Artemis wrote:The Shining is great!
That's a good example of a book that wasn't a disappointment as a movie.
I agree, it's a "hella neat" Kubrick flick about ESP, ghosts, and demonic possession, though Stephan King called it "an interesting failure." It may have failed his vision of the book, fine, but the only goal of a film isn't pleasing the writer. Kubrick's vision was brilliant.
I didn't know that Stephen King was unhappy with the movie.
I wanted to find out more about that and found this very good article..
Stephen King, disappointed in the changes Kubrick had made in adapting his novel, wrote:
There's a lot to like about it. But it's a great big beautiful Cadillac with no motor inside. You can sit in it, and you can enjoy the smell of the leather upholstery - the only thing you can't do is drive it anywhere. So I would do everything different. The real problem is that Kubrick set out to make a horror picture with no apparent understanding of the genre. (5)
Artemis wrote:The Shining is great!
That's a good example of a book that wasn't a disappointment as a movie.
I agree, it's a "hella neat" Kubrick flick about ESP, ghosts, and demonic possession, though Stephan King called it "an interesting failure." It may have failed his vision of the book, fine, but the only goal of a film isn't pleasing the writer. Kubrick's vision was brilliant.
I didn't know that Stephen King was unhappy with the movie.
I wanted to find out more about that and found this very good article..
Stephen King, disappointed in the changes Kubrick had made in adapting his novel, wrote:
There's a lot to like about it. But it's a great big beautiful Cadillac with no motor inside. You can sit in it, and you can enjoy the smell of the leather upholstery - the only thing you can't do is drive it anywhere. So I would do everything different. The real problem is that Kubrick set out to make a horror picture with no apparent understanding of the genre. (5)
Someone's talking out of their ass. Kubrick's The Shining is EASILY the best Stephen King adaptation and one of the greatest horror films ever made. I've never understood King's position on this.
Jasper wrote:
I watched this show, creep, just for you, and I'm not sure it's something I could get into. I didn't like the story or any of the characters, and HBO stole one chick from Mad Men, so now if I watch this on Sundays I'd be watching two shows with this chick, one where she's a bohemian intellectual dyke in NYC in the 60s, and another where she's an idiot bimbo in modern-day NYC, and on a massively inferior show. Don't think I can do it.
thanks for trying.
i am going to give another hbo show a shot tonight. it looks pretty promising.
i might be done with "girls". it just didn't do it for me tonight. veep started out slow but grew on me. it was pretty good. i will probably hate it next week. they are starting to show previews for true blood. i get a bad feeling when i see them because i know i'm going to watch it but i really don't like the show anymore. i'm bummed out that i have to watch it.
Yes, True Blood truly blows, and I fear the same thing - watching it in spite of its poor quality. The first season was fairly enjoyable, but the enjoyment has been pretty sporadic since then. At times, it is truly shameful. Nevertheless, Russell should be reappearing, so it might take a turn for the better. Sadly, even with a good character like that, the writers still appear to be grasping at straws. It's like the plots are being spontaneously cobbled together by a group of six year olds only days before filming.
I watched Girls, and there was one bright spot - the job interview gone wrong. That was actually fairly funny.
creep wrote:
i get a bad feeling when i see them because i know i'm going to watch it but i really don't like the show anymore. i'm bummed out that i have to watch it.
I watched Cabin in the Woods today online, and even though theres no masterful story telling with this movie, I enjoyed it as a whole...
I liked the self-awareness throughout the movie, but there isn't too much tension or suspense built up so you're basically just along for the ride.
I heard that since it was the same writer, this film shared some similar elements with Buffy the vampire slayer and angel, so it probably helped that i've never watched either of those two shows.
Theres some things I wish they handled a little differently, but i'd be giving away some spoilers...
I saw "The Avengers" this week with my son - skipped the 3D and went for good ol' 2D which in this case was probably the right move.
IMO, this flick is pretty over-rated, considering the hype and money it's already taken in. It's not a bad movie by any stretch and in fact, it *is* one of the better superhero movies. But it's no Batman/Dark Knight and I actually think the first two X-Men movies compare pretty strongly to it. The big draw is the obvious novelty of not only getting all the core Marvel superheroes shoehorned into one movie, but the fact that aside from The Hulk (actually "Bruce Banner"), all the key actors from the Iron Man, Thor and Captain America franchises are in their respective roles as well which is a tremendous plus as smart casting has been one of the best points of these movies. However, the movie takes a big turn towards pure crash-boom nirvana when The Hulk finally appears in the last 3rd of the flick (he speaks just one short line near the end) first to take on Thor and later the bad guys. There's two quick bits involving The Hulk that look like they came straight out of a Loony Tunes cartoon, one involving Thor and one involving Loki that were funny as hell.
Pandemonium wrote:I saw "The Avengers" this week with my son - skipped the 3D and went for good ol' 2D which in this case was probably the right move.
