![]() |
the Transfiguration, pretty decent
![]() |
Quote:
AAAAAAA I WANT TO SEE! |
i was scrolling down the page, buzzed, and saw the name of ZEMECKIS
i fucking hate zemeckis! he's the spielberg disciple who made forrest gump yeah? you can keep him to yourself. i will have none. |
Quote:
Baaaahaha. Yeah Forrest Gump sucks. |
Goddammit! Will you people leave that film alone.
Feel like Sev when someone does a dig about Kanye. Well maybe not that far, but it's still annoying! |
Quote:
Haha. Ok. Ok, fair enough. Sorry. |
Quote:
IT'S STILL THERE WITH THAT ANNOYING VOICE "liiiife is like a box of chaaaaaclits..." :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: --- also it's not my fault that someone wrote "zemeckis". i just glazed over and started convulsing. |
Blame Severian :P He's the one that didn't realize the Frighteners wasn't directed by him.
|
You know what? You can all just blast off up your own asses!
"Blame Severian meh meh meehmehblah" Dicks! ;) |
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001765/
career of Harry Dean Stanton, goes all the way back to 1959! '54 actually! |
loved Harry Dean Stanton in the roles I saw him in. RIP
|
Quote:
Yeah. Very sad. He was probably the best character actor of all time. RIP. |
![]() The Blair Witch I love the 1st one but found myself zoning out about a 1/4 of the way into this. Some scenes are pretty creepy but I just couldn't get into any of the characters enough to really care what happened to them. The second half seems little more than people running around in the dark |
Quote:
There was something really special about the original. It was genuinely terrifying. Felt like it was happening, and could happen. Then they let MTV produce the terrible godawful sequel. Then the reboot or whatever. I heard it was awful. Have no interest in seeing it. |
Hate to say it but I'm getting close to writing off contemporary horror. If someone strongly recommends something I'll give it a try but I increasingly feel like I'm not just wasting money on new releases but time, when I could be seeking out older stuff I haven't seen before which, from experience, is almost guaranteed to be better.
|
Quote:
Yep. There seems to be maybe one horror movie every five years or so that's truly great. Like the most recent one I can think of was "The Witch," and it was very atypical for a horror film. So much so that it's not even really "horror" — still, it's the kind of film that seeps into your bones. Before that there was "Let the Right One In," which was fucking fantastic, but again very weird for a horror film. Almost more art-housey at times (like "The Witch.") there are probably a couple fun, worth-watching horror films that pop up on a semi-annual basis, like "It Follows" ... and I hear this new "IT" is pretty good. But are they great? Nah. Maybe two great ones per decade. Looking into older films is almost certainly a better bet. Though I have heard good things about "Transfiguration" and "Raw," neither of which I can substantiate as I've seen neither. My guess is that they both subvert the rules of the genre in some way. If they really are good, that is. |
![]() Nobody seen this yet? I saw it last weekend. Damn good adaptation of the novel. |
Quote:
Still mulling over seeing it tonight possibly. |
Symbols, watch this one though... seriously. It's really goddamn good.
![]() |
Quote:
Thinking about it. I hear it only adapts the first half of the book... which, y'know... thank God. I have a theory that you could lop off 50% of all Stephen King stories and have a pretty decent set of entertaining, if never even approaching brilliant, books with only a few horrendous duds left over. But that's not how things are, and so we have what we have. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:46 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All content ©2006 Sonic Youth