It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I love Silver Linings Playbook. Don't think its mean spirited at all.
And I know EXACTLY what it's problem is: They didn't try and make a movie, they tried to film a novel. When adapting something from one medium to another certain changes HAVE to be made to story/structure to make the transition successful. What works in a book doesn't necessarily work onscreen.
It's something Peter Jackson got EXACTLY RIGHT when he made The Lord Of The Rings movies.
Darabont and Co's slavish dedication to the novel was it's undoing. The resulting film had no mystery nor element of surprise.
Where it goes wrong is when we see John Coffey resurrect the mouse. We'd already seen the warden's wife with the brain tumour so we IMMEDIATELY knew what was eventually going to happen. Was there really any damn point in staying to watch the rest of the movie?
What should have happened is we see them give the mouse to Coffey - and then cut straight after to the mouse running around. So we may have an IDEA of what might have happened - but not seeing it still gives the audience some semblance of mystery and a reason to stay and watch the rest of the movie...
Then when he heals the warden's wife - we THEN have a FLASHBACK to what happened with the mouse, juxtaposed with him wiping away the brain tumour. We'd have had double the impact.
THAT'S how movies should work.
I love the '70's Hammer period as well. VAMPIRE CIRCUS, DR JEKYLL AND SISTER HYDE, CAPTAIN KRONOS VAMPIRE HUNTER are all excellent, IMO.
Some of my favorites:
DRACULA (1958) a.k.a HORROR OF DRACULA
THE CURSE OF FRANKENSTEIN (1957)
THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES (1959)
THE MUMMY (1959)
THE CURSE OF THE WEREWOLF (1961)
THE BRIDES OF DRACULA (1960)
SHE (1965)
FRANKENSTEIN CREATED WOMAN (1967)
DRACULA HAS RISEN FROM THE GRAVE (1968)
FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED (1970)
THE VAMPIRE LOVERS (1970)
TWINS OF EVIL (1971)
VAMPIRE CIRCUS (1971)
CAPTAIN KRONOS VAMPIRE HUNTER (1974)
Actually any of the Christopher Lee Dracula films and Peter Cushing Frankenstein movies are fun. Some better than others, but still great, IMO.
Also some of the other genre films like
WHEN DINOSAURS RULED THE EARTH (1970)
and ONE MILLION YEARS B.C. (1966) are fun.
Thanks @ToTheRight, I'll make a note of these! Always wanted to see The Hound of The Baskervilles in particular, but I've never had the chance.
Some lesser well-liked films that I personally love are:
- THE DEVIL RIDES OUT, actually this one is rather well-liked but was not included in the list above ;))
- SCARS OF DRACULA
- LUST FOR A VAMPIRE
- BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY'S TOMB
- DRACULA AD 1972
- THE SATANIC RITES OF DRACULA
Happy viewings! :)
I highly recommend those as well!
Added all of these to the list as well, @GoldenGun! A few of these are available for digital download on Google Play/Apple TV, so that should get me started :-)
I prefer PREDATOR 2 starring Danny Glover over the original Arnold epic.
I like Glover's performance, the production design, costumes, and of course Robert Davi appears in the film.
It's not bad, but it has nothing on Predators Arnie vs. Creature smackdown climax, which is wonderfully staged!
You'd better run for the chopper............
Arnies Predator is an original and quite brilliant.
So many great concepts and casts harmed by the endless self-congratulatory cleverness. I do enjoy some of his films, but he is definitely THAT guy who always thinks he is the smartest guy in the room, loves everyone to know it, yet seldom is.
It's like a Bond film. Just shut your mind-off and enjoy. I think the movie has a unique appeal to Americans too due to the subject matter.
Predator 2 is a fun watch. But I’m still with majority opinion on this one: the first is the best. I like the slow reversal of technology in it. It starts off with helicopters and stuff and the weapons get more and more basic as the film progresses, until at the end Arnie and the Pred are essentially fighting each other with sticks.
My controversial opinion about the Pred series is that Predators, the one with Adrien Brody and Walton Goggins stuck on another planet, is a great film to watch, nearly as good as the original.
When I did see Gump, I liked it. I still do, although it gets overplayed on cable all the time. It's good filmmaking and feels sincere. Pulp is also still fresh and I have no problem saying both are landmarks in cinema.
I will add a controversial opinion on back of this: I have never seen Shawshank Redemption and don't really have any desire to. Trivia fact: The prison it was filmed at is one I've driven near many times as it's in the state of Ohio where I live.
Ed Wood was the last worthwhile Tim Burton/Johnny Depp movie. For 1994, I also love Clerks, great dialogue.
Now that is a controversial opinion!
As for Kevin Smith, i slightly prefer Chasing Amy to Clerks.
@jobo Is it that controversial? Shawshank is damn great, though rather under appreciated it it’s initial release. I assume what I said is controversial because Pulp Fiction is more beloved, but I find Shawshank a more rewarding and rewatchable film. And anyway, no matter how much I love Pulp Fiction, my favorite Tarantino film is actually Jackie Brown.
Well, for me personally it´s controversial ;) I have always found Shawshank quite underwhelming (Although the Family Guy parodi is hilarious) while I consider Pulp Fiction a masterpiece for the ages.
Sure, it's terrible as a sequel to The Exorcist. But I love it as a zany nightmarish trip into nonsensical madness, with atmospheric cinematography and a top-notch score by Morricone. In a way, it feels more like an Italian horror film than a big budget sequel.
I really want to see it, Martin Scorsese said he likes it better than the original.
http://www.tasteofcinema.com/2017/10-guilty-pleasure-movies-from-martin-scorsese/2/
I like some bits of it. The scenes in the rock-cut church in Ethiopia are actually pretty good, I think.
Overall though it’s bonkers, and bonkers enough to enjoy watching. I genuinely laughed out loud when I saw Richard Burton try to put out a fire by hitting the flames with a crutch. It is never dull, I’ll grant it that.
It’s problem though is that it isn’t scary, whereas The Exorcist was very scary for its time, and Exorcist III has the best single jump scare I have ever seen in my fifty years of watching films.
A bit of a shame really. It was made by John Boorman who had just made Deliverance, you’d think he would be a perfect fit. Deliverance is pretty tense and scary.