- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Which movie was better? Phenomenon (1996) or Powder (1995)
Posted on 7/15/15 at 9:32 am
Posted on 7/15/15 at 9:32 am
I really like both of these movies. I think they represent the 1990s well and they hold up over time. Sorta nostalgic for me.
However, if ISIS forced me to choose one...I'd choose Powder.
However, if ISIS forced me to choose one...I'd choose Powder.
8
Posted on 7/15/15 at 9:36 am to mizzoukills
I like Phenomenon.
Posted on 7/15/15 at 9:40 am to mizzoukills
I'll vote Powder.
Posted on 7/15/15 at 9:42 am to mizzoukills
I loved them both but if I had to choose it would be Powder.
Posted on 7/15/15 at 9:43 am to mizzoukills
For years I had no idea that this guy was Powder:
Posted on 7/15/15 at 9:44 am to mizzoukills
Great call on the similarity.
Powder was more of a teen/adolescent story, and Phenomenon was more of an adult story - but I think Forest Whitaker and Robert Duvall supporting Travolta nudges Phenomenon to the lead.
Sean Patrick Flanery was good in the lead in Powder, but that film felt like Edward Scissorhands at the time (Flanery was 30 years old when the film was released - like Alan Ruck playing a high school at 30 in Ferris Beuller a decade earlier).
Powder was more of a teen/adolescent story, and Phenomenon was more of an adult story - but I think Forest Whitaker and Robert Duvall supporting Travolta nudges Phenomenon to the lead.
Sean Patrick Flanery was good in the lead in Powder, but that film felt like Edward Scissorhands at the time (Flanery was 30 years old when the film was released - like Alan Ruck playing a high school at 30 in Ferris Beuller a decade earlier).
Posted on 7/15/15 at 9:48 am to mizzoukills
Phenomenon
Posted on 7/15/15 at 9:57 am to Ace Midnight
Ace,
Yes, Phenomenon had a great supporting cast in Whitaker and Duval, but don't forget that Powder had an excellent supporting cast too in Mary Steenburgen, Lance Henriksen, and Jeff Goldblum
Yes, Phenomenon had a great supporting cast in Whitaker and Duval, but don't forget that Powder had an excellent supporting cast too in Mary Steenburgen, Lance Henriksen, and Jeff Goldblum
Posted on 7/15/15 at 10:04 am to mizzoukills
I was going to say Power but when I did a quick read up on it I found out the director Victor Salva is a scumbag child molester so I gotta go with the Scientologist's flick.
Posted on 7/15/15 at 10:06 am to Dr RC
so these movies are inherently evil and you're choosing the lesser evil. Gotcha.
Posted on 7/15/15 at 10:11 am to mizzoukills
if the movies are that close then yea, I'm gonna pick the one with that I'm going to feel less dirty watching.
Posted on 7/15/15 at 10:12 am to mizzoukills
quote:
excellent supporting cast too in Mary Steenburgen, Lance Henriksen, and Jeff Goldblum
No question - another similiarity between the films - but the total package of Phenomenon is more appealing to me. The leads were both competent (maybe even more so), but Whitaker delivers the best performance across the 2 films.
Posted on 7/15/15 at 10:13 am to Dr RC
quote:
if the movies are that close then yea, I'm gonna pick the one with that I'm going to feel less dirty watching.
If Powder makes you feel dirty then I think you may have closeted issues you haven't addressed yet...
This post was edited on 7/15/15 at 10:14 am
Posted on 7/15/15 at 10:16 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
No question - another similiarity between the films - but the total package of Phenomenon is more appealing to me. The leads were both competent (maybe even more so), but Whitaker delivers the best performance across the 2 films.
See, I think Lance Henriksen's performance is the best across the two films followed closely by Duvall's performance. Almost equal performances in my opinion.
Whitaker delivers a very solid performance as well.
FWIW...I'm a huge Lance Henriksen fan which is a thread for another time...
Posted on 7/15/15 at 10:20 am to mizzoukills
quote:
I'm a huge Lance Henriksen fan which is a thread for another time
He's underrated - I like his work a lot.
He's in that rare club - killed by a Terminator, a Predator and an Alien - that's just him and Bill Paxton.
Posted on 7/15/15 at 10:23 am to Ace Midnight
I like to compare similar movies a lot. Lance Henriksen and Bill Paxton are two actors who could easily be compared to each other.
Think about their earlier movies and the type of movies they filmed. Hell, they were in several movies together that are now classic films.
I'm starting the thread...
Think about their earlier movies and the type of movies they filmed. Hell, they were in several movies together that are now classic films.
I'm starting the thread...
Posted on 7/15/15 at 10:26 am to mizzoukills
quote:
Lance Henriksen and Bill Paxton are two actors who could easily be compared to each other.
And both owe a lot to Cameron - Paxton probably a little bit more - everything, really.
Posted on 7/15/15 at 10:30 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
And both owe a lot to Cameron - Paxton probably a little bit more - everything, really.
I agree...Paxton owes everything to Cameron. Henriksen, on the other hand, should thank Cameron for legitimizing his acting, but Henriksen would've been a great character actor with or without Cameron.
Actually, I think Henriksen is a bit more talented actor than Paxton. Henriksen is certainly more versatile. Make no mistake, Paxton is a very solid who is more popular than Henriksen simply because he is more more marketable to the masses.
This post was edited on 7/15/15 at 10:32 am
Posted on 7/15/15 at 10:34 am to mizzoukills
quote:
Actually, I think Henriksen is a bit more talented actor than Paxton. Henriksen is certainly more versatile. Make no mistake, Paxton is a very solid who is more popular than Henriksen simply because he is more more marketable to the masses.
Solid analysis - Paxton had more of a leading man's charm and looks, while Henriksen has more of a charactor actor's acting chops - a poor man's Ben Kingsley, for lack of a better description.
Posted on 7/15/15 at 10:45 am to mizzoukills
Power doesn't but knowing that its director was convicted of having oral sex with a 13 year old sure as shite does.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News