MovieChat Forums > Gary O. > Replies
Gary O.'s Replies
<blockquote>It also seems reasonable that the concentration of virus particles in the air of the facility would have been very high, leading to rapid infection. </blockquote>
This is what I understand as well.
No; I wondered what happened to "Paint it Black" when I first started on the series a couple of weeks ago, but it is a different tune from the original CBS series.
An FYI:
This series is streaming on POP CORN FLIX with English suntitles
<blockquote>I think he's King's representation of the devil or just "evil" incarnate.</blockquote>
The book states that he was not the devil, but a close associate of Satan.
I just got it from amazon. Corny in places, but good. Plus, it is closed-captioned and English SDH subtitled for the hearing-impaired, like me.
He was checking for track marks.
(continued)
Is this virtue signaling on my part? Hardly The target audience for my book, that is the group it is most likely to appeal to, is conservative men. If I were to introduce the previously-mentioned Blacks in a story of 9th century Vikings and tell how the best warrior that they had was a female, how the men respected her prowess as a fighter, and how this was very common, all in an attempt to appeal to minorities and modern females, THAT would be virtue signaling.
My argument is not with stories reflecting us as we are, it is with the sometimes twisted means of signaling virtues that are not really there in the first place just to generate admiration that is not deserved.
This is a C&P of a post I made on Facebook a while back and it still reflects what I see as a major issue in Hollywood: virtue-signaling.
I don't see virtue-signaling in quite the same way that many do, it seems. Some seem to see it, if I am not mistaken, in terms of reflecting current social trends, and I see it as being sanctimonious, proclaiming a virtue that is not really there.
In my writing, I give female and minority characters a prominent place, but it is also one that accurately portrays the times and culture in which the story takes place. If I were writing about 9th century Vikings, I see no reason to include Black characters, for example, and if the story concerns a little boy from the 1950s, it will have methods of child-rearing appropriate to that era.
In my story, The Pale Horse, set in a post-apocalyptic USA in the early 21st century, I have both Black and Jewish heroes, villains and victims. One of the main good guys is a Hispanic cop. Another is a young guy who is disabled, with everything that that entails. Even though he has been dead for more than a century, the main villain is a German, whose poisonous ideology still infects many today. No; it's not Hitler, it is Karl Marx.
And females are given a prominent place as well, as good guys, bad guys, and victims. The USAF security forces is the prominent unit of the US military surviving in the novel and females serve admirably in that group. Two of the primary scoundrels are women, one of them a German terrorist, and the other is a Marxist fanatic, the partner of the main bad guy.
It was kind of a combination between "The Searchers" and "The Hills Have Eyes". Just watched it for the first time and liked it.
I agree with the OP.
Plus, I think that the 1994 series is far superior to the 2020 effort, although there are things that the later CBS series did better. The addition of Rita's character, for example. The weak point of the 2020 effort was, I think the script.
[quote]Do you think he would like me back?[/quote]
Who knows? What do you think?
[quote]I hope the new film stays true to the source material [/quote]
I hope so too, but judging from the little that I've seen so far, I doubt that it will.
So do I Stones, but I'm not optimistic.
This is one of my favorite films because it is so faithful to the book, which is my favorite story by King and one of my all-time favorites by any author.
Liking Post-Apocalyptic stories in general, I consider this story to be King's best work. My understanding is that he disagrees, giving that status to the Dark Tower series, which BTW, includes Flagg as one of the villains in that series.
These boards have been dormant for so long and I hope that we can have many conversations about the books and both series in the future!
And being a guy, I don't think that Flagg is hot. But since I gather that you are of the female persuasion, be my guest.
You won't find out by reading the book, as it doesn't tell how Barlow became a vampire either.
Louis Jourdan was the Count and Frank Findlay was Dr. van Helsing. But, sorry; no Christopher Plummer.
My fear is that this film will spend more effort on being 'woke', than they will in telling the story.
The '79 version of SL was good; no denying that, but the best vampire film of all time was the 1977 BBC effort, 'Count Dracula'. In part, this is because it was the most faithful to the 1897 book by Bram Stoker.
I have had it for a long time. It is not bad, although it was not quite what I expected.
Creepy Uncle Joe was ALWAYS worse than Trump. And I don't particularly like Trump.