- Awards
- 21
ALL ABOUT EVE.
Last edited by a moderator:
What was the last film you watched?
- Thread starter Mel O'Drama
- Start date
- Copy link Copy link
- Awards
- 21
REAR WINDOW.
- Awards
- 11
Rear Window is a great one!
I watched Rosemary's Baby recently. So well done.
I watched Rosemary's Baby recently. So well done.
- Awards
- 44
Jaws
- Awards
- 21
SHADOW OF A DOUBT
- Awards
- 6
Rocketman.
Thought that it pi**ed over Bohemian Rhapsody (which I loved) because it was a warts and all film.
I also adore Taron Egerton.
Thought that it pi**ed over Bohemian Rhapsody (which I loved) because it was a warts and all film.
I also adore Taron Egerton.
- Awards
- 18
In Bruges (2008)
An idiosyncratic gem - funny, violent and surprisingly touching. Brendan Gleeson and Colin Farrell are the business.
An idiosyncratic gem - funny, violent and surprisingly touching. Brendan Gleeson and Colin Farrell are the business.
- Awards
- 18
I just watch "Venom", the movie was okay but not really my favorite Marvel action hero movies.
- Awards
- 27
Blair Witch meets Wicker Man. It was OK, but a waste of time nonetheless.
- Awards
- 27
Dark Shadows
- Awards
- 7
what did you think of it? if i hadn't known it was a comedy before i saw it i would really have hated it and so i viewed it as a comedy which what it sadly is. Burton on purpose has said he made it that way to piss the fans off and it worked. which is why it's not one of his biggest hits and i get why too. as for what i watched? that would be an old classic "Dead End' From (1937) has any of you guys or gals seen it yet? it's the 1st film appearance of The Dead End Kids later morphed into the east side kids and again later renamed The Bowery Boys
and when you watch it compared to the stuff they did much later on they look so damn young. hell Huntz Hall was like 16 when he filmed it in (1937) he was what 37 or 38 when he stopped played the role that's 21 years he was doing those roles (1937-1958) a good steady paycheck i think don't you my score 10/10
and when you watch it compared to the stuff they did much later on they look so damn young. hell Huntz Hall was like 16 when he filmed it in (1937) he was what 37 or 38 when he stopped played the role that's 21 years he was doing those roles (1937-1958) a good steady paycheck i think don't you my score 10/10
Last edited:
- Awards
- 27
I think every soap opera becomes a comedy if you give the story in a nuthsell.
But I know what you mean, yes there was the obligatory old world meets new world antics which allowed Johnny Depp to do his "confused" act, but it wasn't as bad as it could have been - and he sure knows how to deliver bombastic dialogue.
The old housekeeper made me laugh out loud, Angelique was OTT wicked and Tim Burton's trademark gothic-kitsch is always pleasant to watch.
I had expected an Addams Family clone, but the passion and the hatred seemed to be enshrined in daytime soap "reality".
The 1970s setting didn't impact the story in a positive or negative way, the Dr. Hoffman character was the best part of it and at least there was no performance by The Village People.
It also illustrated why a soap is a soap, and not a movie. The Victoria Winters character felt like an afterthought, eventhough her arrival at Collinsport suggested otherwise.
There simply wasn't enough time to make the best of every character, but in the "fun homage" genre I thought it was a decent movie. I've seen worse, much worse.
- Awards
- 7
fair enough, for me it's my 2nd favorite show of all time, Lost in Space the 1st. i love Dallas dom't get me wrong but i wasn't a fan of that till i was 26 i'm 40 now. i've loved Lost in Space i want to say since to hazard a guess (1988) when USA used to air it during the week at 10:00 am. i'd watch it when i wasn't at school good times, good times. and i've loved DS since i'd say (1991) when the remake was on and i still think that was good. anyways, as for the film DS you would not believe the hatred for that film, i did buy it on blu-ray and i have seen the other films i think i posted somewhere i forget where i'd said that House of Dark shadows was so badly edited that it's a wonder/miracle it was even a hit.
