|
|
Post by Thorngrub on May 19, 2004 23:15:11 GMT -5
...funny how Weeping had the Eternal moniker on his old board for so long....and now that i come to think of it, i don't recall a single person every posting one thing about that movie.
maybe those memorycells got burned away or something
|
|
|
|
Post by PC on May 19, 2004 23:49:42 GMT -5
I did...I saw it, it was excellent.
~PunkChick
|
|
|
|
Post by Mary on May 20, 2004 4:18:57 GMT -5
I find the remakes of both The Stepford Wives and The Manchurian Candidate totally ridiculus. Yes, Bette Midler is cool, but even she can't justify remaking a movie which was so bloody perfect in its own time and place and that simply doesn't need any kind of updating. In fact, both movies did such an amazing job of capturing the zeitgeist of their respective social contexts - remaking The Manchurian Candidate against the backdrop of the first Gulf War instead of Korea just doesn't fuckin work. Remaking the Stepford Wives in the era of so-called 'post-feminism' - more than 30 years after womens' lib - also doesn't fuckin work. They're both terrible ideas.
Also intriguing and alarming for similar reasons is the fact that the long-talked-about prequel to The Exorcist (called Exorcist: The Beginning) is coming out soon. There has been talk of this movie for decades, insofar as the first Exorcist references the older priest's experiences with an exorcism many years before, in ... Africa I think it was? In any case this prequel is supposed to examine this earlier exorcism. And there's been a ton of controversy and hype surrounding it, insofar as the original director was Paul Schrader (very famous guy, and quite a good choice - he is most famous for writing the script for Taxi Driver and working closely with Martin Scorsese on a number of other projects, but also has a hardcore catholic background and invests many of his films with catholic themes) but the studio, upon seeing his work, hired Renny Harlin (who did Cliffhanger, The Long Kiss Goodnight, and Deep Blue Sea) to direct it instead - a more mainstream action-movie big Hollywood type, because they thought that Schrader's version was too moody, contemplative, arty, and psychological, and they wanted something that has greater mass-audience appeal and more explicit shocks and thrills, not something that seemed like a deep meditation on Catholic theology.
Personally the thought of Schrader directing a moody ultra-theological prequel to the Exorcist sounds pretty fuckin interesting to me, whereas I expect the Renny Harlin version to be irredeemable action movie crap. But either way, the whole idea of making a prequel to the Exorcist now seems pretty sketchy. Someone needs to get a new fuckin idea for a truly great horror movie.
Cheers,
M
|
|
|
|
Post by rockkid on May 20, 2004 7:46:36 GMT -5
110% in agreement Mary. The Exorcist is another sacred (IMO) piece of filmdom that needs not be tampered with.
Just remembering how horridly bad the last so called installment of it was is shudder worthy never mind a prequel.
Some one needs to exorcise Hollywood at times !
Sorry but I’m not intrigued.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ampage on May 20, 2004 8:06:51 GMT -5
Oh, I am somewhat excited about The Stepford Wives remake. From what I have seen, its going to be dark and funny, which I love. Add Nicole, Glenn, and even the always over the top Bette, and you may just have a great two hours of weirdness.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ampage on May 20, 2004 9:04:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on May 20, 2004 9:30:51 GMT -5
[glow=pink,1,200]I did...I saw it, it was excellent. [/glow]~PunkChick Yes it was. I am so glad I saw it alone. That was one movie I would not want to see with anyone else, not particularly. Very private, very personal . . . and very meaningful. One of the weirdest movies I've ever seen (which is saying something, cuz usually I"m 'exempt' from being affected by 'weirdness', if you know what I mean). Renny Harlin to direct the Exorcist prequel, huh? Well shiver me timbers. Big surprise. Although I'm interested in seeing that movie on principle, I am really, really getting sick of the Hollywood Machine churning out predisposed action-pieces candycoated for us 'masses' to swallow.  |
|
|
|
Post by Weeping_Guitar on May 20, 2004 20:56:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on May 21, 2004 10:00:04 GMT -5
mornin' weepin  |
|
|
|
Post by Weeping_Guitar on May 21, 2004 10:34:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on May 21, 2004 14:15:04 GMT -5
*damn* You beat me to it, weeping (as I suspected you would)  |
|
|
|
Post by PC on May 22, 2004 11:51:32 GMT -5
I finally saw Troy last night...
It was entertaining. Kind of cheesy, but I think that was the whole point. And Brian Cox was really over-the-top as Agamemnon. Eric Bana and the legendary Peter O'Toole were probably the best actors of the bunch. Orlando Bloom is becoming the Keanu Reeves of epics; he can't really act, but at least he's not too hard on the eyes. Some of the dialogue was corny, but I knew that was coming.
I'm not a huge fan of historical epics, but if you're like me and don't mind staring at beautiful men in skirts for two and half hours, I think you'll enjoy it.
~PunkChick
|
|
|
|
Post by Weeping_Guitar on May 22, 2004 23:44:08 GMT -5
The Godfather What can I say that hasn't been said? It's a spectacular movie, probably a perfect 10 on a second viewing (I don't like handing out 10s all that often). Brando, Pacino, Duvall are just spectacular. The sense of family and familiarity is unbeaten. This is a family tale and Brando's growing sense of the tragedy that has/will befall them is my favorite aspect of the film. He knows that no matter how well he did his family is doomed to repeat his trail. The film did seem maybe a bit long, but I can't think of what I'd like to see cut out. The Godfather Part II [8/10] Putting together thoughts in a self created intermission at the conclusion of DVD disc 1 I was thoroughly mixed about this sequel that many say is even superior to the great Godfather. Why is that? Simply because I felt it was much too often forgetting the best story of the series: the family. Much of the time spent in the first part of this film is simply about business and business relationships that it seems to lose all ties back to the people who make this story worth telling. In fact, the Cuba sequences almost made me want to shut it off for good. What kept me going? Well, I loved the flashback work on Vito's rise to glory and what factors contributed to it. DeNiro's fabulously unplayed role expertly filled in for the now absent Brando, whose portrayal of Corleone in the first film is legendary. Ah, but the second half I found quite fulfilling. As the forseen sins of the father visit upon the son we can only turn our heads as Michael seems to destroy every relationship he once held dear and the ending flashback cements those feelings perfectly. A saving grace for a film that I had absolutely wondered why it was so heavily regarded. I have no doubt the first film will rise in regard on repeated viewings, I pray this film's (at times) convultedness will sail a bit smoother the second time around as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on May 23, 2004 9:42:53 GMT -5
Farenheit 9/11 won the PALME D'OR
at the Cannes Film Festival ...Ü...
Must be a Communist ploy ...!Ö!...
|
|
|
|
Post by kats on May 23, 2004 9:47:07 GMT -5
Love his politics or hate them..you have to admit he makes a damn good documentary.
I know at least SOMEONE is going to disagree with that, and call him a rambling moron..or this isn't the rollingstone I know.
Should be seeing the Day After Tomorrow, tonight. Will tell you what I think...if you can't already guess what I'm going to think.
|
|
