Discuss
Printable View
Discuss
:p
The movies were good for their time. As with all sequels, they just kept on going till they were grasping at straws.
On a side note, Stallone couldn't box his way out of a paper bag. However many hours they spent training him for the fight scenes were wasted.
In a real life fight Carl Weathers would've KTFO'ed him inside a round.
You are talking bollocks. Fact
V aside each hold its own when considered against the era it was made in.
How many other character franchises are still going strong after 43 years?
I was never into them really, only one I saw live was the one with Tarver, it was better than I had expected. On a side note, Stallone is actually a really small guy in stature. An old friend met him in Hawaii and got a picture with him on the beach, my friend is maybe 5’7 or something and he was quite a bit taller than Stallone, who was out of shape and looked almost as wide as he was tall. I suspect they used camera tricks galore to make it look semi realistic having him in with Carl weathers or Dolph lundgren.
Haven't watched one since he beat up Morrison and his son was a little twat. Maybe they should have given him mandatory retirement when he was voted into the HOF :-X.
Still going strong? (:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark TKO
I don't think being a franchise is a merit for a film. For me even the best boxing films like Raging Bull, fail precisely because there is enough drama in 12 rounds that no film can really do it any justice. The fight scenes always fail miserably, however well the drama outside the ropes is handled.
Yes they have some charm (though not as much as Paradise Alley) and Stallone can act a bit (Copland) but the Rocky films don't really hold up and just feel like cartoon like dumbfests for casuals now in 2019.
I think even 5 is pretty good. One is the best, but they all have something. First 2 are proper films, next two are more action films, 5 is a return to 1 and 2, but not as strong. Balboa was reasonable. No interest in the new ones at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark TKO
So Creed and Creed II were flops then Beanz ?
Yes Miles 3 and 4 held their own as were 80s action era with the big soundtracks etc. For people of my age they were awesome but looking back Now of course the first 2 are where it’s at. I did enjoy Rocky Balboa kind. Proper nostalgia trip.
But V. No.....
I went to an audience with Stallone about 3 years back at Sheffield Town Hall. He apologised to the audience for Rocky V.
You should try the new ones. They work. Trust me. I wasn’t happy when they first announced them but was very surprisedQuote:
Originally Posted by GandalfI think even 5 is pretty good. One is the best, but they all have something. First 2 are proper films, next two are more action films, 5 is a return to 1 and 2, but not as strong. Balboa was reasonable. No interest in the new ones at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark TKO
You need to separate Rocky from the subsequent sequels, like Raging Bull the boxing element is almost secondary (you don't need to have any interest in boxing to like them).Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanzFor me even the best boxing films like Raging Bull, fail precisely because there is enough drama in 12 rounds that no film can really do it any justice. The fight scenes always fail miserably, however well the drama outside the ropes is handled.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark TKO
Rocky is a love story about two shy loners with no hope, confidence or ambition who inspire each other and flourish. It's a heartwarming little tale.
Raging Bull is about a disgusting, violent, perpetually starving paranoid lunatic. As far as boxing goes, forget the fight scenes, it's the greatest single portrait of why making weight is a fighters biggest nightmare. From the start until he's retired (only when fat is he chilled out), LaMotta's mental mood swings all revolve around him being starving.
I saw Creed getting a good reception so I watched that, but I had trouble understanding what the characters were saying. A lot of mumbling going on and characters you don't really get into unlike the original 6. I love characters like Adrien, Paulie, Mickey, and Rocky. They all gel so well. It was nice how they grew Apollo too. Apart from Rocky I didn't really feel Creed. I will check out the new one, but the originals are films I can always watch again and again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark TKOYou should try the new ones. They work. Trust me. I wasn’t happy when they first announced them but was very surprisedQuote:
Originally Posted by GandalfI think even 5 is pretty good. One is the best, but they all have something. First 2 are proper films, next two are more action films, 5 is a return to 1 and 2, but not as strong. Balboa was reasonable. No interest in the new ones at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark TKO
Beautifully written.Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterYou need to separate Rocky from the subsequent sequels, like Raging Bull the boxing element is almost secondary (you don't need to have any interest in boxing to like them).Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanzFor me even the best boxing films like Raging Bull, fail precisely because there is enough drama in 12 rounds that no film can really do it any justice. The fight scenes always fail miserably, however well the drama outside the ropes is handled.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark TKO
Rocky is a love story about two shy loners with no hope, confidence or ambition who inspire each other and flourish. It's a heartwarming little tale.
Raging Bull is about a disgusting, violent, perpetually starving paranoid lunatic. As far as boxing goes, forget the fight scenes, it's the greatest single portrait of why making weight is a fighters biggest nightmare. From the start until he's retired (only when fat is he chilled out), LaMotta's mental mood swings all revolve around him being starving.
Of the two blockbuster movies that pretty much launched Stallone's career, I actually liked First Blood better. If Rocky was the tale of a lovable underdog who makes good and everybody claps at the end..... First Blood was the tale of a Vietnam vet, symbolic of the spurn vets received coming back home during those times, and running afoul of the law (albeit some sleazy badge wearing cops).
Difference being Stallone didn't have to box in First Blood.
There is a lot of "mumbling" when Rocky speaks so you should be used to it in Creed. Michael B Jordon is awesome actor.Quote:
Originally Posted by GandalfI saw Creed getting a good reception so I watched that, but I had trouble understanding what the characters were saying. A lot of mumbling going on and characters you don't really get into unlike the original 6. I love characters like Adrien, Paulie, Mickey, and Rocky. They all gel so well. It was nice how they grew Apollo too. Apart from Rocky I didn't really feel Creed. I will check out the new one, but the originals are films I can always watch again and again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark TKOYou should try the new ones. They work. Trust me. I wasn’t happy when they first announced them but was very surprisedQuote:
Originally Posted by GandalfI think even 5 is pretty good. One is the best, but they all have something. First 2 are proper films, next two are more action films, 5 is a return to 1 and 2, but not as strong. Balboa was reasonable. No interest in the new ones at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark TKO
Creed 1 and 2 are excellent, they have a good story and the training sequences are good as well.
Not just mumbling but also weird accents and slang that I do not follow. They make Sly sound like Jeremy Irons by comparison. The early films had chemistry. Adrien and Rocky were perfect. Paulie was an arse but you loved him. Mickey was spot on. Perfect symbiosis of composite parts.