or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Warriors

post #1 of 69
Thread Starter 
It's a shame about the new version, and that that's the only thing on Blu-Ray (still have the DVD), but still a perfect movie in the original cut. It also does something that I think is always a good story starting point. That being the story of heroism that would never be exposed if it weren't for the story being told. Also excellent is making suicidal decisions for the betterment of man (see also: Ghostbusters). But The Warriors bathroom fight is still a marvel of construction and betters any action sequence I've seen this year so far.
post #2 of 69
The first time I watched it, as a sophmore in high school, I went into it thinking it'd be nothing more than some cheesy campy fun. Slowly I began to realise I was watching a great film, but it wasn't until that scene with the high school prom kids gettng on the subway (still one of my all time favorite film moments ever) that I realised I was watching a masterpiece. So much I love about this movie.

Oh, and it is totally about high school. I don't care what anyone says, it's an allegory for high school.
post #3 of 69
Such a great film. Are the additions in the new version just the Greek army stuff at the beginning and the comic book panel bits? The panels I can cope with but didn't care for the new opening at all.

I still maintain that the Baseball Furies are the best gang, even though they're useless. Look at their outfit! The effort they must go to each night, plus they get to wield baseball bats. If only they had a strong leader they coulda been a major force.
post #4 of 69
The lingo stuck with me the most!

"We're gonna get JAPPED!"

or "I don't wanna get WRECKED!"

did people really talk like that in the 70s?
post #5 of 69
Thread Starter 
The panels are intrusive at this late stage.
post #6 of 69
Glad I picked up the first dvd release that had the original cut. Never have had the need to pick up the "director's cut".

So much greatness that goes on in the movie. The fantastic synth score, the two main setpieces are still high water marks for fight choreography. There hasn't been a gang fight like the battle between the Baseball Furies in the park, and then that gets one upped by the even better big fight in the small bathroom.
post #7 of 69
Come back Walter Hill.
post #8 of 69
A lot of my friends who claim to love movies don't know who Walter Hill is. That is a crime. Possibly a felony.
post #9 of 69
The moment where Cochise breaks a chair over a hooker's head in loving slo-mo is one of the greatest self-conscious misogynist moments in film history. Just beautiful. Rivalled only perhaps by Sean Connery ripping off a woman's bikini top and strangling her with it in DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER.

My memory's probably a little hazy, so it might be better than I think, but I remember being put to zzzzz by the "romance" between the lead Warrior and the "spirited girl of his dreams". Did anyone ask for that in a movie like this?
post #10 of 69
You don't ask for a car chase in a chick flick, why would you want a romance in an action flick?
post #11 of 69
The romance doesn't work, but it's worth it for the defining moment of the film: Swan and Mercy getting stared down by the prom couple on the train.
post #12 of 69
I can dig THE WARRIORS. But may be the only geek alive who prefers THE WANDERERS. (Philip Kaufman directed the shit outta that underrated flick)
post #13 of 69
Fuck the Baseball Furies??

THEM'S FIGHTIN WORDS

Well I say fightin words but the Furies sure as hell can't defend themselves.
post #14 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Dellamorte View Post
The panels are intrusive at this late stage.
Yeah, when I heard about this being a part of the Special Edition I had a feeling it would hurt the film, I've continued to avoid it despite some curiosity. I'm fine with the original DVD.

"the school bus gang is by far the most badass of them all. Just like 200 guys all crammed into a school bus like sardines in a can, driving around with 2x4s all night looking for trouble".

The Turnball A.C.'s. I remember when I first saw The Warriors oh so many years ago, and being disappointed that we never got to see them fight, but no matter how awesome The Warriors are, that would have been a massacre, not a battle.

By the by, Ajax may have been a boorish prick and sexual predator, but man, what a badass.
post #15 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul McCartney View Post
The moment where Cochise breaks a chair over a hooker's head in loving slo-mo is one of the greatest self-conscious misogynist moments in film history. Just beautiful. Rivalled only perhaps by Sean Connery ripping off a woman's bikini top and strangling her with it in DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER.

My memory's probably a little hazy, so it might be better than I think, but I remember being put to zzzzz by the "romance" between the lead Warrior and the "spirited girl of his dreams". Did anyone ask for that in a movie like this?
Always have loved the look on Cochise's face when he see the knife come out while he's making out with the hooker. "The chicks are packed!"
post #16 of 69
This movie is one last glimpse at the "selling-nun-chucks-and-ninja-stars-at-times-square" 70's NYC that was replaced in the ensuing decades with the squeaky clean aesthetic. NYC was actually gritty at this time and this movie shows it. That said the videogame did not come out as bad as I thought it would be. It surprised me. I actually never noticed that this has a young James Remarr in it. Ajax, Cochise, Swan, etc. all look like guys I could hang with.
post #17 of 69
They weren't hookers, were they? They were a girl gang, I thought...
post #18 of 69
Yeah, they're The Lizzies.
post #19 of 69
Thread Starter 
I prefer THE DRIVER, no doubt. And THE WANDERERS kicks all kind of ass, but it's all different.
post #20 of 69
I probably shouldn't link them. But they're both gang-centric with a slight hallucinatory atmosphere. Obviously THE WARRIORS is more stylized & comic book. (It's all about STREETS OF FIRE anyway)
THE WARRIORS has such an eclectic group of character actors who all seemingly give note perfect performances. (James Remarr becomes legend)
Props to Walter Hill for making Joe Walsh almost cool. I hate The Eagles but when the opening strains of "In The City" kick in, I never walk away from the credits.
post #21 of 69
There's a great little tribute to The Warriors in City of Violence, in case people missed that flick.
post #22 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Man Mundt View Post
Come back Walter Hill.
He has.

