What Films Have You Seen Recently? - Page 4275

SymbioticFunction · #**42741** 31st July 2017, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rik

I don't think there is any

You'd be surprised - some folks actually think the film is a classic. I was critical of it on another forum and all hell broke loose. One person told me that he hoped that I was run over by a lawnmower on my way to work.

J Harker · #**42742** 31st July 2017, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SymbioticFunction

You'd be surprised - some folks actually think the film is a classic. I was critical of it on another forum and all hell broke loose. One person told me that he hoped that I was run over by a lawnmower on my way to work.

You what?? I have fond memories of Maximus Overdrive but i don't want the lawnmower man defiling anyone who thinks otherwise.

MrBarlow · #**42743** 31st July 2017, 11:29 PM

Apocalypse Now 1979

During Vietnam War Captain Willard (Martin Sheen) is assigned to track down and eliminate a rogue colonel who a tribe see as a God.

This is the very first time I have seen this movie, in of Francis Ford Coppola best work since The Godfather. It mixes realism with brutality with American troops and the Vietnamese on the battle ground. It's a film you either like or hate.

SymbioticFunction · #**42744** 31st July 2017, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrBarlow

Apocalypse Now 1979

During Vietnam War Captain Willard (Martin Sheen) is assigned to track down and eliminate a rogue colonel who a tribe see as a God.

This is the very first time I have seen this movie, in of Francis Ford Coppilla best work since The Godfather. It mixes realism with brutality with American troops and the Vietnamese on the battle ground. It's a film you either like or hate.

I'm a big fan of Apocalypse Now. I think that it's a pretty amazing film. Am curious, was it theatrical or extended that you watched?

MrBarlow · #**42745** 1st August 2017, 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SymbioticFunction

I'm a big fan of Apocalypse Now. I think that it's a pretty amazing film. Am curious, was it theatrical or extended that you watched?

It was the extended version I watched, I will agree with you it was amazing movie and great acting

gag · #**42746** 1st August 2017, 03:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SymbioticFunction

My wife and I watched Stanley Kubrick's The Shining. Have certainly never thought that it was an all-time classic but I do have a fair bit of respect for it. Jack Nicholson gives a wonderfully OTT and manic performance, and the film does have some great steadicam work. If memory serves me correctly, Stephen King was quite critical of the film - the reason being that it was clear from the start that the Nicholson character was unbalanced. He may well have been making a valid point. (Could be wrong but it seemed like King stopped critiquing his film adaptions after he tried and failed with Maximum Overdrive). But the film is still pretty cool imo. Final film score - 8/10. David Cronenberg's The Dead Zone is due to arrive tomorrow so this week should be a Stephen King double bill.

btw My wife and I really disagreed on one thing. I think that Shelley 'Olive Oyl' Duvall is pretty darn ugly whereas she does not think so!

Further btw Apologies to any Maximum Overdrive fans.

Yes Stephen king wasn't happy with the film, hence why he did he remake .

gag · #**42747** 1st August 2017, 03:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J Harker

The Shining is a brilliant piece of cinema and King was most likely just peeved that Kubrick actually improved on Kings typically longwinded novel which like anything I've ever read by him seems to add in about a hundred and fifty pages of totally unnecassery twoddle just when things get going.
All hail James Herbert.

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere reason Stephen king novels tend to be long or go into details is because he gets paid by the word .

Susan Foreman · #**42748** 1st August 2017, 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gag

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere reason Stephen king novels tend to be long or go into details is because he gets paid by the word .

He certainly needs an editor who isn't afraid to stand up to him and say 'come on, Stephen. Enough's enough' instead of having one who says 'but it's only 980 pages. I'm sure you can introduce another two dozen characters and bring the page count up to 1,500!"