MovieChat Forums > AlanClarke > Replies
AlanClarke's Replies
I think I just ran across it while browsing IMDb and liked the premise. I'm a fan of JRD anyway so I gave it a watch. The first two seasons were a lot of fun even if they never reached the steady quality of "Quantum Leap". After that they began resembling cheap knockoff movies so I stopped watching around season 4. I'd definitely check out a reboot or a remake. The original cast was really quite good.
I've only seen it quite recently so I have no nostalgia towards the show and I also think it has an absolutely brilliant premise. Like "Quantum Leap" or "Doctor Who" it was a show that could do anything and go anywhere - be any genre in any style. I'd love a really ambitious and smart reboot. But I do agree that most of the actual episodes are average at best.
He's FINE in it (and I say this as a huge fan of his work, especially in "Colditz"). He has the world weary, skeletal look which fits the mood of the film. However, he also looks far too sophisticated and gentle to be a convicting tough-as-nails New York cop. It doesn't help that they dubbed him over with a voice that would fit a man like Ed Asner more than Jack Hadley. The Italian dub has a better suited, more low-key voice that makes his performance come across better. Otherwise, his character as written is kinda flat and lifeless and other than the scenes with his prostitute/girlfriend all he gets to do is give exposition and look disappointed. I doubt Jack had to stretch his acting talents very much.
Not at all. If anything it's a lampoon of New York leftist wannabe intellectuals who think they know everything about the South.
There are a few good ones on right now. I love cosy mysteries and get my fix with shows like "Death in Paradise" (although it was in its prime during the Kris Marshall years) and "Queens of Mystery".
No.
Yeah, it's still hilarious.
A bit hard trimming his part since he's, you know... the killer.
That's actually funnier than anything in the movie.
It'll be a bit hard to hide him in the film since, you know... he plays the killer.
Just rewatching the series. The Governor told Dan that Charlie wouldn't give them the go-ahead for the glacier hotel, so Dan goes to Charlie's to talk to him only to find him dead. That's why he was there.
Yeah, people who have no fucks to give don't get butthurt over other people's innocuous comments. They're not that easy to piss off. Ridley Scott has been a wanker since at least the early 2000s and has now completed his transformation into the old guy who yells at clouds. That's not a person with an opinion, that's a person with a chip on his shoulder.
Coming across like a complete wanker is now a way to sell a movie? If I hadn't already seen "House of Gucci" I wouldn't want to after this.
My god, Ridley Scott's a whinging, grumpy old c..t isn't he? The interviewer is absolutely right, by the way, "The Last Duel" is more realistic than those two films in the sense that it's less stylized. It's also more accurate in the sense that it isn't utter horseshit.
Also, "The Last Duel" didn't fail because of millennials. I'm certainly not a millennial but I didn't rush out to see it either. It didn't strike me as a unique, or interesting enough film for me to take a risk of going to the cinema in these COVID times. While "Dune", for instance, is a film that's definitely enhanced by a cinematic experience, "The Last Duel" seems like something I could just as easily watch on my 4K TV.
His comments on the Gucci family just go to further cement what a pretentious and arrogant sod he really is. "And yet, frankly, how could they be better represented than by Al Pacino? Excuse me! You probably have the best actors in the world, you should be so fucking lucky." Well, maybe they just didn't want to be represented in his movie. Did that possibility even cross his mind? Or should everyone just be thankful to high heavens if Ridley the God of Cinema looks down upon them and subjects them to endless mockery the way he did the Gucci family? And yes, Al Pacino looks nothing like Aldo Gucci.
Telling someone to f-off just because they asked a legitimate and sensible question is not the way anyone should be treating anyone else.
As someone who has worked on film sets before - gun safety is absolutely not an actor's responsibility. There's always a designated person who is responsible for making sure a gun is safe, everyone knows whether a gun is safe... That person is also responsible for monitoring the way a gun is used on set and warning an actor if he is doing something wrong. If someone let you into a nuclear missile silo and you pressed the launch button by accident it wouldn't be your fault but the fault of the person who should have monitored you and warned you not to press that button.
Let's not forget his chin is on SOMEONE ELSE'S (dead) hand in the season 1 poster.
Also the character has significantly changed since season 1 and the show has become much, much darker.
Who does?
What lie? The girl's 17 and looks like Natalie Portman's older sister.
Holy... why does she suddenly look 30?
My argument is that it doesn't matter. How does that affect the quality of the film? We still get the same acting, same writing, same designs, same music etc. as we would if they'd filmed all three parts back to back and that's what actually matters. "Boss" is still a great TV show and a cracking watch even though they had no idea if they'd get to finish their story and got cancelled after the second season. I don't see anyone complaining about "The Sopranos" being arrogant for telling a serialised story without knowing they'd get to finish it.