YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Discuss anything you want.
Post Reply
User avatar
Gort
Posts: 9068
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:50 pm
Location: Reducing some planet to a burned out cinder.

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Gort » Mon Feb 07, 2011 3:29 am

Mad F. Rockatansky wrote:
All of them, actually. Especially the Time Machine ones. The original was a favorite of mine in middle school. (So was the '53 version of The War of the Worlds.)
Yeah, another Remake Rematch I have in planning is The War of the Worlds. And I'm planning one with Dorian Gray. A lot of films have been made from that novel!

I have the DVD of the '53 War, and it's been watched a few times.

I'll select a couple of the Time Machine essays. Most of them are short. And Tonight I might put up a couple of the film reviews, now that the Packers have won.
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Mon Feb 07, 2011 3:45 am

A Comparison of The Time Machine (1960) and The Time Machine (2002):
Racial Composition

Image

Every major character in George Pal’s The Time machine is Caucasian. The main character meets with his Caucasian friends, and travels to a future where there are only Eloi (fair-skinned, blond haired people) and Morlocks (blue-skinned, white haired mutants). Simon Wells made the Eloi brown-skinned. In his version of the story, the Morlocks on the surface are also brown-skinned; only the Morlocks that never come out into the sun are albino.

The Eloi in the novel are probably Caucasian, as they are the expected counterparts of the stolid British of 1900. I don't recall any description of the Morlocks that mentions skin color, which leaves a lot of leeway for the crew in charge of costume design. When I first watched the 1960 version of The Time Machine as a white boy in an all-white Memphis school I didn't notice the absence of people with other complexions. It was a different time. Nowadays I notice such things readily, but back then TV was largely all-white; most films were all-white. Blacks were portrayed in ways that we would now find offensive. At least the absence of non-white characters in the 1960 version saves them from being subjected to ridicule.

Simon Wells made everyone in his future world brown-skinned, except for the über-Morlock who never leaves the darkness of his subterranean cavern world. Is it a statement about white people as overlords? The 2002 version of the über-Morlock is not terribly likable, although he isn't necessarily a target of audience hatred. What I wondered about is why there was no more fascination with Hartdegan's pallid skin than the Eloi evidenced. Then again, the actor chosen to play the role is not extremely fair-skinned, so is only a few shades lighter than the Eloi. Was this done on purpose? I don't know.

But since the question raised itself on my last viewing, I've wondered just what consideration the producers gave to the role of "race" in this version of the story. It is easy to reduce it to Eloi vs. Morlocks; but temporarily at least, there is the addition of Alex Hartdegan to the composition of the future world's ethnicities. Also, in speculative mode, I consider that we don't know what the racial makeup of the world is past whatever the British Isles have become in 802701. We see only what Alex sees on his adventure. It may not represent the whole of the world at that time.
Go back using these buttons.ImageImageImageImageImageImage
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Mon Feb 07, 2011 3:56 am

A Comparison of Romeo & Juliet (1968) and Romeo+Juliet (1996):)
Which Film is the “More Authentic” Version?

Image

If historical setting is to your mind the more authentic marker, then Franco Zeffirelli’s version would have to be more authentic. If you use any other marker, the two films come up about equal. Both use young actors for the major parts played by young characters. Both use contemporary shooting and editing techniques (yes, the 1996 version looks like music videos of the 1990s, but the 1968 version uses the quick-cutting style with hand-held cameras that was popular at the time in music films such as the Beatles movies). The acting in the 1968 version is only a touch more formal than that in the ’96 remake. For their production times they are both “trendy” films.

But, Zeffirelli sets his story in Verona, and in the Middle Ages. Yet, he cut more scenes than Luhrmann did (Luhrmann tends to cut out a lot of lines within scenes to make up the time he needs for stage business and songs); in fact, Zeffirelli removed a few entire scenes (such as the apothecary scene with Romeo buying his fatal dose of poison). At the same time, Luhrmann excised whole chunks of the ending. Still, cutting lines doesn’t make the play less authentic. In fact, in every version of the play I’ve ever seen—except for one—there have been many many lines cut from the Shakespeare play. I once got to see why. I rented a BBC production of the uncut play. It was probably the most boring TV program I have watched all the way through. There is plenty of fat in the play, and it only improves when that excess is sawed away by a careful director. Yep. The Bard actually wrote some speeches that go nowhere, or go where they’re headed with a snail’s pace. Best to cut them. Now, that isn’t true of all Shakespeare plays. I have to admit that Kenneth Branagh’s uncut production of Hamlet is the best one I’ve ever seen!

It is tempting to say, “But people don’t talk like the iambic pentameter of the play’s dialogue anymore, so the one in Verona Beach is out of whack.” You can say that until you realize that people in 1609 England also did not speak in iambic pentameter! Nor those living in Verona, Italy during the period when the play is supposed to happen. Only actors speak in iam, and only on stage.

So, which film strikes you as more “authentic?” Or does “authentic” even matter as you see it?
Go back using these buttons.ImageImageImageImageImageImage
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Mon Feb 07, 2011 4:11 am

A Comparison of Lord of the Flies (1963) and Lord of the Flies (1990)
The Acting

Image

Both films use young boys to play the various parts (of course). All the characters are pre-teens, although Balthazar Getty was 13 when he played Ralph (shooting started in August 1988). Chris Furrh was 14 when he played Jack. It seems that the 1990 film may have been written to have characters between 5th and 8th grades involved, though that isn’t stated anywhere. Brook selected non-professional actors to play his roles, keeping all the parts pre-teens as Golding wrote them. This lends the film a certain quality that is the opposite of “slick.” The professional kids in the 1990 version are much slicker and more studied in their portrayals. Still, they are young, so they have a certain edginess to their performances—especially when they are involved in the actions of the feral boys that are decidedly un-childlike.

Image

I’ve always believed that if Brook and company had not had to completely re-record and edit (in snippets) all the dialogue from the 1963 film, the acting would have seemed even better than it does. As is, the performances of most boys in the film seem so natural that it will draw you in. Both actors who played “Ralph” have continued to act. Balthazar Getty, the 1990 Ralph, is currently Tommy Walker on a TV show called “Brothers and Sisters” with which I am unfamiliar, but it is in its fifth season. Getty was a co-star in David Lynch’s Lost Highway. James Aubrey played Harry in a British TV series called “Brief Encounters” that ran 10 episodes in 2006 (British series often don’t exist except for one season). Everything Furrh did was released in 1990. Apparently acting wasn’t his career goal. None of the other 1963 cast members made a career of going on the boards. Some of the 1990 cast went on to other roles. Badgett Dale (1990 Simon) was in the 2003 season of “24”, and played Officer Barrigan in The Departed.

Image

Keep in mind as you watch that you are seeing the dramatic work of people who are supposedly “too young” to be feeling the complex emotions that they are playing. Yet, Brook’s cast had to actually become their characters. Saying lines was the only acting they did. The rest, according to the audio notes on the DVD, they managed for themselves. Clearly, Brook directed his young charges, but I’m told that the meat-eating scene more or less unfolded on its own, and putting the pig’s face skin over his own face was an improvisation by the boy who did it. The cast of the Hook film probably had more acting coaches present, and their performances are closer to the Hollywood “norm” than Brooks got. Overall, I’d rate the acting in both films as better than you could hope for given the ages of the cast members. I don’t envy either director or his crew to be on long remote shoots with herds of revved up little boys that they had to cajole into appearing before the cameras on a daily basis. I raised two of those critters, and I can’t imagine trying to get 37 of them to act in a movie. (My sons both appeared in some of my industrials, though, over the years.)

Image
Go back using these buttons.ImageImageImageImageImageImage
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
dreiser
Posts: 16193
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 11:17 pm
Location: At the Great Northern Hotel w/ you know who.

