MovieChat Forums > Starduster
avatar

Starduster (212)


Posts


Happy Belated Birthday Directors commentary; a real game changer. Landon, Mall Of America Boy victim So Far.............. What are the FACTS? Is YOUNG Fenton a demon? ??Holmes and Watson?? ABSOLUTELY AMAZING......... Is this a "cold opener"? DYNAMIC performance View all posts >


Replies


NOBODY has ruined it as much as Taylor Swift. If you recall, Steven king didn't like Kubrick's interpretation of the Shining. In order for Mike Flanagan to make Dr Sleep, he needed to handle the movie differently and still manage to tie it into the Kubrick Shining. I was VERY impressed with his work and his ability to duplicate the look of the Overlook and the characters we remember, but still make it its own movie. I think it is a combination of reasons. Like you said, it was isolated and couldn't be open all year around. To make matters worse, the mounting negative "incidents" at the overlook would take a toll on its reputation. It would be MUCH harder to find a winter caretaker as well and insurance liabilities would become prohibitive. So I would say that it would be a combination of circumstances that would take its toll. Kubrick's Overlook was a stunning looking building. Its not really like the one that Steven King envisioned. VERY nicely said! I hate seeing kids in peril. Jacob is my favorite child actor. It emotionally ripped me apart to see what happens to him. And you are right, he plays it perfectly. Like yourself, I hated those who caused this. I hear actors say that they consider it an honor in many cases to die in a movie. I think Jacob felt it an honor to be a part of this movie. He is growing and expanding his horizons. I have no intention of "blindly" rating anything. There are a number of horror movies I like. i DO intend to stay away from movies directed by David Yarovesky. I doubt that he cares. Regardless of what I think of Brightburn, I feel that David Yarovesky's commentary is what I consider "trash for retards". There is no reason to treat viewers to this crap. People actually BUY DVD's for commentaries and special features. We dont buy them to be insulted or be treated like idiots. Yarovesky stated there was a different ending and there were scenes that were changed or deleted. There were no alternate endings or deleted scenes on the DVD. There were plenty of (missed) opportunities to explain things better about the movie. He acted like he didnt even know or care. Whatever a persons position is, they should at least try to be professional. This was totally lacking in professionalism and it was ultimately reflected in the movie; but most certainly reinforced by his comments. GROW UP AND ACT LIKE A PROFESSIONAL! This pretty much insults those who were at least TRYING to give us a decent performance. It insults the viewers. THAT is why i want NOTHING more from David Yarovesky. All directors have a "misstep" in their careers. They shouldn't reinforce it with crappy commentaries. I must say that the conversation on the DVD was more more inspiring than this reply THANKS for a very well thought out review. I guess I can say this since I agree with much of what you have said here. Foe ME, the first (and second) Childs play movies worked because mosy people, dont like seeing young kids in peril. I know I am very much like this. I have rated Alex Vincent as one of the best YOUNG kids in a horror movie and seeing him being threatened by Chucky made me very uncomfortable and I related to his plight of trying to convince adults that the doll was alive and killing people. Who would believe him. By the time we reached the 3rd installment it was loosing its "punch" with me. I missed Alex Vincent and his character was recast as around 13 yo. A slightly younger boy became the target but it just wasn't the same. What I liked about the reboot was the fact that THIS plot is believable; unlike the idea of a serial killer transferring his soul into a doll. The idea of technology being sabotaged and turning on people makes a lot more sense. It also explains why a boy of 13 would be interested in a doll that was more like a robot that could do things and manipulate the environment by interacting with other technology. It makes sense and it makes sense that a kid would like this. It uses a similar idea of putting a child in peril and his trying to convince adults that the doll is taking over and causing all kinds of death and destruction. Gabriel Bateman is a likable kid and a good choice for Andy. I really liked him in the movie "Lights Out". Again we can sympathize with his character. The movie was well thought out. It stretches the imagination a bit but it doesn't try to sell us on an impossible scenario like a soul of a serial killer in a doll. Its a really well thought out remake which almost serves as a warning about technology taking over our lives in a bad way. < I admit Danny Lloyd was a much more effective actor. Too bad he never pursued more roles, but probably a much healthier choice for him > Danny actually DID pursue more roles but with no success. Maybe others were less impressed with his performance than I was. I dont know. Anyway, he dropped out of the acting filed at the age of 13. Today he is a teacher. He doesn't regret anything. he actually thought it was a fun experience. A side note; he really enjoyed riding the Hot wheels bike indoors. They promised to send it to him after the filming was done. They never sent it. That was pretty crappy if you ask me. It would be a nice collectable if it were around today. Shawshank Redemption is probably the best in retrospect. Like many, we tend to forget the movies that are not horror related and that was the case here. Stand By Me seemed like a piece of Steven Kings life, (Gordy being a writer) and of course much of it was fictional but the bonds of friendship makes it so memorable to me. Today they would probably completely overdo the CGI of the topiary animals and it could well end up really stupid. This was a problem i had with the recent "IT" part 2. "Just WISH he Pennywise monster down to a smaller size so we can defeat him. Yah Right! Thanks for reminding me of Shawshank. I am going to "slaughter a few sacred cows" here but keep in mind that these are MY OPINIONS. I am not a Stanley Kubrick fan. I didn't find the Shining all that "scary" I DID like the cast choices he made. I DID like his location choice for the movie, even though it was really "too nice" to fit the story line as it was written. I didnt really originally understand the choice of Shelley Duvall, but I later understood the strength that the character had to stand to to her husband who was going insane. We saw a vulnerability but a strength as well. In Kings miniseries one of the worst casting choices was Courtland Mead as Danny. I know you liked the choice. For me it was awful. I used to have a book about the making of The Shining. An interesting note is that Danny Lloyd who played Danny was chosen over 5000 other kids who were originally considered for the part. For a young child he handled the horror PERFECTLY. My two favorite very YOUNG kids in horror movies are Danny Lloyd and Alex vincent of Childs Play (original and part 2) I liked the fact that King kept the Topiary hedge animals to life in his miniseries. The hedge maze in Kubricks version was convenient for HIS ending but not faithful to the book. The BEST adaptation of Steven Kings work was not even a horror film, STAND BY ME! Overall I like most or the adaptations of Kings books. Leaving King to his own work we come up with Maximum Overdrive (a very strange oddity) and The Shining miniseries. The original "IT" had its good points as well as its limitations. The movie version has its good points and its bad points. CGI is a great tool but overuse becomes stupid. THIS however is another discussion. Anyway these are just MY thoughts. BTW I think King liked Cujo View all replies >