then I remember as a kid it finally hitting me that the movies were labeled 4, 5 & 6
I read somewhere recently that they weren't initially numbered that way--but I can't remember where I read it so I can't cite any authority.
'Bushwhacked'
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.
then I remember as a kid it finally hitting me that the movies were labeled 4, 5 & 6
I read somewhere recently that they weren't initially numbered that way--but I can't remember where I read it so I can't cite any authority.
The BF and I were discussing how one might re-make the entire Star Wars sage to make it work episodically (so that the "I am your father" reveal is still a reveal, even if you watch from 1)
And Buttercup needed to be played by a much more beautiful actress.
With hair the color of autumn and skin like wintry cream.
In 30 years, I hope some of the kids who grew up with Harry Potter do a Peter Jackson and re-make the HP books properly (i.e.--with affection, devotion, and knowing how the damn thing ends before you start writing). Possibly as annual BBC mini-series for 7 years.
I know that there are movies I've seen where I've said, "Your basic idea was good, but wow did you screw it up." Can't recall many of them, though, at the moment.
And Buttercup needed to be played by a much more beautiful actress.
Man, I think Robin Wright was (and still is, really) breathtakingly beautiful. And she got the vapid just right too. I'd have tweaked the production values on the movie, if anything, but I love it just as is.
I'm with ita. I have no problems with Robin Wright.
Hmmm...There is, in my head, a distinct difference between book Buttercup and Movie Buttercup. It's not something that I can put my finger on, though.
I think, to me, the movie softens the edges of all the characters a bit, which makes sense, with the shortage of backstory on them (goes with the territory) and that it's more of a fairy tale than the book. I don't know that I love either less, but they're definitely different.
I think my recasting of Buttercup has nothing to do with RW and more to do with the description of book Buttercup, and that's a pretty high fricking standard. I saw the movie first, and she didn't bother me. But ever since I read the book, The Most Beautiful Woman EVER is always in the back of my brain, and RW is not my cuppa. Almost but not quite how Jen Garner is quite fugly to me.
The Most Beautiful Woman EVER is always in the back of my brain
Who would you have cast in her place? I think she has a remoteness that I think is applicable to Most Beautiful Woman EVER even if I can't decide who wears that crown.
The movie is one of my favourite book adaptations ever, because of precisely what it left out--so much, but somehow still telling the same story.
Who would you have cast in her place?
I don't think I could even begin to answer that question. Not off the top of my head. If only because I can't think of who was around at that time. And also because who knows what unknowns were around at that time with the looks and the chops.
Well, if you're remaking the movie is there any one you'd pick from the here and now? I'm interested in how she looks to you.
No one is more beautiful than a young Michele Pfeiffer. And, I know you hate, but Jessica Biel has that otherly beauty that is so not the norm for Hollywood beauty.
But that's not to say that's how she looks in my head when reading the book.