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by dreiser » Mon Feb 07, 2011 6:12 pm

Gort wrote: Which essay would you like to read? I can probably have it posted within 15 minutes. Maybe faster.
Planet of the Apes.
"I hate the dark, the sharks liars. And the stems of cherry..."

Like Someone in Love (Kiarostami, 2012) 4/10
Killing Them Softly (Dominik, 2012) 2/10
The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm (Pal/Levin, 1962) 6/10
The Dark Past (Mate', 1948) 7/10
New Rose Hotel (Ferrara, 1998) 3/10
User avatar
Gort
Posts: 9068
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:50 pm
Location: Reducing some planet to a burned out cinder.

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Gort » Mon Feb 07, 2011 9:47 pm

dreiser wrote:
Planet of the Apes.
That's still upcoming. :D
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
kiddo in space
Posts: 13023
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by kiddo in space » Mon Feb 07, 2011 10:01 pm

Lord of the Flies is a great novel. I must watch those films.
User avatar
dreiser
Posts: 16193
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 11:17 pm
Location: At the Great Northern Hotel w/ you know who.

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by dreiser » Mon Feb 07, 2011 10:03 pm

Gort wrote: That's still upcoming. :D
:up:
"I hate the dark, the sharks liars. And the stems of cherry..."

Like Someone in Love (Kiarostami, 2012) 4/10
Killing Them Softly (Dominik, 2012) 2/10
The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm (Pal/Levin, 1962) 6/10
The Dark Past (Mate', 1948) 7/10
New Rose Hotel (Ferrara, 1998) 3/10
User avatar
Gort
Posts: 9068
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:50 pm
Location: Reducing some planet to a burned out cinder.

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Gort » Tue Feb 08, 2011 11:24 pm

Well, I picked up the 3-disc set of three versions of films based on the novel The Maltese Falcon from the library about 15 minutes ago on my way home from work! I"ll get YTMN watching and reviewing and pulling frames from them, so the Remake Rematch can start. After that I'll probably do Planet of the Apes. Of course, posting will be spread out over months.

This will be the first Rematch to feature more than one film, and the first to have only black and white films. I'll have to do something graphically colorful, I guess.

And, I started grabbing stills from the 1922 Nosferatu the other night as an experiment. I own both versions of The Day the Earth Stood Still, except the new one is only on Blu-ray, and my Blu-ray player software won't allow me to grab frames for some freaky DMCA reason, probably. Still, I will try print-screen-and-paste-into-Photoshop. If that works it will be slow, but it will get the job done. Hey, I might test that tonight, just to know whether I need to borrow a DVD of the new
crappy
version of the movie, in advance of actually starting to work on that Rematch.

Who knows, I might actually post one or two of the film reviews from the Redux Rematches. We'll see. :)

EDIT: As I expected, the DRM in the Blu-ray disc can't be overcome at all. Print screen is disabled! Can't do it from Blu-ray without buying an expensive Blu-ray player package, or totally screwing around with my OS settings (thus, inviting disaster). I'll just borrow the DVD from someone, the library or Netflix, to get the needed screencaps for the new TDtESS.
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
Gort
Posts: 9068
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:50 pm
Location: Reducing some planet to a burned out cinder.

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Gort » Wed Feb 09, 2011 12:19 am

Balthazar Getty's father died today. Balthazar played Ralph in the 1990 remake of Lord of the Flies. I remember following the news when his father, John Paul Getty III was kidnapped at age 16 in Rome. Later, after his grandfather (at the time the richest person in the world) refused to pay ransom, a package was delivered to his home bearing the severed ear of the boy. It was a sad story, to me. Proof that not even having "all the money in the world" cannot shield you from terror and disfigurement.
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Wed Feb 09, 2011 4:21 am

The Time Machine (1960) dir. George Pal
IMDb link RT-link

Year: 1960 Director: George Pal Cast: Rod Taylor; Yvette Mimieux; Alan Young Length: 103 min. Color/Mono

Image

I’m not sure what year it was (1968 or 1969), but in my High School years my English teacher managed to start the Kingsbury High Film Society. The hundreds of member students met one 3-hour afternoon in the auditorium once a month. The teacher rented a 16mm print of a film she though we should not die without seeing. As some of us were about to be drafted and sent to Viet Nam this might have been more urgent than I realized at the time. We saw a good many films that she considered classics. Now, this one was a stretch because it was only 8 or 9 years old when we saw it. But I fell totally in love with the movie, with the time machine prop, and with Yvette Mimieux who plays Weena in the movie. This was the era of “Star Trek” the original series. It was still in first runs on NBC TV, as a matter of fact. So I was used to the style of the film as the way in which science fiction stories were told on the screen. Post Star Wars it doesn’t look so hot.

What follows are entries about things I like and do not like about the film. There is a longer list of things I don’t like. See, whether a film has flaws is not the controlling factor in whether I like it, or not.

LIKE: I’m remembering my initial reactions when I saw the film while a High School student: I liked the stop-motion animated transitions as things change during George’s journey into the future. There was no other way to accomplish the effect in 1959 when the movie was being made, besides stop-motion filming of the action. To show things changing rapidly from George’s perspective in the saddle of the time machine, it was the only possible alternative — unless Pal had made the film as 2D drawn animation. But that smacked of “a kid’s movie” back then even more certainly than it does today. I liked the whole idea of time travel, back then.

Image

LIKE: The feeling I get when the movie concludes. It is a very hopeful feeling, and a feeling that everything is in order.

LIKE: The friendship that exists between David Filby and George. Filby’s concern for George is honest. His warnings against using the time machine are sincere, as is his fear. Yet, he does not try to intervene other than by suggesting “If that machine can do what you say it can…destroy it,” regarding the machine.
LIKE: Yvette Mimieux’s entrance as a drowning girl in the water.
LIKE: The set design for the ruined future. It is simplistic but on a grand scale. The large hall where the Eloi live is like an opulent feed lot. The fruit on the tables is beautiful. The Eloi costumes are simple.

LIKE: The innocence with which the Eloi are portrayed. Weena is especially charming, and even though she is open to new things, she is like a child in her approach to them. Her curiosity is not philosophical, but practical. Her submergence in the world of her time is complete. Yet the other Eloi provide information too readily, and you will see this addressed in one of my DON’T LIKE sections below. The Eloi have discovered some technological items that remain, and that still function (for some reason) but they don’t understand the teachings of these devices. That makes sense.

Image

DON'T LIKE: Damn! Another nuclear holocaust film. You’d think that’s all people thought about in the 1950s and 1960s. (In large part, you’d be right!) Some of the reviews at the time the 2002 script was in development and after the remake came out, criticized the 2002 film for deviating from the anti-violence imperative of Wells’s novel, for adding things that weren’t in Wells’s original idea, and for substituting anti-technology as a theme rather than sticking to Wells’s anti-violence theme. Mostly, this argument comes from a fellow named Mark Bourne. But in the 1960’s every sci-fi film had to be about nuclear weapons to some degree. Be honest, folks, that’s as much an anti-technology stance as it is anti-violence. The weapons would not exist without the march of technology.

DON'T LIKE: A volcano in London. Triggered by blasts from atomic satellites.

Image

DON'T LIKE: The Morlocks are blue. Really! They have mutated into very ugly things.(Of course in the yellow light from the match they appear greenish!)

DON'T LIKE: The Morlocks as envisioned make no sense! They are speechless, growling, yowling and grunting, but they are masters of the technology and keep the machinery running. Plus, they are afraid of fire! They are too stupid to understand fire, but smart enough to keep internal combustion or steam engines running underground. Hmm. There’s an anti-technology message for you!
DON'T LIKE: The Morlock-aflame effect is awful. Besides, if it is wearing no clothing beyond a breech-cloth, how the hell does it catch on fire?
DON'T LIKE: George is a Johnny One-note, always talking about how he expected to see interminable progress in the future, and how the Eloi are a disappointment to him, yada yada yada.

DON'T LIKE: The lack of engagement with the characters. Frankly, I just don’t ever have any sense of anyone in this film being a real human being. It’s an intellectual jewel, full of ponderables, but who cares? Usually I don’t see that as a fatal flaw in a film (nor do I here, obviously) but it would be nice to be happy when a certain person is rescued. The film has an air of melancholy that I used to find wonderful but I now find tedious.

DON'T LIKE: “Laws? There are no laws,” says an Eloi youth. If there are no laws, how does he know what laws are, therefore how does he know there aren’t any? (BTW, the Eloi cannot read, but they know of books by name only. Clearly what books they have are unused.)

DON'T LIKE: The 1960s style of treating science fiction with an oppressive atmosphere of acting and pacing that says “This. is. Important. Cinema!” Ugh.

Image

DON'T LIKE: It’s been 800,000 years (80 times the existence of human civilization on earth so far) and the Eloi still speak English. In fact, they still speak the 1899 English that George came to them with. Furthermore, they still respond to air-raid sirens by instinct, leading them to parties with the Morlocks. In truth, H.G. Wells was scarcely more imaginative in his depiction of how languages and the like would have changed in 800,000 years. No one knows, and what things and customs would be in use then might be largely incomprehensible to us. The original story was written for 1900, and the movie was made for 1960—and the people alive in those times. I can forgive this, but I don’t like it.


Want to read the original story? Project Gutenberg e-Book of H.G. Wells' The Time Machine.
Go back using these buttons.ImageImageImageImageImage
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Wed Feb 09, 2011 4:21 am

The Time Machine (2002) dir. Simon Wells
IMDb link RT-link

Year: 2002 Director: Simon Wells Cast: Guy Pearce; Samantha Mumba; Jeremy Irons Length: 96 min. Color/Stereo

Image

Even before this film came out I was hearing and reading about what a horrid piece of degenerate cinema it is. I read one good review, and that’s all. In 2004, I ordered it through Blockbuster Online, and expected to watch it once and send it right back, because I revered the 1960 film version that George Pal made. I was in my 37th year of that love affair when the 2002 DVD arrived in my mailbox. I watched it. I went to a store and bought my own copy.

When you watch a film for the fifth time, and you’re still getting a post-viewing high from it, there is no way you could rate it merely “Good” or OK,” no matter what other people think about it. That’s my experience, having just finished the 2002 film The Time Machine. You may be in agreement with the 72% of reviewers who trashed this movie, but there is no way I could be. [I can’t help but use a statement that I generally detest: “They just didn’t get it.” What else could I say?] I think I’ve finally figured out why the movie works: Simon Wells probably loves his great-grandfather’s story as much as anyone. If he had planned to make a movie because of the changing millennium, this film would probably have come out 2 or 3 years earlier. His great-grandfather wrote many novels that Simon Wells could have adapted, but he selected this one. The movie is as good as it is because Simon wanted to do well by revered Herbert George. He certainly would have had no idea of trashing his ancestor in any way.

Image

If you don’t like this film there is nothing I can write to change your mind. But in many ways it far surpasses the excellent 1960 George Pal version. The 2002 film is not bereft of emotional touch-points (the lack of which is a severe, if not fatal flaw of the 1960 film); nor does it lack intellectual hooks. It is beautiful to see. The only thing that this movie is lacking to any great extent is—respect. It doesn’t seem to get any. Fifty years from now, viewers of 2058 will give it respect, though. All those who idolized the Pal version will be rotting in boxes somewhere, or be reduced to ashes. The viewers of 2058 will simply see two old films. One will be nearly a century old, the other a mere 56 years. And this one will seem to those viewers to be the equal of or superior to the 1960 version.

Both films and the original novel more or less address the question, “If you could move through time, would you? If you did, what would you do it for? If you went to a different era, would life be that much different?”

What follows are entries about things I like and do not like about the film. Often there will be more aspects of a film that I don’t like than there are that I like, yet that doesn’t control whether I like the film, overall.

Image

LIKE: The Morlocks look much better in this version of the movie. The time machine is simply a frillier version of the one George Pal’s set designer came up with in 1959, but it’s great eye-candy.

LIKE: The substitution of nuclear irresponsibility on the Moon for a nuclear war on earth.

LIKE: The fact that 800,000 years after A. Hartdegen leaves New York, the Eloi have their own language. “Stahn lahf toon queen?” Kalen asks Alex. A plausible (if stretchy) plot device is used to make it possible for him to speak directly to the Eloi — because, as we all know, it should never be up to a contemporary human being to learn the language of the people of the Future! The fact that the Eloi know and for some odd reason (“it’s a tradition we pass down”) have learned “the Lex” allows immediate communication. “Tah fahm way kah lex!” Not only that, but Mara is a teacher of the Lex, so she’s fluent. So’s her little bro. (Dramatic problem solved.)

LIKE: The moon in the sky of 802,701.

LIKE: The movie seeks first, and ultimately, to entertain me. Yet, it does not shy away from the paradoxes of time travel, or the philosophical underpinnings of why someone would want to travel forward in time. And when Alex finally gets the answer to his question from an unexpected source, it fits so well.
LIKE: The effect of the final scene showing action going on in the same physical space 800,000 years apart.
Image

LIKE: The transition from 1899 to 2030 as Alexander propels himself away from his home time and into the amazing future of New York. The camera flies up and away from his collapsing laboratory, above the advent of skyscrapers, passenger planes, and jumbo jets, to the moon colony of 2030. Pal probably could have dreamed up something like this in 1959 when he was making his movie — but there was no way he could have afforded to do it.

LIKE: The totally bizarre holographic individual from the 2030 Library: VoX system NY114, played by Orlando Jones. Sure, it’s unlikely that any part of such a system would have survived for 800,000 years, but people can’t travel in time any faster than one second per second, so it’s a dramatic device, like the time machine itself. You’ll get over the “plot holes.” I did.

LIKE: The ending is not a “happy ending” where everything is resolved and goes back to the way it was at the beginning of the story. There are severe and lasting changes that have been made.

LIKE: When Filby tosses away his bowler hat. I lose it, every time. Can’t stop myself.

LIKE: Mara having a little brother for whom she can plead with Alexander, “Go back to your own time — and I must ask — will you take Kalen with you?”

Image

DON'T LIKE: With the huge budget, Wells sometimes gets distracted by what he can show and how he can show it. For a first-viewing, there is perhaps too much eye-candy. It’s beautiful, naturally, and looks ever so sweet. But the film packs in so much activity that it seems longer than 97 minutes. Although there are stretches where you can relax, most of the film is set at a rather swift pace. I am not fond of the action-movie type ending, but on fifth viewing, you know, it doesn’t bother me that much. It’s a very small portion of the film. And I do like it when Alex kicks a lynch-pin out of an enormous lock hasp!

DON'T LIKE: The control technology of Hartedegen’s time machine seems to befit his time. But they didn’t have lasers in 1903, for Pete’s sake. What’s with the cool-looking but utterly anachronistic beam of white light in the workings of the machine? Nor did they have small batteries to run an electric toothbrush in 1899, as far as I know. Perhaps my technological history has gaps. Anachronisms of that kind in this or any historical period film sort of gall me. I should look up those batteries.

DON'T LIKE: One guy laboring away in secret can build a device that will take someone through time? Heh heh. Sure.

DON'T LIKE: (but DON’T REALLY CARE): The name Weena from the original novel was retained in Pal’s version of the movie, but modern sensibilities say that Weena is a “funny name” perhaps with penile overtones? So “Ween” was replaced with “Mar.” Weena, Mara—both names are funny-sounding. What difference did it really make? So, that’s why I don’t really care.

DON'T LIKE: Dr. Hartdegen’s dramatic motivation to build the time machine in the first place. Frankly, I don’t like that he has to have a motivation other than curiosity about whether he could do it. However, I do like the way the utterly unnecessary motivation is used in the screenplay. And his reason for going to the future is in quest of knowledge, rather than simply because he “doesn’t like the time I was born in,” the way George does in the 1960 film.
DON'T LIKE: The people of New York left a single computer running for over 800,000 years? Get off it. That building it was in wouldn’t have lasted until 2130 before someone wanted to improve it by destroying it.
Image

Homages to the 1960 version
A whirling device on the time machine. The sun seen zipping across the sky from day to day, through the roof glass on the time traveler’s greenhouse. A decomposing Morlock when the time traveler gets hasty to depart the future world. A threat to the earth from the sky. Someone remarks on the retro look of the time traveler’s clothing. The time traveler learns the truth of the Eloi and Morlocks from a recording device. (In the novel, BTW, the time traveler simply surmises the truth about the speciation event that led to Eloi and Morlocks.)

Image
Go back using these buttons.ImageImageImageImageImage
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
Mod Hip
Posts: 14065
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Mod Hip » Wed Feb 09, 2011 5:00 am

Skimmed, and am loving what I've read so far. Educational thread! I will surely return to read in full when my eyes are no longer begging to shut. The Time Machine "rematch" is the one I've been most interested in from those you've teased.

Main thoughts leaping to mind as of yet - Nice picking up on the whole knowledge-of-law-in-law's-absence (and the like) stuff. That sort of thing always bugs me. I also notice such things as you did with the Morlocks' contradictory state of being between animalism and technology. I thought of contesting it since I talked myself out of being too bothered by a similar state in the very different, more recent time travel movie Idiocracy... but the difference is that, as you point out, the Morlock tech is steam-powered and relies on attention whereas the Idiocracy tech, as far (or, really, not-so-far) as it's explored, appears to be automated (though perhaps unrealistically in need of no maintenance seeing as no one capable of such a task remains alive). Also... Weena. Yeah, I'm okay with that having been changed :shifty:
User avatar
Gort
Posts: 9068
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:50 pm
Location: Reducing some planet to a burned out cinder.

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Gort » Wed Feb 09, 2011 3:21 pm

Mod Hip wrote:Skimmed, and am loving what I've read so far. Educational thread! I will surely return to read in full when my eyes are no longer begging to shut. The Time Machine "rematch" is the one I've been most interested in from those you've teased.

Main thoughts leaping to mind as of yet - Nice picking up on the whole knowledge-of-law-in-law's-absence (and the like) stuff. That sort of thing always bugs me. I also notice such things as you did with the Morlocks' contradictory state of being between animalism and technology. I thought of contesting it since I talked myself out of being too bothered by a similar state in the very different, more recent time travel movie Idiocracy... but the difference is that, as you point out, the Morlock tech is steam-powered and relies on attention whereas the Idiocracy tech, as far (or, really, not-so-far) as it's explored, appears to be automated (though perhaps unrealistically in need of no maintenance seeing as no one capable of such a task remains alive). Also... Weena. Yeah, I'm okay with that having been changed :shifty:
Idiocracy had me laughing all the way through, and it had me thinking about it for days afterward. But, do we know that the entire world is like that? The film is a cartoon, so anything could happen. I can only assume that if the USA is the way it's depicted in Idiocracy that the rest of the world would be, too; but in fiction the writer has to create a world, and a fictional world is always simpler than the real one.

That's the reason that I notice things like you observed in my own comments and your own musings on the films, and after noticing them I forgive them. Unless they're stupid. In the case of The Time Machine there are all sorts of psychological forces at work: the book was written at the beginning of the 20th century and Pal wanted to remain true to it, as did Simon Wells. Yet, many assumptions about how the immediate modern world would unfold were unwarranted, based on the natural ignorance of the time in which the book was written. Frankly, Herbert Wells could not have imagined Steve Jobs or what he invented, or the way in which he marketed it. So he could not have written about it. Nor did he foresee the World Wars until years after The Time Machine was pressed onto sheets of paper for the first time. (I'm thinking of Things to Come, of course.)

This puts the producers in a bind, don't you think? They want to remain true to the original story, but the original story is now very much outdated. Pal set his "present" time frame back in the end of December 1899. Wells set his in the Victorian Age also, but they had knowledge of different length spans of time that George or Alex would travel through, and that gave them a broader base for guessing at the future just past that time...but when you get to 802701, it's up for grabs. I doubt that we'd recognize the technical side of life in 802701, unless everything has reverted to the Stone Age for the dozenth time or something!

I 'preciate your compliments. And I admire your observations.
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
Mod Hip
Posts: 14065
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Mod Hip » Wed Feb 09, 2011 5:01 pm

Gort wrote:George is a Johnny One-note...

The lack of engagement with the characters...
The main reasons I had trouble getting in to the original when I first viewed it in 2006, I believe.
Gort wrote:When you watch a film for the fifth time, and you’re still getting a post-viewing high from it, there is no way you could rate it merely “Good” or OK,” no matter what other people think about it. That’s my experience, having just finished the 2002 film The Time Machine.
Ah, makes me want to dig up my old DVD and watch it again - I do recall such a feeling from at least the first two viewings.
Gort wrote:When Filby tosses away his bowler hat. I lose it, every time. Can’t stop myself.
The first image that springs to mind when I think of the movie :) The second is one of the nicer wide shots of Guy Pearce and Jeremy Irons' showdown.
Gort wrote:What’s with the cool-looking but utterly anachronistic beam of white light in the workings of the machine? Nor did they have small batteries to run an electric toothbrush in 1899, as far as I know. Perhaps my technological history has gaps.
Tesla magic?
Gort wrote:Dr. Hartdegen’s dramatic motivation to build the time machine in the first place. Frankly, I don’t like that he has to have a motivation other than curiosity about whether he could do it. However, I do like the way the utterly unnecessary motivation is used in the screenplay.
I was trying to recall whether the wife subplot was in the original (I haven't read the book). I guess not?
User avatar
Gort
Posts: 9068
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:50 pm
Location: Reducing some planet to a burned out cinder.

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Gort » Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:01 am

Mod Hip wrote: I was trying to recall whether the wife subplot was in the original (I haven't read the book). I guess not?
In the 1960 version the time traveler, called George, doesn't even have a girlfriend. He falls in love in the year 802701.
And at the end he returns there, presumably to get it on with Weena.
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
Gort
Posts: 9068
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:50 pm
Location: Reducing some planet to a burned out cinder.

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Gort » Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:02 am

Any requests for certain essays to be posted, or shall I just randomly select three?
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:23 am

A Comparison of The Time Machine (1960) and The Time Machine (2002):
The Effects

Image

No comparison. The 2002 production had the advantage of 42 years advance in technology that it could bring to bear on visualizations. Pal used what he had at his disposal very well. The 2002 version looks a hell of a lot better. So, why shouldn’t it? Most films made in 1960 looked better than most films made in 1920. However, special effects technology had not pressed forward very well, and would not until 1968, when the freewheeling ride we’re all on right now began with 2001: a Space Odyssey, and shifted into high gear in 1977 with Star Wars.

In the review, I mentioned the use of stop-motion animation for certain scenes in the 1960 film. As a kid and a teenager I loved stop-motion so much that I hatched the idea of using clay (plasticene) to make movable models that I could snap single frames of with my Super 8mm camera. I tried this with my 8mm, but it was spring drive and had no specific single-frame release, so I might get 0-3 frames when I tapped the big release button on the front. The Super8 had a single-frame release that was triggered with a plunger, like you use on SLRs. I actually had an eyeball fall out of a character's skull, and I was gratified to see a Morlock eyeball do the same in the film. I haven't read what they used for the models in 1960, but it looks like it might be plasticene in some shots. Of course when the trademarked Claymation type of animation hit the scene I was disappointed that someone else independently devised something that I thought was my own brainchild. Oh well, that's life!

