One of the scariest things I've ever seen on TV was Threads, the British The Day After,
Oh, hell yes. Scary, and bleak, bleak, bleak, with whipped bleak on top.
I will heartily second the rec for Sapphire and Steel.
A place to talk about movies--old and new, good and bad, high art and high cheese. It's the place to place your kittens on the award winners, gossip about upcoming fims and discuss DVD releases and extras. Spoiler policy: White font all plot-related discussion until a movie's been in wide release two weeks, and keep the major HSQ in white font until two weeks after the video/DVD release.
One of the scariest things I've ever seen on TV was Threads, the British The Day After,
Oh, hell yes. Scary, and bleak, bleak, bleak, with whipped bleak on top.
I will heartily second the rec for Sapphire and Steel.
I adored Sapphire and Steel. I remember being heartbroken when we had to leave to go on holiday to the States, which meant missing the rest of the series (we did not yet own a VHS recorder in 1979). Thankfully, ITV then went on strike, and when we got back and the strike was over, they repeated the series from the beginning - which I thought was pretty nice of them.
Now I'm scared to watch it on DVD, as there's no way it will be as good as it was in my young imagination.
Huh, there are only four movies on Wright's list I haven't seen (although I saw one of them edited for television).
Was Asylum one of them? (I'm trying to find out the twist about the identity of Dr Starr and what happens to the protagonist.)
Was Asylum one of them? (I'm trying to find out the twist about the identity of Dr Starr and what happens to the protagonist.)
I did see that, but it's been so long I can't remember the final twist. I want to say it's the guy interviewing the new doctor that is the crazy doctor but I may be mixing it up with another movie.
Here is a totally wonderful review of Anonymous, by a Shakespearian scholar: [link]
Our first glimpse of London’s playwrights in 1598 shows them as a catty bunch taking up a generous section of the Rose’s second gallery (consequently, a pretty well-to-do bunch): Dekker, Jonson, ... [and] Christopher Marlowe. In 1598. Marlowe makes fun of Dekker for the failure of Shoemaker’s Holiday and claims preeminence among historical playwrights. Which is funny, since Marlowe hadn’t written a history play in five years at that point, largely because he was murdered in 1593.
And apparently everyone is shocked (shocked!) by the fact that Romeo & Juliet is written in verse. As if nobody had ever thought of that before.
There's more, and then the screenwriter shows up in the comments. Heh.
Here is a totally wonderful review of Anonymous, by a Shakespearian scholar
Oh god, for a minute I was worried that was going to be DH's aunt. And then I remembered she doesn't know how to use the internet.
I'll have to look at that. In college, I worked with a guy was a firm believer in the Oxfordian view of Shakespeare's plays, but that's all I know on the subject.
Aw. I wanted it to be halfway decent. I love all the conspiracy/authorship stories, and Sarah Smith's Chasing Shakespeares is a fantastic novel about it. The review is an excellent read, though.
My DH is absolutely LIVID about this film. Even seeing the trailer enrages him. As former Literary Manager at the Public Theater and dramaturg for Shakespeare in the Park, the whole Oxfordian thing is like a slap in the face to him. It's kinda sexy when he gets all defensive of his guy, Will.