MovieChat Forums > Gary O. > Replies
Gary O.'s Replies
To me, it was annoying rather than confusing.
Agreed. The way they did it in this series could be confusing to anyone who hasn't read the book.
Agreed. While I respect Doss' zeal and commitment to his faith, I don't agree with his belief that the Scriptures advocate absolute pacifism, as the Israelites were commanded by God to go to war and also to execute the death penalty against persons found to have committed certain crimes. Scripture also provides for killing in legitimate self-defense.
Also, as you so ably point out, many modern translations of the Bible render the Sixth Commandment as 'You shall not murder.' To hold otherwise, that is, that ALL taking of life is prohibited, makes absolutely no sense, as we all kill to live, even those who hold to absolute pacifism.
My point, and I believe yours is as well, is that the Scriptures make certain logical exceptions to the Sixth Commandment.
Kudos.
Did the court-martial ever take place or was this something made up for the movie?
<blockquote> hates Candace because she's black.</blockquote>
She's a Black that is not enslaved on the Democratic plantation.
A-B could recover at least some of their sales numbers if they would apologize for this horrible mistake. Granted, they won't completely recover their lost customers, but they would, I believe, persuade at least some of them to come back.
A-B, please, for your sakes, apologize.
<blockquote>But yeah, every few years I get a strong urge to revisit The Stand. Weirdly, I start to get dreams about it and have to fire up my blu-ray. As soon as we get ‘Don’t Fear The Reaper’ over those opening credits I’m all-in for the next six hours. One day I’ll have to read the book…</blockquote>
I believe that you would enjoy the book. It is my favorite SK book and one of my favorites by any writer.
<blockquote>Also, you can pause for that frequent unrination issue 😉</blockquote>
I presume you meant 'urination'. Yes, there is that.
I won't see it in theatres but not because I don't expect to like it. I require closed-captioning or English subtitles due to a severe hearing impairment. I'll have to wait for the DVD or BluRay to come out.
I liked KOTCS. The negativity towards it puzzles me.
Personally, I'd go with huckster.
<blockquote>So, was the remake as gash as everyone says?</blockquote>
It was a mixed bag for me. The acting and effects were good, but the cast and the script could have used a bit more work.
On the cast, I think that one improvement over the 1994 miniseries was Odessa Young as Fran. Amber heard was adequate as Nadine, and the kid who played Joe was good. James Marsden, Whoopi Goldberg, and Alexander Skarsgard were adequate Lloyd was a disaster but most of the rest of the cast was 'meh' at best.
The real weak point of this miniseries was the script, however. While it followed the original story fairly well, (which I liked) it definitely had its' flaws. The main one was the series skipping around too much. For those who are familiar with the book, like most of us, it was not hard to follow the story but to those who haven't read the book, it could present difficulties
And while the story of the Free Zone was presented well, with few extra trappings, the story of the Vegas residents presented them as a bunch of crazies, which in the book, they were anything but. The way Lloyd was handled was totally off-the-wall.
So. this is my impression of the 2020 series. I enjoyed it, but I could also see major flaws as well.
When I first saw it, Ralphie appearing to Danny gave me the creeps. I've seen it more than a few times since, so it doesn't bother me now, but the first time--WOW!!!
<blockquote>He ate his head.
My question is… why does Flagg not kill Glen himself? He orders Lloyd to shoot him instead, as if he cannot take a life himself, but we know he can kill because he eats Sam Raimi’s head and gives Kareem Abdul Jabbar a heart attack. What gives?</blockquote>
Just a guess, but perhaps Flagg had Lloyd kill Glenn as a loyalty test or something like that.
When Nick has the fight with Ray Booth's bunch in Shoyo, he suspects 'by the sound' that he has broken one of the attacker's noses. How could he do this if he was profoundly deaf?
Friday (<i>Dragnet</i>) was LAPD and as you note, <i>Code 3</i> was the LA County Sheriff. Both of them took their cases from their respective agencies, and even though the cases shown were no doubt somewhat embellished, they were based on actual incidents.
Wasn't familiar with the term 'retcon', so I looked it up.
I agree with you on this. On the old IMDb boards, this was discussed as well, without the name that you correctly gave it, and some posters there got a bit miffed when inconsistencies in the book and both of the films were pointed out.
An example would be Barlow's entering the Petrie house uninvited. Matt Burke pointed out and this was later affirmed by Mark that a vampire cannot enter a house uninvited, and the explanation given by some was that Barlow was a master vampire, so this rule did not apply to him. I believe that this is claptrap. A much simpler explanation is King goofed here.
King, even though I really love many of his stories, is sometimes a very sloppy writer and he has quite a few inconsistencies in his novels.
Good observation on your part.
She was also in the John Wayne flick, <i>Cahill, US Marshal.</i>
<blockquote><b>So the whole idea of making Dracula in love with Mina and she in return has always bothered me.</b> We actually have the aforementioned scene in this film except it's depicted as erotic and consensual as opposed to him violating her.</blockquote>
It bothered me as well. I've said before that the script changed the basic theme of Stoker's story from that of an epic battle between good and evil to one of a sappy love story between Mina and the Count.
This was not only irritating, but totally unnecessary.
This was an interesting thread. BTW, I still believe that Barlow's entering the house uninvited was a goof on King's part as well as the scriptwriters for both mini-series.