One of the finest animation effects in the first movie is the scene of the sun arcing across the sky above the greenhouse. Of course, that is time-lapse rather than stop motion. So is the candle melting as George accelerates slowly forward through an evening. But as limited as the effects were, Pal used them to very clever advantage to get across the point of accelerated time travel, I think.

Wells used CGI effects well, also. Still, I prefer the look and the feel of George's imprisonment in lava, to that experienced by Alex Hartdegan. And as advanced as the grass animation was at the time, the 2002 scenes after the granite erodes away and reveals the bubble of the time machine in a field, which becomes the canyon in which the Eloi live, lacks a degree of realism. It's disturbing, but I couldn't do as well. Once again, it gets the point across despite the flaws in the technique used.

The über-Morlock is the one that falls apart in 2002, analogous to a Morlock attacker who falls into a corner of the chamber where George's time machine has been slid by the blue meanies. But in 2002, the disintegrating Morlock is dangling over a chasm, its hand held by Alexander Hartdegan, its arm protruding into the time effect bubble. Thus, the bulk of the beast ages, and decays, while the forearm and hand remain the same. It is a cool effect, but somehow lacks the emotional impact of the claymation 1960 disintegration scene.

Overall, I don't prefer either of these movies over its counterpart, but in the effects department the 1960 film has a nostalgic edge with me. It's only nostalgia. Neither film has flawless SFX!

As for the Morlock character design, the 2002 version wins hands-down, for me. The costuming is more convincing. It's amazing how make-up effects have advanced along with the advent of CGI. You often can't tell whether you're looking at practical makeup or CGI enhancements. (I'll be writing more about this when analyzing the two Planet of the Apes movies.) So long as the story being told is pretty-well conceived and told, and the acting bears up to the willing suspension of disbelief that we must participate with in order to remotely enjoy such a film, these newfangled developments are very nice.

They really fail when the budget is there only for SyFy levels of competence. It's still better than I can do, but not good enough for me to waste my time watching.

Do you have any favorite special effects scenes from either Time Machine film? Or maybe there are SFX scenes that you love to hate?
Go back using these buttons.ImageImageImageImageImageImage
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
kiddo in space
Posts: 13023
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by kiddo in space » Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:29 am

I got Planet of the Apes and Lord of the Flies, both the originals. Will watch them soon.
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:32 am

kiddo in space wrote:I got Planet of the Apes and Lord of the Flies, both the originals. Will watch them soon.
Yay! Then perhaps we can discuss them.
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:36 am

A Comparison of Lord of the Flies (1963) and Lord of the Flies (1990)
The behavior of the Tribe vs. Ralph and Piggy

Image

Both films pretty much depict the relationship that exists in Golding’s book when it comes to the interactions between the Tribe, and Ralph and Piggy as the latter two attempt to maintain a sense of civilization among the stranded boys. In some of these comments and my write-ups I’ve speculated that Golding may have intended Piggy’s and Ralph’s adoration of civilized orderly behavior to be a figment of their imaginations. Perhaps Golding’s point is that we are all on the verge of becoming savages with just a small twist in our situations. Piggy and Ralph stand together as part of a shrinking club, with membership dwindling steadily, until they are the only holdouts to joining Jack’s hedonistic tribe of hunters. In all three works, one of the things Jack offers is fun. “Who wants to join my tribe? We’ll hunt and have some fun!” Another thing he does is make Ralph and Piggy the enemy of fun, “Wanting to tell everyone what to do,” and observing in the 1963 version, after Ralph points out, “I’m chief. I was chosen,” “Why should choosing make any difference? Telling people what to do.”

Eventually, Piggy’s and Ralph’s voices of reason and level-headedness are literally hooted and laughed down, just before the Civilized Boys Club is reduced to one by circumstances beyond Ralph’s and even Jack’s control. Simon has a role in the novel that he is not awarded in either film: Christ figure. In both movies, Simon is on a quest for the truth. He stands outside both camps, and suggests that “Maybe the Beast is... well, maybe it’s us,” which makes no sense to anyone but the reader. He attempts to look beyond the surface of everyone’s fear and see what they are afraid of—perhaps believing that if they know the fear, and can name it, then they will lose the fear altogether. He seeks to bring the truth about the monster to the other boys, but he is unable to complete that mission.

Go back using these buttons.ImageImageImageImageImageImage
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
kiddo in space
Posts: 13023
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by kiddo in space » Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am

But, can the 90's version of Lord of the Flies be considered a remake? Since they both have a novel as a source, each of them could be seen as an adaptation of the movie, instead of one being the remake of the other.
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:43 am

kiddo in space wrote:But, can the 90's version of Lord of the Flies be considered a remake? Since they both have a novel as a source, each of them could be seen as an adaptation of the novel, instead of one being the remake of the other.
That argument is quite valid. But the same producer made both films. And it's an additional film made from the same source material, or idea.

I suppose a person could effectively argue that unless only a film exists as the source for a second movie, that there is no such thing as a remake. But, as an example, if you've ever read Pierre Boulle's novel Planet of the Apes, you know that it is not a whole lot like either of the films. The "reimagining" that Burton did in 2001, is more like the first film than it is like the book. The same is true of the 1990 Lord of the Flies. It more closely resembles the 1963 film than it does the source novel.

What do you think about this?

EDIT: The Boulle novel has a twist ending, but it is one that works only in the human imagination. It would never have worked at all in a movie.
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Thu Feb 10, 2011 2:09 am

A Comparison of Romeo & Juliet (1968) and Romeo+Juliet (1996):
The Acting

Image

At first glance the acting styles in the two films seem to be worlds apart. Baz Luhrmann seems to have let his actors run a little closer to the edge than Zeffirelli did, but he kept most of them from falling over. Upon reflection, it seems that Luhrmann allowed more broad comedy to be used, but both directors played the dramatic scenes with much intensity. Overall, the acting styles appropriated by the two directors serve their visions of the story well. Leo DiCaprio had more trouble with his Shakespearean lines than anyone else in either cast. It wasn't that he failed often with inflection, but that his naturalistic acting style made it seem like he was thinking, "Damn, people just don't talk like this!" a lot of the time. Also, his voice isn't exactly stentorian, so when he says the lines they don't have as much import as when Leonard Whiting says them; yet DiCaprio does more facial acting. Is this good or bad?

That depends entirely on what you like. When the Remake Rematch was posted in 2008, I actually had a couple posters tell me that they prefer the Luhrmann version to Zeff's vision of the story. The thing is, Zeffirelli didn't use much comedy at all to break the growing despair of the main characters, while Luhrmann took pity on his audience and their adrenal glands, and put in some goofy stuff once in a while to ratchet down the anxiety (even though he ratcheted up the violence). Perhaps he is aware that his audience is basically younger people, probably a bit more slanted toward boys, and that boys generally find love stories icky. Boys also find heavy drama unbearable, as a rule. I think we males want to be shielded from feeling anything strong for longer than a few moments running. Luhrmann allows us that break by having his actors play broad comedy in the opening rumble, in the scene at the ball, and on the beach when Tybalt shows up.

He also allows music to make a couple of tension-relief efforts, as the boys choir rehearses in the cathedral where Romeo goes to consult Friar Lawrence, and at the party when Fulgencio Capulet sings. If someone had told me that Luhrmann's version had these features I probably wouldn't have ever watched it, or would have done so only grudgingly. But his choices all work together well, given the stylistic vision that he selected for his presentation.

