HNT
Grizzled HMaM Vet
Horror in General & Everything Else Moderator[/i]
Kiss my tuchis
Posts: 6,296
|
Post by HNT on Oct 12, 2010 8:11:02 GMT -5
Cool, man. Lemme kniow how it is. This is definitely one I would consider upgrading.
|
|
|
Post by abraxas on Oct 12, 2010 10:26:40 GMT -5
Well you said you hate movies that tell you the motivation of the killer
|
|
|
Post by The Walking Dude on Oct 13, 2010 3:38:08 GMT -5
How do you make perfection better? Put it on Blu-Ray that's how.The transfer in th 50th anniversay addition is astonishing,the most striking in my collection thus far. Not to mention the abundance of extras.I think the only way this release could have been better is if they included a soundtrack disc.
|
|
HNT
Grizzled HMaM Vet
Horror in General & Everything Else Moderator[/i]
Kiss my tuchis
Posts: 6,296
|
Post by HNT on Oct 13, 2010 8:24:56 GMT -5
Sweet. I'm sold. Can't frigging wait to get it.
|
|
|
Post by stinger on Jul 13, 2012 13:32:36 GMT -5
Did anyone like the remake? I think Vince Vaughn did a really good job.
|
|
|
Post by GL on Jul 16, 2012 10:10:50 GMT -5
I've always thought it was pretty good because all the hate towards it was because it was a shot-for-shot remake and that wasn't a good enough reason for me to hate it, especially when I wasn't a huge fan of the original to begin with. I need an uncut rewatch though as I taped it off TV but now need a chance to rewatch it and never gotten to it.
|
|
|
Post by Clathian Salvator on Jul 17, 2012 13:48:45 GMT -5
People who did the remake should be executed
|
|
|
Post by The Walking Dude on Jul 18, 2012 1:20:32 GMT -5
Did anyone like the remake? I think Vince Vaughn did a really good job. I thought the cast was the only decent thing about it.
|
|
HNT
Grizzled HMaM Vet
Horror in General & Everything Else Moderator[/i]
Kiss my tuchis
Posts: 6,296
|
Post by HNT on Jul 18, 2012 14:24:26 GMT -5
The remake was pretty awful and unnecessary. Not only was it a bad idea, but it was poorly executed. First, the pacing is all wrong for a modern film so young kids were not swung by this early entry into the remake sweepstakes. Second, it wasn't even a shot for shot remake. First, they included a completely stupid scene of Vince Vaughan masturbating that was both uneeded and not in the original. Second, the shower scene was altered becuase nobody can recreate exactly Hitchcock's sequence because some of the hundreds of quick cuts done in that sequence simply can't be easily reproduced. It was probably the quintessentially perfect death sequence in a horror film. Never been equalled, much less topped. And it can't be reproduced. So, basically, Van Zandt failed in his mission because he couldn't even reproduce the best parts of the original film (presuming for the sake of argument that there was any logical reason to do so in the first place).
|
|
|
Post by GL on Jul 19, 2012 10:12:08 GMT -5
Well, I'm not going to argue the shower scene thing, I think that's a legitimate point there, but to call it out for why it's there? To me, that's pointless, it's there deal with it. It's the exact same thing as starting off a movie review with your personal backstory with the film, I don't care about how you came into finding the movie the first time, I want to know your thoughts on the film which is why I'm reading it. I don't care why a film came into being, it's being therefore that part is unnecessary and irrelevant to the movie itself, what did you think of the movie itself? Simple.
|
|
|
Post by Jen on Jul 19, 2012 11:48:26 GMT -5
I agree it was completely unnecessary. I just ignore it for the most part. It didn't add anything new or special (though I do think Vaughn did a decent job). And it was all done so much better in the original in my opinion, so no reason for me to ever watch it again. Especially when I enjoy the feel, the cast and the look of the original so much better.
And except for Drugstore Cowboy and Good Will Hunting not much of a Van Sant fan. Never seen Milk though, really need to get to that one soon.
|
|
HNT
Grizzled HMaM Vet
Horror in General & Everything Else Moderator[/i]
Kiss my tuchis
Posts: 6,296
|
Post by HNT on Jul 20, 2012 12:06:07 GMT -5
I agree it was completely unnecessary. I just ignore it for the most part. It didn't add anything new or special (though I do think Vaughn did a decent job). And it was all done so much better in the original in my opinion, so no reason for me to ever watch it again. Especially when I enjoy the feel, the cast and the look of the original so much better. And except for Drugstore Cowboy and Good Will Hunting not much of a Van Sant fan. Never seen Milk though, really need to get to that one soon. Milk is a brilliant film, and I honestly thought that Elephant was pretty decent. Your assessment of this film is pretty much the same as mine, though. GL, my thought on the remake is I don't like it and I am not impressed by it. A shot for shot remake is not valuable as filmmaking in my eyes, nor is it artistically impressive. To me, it is like tracing the Mona Lisa and then saying that your tracing is as impressive as the original. This is like a tracing of the first film, and you can even spot the parts where it deviates, meaning Van Zandt failed even to trace it. He colored outside of the lines.
|
|