THE DANMAN CAN

I get that  Days Of Thunder   (1990) is basically just  Top Gun   (1986) ( review ) with race cars but I only watched the latter film for the first time a few months ago and I saw DOT when it was released (and more than a few times since). As mentioned in my TG review, neither jets nor cars interest me all that much and  Tony Scott , while being a slick commercial talent, was never a top director for me. However, DOT  is a fun, exciting film with a great cast and a lot of heart. It's also neat to see Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman basically falling in love while shooting their scenes. You don't have to turn off your brain completely for this movie, but it helps if you drop the hammer and just enjoy the ride. Tony Scott Feature Films Ranked

For someone who watches as many films as I do, my guess is that it might surprise a few folks that I'd never seen  Top Gun   (1986) until now. Top Gun: Maverick (2022) is getting a lot of buzz (many are claiming it's better than the original), so I figured I might as well fill this gap in my movie-watching history. From the perspective of a first-time viewer watching TG in 2022, I can definitely say that nostalgia clearly plays a big part in the love for this one.  I'm not saying it's not good; it is. Everything (and everyone) looks beautiful, the flying scenes are mostly exciting (if not repetitive), and the soundtrack (meaning the songs, the score, and the sound effects) is thrilling ( Harold Faltermeyer 's " Anthem " in particular is a banger). But the plot is pretty threadbare, the acting is fine, I suppose, and I don't think I've seen another film (that doesn't take place in a desert) where people are sweating so much (seriously, almost ...

The last time that I watched  True Romance  (1993) was eight years ago where I wrote that it hasn't aged well (my review here ). My feelings haven't changed much. I first saw the film when I was 19 or 20 and for years I really loved it. In the past decade, not so much. I do think it has a ridiculously good cast and some great moments. It's occasionally fun and funny. But the whole of it leaves me empty. It's no all-timer. David Lynch  and Barry Gifford are to blame. As soon as I saw  Wild At Heart  (1990) and the similarities between the two films (both modern updates of the  Bonnie and Clyde  story), I just couldn't appreciate True Romance the same way anymore. I know they aren't exactly the same film, but WAH  is weirder,  wild er, and—compared to TR — underappreciated. My thoughts on WAH   here . Nicolas Cage and Laura Dern  are more convincing in their roles and have better chemistry as Sailor and Lula than Chri...

Despite a studio-mandated ending, The Hunger  (1983) is an excellent horror/drama that begs the question—why did  Tony Scott  never make any more art films (particularly when this was his feature film debut)?? It's somber, it's romantic, it's tragic, it's gothic and, at times, it's incredibly 80s (very much embracing The New Romantic  movement). Scott's brother  Ridley  was clearly a big influence because The Hunger  is a lot like a vampire version of  Blade Runner  (1982)—the mood, the pace, the cinematography (neon-lit studio apartments, long and winding staircases, and lots of slow motion shots of doves). Along with his understated performance, David Bowie 's Dorian Gray-like aging f/x (courtesy of makeup wizard Dick Smith ) are a marvel to behold—particularly sad and striking to watch now that Bowie's no longer with us (nor Smith, nor Tony Scott). If you're looking for a slow burner filled with devastatingly attractive stars and h...

I finally got around to seeing this and it's excellent, despite a studio-mandated ending. I only wish  David Bowie   had more screen time. And why did  Tony Scott  never make any more art films? Scott's brother  Ridley  was clearly a big influence because  The Hunger  (1983) is basically the vampire version of  Blade Runner  (1982) (complete with slow motion dove shots).

True Romance  (1993) hasn't aged well. I feel as if I should like this way more than I do now.  Upon previous viewings, I have rated this movie a 1 / 2 to a whole * higher.  Now it seems *** is pushing it. This movie has a ridiculously good cast, and some great moments, but the whole of it leaves me feeling a bit empty. This film doesn't know what it wants to be - a romantic "comedy", a "serious" drama, a "mob" movie - and I suppose the mishmash is probably why some people like it or what they feel sets it apart from other films. But the jumble, along with the almost "heart warming", "feel good" score just doesn't grab me. There was a very similar and far better film made three  years prior to this one; it's called Wild At Heart  (1990) (how about a Blu-ray of that film??).