This is not to say that Zeffirelli's presentation is lacking. Not at all. It is very well-centered, exceptionally well-conceived, and has a certain air of reality that the Luhrmann remake avoids altogether. Whereas the Baz version is tongue-in-cheek, Zeffirelli takes pains to allow us to transport ourselves back to the time when a mythical Verona was crawling with young men wearing colorful tights and sporting swords at the waist.

In terms of the emotion generated, somehow Luhrmann manages to not let his goofiness impinge on the horrible ending, and how that makes the viewer feel. In fact, as I wrote in another essay, his choice of two small alterations to the scene in the tomb makes it induce goosebumps without fail. His actors play along with this, becoming ever more serious as the story nears its climax. Zeffirelli has his actors reigned into the tragic aspect from the beginning. When the Capulets and Montagues tangle in the market in the opening of the film, it is clear that something bad will eventually come to pass. His actors also go along with his vision, and the end result is the same.

In both cases, I get the most intense feeling of anguish, accompanied by goose-flesh, when Romeo, realizing what he has done, and what he has undone, falls to his knees and shouts, "Oh, I am Fortune's fool!"

Image
Go back using these buttons.ImageImageImageImageImageImage
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
Mod Hip
Posts: 14065
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Mod Hip » Thu Feb 10, 2011 2:19 am

Now, of course, you'll have to see Gnomeo and Juliet and compare that.

...(I actually may be seeing it tomorrow. Free current movie review fodder... tough to say 'no' at this point)
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Thu Feb 10, 2011 2:22 am

Mod Hip wrote:Now, of course, you'll have to see Gnomeo and Juliet and compare that.

...(I actually may be seeing it tomorrow. Free current movie review fodder... tough to say 'no' at this point)
I'll defer to you on that. Feel free to do such a comparison in here, if you wish!
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
kiddo in space
Posts: 13023
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by kiddo in space » Thu Feb 10, 2011 2:29 am

YouTookMyName wrote: That argument is quite valid. But the same producer made both films. And it's an additional film made from the same source material, or idea.

I suppose a person could effectively argue that unless only a film exists as the source for a second movie, that there is no such thing as a remake. But, as an example, if you've ever read Pierre Boulle's novel Planet of the Apes, you know that it is not a whole lot like either of the films. The "reimagining" that Burton did in 2001, is more like the first film than it is like the book. The same is true of the 1990 Lord of the Flies. It more closely resembles the 1963 film than it does the source novel.

What do you think about this?

EDIT: The Boulle novel has a twist ending, but it is one that works only in the human imagination. It would never have worked at all in a movie.
I think that, if we look at it that way, it can be considered a remake. Since I haven't seen the Lord of the Flies films, I didn't know about that. Also, book and film are separate media, so, now that I think about it, the films we are talking about can be considered remakes, even when they come from a novel, since the new versions are "adapting an adaptation" to put it in a way.
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Thu Feb 10, 2011 4:59 am

I've added an upcoming Rematch: The Picture of Dorian Gray 1945 vs. Dorian Gray 2009 to the OP.

Don't worry, dreiser, I'll get started on Planet of the Apes before I get that new one well underway. (Although I've already seen both flicks!)
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:25 pm

ImageImageImage
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Thu Feb 10, 2011 11:36 pm

Image The 1963 Lord of the Flies Image Image

The 1963 film is released by The Criterion Collection (here’s their page about it).

1963 version From DeepDiscount.com

Lord of the Flies is available in a special Criterion release called “Essential Art House”

1963 version From Amazon.com

The "Essential Art House" DVD from Amazon.com

A Region-2 release of the 1963 film with English, and a Hungarian language option!

Want it in Italian? Region 2. Enjoy.

Netflix has the Criterion 1963 DVD & the film is on Watch Instantly

Image The 1990 Lord of the Flies Image

The 1990 film is an MGM DVD release.

1990 version From DeepDiscount.com

1990 version From Amazon.com

1990 version On-demand at Amazon

Selection page from Amazon.ca for Canadian readers

NetFlix has the 1990 DVD


Image
Lord of the Flies has not been released on Blu-ray at this time.


Image
YouTube links are unreliable for longevity, and usually low in quality, but possibly better than nothing.

Lord Of The Flies 1963 Part 1 of 9 parts.
The entire film has been uploaded by EnglishAssist.

Lord of the Flies 1990 Part 1 of 13 parts.
This film has been uploaded by LordoftheFliesmovie.
Go back using these buttons.ImageImageImageImageImage
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Fri Feb 11, 2011 12:23 am

Image The 1960 film The Time Machine Image

1960 version From Amazon

The 1960 film along with three other sci-fi classics at Amazon
Seems like a good deal. It is the TCM Greatest Classic Films Collection: Science Fiction including 2001 A Space Odyssey / Soylent Green / Forbidden Planet / The Time Machine 1960.

1960 version from BestBuy

NetFlix has the 1960 version on DVD

DeepDiscount does not have the 1960 version.

Image The 2002 film The Time Machine Image
2002 version from DeepDiscount

2002 version From Amazon

2002 version from BestBuy

NetFlix has the 2002 DVD available

Image
The Time Machine is not yet out on Blu-ray disc.
Go back using these buttons.ImageImageImageImageImage
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Fri Feb 11, 2011 1:29 am

Image The 1968 Romeo & Juliet film Image

The 1968 film is released by Paramount Home Video.

1968 version From Amazon.com

NetFlix has the Zeffirelli DVD available

A 1936 version from Amazon, in case you're interested in exploring;
(perhaps this is the one I saw with the “old people” playing the star roles) Norma Shearer and Leslie Howard star.

DeepDiscount doesn't have the 1968 film.

Image The 1996 Romeo + Juliet film Image

The 1996 version is a Twentieth Century Fox Home Video release.

The regular issue DVD from Amazon

1996 version “music edition DVD” From Amazon

1996 version from BestBuy

NetFlix has the 1996 version on DVD and on Watch Instantly

DeepDiscount doesn't have the 1996 film on DVD.

Go back using these buttons.ImageImageImageImageImage
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Fri Feb 11, 2011 1:36 am

Image The 1968 Romeo + Juliet film

The 1968 version is not available on Blu-ray at this time.

Image The 1996 Romeo + Juliet film Image

1996 version released by 20th Century Fox

Review of the Blu-ray at blu-ray.com

Available at DeepDiscount

Available at Amazon

Available at BestBuy
Go back using these buttons.ImageImageImageImageImage
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
Gort
Posts: 9068
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:50 pm
Location: Reducing some planet to a burned out cinder.

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Gort » Fri Feb 11, 2011 1:10 pm

If anyone knows/cares about other good sources for any of the films in this thread (DVD, Blu-ray, other ways), either PM Gort or YTMN the link information and I'll put it into the posts, or you can post it here and I'll copy it into the posts (with a credit to you).

Of course, Netflix and similar bidnessiz ought to have all six that I've involved so far.
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
Hank
Posts: 2451
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:17 am
Contact:

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Hank » Fri Feb 11, 2011 10:38 pm

Amazing, Gort. Simply put.
User avatar
Gort
Posts: 9068
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:50 pm
Location: Reducing some planet to a burned out cinder.

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Gort » Sat Feb 12, 2011 12:55 am

Hank wrote:Amazing, Gort. Simply put.
Thanks, Hank. I'm not sure anyone really understands what's going on since I'm posting a jumble of information about three films all at once.

I couldn't figure out how to make it a contest. :D
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
Hank
Posts: 2451
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:17 am
Contact:

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Hank » Sat Feb 12, 2011 1:03 am

Gort wrote: Thanks, Hank. I'm not sure anyone really understands what's going on since I'm posting a jumble of information about three films all at once.

I couldn't figure out how to make it a contest. :D
Ha! I don't know why my threads tend to be contests...

Maybe I should stop that.
User avatar
Gort
Posts: 9068
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:50 pm
Location: Reducing some planet to a burned out cinder.

