Bram Stoker's Dracula - the Coppola version. I love how Coppola tackled the book, which in its purest form is pretty much unfilmable. Great performances from Oldman, Hopkins, Ryder, and most of the support cast (Keanu notwithstanding), and one hell of a beautiful looking production. It's easily my personal favorite "vampire" flick.
Selk wrote:Bram Stoker's Dracula - the Coppola version. I love how Coppola tackled the book, which in its purest form is pretty much unfilmable. Great performances from Oldman, Hopkins, Ryder, and most of the support cast (Keanu notwithstanding), and one hell of a beautiful looking production. It's easily my personal favorite "vampire" flick.
I thought he overdid it with the visual styles. This was suppose to be a love story but I didn't feel much love from it.
molly1216 wrote:Selk wrote:Bram Stoker's Dracula - the Coppola version. I love how Coppola tackled the book, which in its purest form is pretty much unfilmable. Great performances from Oldman, Hopkins, Ryder, and most of the support cast (Keanu notwithstanding), and one hell of a beautiful looking production. It's easily my personal favorite "vampire" flick.
I thought he overdid it with the visual styles. This was suppose to be a love story but I didn't feel much love from it.
my favorite parts are when he uses special effects styles from 1890s i think that's charming.
Also, Monica Bellucci. Just sayin'.
Dan Mancini wrote:molly1216 wrote:Selk wrote:Bram Stoker's Dracula - the Coppola version. I love how Coppola tackled the book, which in its purest form is pretty much unfilmable. Great performances from Oldman, Hopkins, Ryder, and most of the support cast (Keanu notwithstanding), and one hell of a beautiful looking production. It's easily my personal favorite "vampire" flick.
I thought he overdid it with the visual styles. This was suppose to be a love story but I didn't feel much love from it.
my favorite parts are when he uses special effects styles from 1890s i think that's charming.
Exactly. Nosferatu will probably always be my favorite vampire flick, but Coppola's version of Dracula is right up there (even though it completely falls apart in the third act). It's a gorgeous flick with great atmosphere. And, yes, the in-camera effects are the bomb.
Also, Monica Bellucci. Just sayin'.
ROWR!
Selk wrote:Tom Skerrit is great. He is one of those actors whose presence in a movie just makes it automatically cool. There are a few actors like that.
Bruce Greenwood comes to mind.
Steve T Power wrote:I used to think that, but it played much better for me this time around. I just had a great time all around. I liked the ratcheted tension and the frantic pacing of the last bit.
molly1216 wrote:I'd like to see someone film Saberhagen's The Dracula Tape where from D's POV and he's not actually the BAD guy. it was van Helsing stupidly pumping mis-matched blood into Lucy that killed her!
molly1216 wrote:I'd like to see someone film Saberhagen's The Dracula Tape where from D's POV and he's not actually the BAD guy. it was van Helsing stupidly pumping mis-matched blood into Lucy that killed her!
By all means yes!HGervais wrote:Kick-Ass...go see it now.
HGervais wrote:Kick-Ass...go see it now.
By all means yes!
Selk wrote:HGervais wrote:Kick-Ass...go see it now.By all means yes!
By all means, no!
Dunnyman wrote:After watching Indiana Jones & The Last Crusade, my best friend wanted to see other stuff like it, and the discussion led to to truly wretched King Solomon's Mines.
Andrew Forbes wrote:Dunnyman wrote:After watching Indiana Jones & The Last Crusade, my best friend wanted to see other stuff like it, and the discussion led to to truly wretched King Solomon's Mines.
Coincidentally, I watched the Kerr/Granger King Solomon's Mines on Friday. It was decent fun, although I really didn't enjoy watching the graphic (real) shooting of an elephant in the first minute.
Falling Down - Why this flick isn't held in more prestigious regard totally baffles me. Just a powerhouse of a film that still crackles almost 20 years later (shit, now i feel old!) Some amazing performances from Douglas and Duvall, some great tension, and fantastic writing. It probably has one of the single best "final reels" i've seen. Just a great, criminally underrated flick that feels just as relevant in today's economic climate as it did in the post Gulf War recession. The blu-ray looked damn nice as well - but what the heck was up with that True HD STEREO mix???
HGervais wrote:Kick-Ass...go see it now.
The first Nicholas Cage movie that hasn't irritated me in ages.
Selk wrote:The first Nicholas Cage movie that hasn't irritated me in ages.
Really? Did you see The Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call - New Orleans? That was one of his best.
And personally, I was kind of alone in liking Knowing. It was a goofy film but I kind of liked it.
Gabriel Girard wrote:Up In The Air (2009) - That Reitman kid is on a roll! This takes a classic ''curmudgeon learns to live'' story and makes it both real and original. It never condescends to the audience and mostly avoids plot contrivances. Great script, Clooney has rarely been better and he's ably supported by the alwys excellent Farmiga and Anna Kendrick who is a revelation - even if she reminds me of Amy Adams in her mannerisms. Also a nice comment on today's megacorps and about the need for companiom=nship. Definitely one of last year's best.
I was with it until the final act, when it careened off the rails... on fire... belching toxic fumes... into a lake... that was bottomless.
Selk wrote:I was with it until the final act, when it careened off the rails... on fire... belching toxic fumes... into a lake... that was bottomless.
Which one?
Selk wrote:I don't know, I liked Knowing. Strange but I liked it, even the ending.
Hey, that's fine with me. I liked Battlefield: Earth.
Selk wrote:Hey, that's fine with me. I liked Battlefield: Earth.
I know a lot of people that do just for the kitsch value. It is one of those movies that is so bad, it might be entertaining. For me, though, it is not entertaining. I just can't watch John Travolta prostituting himself. I mean, who came up with that make-up? He looks like Rastafarian werewolf. Ugh!
HGervais wrote:Selk wrote:Hey, that's fine with me. I liked Battlefield: Earth.
I know a lot of people that do just for the kitsch value. It is one of those movies that is so bad, it might be entertaining. For me, though, it is not entertaining. I just can't watch John Travolta prostituting himself. I mean, who came up with that make-up? He looks like Rastafarian werewolf. Ugh!
That would be fine if Travolta were prostituting himself....which to be fair a lot of actors do, a job is a job....but he isn't. Travolta was heavily involved with Battlefield Earth through its entire production.
which to be fair a lot of actors do, a job is a job....but he isn't. Travolta was heavily involved with Battlefield Earth through its entire production.
I also dug The Postman.
Selk wrote:which to be fair a lot of actors do, a job is a job....but he isn't. Travolta was heavily involved with Battlefield Earth through its entire production.
So, what's the excuse for Wild Hogs and Old Dogs?I also dug The Postman.
The good Italian Postman or the bad American Postman?
I also dug The Postman.
This may come as a shock to you but in some instances things are not the same thing or alike. As a follower of the cult dedicated to L. Ron Hubbard, Battlefield Earth was something of a vanity project for Travolta and he was involved through out its entire production. That is quite different than the paycheck grab of those two later movies. Travolta is of course not alone in taking the money and running but like most leading actors he takes easy paychecks to help finance more personal, intimate or vanity style productions.
Selk wrote:I also dug The Postman.
The good Italian Postman or the bad American Postman?This may come as a shock to you but in some instances things are not the same thing or alike. As a follower of the cult dedicated to L. Ron Hubbard, Battlefield Earth was something of a vanity project for Travolta and he was involved through out its entire production. That is quite different than the paycheck grab of those two later movies. Travolta is of course not alone in taking the money and running but like most leading actors he takes easy paychecks to help finance more personal, intimate or vanity style productions.
They're all crap no matter who was responsible.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests