in mind of attached person. They think they are mad, or they're pretending something wrong is happening- “depression is nothing serious”.
I'm Mary:
I'm ready to finish my living, to kill myself, to die in the full coldness of the life. There is no good person in the world, there is no sense of
life, there is no hapinnes in the world, there is nothing funny to do. But I won't do this. Medicines are really useful. They're changing our brain. I want to be in a closed room, I don't want to eat, I hardly ever sleep, but I'm tired. My willing is just to make me being physically smaller, to become a dot in a nowhere and to forget about everything. I have headaches. I almost haven't eaten anything for a couple a days, I'm sad, unsuccessful, bad in every possible way. There is no meaningless of living. We've been born. We're going to dye. We're nothing. I'm isolated, obsessed with horrible thoughts, (horrible from my point of view). These thoughts are as normal as they could be. I'm right but
nobody understands me. Acting happiness and smiling and funny person makes me feeling even worse after a while. The first thing I'm going to do is to push walls around me, to make me feel pain, to be alone and to do nothing – because, there is nothing to do. The only one friend I believed in disappointed me. Nobody cares. The next state is that I would try to be “normal”. I'm buying stupid cosmetics instead of going to travel. I'm talking to people, doing this as they do. Pretending being cool and perfect. Funny. Communicative. Everything went bad because it's not me. Go ahead!
Now, I'm Max:
Einstein said there were only two infinite things: cosmos and one's stupidity. I agree with him. I am different, I'm maybe even smart, I'm trying to understand the world. Maybe others are, too. Different, and also triers. I like chocolate, I don't have friends, there is no justice in the world. Anxiety and changing mood are no so simple things. Feeling are unpredictable, emotions are strong. Emotions are strong but undefined. I gave up. My psychiatrist is giving me instructions how to act in real life. “This is good, this is bad, in this situation you have to cry, in this to laugh, in this to imitate some nerd.” I was even using small notebook where I wrote “acting explanations”. I met Mary, but who cares. I'm used to living on my own. There is no friend. I am distanced form everyday life, like there is invisible barrier between me and others. It makes me being special; but obviously not in a good way.
We're now good friends. She is the best one for me; but also the only one. Oh, there are more freaks here. Haha. Impossible. She understands my needs, my mind, my reactions, my way of viewing stuff.
The second – don't worry. Robots are walking down the streets. Everyone is the same as the others. They define themselves as normal guys. Just define, don't worry. You can define them as you want The left person is copy of the right one. Everyone is the same. Everyone
has striped hair, blue narrow jeans, the equal brains, the equal opinion.
It's easier acting like they are acting. Just go down the street, listen to the others, turn off your mind, point of view the world and your charm. Just be like others. Be stupid. Be robot. I'm starting to believe Einstein. This is not myth he's very smart. But also you need to be good. Brave, beautiful, funny, intelligent, popular,...(just kidding) ;)
Be who you are, and help humanity. And believe there are also people worth respecting, because they are not robots. You just have to find them. Also they'll find you. They exist. Look bright, go straight. We're here and we can't run out of it. Imagine our life is one adventure we are lucky to have chance to play in. You're not a weirdo. Just go on, enjoy the adventure, be yourself, even when you have to be pathetic as I am now. :) After that, sense of life will come to you; you don't have to search so much! Just relax ;)
Let the game begin!
Written by Mary and Max,
December 2016,
for goodness of the world

**Surprisingly deep for a Stallone movie**
Wonderful and uplifting movie and story with some relatively deep messages that I didn't expect in a superhero movie starring Stallone. The twist was good too and nicely build up, though maybe they were building up the twist a bit too well. Cause if you think about it, the title itself already gives away the twist, at least to someone who is familiar with the Bible and knows what "Samaritan" refers to.
Cause a "good Samaritan" isn't simply a good guy, but is actually someone who is supposed to be bad, but turns out to become good in the end, which is exactly what Stallone's character (Joe) goes through. So in a way, he really is the Samaritan of the movie and the true antagonist Cyrus, really is the perfect "nemesis" for him as they are actually perfect counterparts. While Joe becomes good, Cyrus becomes bad. While Joe starts fighting crime, Cyrus instigates it. While Joe bears his cross, Cyrus breaks the cross (literally). Joe is a loner who avoids crowds and hates getting attention, while Cyrus baths in crowds, leads them and incites them, and while Joe goes around looking for broken things (both objects as well as people) that he can fix, Cyrus believes in "Ordo ab Chao" or to put it more direct, in breaking things before things can be rebuild.
Talking on a deeper lever, there is both Christian and occult symbolism in this movie, though unlike with many other Hollywood movies, the occult aspects aren't glorified. And though the movie appears to be morally ambiguous, it actually isn't. Joe might seem like a very unchristian hero, but in the end he is probably the most Christian hero seen in a mainstream Hollywood movie in a long time.