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Gort » Sat Feb 12, 2011 1:06 am

Hank wrote: Ha! I don't know why my threads tend to be contests...

Maybe I should stop that.
Don't you dare!
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Sat Feb 12, 2011 2:58 am

William Shakespeare’s Romeo & Juliet (1996) dir. Baz Luhrmann
Image
IMDb link RT-link

Year: 1996/1997 Director: Baz Luhrmann Cast: Claire Danes, Leonardo DiCaprio, Miriam Margolyes, Pete Postlethwaite, Harold Perrineau, Paul Sorvino, Brian Dennehy Length: 120 min. Color/Stereo

I watched Baz Luhrmann’s Moulin Rouge because I liked this film so much. No comparison. This one is actually good. :D

Unconventional? Of course. Even a travesty at times. But always respectful, I think, of the source material. I see a difference between “respect” and “reverence.” Respect is shown by keeping the lines as they were written, though not always in the same order. Lack of reverence is shown by attending to comedic moments with levity, and even adding comedy to some moments that were, perhaps, not conceived as funny in the beginning. For example, Luhrmann has characters react to other character’s recitation of the thicker examples of Shakespearean verse with a comic take, at times. One example is Juliet’s speech where she tells her mother, “I'll look to like, if looking liking move:/But no more deep will I endart mine eye/Than your consent gives strength to make it fly,” to which Lady Capulet shakes her head in bewilderment. Much like many members of the audience, no doubt!

Image

My dream casting of Romeo and Juliet would be Leonard Whiting and Claire Danes. That could never happen in real life, of course, due to age differences. But how about digitally? Now, having watched both versions of the play on the same day this time, I don’t see Claire Danes’s Juliet as that much more fitting or likeable than Olivia Hussey’s. Watching the two films with quite a bit of time between them as I always did before, it seemed to me that Danes does a more approachable and more “realistic” Juliet. She isn’t quite as “pretty” as Hussey. But she’s more of a genuine girl. She seems a bit more of an airhead than Hussey does in the role. And this is a teenage girl in love—truthfully, a 13-year old in love. Her thoughts are not fully in order as she approaches Romeo and her passion for him. Attributing more wisdom to her than a girl her age would have, makes things seem wackier than they already do. For that reason the slight ambience of “airheadedness” is appropriate, I think.

Image

I have a little conceptual trouble with the “rumble” aspect of the story. Still, if you allow West Side Story as a previous version of Romeo and Juliet, then you even have precedent for the Latin gang-war approach to the play! And the rivalry of families functioning as if they are gangs is present in the original play. So it is not a stretch—it just rattles me a bit. I am also slightly squeamish about the inclusion of party drugs in the story, but it’s being updated to modern times when many people take drugs for parties, or to help them have sex. Or to control their tendency to be distracted by things around them in a world designed to be full of such distractions. So, I suppose it’s appropriate to include it although I cannot personally participate in the behavior. I don’t set gas stations on fire, either, but I watch raptly when someone does it in a film.

Image

Luhrmann does make one substantial change to the play itself. Whereas the original Friar Lawrence lines say that Juliet will mimic death for “two and forty hours,” Luhrmann changes this to “four and twenty hours.” But, the update injects the tale into the speedier modern world, where four and twenty hours is a long time. Especially with companies such as Poste-Haste-Dispatch at our command.

A note about the release date: IMDb says the film was released in 1996. Rotten Tomatoes says 1997. The DVD box I own says 1997. But a RottenTomatoes poster corrected me in the 2008 RT posting of this thread, and I changed the date in the banner before I researched the release dates. It doesn’t really matter, anyway. Some of the more prolific posters on film-lover's boards were barely out of diapers in 1996 or 1997. And if you don’t remember a thing clearly it’s Ancient History. That’s how the human brain works. So, the date of release doesn’t really matter, I say.

Following are some points I like and some points I don’t like about this film:

Image

LIKE: The placement of the play into a modern millieu. When I first heard that Lurhmann was doing this I figured he’d change the words, too. And he did, but ”legally” by scooting certain lines around. For example, Romeo says at the party, ”The drugs are quick,” which is a line from the death scene. But Shakespeare wrote it, and it is from Romeo and Juliet. I figure that’s not any worse than cutting lines.

LIKE: The way Lurhmann doesn’t take the play totally seriously. For example, there are ”Looney Tunes” moments in the movie. An example is when Benvolio is telling Mercutio that ”The Capels are afoot” and at that time the blue Capulet car is seen moving behind him on the beach, with some dopey sound effect playing. I think that’s pretty cool. I understand if some wouldn’t like it.

LIKE: That Luhrmann keeps a couple of the ”more difficult” scenes and speeches in place. Scenes that Zeffirelli left out. Examples are the short speech by Juliet about seeing Romeo as if in his grave as he leaves following their night together at the Capulet house. And the scene at the apothecary’s business when Romeo buys the drugs that will allow him to join his wife in death.

Image

LIKE: The way Luhrmann sometimes lets go entirely of his five cuts in 10 seconds editing style and hangs on a shot for a long time. A good example is the shot following Mercutio’s death scene. Luhrmann hangs on the wide shot as Romeo, then Benvolio run down the beach to Romeo’s silver convertible. The shot stays that way until Romeo drives away.

LIKE: Luhrmann’s staging of the scene in Act V in the Capulet Tomb. I will have a Comparison feature about that over in the Essays posts, so I won’t write a lot here. But when I first read the play in 10th grade I imagined it played out pretty much the way old Baz Luhrmann put it on the screen. To my teenage mind it seemed sweetly ironic.

LIKE: Poste-Haste-Dispatch. It’s an addition. The original lines say, ” In this resolve: I'll send a friar with speed/To Mantua, with my letters to thy lord.” Nothing is mentioned about dispatching a letter Post Haste in the play. For this reason I don’t understand why Luhrmann didn’t come up with weapon names that would scan in iambic pentameter and substitute them for ”dagger” and ”longsword.” Ho. Like, ”What noise is this? Give me my long sword, ho!” could have become, ”What noise is this? Give me my rifle, ho!” Guess he didn’t want to.

Image

LIKE: The substitution of a swimming pool scene for the balcony scene. The young couple look quite adorable all wet as they say those most famous of lines. And this is a part of something else that I admire about Luhrmann’s staging...The emulation of many silent-film standards in the making of this Romeo and Juliet tale. As each major character appears there is a freeze-frame with a title bearing the character name and role in the story. And there is slapstick business injected into the play, but always in a most fitting way. Romeo is especially clumsy (teenage boys often are, especially when they are in lust—or in an enemy’s security-guarded garden). So he causes both him and Juliet to fall into the Capulet’s swimming pool. He trips and knocks over a candle stand after convincing Friar Lawrence to marry them.

LIKE: The immersive presence of The Church (presumably the Catholic Church) in the sets for the movie. Well it’s immersive for the Capulets, the Latin family. The Montagues have a cross in the back of their limo, but they aren’t seen at home as much, so we don’t know whether Romeo has an altar in his bedroom the way Juliet does in hers. But he is in constant contact with Friar Lawrence, his tutor and confessor, so we might deduce that the presence of The Church in their lives is just as strong. Not that it reduces the level of violence in ther lives. A sad parallel with many modern ”religious” families.

LIKE: The way I feel the day after I watch this movie. My head is full of pleasant memories and the strains of the music. It affects me, clearly, and for longer than my butt is parked in whatever chair I sit in while I watch it. I wonder what effect it would have on me if I were ever able to see it in the theater.

Image

DON'T LIKE: The substitution of firearms for swords. This has ramifications beyond the strangeness of referring to guns with names of blade-weapons. Still, in a modern city people don’t conduct gang wars with swords. That’s a thing long gone. And if Luhrmann had set his play in the time of old Verona, he’d have been competing directly with Zeffirelli’s great version, plus what would be the point? He made an M-TV Romeo and Juliet on purpose. This is his vision of the story. The guns are necessary to the updated setting.

