For me, The Adventures of Robin Hood starring Errol Flynn is my go-to Robin Hood movie.
[Movies] Talk about the last movie you saw 2: Electric Threadaloo
- Thread starter Dave
- Start date
Here's the story: http://sex-in-a-sub.blogspot.com/2010/05/robbing-from-poor-writer.html
What's really sad is because that script has already been produced (even though it became unrecognizable), we'll probably never see the original story made into a movie.
Yeah, I read that. But watching it, it wasn't what could have been that bothered me. It was just how mediocre and sloppy and nonsensical what they actually did was.
GasBandit
Staff member
You might want to start locking your RV...
Crimson Peak
It tried really hard to be creepy and scary. It wasn't, which left me disappointed. I didn't feel like there was much character development either.
Honestly it almost felt like it should have been an Anne Rice novel, but without fangs.
Tom Hiddleston was pretty to look at though.
It tried really hard to be creepy and scary. It wasn't, which left me disappointed. I didn't feel like there was much character development either.
The incestuous relationship between Thomas and Lucille was very obvious.
Tom Hiddleston was pretty to look at though.
It didn't try at all. I wish this hadn't been advertised as a horror movie, but then maybe it would've done even worse at the box office. But the ghosts were never supposed to be scary, which is why they're all in your face and screaming and blood everywhere.
The only thing in it that was supposed to be scary was
Jessica Chastain
and in that YMMV.
This is more Crimson Peak's wheelhouse. It was just mis-advertised.
They were supposed to be a METAPHOR, why won't people get that? They said it a million times in the flick!
Are you sure they weren't similes?
"It's not a ghost story. It's a story that happens to have ghosts in it."
That's said very early in the film and pretty much spells out how the film is meant to be viewed. I'm with @Zero Esc, though. It was advertised the wrong way.
Ah, I miss that running joke. Good times.SIMILES?!
I just missed Barry in general. Only ONE ep with him last season.
Yes, but it's okay. Arachnophobia is a much worse came of mis-advertising, almost to an insidious degree.
I realized that while I was watching. It was part of my disappointment, too, because I had kind of hoped it was going to be (I don't know what it is actually called so bear with me) a kind of reverse psychology foreshadowing. "It's not a ghost story....HOT BUTTERED JIBBERS THEY'RE GOING TO EAT MY SOUL IF I BAT AN EYELASH!" Meh.
Going to see part 2 of Mockingjay with my son in an hour. He doesn't do well with emotional scenes in movies, and we always have to sit at the end of the row because he will bolt out of the theater until they are over, so I think this is going to be interesting. (He wants to see it because he's read the books and seen all the other movies.)
@blotsfan
They really fuck up the emotional response in this movie IMO. They rush from one thing to another so fast that I didn't even feel sad. TO BE FAIR, I knew what was coming, but I cried a lot when I read the book, and a well done movie will always spawn tears even if I've watched it over and over.
And no, Prim gets blown up, and Katniss gets hit by it too, and then it cuts to the next scene with her in a bed.
And no, Prim gets blown up, and Katniss gets hit by it too, and then it cuts to the next scene with her in a bed.
In regards to Mockingjay Part 2.
Does the movie have the scene where Katniss just straight up murders that poor woman in the Capital just for spotting them? That's literally the moment I lost ALL sympathy for Katniss and actively hoped she wouldn't make it to the end of the story.
I feel like Katniss took on a lot of Peeta's personality in this movie, and actually felt remorse about everyone that died, rebel or loyalist. I don't recall her shooting any civilians at all. You really don't see Katniss going mad at all, and Peeta's whole storyline feels more like a footnote than anything. They don't even have his cake at the wedding.
I liked that part of the book, and honestly felt it was about the only realistic portrayal of her character in the entire series.
Katniss is dead. It may not be clear when she died, but she's no longer a living, loving human being - she's been utterly destroyed and is little more than an empty shell, a symbol or puppet with barely any will and definitely no hope. Honestly little else of her story and decisions makes much sense, but this is one area where the book showed the devastation she's experienced and how it's affected her.
In fairness, though, I read the book long ago, and don't recall very much. But I do recall thinking that this portrayal was one of the more honest and self-consistent in the books.
okay so, I'm scared to ask, but we're done with the Hunger Games nonsense right? Jennifer Lawrence is set free to do maybe a couple action movies that aren't complete shit garbage? awesome.
The Hunger Games is over, but the knock-offs still have their third books to be split into third and fourth movies forthcoming.
From what I have read (such as i09's spoiler free review as well as earlier interviews with the creators), they had a giant bloated mess and the directorial shift basically gutted it down to a very simple story that generally works in its favor but that may be a little too thin for the payoff. It sounds critical, but only in contrast to the Pixar greats, especially one that came out earlier this year.
It's like the main core story is a very familiar plot with a main character who I feel is a bit too defined by the fact that he is constantly afraid, yet the film's also tempered by this weird dinosaur Western flavor. Oh, and all the settings and water physics look stunning.