Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
bollemanneke

Is this movie worth my time?

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, publicist said:

 

Both terrible but 'Frenzy' is quite chilly in a good way. The Thames main title is a great opener indeed.

 

Has Mancini's score ever been released?--what was recorded of it, anyways?

2 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

I'm not exactly sure what Elfman did. Since he doesn't orchestrate or conduct. But its a good rerecording of Bennie's score.

 

Agreed! Although, everyone hisses at the Van Sant remake, and frankly, I really don't understand why. I can see people complaining that it's pointless, but I don't think that's why someone would think this movie is trash. 

 

I mean, Psycho is Psycho, yeah?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, publicist said:

It's not trash it's just utterly pointless. And Vince Vaughn and his jock appearance the worst casting idea after having Laurence Olivier play MacArthur in 'Inchon'.

 

Having seen the movie in high school during the late '00s, I actually think it's an interesting artifact showing that Vince Vaughn was once an actor. 

While they trumped certain aspects of Norman's persona up in this one, I thought he did a nice job playing the unassuming dude Bates is supposed to be. 

 

And ultimately, I do really see it as a very fascinating experiment: you see this sort of thing in live theater all the time, but almost never with film. Seeing how a different team handles the exact same source--the screenplay--is great look into the creative process. I only wish Van Sant allowed himself more liberty in staging and mise en scene, and Elfman to write an original score.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Nick Parker said:

And ultimately, I do really see it as a very fascinating experiment: you see this sort of thing in live theater all the time, but almost never with film. 

 

I don't think that's quite right. You have certain limitations in theater which makes similarities inevitable but usually you try to avoid what Psycho '98 does: slavishly recreate another play. What's the point, artistically?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, publicist said:

 

I don't think that's quite right. You have certain limitations in theater which makes similarities inevitable but usually you try to avoid what Psycho '98 does: slavishly recreate another play. What's the point, artistically?

 

True, which is why I said what I did in ny last sentence. That said, even with the screenplay, it's of course a different experience seeing Perkins vs Vaughn, Moore vs whoever that lady was, etc. delivering the performances, and all of the subtext that's a result. I enjoy that aspect of it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Holko said:

Is 8½ something I could be interested in?

 

Well, I'd need to know a bit about your taste first.


Fellini is certainly not for everyone. I'm a bit on/off myself. Something like the BOCCACIO '70 segment, for example, is so wild, it almost becomes self-parodical (the circus elements, the noise of the characters and surroundings etc.). But 8 1/2 is obviously a historical cornerstone for a reason. The experimentation seems more focussed here, and less 'aggravating'. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

It's an adaptation that holds to the original far stricter than Cape Fear.

 

This is true. Although both are quite close. Great adaptations, the both of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Alexcremers said:

Are you a JW fan? 

Yes. So yes.

 

And yes I've listened to the score plenty of times. I'm asking about the movie, which I've realized I've never actually seen until I caught the opening of it on TV the other day. I couldn't stay and watch, but should I watch it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course!

 

Go with the Collector's Edition (probably the most common version) if you want additional family drama, go with theatrical if you want a better, tighter film experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, The Illustrious Jerry said:

Should I see Close Encounters of the Third Kind?

ARE YOU FUCKING JOKING?????!!!!!!!

 

 

 

 

A very slight adjustment, Steef, if you don't mind...

36 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

It has the very best score of the Maestro, so yes!

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm late to the party (either you saw it last night or you didn't, Alex), but it's a rather weak film, IMO, that doesn't live up to its promise. It fails to properly explore the moral dilemmas, and feels rather superficial in its treatment.

 

You're better off listening to the Alan Parsons album instead, as Richard alludes to. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Alexcremers said:

 

I've recorded it. It gets mighty high scores everywhere.

 

Could be. My colleagues and I were pretty much in agreement over its faults, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×