but that was not all Dan Curtis's fault since he was forced to do those edits and the editing for the 2nd film is even worse cause he again cut out like 45 miutes? i don't remember how much for the 1st film he cut i want to say 8 or 9 minutes i forget, but they wanted it to be 90 minutes. than for the 2nd one they wanted it 90 minutes when it was 130 minutes.
that's yeah 40 minutes that got cut and what was left was a complete mess on a film that makes no sense and it's a wonder why there weren't anymore DS films ya know? not a surprise either to be honest. anyways for the Burton film he had the look and everything and it was well cast though i do think that Depp really over did it on this one but he was decent in it.
but the script was a mess it could not make up it's mind what it wanted to be a comedy or a horror film. it starts out strong than as what it should be a kind of horror film that they used to make i want to say in the 40's of sorts. than it turns into a comedy and really ruins the film than it's back to it being horror of sorts at the end. now i may have liked it more than i thought i would and i may have bought it, but when i went in i really had low expectations once i knew it was a comedy. makes me think of the Buffy film and people hate it expecting
the show and it's not. they don't get that one is actually a comedy and it was advertised as such, take a look of the trailer for that one it's a comedy that is part horror too. Paul Rubens's is doing comedy clearly on how he played it. that one also had studio's stamp on it too they say. and the book which i haven't read it suppose to be way darker.anyways having said that but when you make a film like DS and you intend to piss the fans off that really angers me because DS is a much loved show for a reason. yeah it can be a bit cheesy and there is a lot of bad acting in it. what's really funny is that the acting was better in the black and white years than the color because after they went horror they had Lela Swift give ratings on how you can overplay it when you were scared for example and that i think hurt the performance and Nancy Barrett who is good on the show but is awful when she's suppose to act scared.
i want a DS film from a guy like Burton who claims to love the show and can who can give the right look and cast for the show and make it a serious film based off a hit show. the brady bunch films are actually better than the tv show so it's been done before. why not DS? sorry for the rambling i just love the show so much ya know?
but that was not all Dan Curtis's fault since he was forced to do those edits and the editing for the 2nd film is even worse cause he again cut out like 45 miutes? i don't remember how much for the 1st film he cut i want to say 8 or 9 minutes i forget, but they wanted it to be 90 minutes. than for the 2nd one they wanted it 90 minutes when it was 130 minutes.
that's yeah 40 minutes that got cut and what was left was a complete mess on a film that makes no sense and it's a wonder why there weren't anymore DS films ya know? not a surprise either to be honest. anyways for the Burton film he had the look and everything and it was well cast though i do think that Depp really over did it on this one but he was decent in it.
but the script was a mess it could not make up it's mind what it wanted to be a comedy or a horror film. it starts out strong than as what it should be a kind of horror film that they used to make i want to say in the 40's of sorts. than it turns into a comedy and really ruins the film than it's back to it being horror of sorts at the end. now i may have liked it more than i thought i would and i may have bought it, but when i went in i really had low expectations once i knew it was a comedy. makes me think of the Buffy film and people hate it expecting
the show and it's not. they don't get that one is actually a comedy and it was advertised as such, take a look of the trailer for that one it's a comedy that is part horror too. Paul Rubens's is doing comedy clearly on how he played it. that one also had studio's stamp on it too they say. and the book which i haven't read it suppose to be way darker.anyways having said that but when you make a film like DS and you intend to piss the fans off that really angers me because DS is a much loved show for a reason. yeah it can be a bit cheesy and there is a lot of bad acting in it. what's really funny is that the acting was better in the black and white years than the color because after they went horror they had Lela Swift give ratings on how you can overplay it when you were scared for example and that i think hurt the performance and Nancy Barrett who is good on the show but is awful when she's suppose to act scared.
i want a DS film from a guy like Burton who claims to love the show and can who can give the right look and cast for the show and make it a serious film based off a hit show. the brady bunch films are actually better than the tv show so it's been done before. why not DS? sorry for the rambling i just love the show so much ya know?
- Awards
- 21
Same with the series.
- Awards
- 27
I assume there weren't enough episodes to give her some character development?