Plus either of them act better than Schwarzenegger did.
You know the best part about the Govenator's acting? Being able to tell your kids "it's not a tumor" just like he did in Kindergarten Cop. That plus quoting Scar "life's just not fair" are a couple of the up-sides of parenting.
Question I can't answer:
Does Empire Strikes Back stand well on its own as a movie?
My instinct is to say "Yes," but it's hard to imagine why you would watch it and not the other ones.
ita,
I think a person could view ESB without seeing the first. It has a strong beginning, middle, and end and relationships are established early in the film. I think it is probably better on its on than Return of the Jedi - in which 50% of that movie relies on nostalgia.
But it ends all cliffhangery.
well do you think the first Lord of the Rings movie stands on its own?
I do think it's perfectly cromulent to release a movie that lacks a beginning, middle or end, if that's your artistic choice. So why would it be bad to watch a movie out of order if that's your choice as a viewer?
I can't defend my stance. It just feels wrong. On the other hand I love movies with ambiguous endings.
Hugh Jackman up for the role of Huntsman in the Snow White movie that Viggo Mortensen opted out of.
Is that the one where Julia Roberts is the evil queen?
I found a fun film blog that Bufistas might like, Post-Punk Cinema Club.
I particularly liked their take on John Sayles' Eight Men Out in relation to economic game theory and the recent financial crisis.
You can pick through their favorites and find excellent write ups on the first season of Deadwood, the STNG episode "Genesis," and the somewhat forgotten Colin Firth/Kenneth Branagh movie A Month in the Country (hurt comfort, much?).