See BROKEN TRAIL (my favorite from '06).
post #23 of 69
This movie's practically a rite of passage for native New Yorkers... and it's incredibly fun to track their passage through the city.

I think my first experience to the film was actually through Monstervision- http://www.angelfire.com/mn/nn/Warriors.html

Quote:
See, they shoulda carried one of these subway maps, instead of just jumpin on trains. But it's probly a gang rule or something. If you're in the gang, you wouldn't be allowed to have a subway map stickin out of your back pocket like a German tourist.

Wouldn't be cool. You wouldn't get any chicks.
Man, do I miss Joe Bob Briggs.
post #24 of 69
I need to see this movie but can only find the director's cut. Does Netflix have the original cut? I can't find any notation to indicate one way or the other.
post #25 of 69
Netflix only lists the original cut.
post #26 of 69
That's what I assumed but I didn't want to get the director's by mistake based on word of mouth. I'll give it a shot.
post #27 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans Gruber's EYE CONDITION! View Post
The lingo stuck with me the most!

"We're gonna get JAPPED!"

or "I don't wanna get WRECKED!"

did people really talk like that in the 70s?
People still talk like that.
post #28 of 69
Right, but you're talking about Gruber's Eye Condition here. Judging from his posts, I'd be genuinely curious as to the last time he's seen another living, breathing human being.
post #29 of 69
Good point there Jake.

As for this film, I'd certainly place it with The Taking of Pelham One Two Three as part of the decayed NYC of the 70s. I've never seen the director's cut but from what I figure. It really detracts.

Not to mention I was kind of surprised how short the movie is or feels for that matter.

"CAN YOU DIG IT?!!!!!!!!!!!"
post #30 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll View Post
They weren't hookers, were they? They were a girl gang, I thought...
They were a gang, they were also lesbians, a gang of lesbians.
post #31 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll View Post
The first time I watched it, as a sophmore in high school, I went into it thinking it'd be nothing more than some cheesy campy fun. Slowly I began to realise I was watching a great film, but it wasn't until that scene with the high school prom kids gettng on the subway (still one of my all time favorite film moments ever) that I realised I was watching a masterpiece. So much I love about this movie.

Oh, and it is totally about high school. I don't care what anyone says, it's an allegory for high school.
Because of this discussion revisited tonight.

I don't think the movie takes place at a specific time. And any allegory is brought by the audience. However, considering this was ten years after the pivotal '68, I think a loose analogy with the Warriors' plight & the end of the 60's kind of works.

(Cyrus MLK/X/Kennedy; the meeting the Chicago convention; the gangs the New Left; The Warriors keepers of the Dream/ idealists; Luther=J. Edgar Hoover or Lee Harvey Oswald; The leader of the Riffs Nixon?)

Awww hell, I think I've had too much to drink.

What a great movie!
post #32 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russell Faraday View Post
Fuck the Baseball Furies??

THEM'S FIGHTIN WORDS

Well I say fightin words but the Furies sure as hell can't defend themselves.
I think when all is said and done the Orphans gave the Warriors as stern a test as the Furies did.


But "Baseball Fury" is a way more fuckin' awesome Halloween costume.
post #33 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Clark View Post
The romance doesn't work, but it's worth it for the defining moment of the film: Swan and Mercy getting stared down by the prom couple on the train.
Well, part of that may be that initially Mercy and the Fox were supposed to be the couple that hooked up, but Walter Hill wasn't getting along with (forget the name of the actor who played him), so he literally decided to throw the character under a train and get the guy off set.

So Swan became the default "romantic lead" but I agree that there isn't that awful much chemistry going on there. Maybe if the romance angle had worked a little better, it wouldn't be such a drag on the film.
post #34 of 69
Oh, and best perf in the movie?

Lynn Thigpen's lips, of course...."you're lookin' good back to Coney, Warriors. Real good."
post #35 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Thain View Post
This movie is one last glimpse at the "selling-nun-chucks-and-ninja-stars-at-times-square" 70's NYC that was replaced in the ensuing decades with the squeaky clean aesthetic. NYC was actually gritty at this time and this movie shows it. That said the videogame did not come out as bad as I thought it would be. It surprised me. I actually never noticed that this has a young James Remarr in it. Ajax, Cochise, Swan, etc. all look like guys I could hang with.