"Sam" (Javon Walton) lives with his mum in a run down housing project in Granite City (no, not Aberdeen) where he is frequently bullied. After the timely intervention of his neighbour "Mr. Smith" (Sylvester Stallone) the youngster starts to believe that his rescuer may be none other than the eponymous super-hero who went missing some twenty years earlier. Could he be back to save the city from terminal decline at the hands of his "Nemesis"? Well despite the reticence of "Smith", the young man is determined that he can cajole his newfound friend into saving society. As the pair start to bond, we realise that this young man is decent and has potential and that his elderly chum has quite a few skeletons in his closet - though perhaps not quite the ones anyone is expecting. Sadly, though the young Walton is quite effective, the underused Stallone is just going through the motions and the story is an amalgam of loads of other DC/Marvel style affairs with some fairly pedestrian writing underpinning a disappointingly under-developed story. The ending has a twist but it's not really enough to redeem the rest of this rather predictable effort that, though it looks fine, is all pretty forgettable fayre from all concerned.

Samaritan is a by the numbers action flick but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
One of the key problems with a lot of modern movie making, is the constant need to experiment and at times, inject social messages into what it supposed to be entertainment.
Samaritan follows a well known and well worn, by the numbers, action film formula. It tries to throw in a twist I saw coming pretty early on but that's alright. In essence, this film is inherently watchable. Stallone still has excellent screen presence and the chemistry, between him and the young boy, works well.
My advice, ignore the carping from the soy latte class of movie goers who bemoan a lack of sophistication. Its often the simple things in life that are most enjoyable and this is one of them.
In summary, Samaritan wont win any accolades for high brow cinema but what it does, it does competently enough to be reasonably enjoyable and entertaining. For many of us, tired of shallow cinema sophistry and intellectual pretension, that's what really matters.

FULL SPOILER-FREE REVIEW @ https://www.msbreviews.com/movie-reviews/samaritan-spoiler-free-review
"Samaritan holds quite an interesting premise, but sadly, it's yet another addition to the list of films with wasted potential.
What could have been a truly dark, fascinating story about two superpowered brothers with distinct views on life is, instead, a bland, predictable, formulaic narrative with less Sylvester Stallone than expected.
The cast offers good performances, but choosing to focus on Javon Walton's generic character when the prologue leaves room for such an engrossing exploration of the past proves to be a terrible decision. Action-wise, it lacks the energy and creativity necessary to entertain most viewers, despite the dedicated stunt work.
A tad frustrating in retrospect."
Rating: C-

Combination action, adventure, broad comedy, and buddy movie has The Rock well-cast as a "retrieval expert" fed up with his occupation and looking for a way out. He agrees to one last job in which he travels to a remote village in South America to find his employer's delinquent son, but in the midst of his search he tangles with the town's greedy, megalomaniacal boss, embittered citizens, and gets caught up in a search to find a rare and priceless artifact. Engaging, high-energy action scenes, enthusiastic performances, and moments of genuine humor make this a blast from start to finish. Formulaic to be sure, but lots of fun with Walken adding a hilarious presence as Hatcher. ***

John Singleton really isn't my thing. I mean, the movie came out in '91 but didn't get much exposure out in the country where I grew up until it was on HBO. However "Poetic Justice" DID and when I finally came around to watching "Boyz n the Hood" I had extremely low expectations.
I honestly thought it was going to be as absolutely pointless as "Poetic Justice" was.
And, yeah, I did kind of like "Higher Learning," which I also saw before this, but I still kind of feel that he was pointing the finger at white people and telling the viewers that we are all evil and the cause of all the problems in the world.
So I went in here thinking it was going to be a talented racist mess.
However, it wasn't. The fact is the film was absolutely amazing. And, honestly, it was the first film I saw about gangs, from a non-police POV, that didn't glorify them. And it remains one of the few gangland movies I've seen that doesn't glorify the lifestyle.
And I understand that they are two completely different beasts, but the film felt like it was taking the issue of gangs and giving it a "The Godfather" treatment...and it worked.
It worked brilliantly. You can both relate to the characters--although I'm probably not supposed to say that--and see that the gang culture is a horrible thing.
Unlike "Poetic Justice" it has a point. And unlike "Higher Learning," it doesn't cast as racist of a finger.
It actually deals with issues and tells a story and, honestly, to watch it is to love it.