Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/07/12 in all areas

  1. Yeah, I'm with you here. I don't think it's dated in any way that matters, and from my perspective, it retains a painterly, almost impressionistic look -- particularly in the matte paintings -- that still looks pretty great to my eye. Certainly it looks different from the photo-realism of most modern movies, but I think in the case of CE3K, it lends the film a dreamy quality that serves the material quite well, and doesn't date it as much as other films where that artificiality works against them. It may not be the kind of thing that wows jaded teenagers anymore, but I think Quint also may be underestimating the ability of those young people to appreciate finer aesthetic qualities as they themselves get older. Worked for me, anyway. Also no, there's nothing inherently wrong with remakes (or sequels, for that matter).
    2 points
  2. I have terminated this conversation. Good day.
    1 point
  3. It's refreshing, as I've grown tired of people who miss the point.
    1 point
  4. I like KOTCS because John has some fun with the music. His ending of the end titles is just awesome. It's a delightful twist.
    1 point
  5. Fair enough. Hans Zimmer is German. ~*~ At any rate, celebrating the Fourth of July is silly without also celebrating the signing of the Treaty of Paris on September 3, 1783. We didn't win our independence on July 4, 1776 -- it's the day we signed a piece of paper that thumbed our collective colonial noses at the Crown. We're just lucky we had French help to win the war, or the Fourth of July would be known in England as the day they got to hang a whole bunch of traitors. It's the difference between the day you tell your parents that you're moving out, and the day you take the last piece of junk out of their basement and (maybe) hand in your house key. It's all about perspective, but one is more effective than the other. "Fourthajuly" is more catchy than "Thirdaseptember," which already has its own summer's end holiday in Labor Day. We do need that mid-summer holiday of July 4. Just sayin'.
    1 point
  6. Ha ha ha, just noticed what I said there! I'll leave it for posterity
    1 point
  7. Tintin, for me. It's the one I'm revisiting the most, right now... War Horse comes a close second, and KOTCS third.
    1 point
  8. For: Sometimes you can get an improved story/cast & crew/director/visual effects/topical relevance than the original. Also if the original is available on DVD/Bluray, who cares if they remake your favorite movie? Against: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Sometimes the appeal is the ACTORS, not the plot, ie Back to the Future -- I watch that movie for the chemistry between Michael J. Fox and Christopher Lloyd, and that can never be replicated.
    1 point
  9. Very good points. I might add that people often forget that some of the great classics of Hollywood history are in fact remakes - The Adventures of Robin Hood for example, or Ben-Hur. I somewhat disagree with you about the datedness of CE3K. While it's certainly and clearly a movie of its time, I don't think it has aged poorly, except in the light of shallow Michael Bay speciall effects orgies that so often become blockbusters these days - but that doesn't make them better movies. Which isn't to say that a remake of CE3K couldn't be, in theory, interesting and even good, though it's unlikely - I suppose for every great remake of a good/great movie, there are at least a dozen utter failures nobody remembers. But take Ben-Hur again. The version from the 1920s, available on the DVD/Blu with Carl Davis's score, is totally engrossing even today. It's less a matter of remaking something because it's no longer "watchable", but rather one of presenting a fresh take on the same material with "modern" technology, or perhaps also (see The Fly) to present a new view on the same story. Finally, I've long considered the equation "remake = Hollywood's utter lack of ideas" to be wrong. A large percentage of movies are based on novels (or novellas, comic books, stage plays, you name it). How is that in any way more original than a remake? And then of course there are those movies that are remakes of movies based on books - again Ben-Hur comes to mind. Or movies that are based on books that had been filmed before, but with the new version going back to the source and not the script of the first film version - like Lord of the Rings or apparently Planet of the Apes (I've never seen the new versions). The combinations are endless.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.