Search results

I hope Michael Elliott's reading this, because he and I have often talked about people being "right" or "wrong" when evaluating a film. Mike has always felt a person is "wrong" if he doesn't see it the way the majority gets it, and I've often told him I disagree. BUT... One thing we do agree...

I guess because, as lovers of Peter Jackson and this over-inflated dud of a headache will claim, "every frame is a loving tribute to the original"! :rolleyes

Ditto, Steve! And God Bless You! :emoji_thumbsup:

I certainly support the idea of re-watching films you already know and love, but in my experience you can't always "know" in advance whether or not you'll likely never want to see a new film again. Michael Elliot and I recommended five films each to one another in 2005 (we're doing one per...

Well, yeah. But why do you own some movies?

True - but then it doesn't really make much sense to own DVDs, does it? :)

Alas, Mike, no. Today was: go to work, come home, spend a few minutes online, shower, go out for New Year's Eve.

It was a very disappointing total for me this year, personally. I always like to see at least 300 films per year, but this time I ended up at 249. Last year I managed 316. Looks like I've got to try harder in '06! :) But I discovered a lot of great films for the first time, and that was a plus...

Thank you, Henry! Happy New Year to you as well! And I incerely hope to read many, many comments from you in the 2006 discussing the films you've watched! :)

Why would a person even bother joining the thread and then only contribute one post of comment all year?

Paths of Glory (1957) :star: :star: :star: :star: A riveting film from Stanley Kubrick regarding the insanity of war, well directed and emotionally charged. Powerful sequences include the battle scene and the fate of the three prisoners. I especially got a kick out of George Mcready as the...

Huh? The use of Christ in the 1959 version is very subtle and reserved. There is a great deal of nuance in it. I'm going to have fun with this discussion later, but I have to leave for work at the moment...

:D -- And those nonstop CGI sequences require NO attention span! ;)

KING KONG (2005) :star: :star: Just okay, nothing more - and a lot less. Way too long because it FEELS to long, not because of the running time itself. Jack Black wasn't as bad as I feared because he suits the persona of an unscrupulous Carl Denham; trouble is, I don't like Denham rendered...

Anyway, this "twist" (if you like) is something you either "get" or you don't. To have ended the film any other predictable way would severely weaken it, IMO. But we've pretty much exhausted this I'm sure you'd agree... :)

Well, the father in the film didn't mind now, did he? ;) Me personally? I wouldn't ever go the route of John Cassavettes' character in the first place. But this film is not about what you or I would do under such circumstances ... it's about THESE people. Everyone's different and reacts to...

I've always thought this film was as close to perfect as a film can be, and the ending is very appropriate IMO.

It's a great relief to have the old format back! :) However, we seem to be missing many posts and I hope they can be restored... I tried to update my list from memory!

Why? I don't see the connection.

I find no problem with the pacing of KING KONG, and think the first scenes in the film are all important and lead up to a satisfying payoff by the time we get to the island.

Mighty Joe Young (1949) :star: :star: :star: The cute takeoff on the KING KONG formula, with Joe as a lovable oversized pet gorilla. Great stop-motion effects sequences, humor, and plenty of action (the climax at the orphanage is great; much better than the ferris wheel one in the remake!).

Psycho (1960) :star: :star: :star: :star: Alfred Hitchcock's masterpiece is still admirable for its groundbreaking style, and deserves to be praised. There is nothing I can say about it that hasn't already been stated a million times, except that while it retains the cinematic artistry of...

King Kong (1933) :star: :star: :star: :star: It's been 7 years since I last saw this classic, and boy does it still hold up, even 72 years later! It's a magnificent film that still impresses with its special effects, especially when considering the time it was made. Non-stop action, brisk...

The Haunting (1963) :star: :star: I finally got around to seeing this one and it was every bit as underwhelming as I thought it would be, unfortunately. I really enjoyed the opening and the first half hour or so, where we are introduced to the quirky characters (particularly the neurotic...

Looking forward to it!

Well, Jim, I was being... err... tongue in cheek (sort of!) )

If the studios decided to stop doing so many remakes, and only made independent films with new ideas, then THOSE would be the ones people would see at their theaters. The average Joe Six Pack movigoers are just like sheep. They'll go see whatever's the latest rage at their local multiplex, and...

Fair enough. And I'll tell you that I have enjoyed new remakes/re-imaginings now and then too, despite the fact that I tend to shake my head when the latest one's announced!

George, you can use my response above to Michael to cover this too (as it's the same one). :) I know they're out there; I can't list them off the top of my head. Just think of good or great films, and then recall the remakes. Go back to 1980 remakes if you'd like. How many would you list as...