IMO, this flick is pretty over-rated, considering the hype and money it's already taken in. It's not a bad movie by any stretch and in fact, it *is* one of the better superhero movies. But it's no Batman/Dark Knight and I actually think the first two X-Men movies compare pretty strongly to it. The big draw is the obvious novelty of not only getting all the core Marvel superheroes shoehorned into one movie, but the fact that aside from The Hulk (actually "Bruce Banner"), all the key actors from the Iron Man, Thor and Captain America franchises are in their respective roles as well which is a tremendous plus as smart casting has been one of the best points of these movies. However, the movie takes a big turn towards pure crash-boom nirvana when The Hulk finally appears in the last 3rd of the flick (he speaks just one short line near the end) first to take on Thor and later the bad guys. There's two quick bits involving The Hulk that look like they came straight out of a Loony Tunes cartoon, one involving Thor and one involving Loki that were funny as hell.
Pandemonium wrote:I saw "The Avengers" this week with my son - skipped the 3D and went for good ol' 2D which in this case was probably the right move.
IMO, this flick is pretty over-rated, considering the hype and money it's already taken in. It's not a bad movie by any stretch and in fact, it *is* one of the better superhero movies. But it's no Batman/Dark Knight and I actually think the first two X-Men movies compare pretty strongly to it. The big draw is the obvious novelty of not only getting all the core Marvel superheroes shoehorned into one movie, but the fact that aside from The Hulk (actually "Bruce Banner"), all the key actors from the Iron Man, Thor and Captain America franchises are in their respective roles as well which is a tremendous plus as smart casting has been one of the best points of these movies. However, the movie takes a big turn towards pure crash-boom nirvana when The Hulk finally appears in the last 3rd of the flick (he speaks just one short line near the end) first to take on Thor and later the bad guys. There's two quick bits involving The Hulk that look like they came straight out of a Loony Tunes cartoon, one involving Thor and one involving Loki that were funny as hell.
Recommended, but don't rush to see it.
With the exception of your Batman/Dark Knight comment (I'm not a fan), I agree with your review, 100%.
Pandemonium wrote:I saw "The Avengers" this week with my son - skipped the 3D and went for good ol' 2D which in this case was probably the right move.
IMO, this flick is pretty over-rated, considering the hype and money it's already taken in. It's not a bad movie by any stretch and in fact, it *is* one of the better superhero movies. But it's no Batman/Dark Knight and I actually think the first two X-Men movies compare pretty strongly to it. The big draw is the obvious novelty of not only getting all the core Marvel superheroes shoehorned into one movie, but the fact that aside from The Hulk (actually "Bruce Banner"), all the key actors from the Iron Man, Thor and Captain America franchises are in their respective roles as well which is a tremendous plus as smart casting has been one of the best points of these movies. However, the movie takes a big turn towards pure crash-boom nirvana when The Hulk finally appears in the last 3rd of the flick (he speaks just one short line near the end) first to take on Thor and later the bad guys. There's two quick bits involving The Hulk that look like they came straight out of a Loony Tunes cartoon, one involving Thor and one involving Loki that were funny as hell.
Recommended, but don't rush to see it.
I asked around if it was worth seeing it in 3D and it was! I saw Thor in 3D but I was very disappointed. I think I'm glad I'm not big into comics, because I enjoyed this a lot. I only have to say that Captain America was meh for me.
perkana wrote:
I only have to say that Captain America was meh for me.
I remember, when you were down
And you needed a helping hand
I came to feed you
But now that I need you
You won't give me a second glance
Now I'm calling all citizens from all over the world
This is Captain America calling
I bailed you out when you were down on your knees
So will you catch me now I'm falling
I want to see Casa de mi padre this weekend...I've only read negative reviews and I know it bombed in the US, but I'm going with the mind that a)it's a satire b)I love any movie with Will Ferrell c)Him talking in Spanish is an extra d)I haven't seen any Diego + Gael movie that I didn't like so far
perkana wrote:I want to see Casa de mi padre this weekend...I've only read negative reviews and I know it bombed in the US, but I'm going with the mind that a)it's a satire b)I love any movie with Will Ferrell c)Him talking in Spanish is an extra d)I haven't seen any Diego + Gael movie that I didn't like so far
fun fact: when I was in todos santos, there was a dude in one of the shops who kept telling me I loked like Diego Luna, he was grabbing his friends and taking pictures and stuff, he even made me sign some "diego luna" autographs for him.
i was pretty scruffy at the time, but I still don't see it.
perkana wrote:I want to see Casa de mi padre this weekend...I've only read negative reviews and I know it bombed in the US, but I'm going with the mind that a)it's a satire b)I love any movie with Will Ferrell c)Him talking in Spanish is an extra d)I haven't seen any Diego + Gael movie that I didn't like so far
My review: I really enjoyed it, especially because it was the last movie of one of the best Mexican actors (Pedro Armendáriz Jr.). My favorite line:
Pedro : "Tienes los ojos de tu mamá"
Will : "Sí, chiquitos como de pollito"
Now I know why it bombed over there, too many references about Mexican soap operas.
thanks for trying.
I've forgotten last season's finale, but since it is not based on the books, I have no idea wtf to expect for season 4...