I took an American Studies class this past Fall and our last assignment was to give a presentation focusing on portrayals of the "American City", using literature, film, music and other art forms.

Anyway, one of the presenters used crime and economic statistics and "The Warriors" to demonstrate the decay of New York City in the 70s. Its always going to be a pretty good class when you get to watch a couple of 5 minute clips demonstrating the intellectual value of a subway bathroom fight.


* My presentation focused on the differing viewpoints of Cleveland and NYC in the 70s even though they were basically in the same level of disrepair and distress. I compared the depictions of the cities in "The Royal Tennenbaums" and "American Splendor."
post #36 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by TURBO-1984 View Post
* My presentation focused on the differing viewpoints of Cleveland and NYC in the 70s even though they were basically in the same level of disrepair and distress. I compared the depictions of the cities in "The Royal Tennenbaums" and "American Splendor."
Not to go too far off topic, but I always considered the Royal Tenenbaums to take place in sort of a timeless, fictional New York, not the New York of the 70s. Were you being sort of figurative in using it?
post #37 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Elvis View Post
Props to Walter Hill for making Joe Walsh almost cool. I hate The Eagles but when the opening strains of "In The City" kick in, I never walk away from the credits.
Joe Walsh is a god. Walter Hill had nothing to do with it.

Glenn Frey on the other hand never was and never will be cool. All those Eagle songs most people hate? Frey tunes.

The Warriors is one of those rare movies that actually gets better the older you get and the more you understand film and film technique.
post #38 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chavez View Post
Well, part of that may be that initially Mercy and the Fox were supposed to be the couple that hooked up, but Walter Hill wasn't getting along with (forget the name of the actor who played him), so he literally decided to throw the character under a train and get the guy off set.

So Swan became the default "romantic lead" but I agree that there isn't that awful much chemistry going on there. Maybe if the romance angle had worked a little better, it wouldn't be such a drag on the film.
That's a great tidbit! (Never heard before). I so want a Walter Hill biography! I'm sure the Nick Nolte stories alone would make it a must read.
post #39 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveB View Post
Not to go too far off topic, but I always considered the Royal Tenenbaums to take place in sort of a timeless, fictional New York, not the New York of the 70s. Were you being sort of figurative in using it?
I agree with you but I kind of narrowed it down to the era that I felt it MOSTLY represented, so I went with the 70s. Plus, it worked for my argument if I did that.

Ah, college.
post #40 of 69
Secret shame - I only just saw this film this week. In a way I'm glad - had I seen it at age 12, maybe I'd be all caught up in the merchandising and fan filmmaking. But I wished I'd watched it a few months ago, as I recently witnessed Cochise and Vermin get into a shouting match at a horror con about what they should charge for photographs, and that would have been more fun had I any idea who they were at the time.

Anyway, really fun film. I love stories that take place all in one night, and Hill could show Carpenter a thing or two about swiping Western tropes.

I'd heard so many kids in school do the "come out to play-ay" line, but David Patrick Kelly was really coming from another planet with that shit. Actually scary. He looks like he's full of drugs.

Did the weird, not-quite-realistic vibe of this film carry over into Streets of Fire? And did you know you can make Ajax gay in the video game?
post #41 of 69
I would say the connection with Streets of Fire is the fact that it and The Warriors are essentially westerns. But I'd rather belive The Warriors is in its late NYC 70s setting than the strange 1950s world Streets is in.
post #42 of 69
Yes but streets of fire wasn't very good.
post #43 of 69
I do agree with that statement. Sreets was ambitious but I didn't really care for it.
post #44 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waaaaaaaalt View Post
Yes but streets of fire wasn't very good.
Nice analysis.

I know it's an acquired taste--but , come on, you gotta bring more than that.
post #45 of 69
BTW anyone think the leader of the Orphans had a David Schimmer thing going on?
post #46 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdHocken View Post
BTW anyone think the leader of the Orphans had a David Schimmer thing going on?
Yeah, kind of uncanny. Always assumed it was his older brother or something. (Guess not)
post #47 of 69
Well Fat Elvis I was actually looking forward to seeing Streets of Fire since I was such a huge fan of The Warriors. It's a relatively short film however it still feels like it drags too much and theres little action. Also I know this movie isn't exactly based in reality and neither is The Warriors. However I can only suspend my disbelief so far. If 2 people go into a night club full of people that are trying to kill you, you might have to shoot someone. If you shoot someones motorcycle and it explodes they die. Thery don't get blown off the motorcycle and land safely.
post #48 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil View Post
.

I'd heard so many kids in school do the "come out to play-ay" line, but David Patrick Kelly was really coming from another planet with that shit. Actually scary. He looks like he's full of drugs.
David Patrick Kelly's most frightening film role had to be Harry S Truman in Flags of Our Fathers. Look - goosebumps!
post #49 of 69
Such a cool movie. And Patrick, I tend to agree that this is an allegory for high school.
post #50 of 69
I only own the director's cut, so I watched the original cut again a few days ago after recording it from TCM.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Films in Release or On Video