Unrelatedly/relatedly, who else has seen The Host ?
The Korean movie, yes? I watched it a couple of months ago. I am a huge sap, because
the fact that they were just too late to save the little girl after everything they'd been through really pissed me off. I'd thought it was great up till then, though. Well, and still a great movie after; just not as enjoyable for me.
Another interesting point about the movie:
the posters are more or less completely accurate, and at the same time give you a completely misleading impression of the monster's design. I liked that.
I thought it was
super hardcore for them to kill off the kid because you DON'T DO THAT, although I wasn't pleased either because she was so awesome. But at least the boy survived, and it was all because of her sacrifice. If neither one had survived, I would have been even less pleased.
Mostly, I love that
about ten minutes into the movie, THEY SHOW THE ENTIRE MONSTER STOMPING AROUND EATING PEOPLE IN BROAD FUCKING DAYLIGHT. Breaks one of the cardinal rules of monster movies, and from then on, you know all bets are off. It's brilliant. (And then, of course, they kill off the kid, again breaking what you thought was a rule. The rules? IT DOESN'T PLAY BY THEM.)
I saw Alien at camp. As a special treat, my cabinmates and I were allowed to go to the councilors' cabin, which had cable to watch it. A cabin full of 12 year-old girls watching Alien. Amazingly it didn't end in disaster.
I saw it on video at my "rich" friend's house (it's not like the rest of us had VCRs or colour TV) and it spooked the fuck out of us. Whatever we had for lunch was the same as what was onscreen in the meal scene before the first burst.
We're staring at our food like we don't know what to do with it, and then her knee brushes mine under the table, and it's a miracle no pants were soiled.
How sacrosanct is the original Arthur? I decided to see them both (since they're airing within a week of each other) to see if they are apples and oranges or not. I know people are defensive about Dudley's movie, but is that based in nostalgia or accurately-remembered quality?
A lot of it is nostalgia for me, but there are some really genuinely funny moments, and a lot of sweetness with John Gielgud.
My instinct is nostalgia(though I liked both versions) Also, a certain crowd of moviegoers always(in my experience, at least) bitches about remakes.
I think I remember reading that Russell Brand considers "Arthur" a personal favorite(or, you know, favourite) so I don't think he'd want to mess up his favorite movie, but you know how studios are.
So, John Carter is directed by the guy who made Wall-E and Toy Story 3, and co-written by Michael Chabon.
... and yet I still expect it to be a great big stinker.
I just feel like the title is ridiculous in a post-ER world. In addition to the trailer looking fairly ridiculous. (I know nothing about the book.)
Everything Jesse said x 400. The title makes me laugh every time I hear it and when I've seen the trailer, my response is: WTF is this movie about? It looks ridiculous and stupid.
It may not be actually, but the trailers are terrible.