In a sense, the setting brings the same logic to bear as whatever logic might be used to imagine-up a setting for a music video. It’s almost as if Luhrmann has created a 120-minute music video version of Romeo and Juliet. Well, not almost like it. That’s what he did! But, the reference to “Dagger” and “Longsword” as gun manufacturers just seems clumsy to me. And it only appears three times in the movie! Why can’t I just ignore it?

Oh, yeah. Romeo “shoots his way into” the Capulet tomb while under attack from SWAT snipers and a helicopter based gunner. *Rolls eyes*

Image

Oh, yeah. Romeo blasts away at Tybalt, rather than accidentally impaling the boy on a sword as Tybalt falls forward (see the 1968 film). In the 1968 play the aggressiveness is not put-on, but both Mercutio’s deadly wound and Tybalt’s are accidentally received. That changes the irony and tragedy of the story a great deal. In this 1996 retelling, Romeo is able to hold onto deadly feelings of revenge for several hours, and then blow a number of holes into his adversary.

DON'T LIKE: At times the emotional level of the delivery is a bit too high. Not that Shakespeare is above being screamed at the top of one’s lungs. Why not? The plays are not gospel, they are merely very well-written and lasting. But certain over-the-top moments annoy me. Such as Mercutio’s ending lines, ”This is she...this is she...!” for his Queen Mab speech. And Tybalt is too flat a character in this version. Zeffirelli at least gives the Prince of Cats a sense of humor, and playfulness. I know Leguizamo can do that. I’ve seen him. So it had to have been a directorial decision to make Tybalt one-dimensional, here.

DON'T LIKE: The way I can sometimes tell that Leo DiCaprio wasn’t totally up to delivering Shakespearean verse. At times he seems to lose the sense of what he’s trying to say. But, by and large, he does well with it. Not as well as Ethan Hawke does in the Hamlet of 2000, but far better than adequate.

Image

DON'T LIKE: Luhrmann cut all the Nurse’s lines in the scene where Lady Capulet tells Juliet that she is going to meet her future husband (Paris) at the party that evening. Then again, in a modern context most of the nurse’s lines would not make sense. I can still see a great performance of those lines in the 1968 film. What’s my complaint?

DON'T LIKE: The way Luhrmann takes the playfulness out of the rumble between Mercutio and Tybalt. Perhaps it is not ”there” in the original lines, but Zeffirelli’s rendering of that scene is seared into my mind as the ”right way” to play it. And I’ve seen other directors use that approach (guided no doubt by the fact that Mercutio’s wound is a total accident). But Lurhmann’s Tybalt is simply mean-spirited from the first shot, and he takes out poor Mercutio on purpose. They are not goofing around, but become involved in a deadly fight that is intended to end in death. The quarrel between Romeo and Tybalt is supposed to be to the death; but in the play, Mercutio becomes worm’s meat because a bunch of boys are playing around with their swords. Romeo’s pivotal line, ”I am Fortune’s fool!” makes less sense in the Luhrmann version just because of the vengeful playing out of the Tybalt-Mercutio duel, followed by Romeo driving around Verona Beach for hours planning to kill Tybalt.

Image

DON'T LIKE: All the closeups. Especially after seeing Zeffirelli’s looser framing on the same day, the constant practice of shoving the camera right up into the actor’s nostrils grated on my sensibilities. Keep in mind, I liked that aspect of the movie before today. And I might like it the next time I see it. I was trying to get appropriate still frames for this thread, and the constant cutting between close-ups was thwarting my attempts. So call this an aspect that I Don’t Like At the Moment!

Image
Go back using these buttons.ImageImageImageImageImageImage
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Sat Feb 12, 2011 3:11 am

The Lord of the Flies (1963) dir. Peter Brook
IMDb link RT-link

Image

Year: 1963 Director/Screenplay: Peter Brook Cast: James Aubrey as Ralph; Tom Chapin as Jack; Hugh Edwards as Piggy; Simon is played by Tom Gaman. Roger Elwin plays Roger. Length: 92 min. Black & White/Mono

Following a plane crash, a group of boys, all elementary school age, become stranded on an idyllic tropical island. It should be paradise. Their plan to attract the attention of passing ships and planes with a signal fire should work out. They are old enough to work together. But something goes wrong. It goes wrong within the boys, according to William Golding who published Lord of the Flies as a novel in 1955.

I read Lord of the Flies when I was in 10th grade. It was one of those “optional” books that you could read, and either simply enjoy or do an extra-credit book report on. I loved the book, and for once I could see how William Golding was conscious of the symbolism of each character as he wrote the story (in those days “symbolism” usually seemed to me to be something the teachers made up. I just didn’t see it!). Golding’s story was clearly a modern fable, not meant to be taken as a pronouncement on “what would happen” but a true “What If…” or “Once Upon a Time” type of story. A possibility. The reason I read the book was because of an incident when I was 11 or 12 years old.

Image

While waiting in an eye doctor’s office one Saturday morning in 1963 or maybe 1964, I found the October 25, 1963 issue of Life magazine (with Yvette Mimieux on the cover wearing an orange 2-piece swimsuit, and propped against an orange surfboard!). That issue featured a Robert Wallace article about the film. “The Young Wild Pack in Lord of the Flies” reads the headline on the first page (although that is not the title of the article). With ample photos and a bit of text about Peter Brook’s film, the article whets the curiosity of the movie-goer. I had never heard of the novel at 11 or 12 years old. I was rather shocked to learn that some of the boys would be naked in the movie (not knowing that they mostly forego clothing in the book), but this aspect of the film made me rather curious, as well. I’m a really modest person, even moreso back then. I couldn’t imagine anyone acting in front of a camera with no clothes on! I also couldn’t imagine a story where kids got to run around without adults—forget the absence of clothing; I thought the absence of adults would be paradise. (Note, photos of this Life magazine article are an extra on the Criterion release.)

Image

From that Life magazine article, a pararagraph explaining the pure-luck aspect of the film getting made at all:
Director Brook, for his part, undertook the task "because it was an impossible thing to do." Brook, 36, was at one time the enfant extraordinaire of the British theater--at 22 he directed Alec Guinness in Sartre's No Exit. Thereafter, working at Stratford-on-Avon with actors of the caliber of John Gielgud and Laurence Olivier, he became one of the world's foremost Shakespearean directors. In New York he has staged such plays as The Fighting Cock with Rex Harrison, The Visit with the Lunts, and musical Irma la Douce. "Impossible" may not have been precisely the word Brook intended to use; he meant that the film would have seemed impossible to the Hollywood mind, which would have raised so many objections that the work might not have commenced until 1970. –-Robert Wallace, LIFE Magazine, October 25, 1963
Brook made his film. It was not critically praised, yet people lined up around the block to see it wherever it went (or so I’ve read). I first saw the film while I was in college at a free screening by the Memphis Public Library. It was held in an old storefront on Summer Avenue. I finally saw it in 1972, projected from a 16mm print—and only because my roommate had always loved the book; he learned about the showing and having no car of his own, had to have someone drive him there. I believe we missed the first 15 minutes that night.

In the 1990s I learned of the newer version. I rented both and watched them in the same week. Later, I acquired the Criterion DVD of the Brook version and the DVD of the Hook version after that. My older son did a home school assignment wherein he read the novel, watched both movies, and wrote an essay comparing the three. As I do, he concluded that the first version captures the book more literally, yet the second version captures the spirit of the novel much better. I believe that the best Lord of the Flies experience, cinematically, would be to 1) read the original novel, 2) watch Peter Brook’s visualization of the story, and 3) watch Harry Hook’s remake. Neither film directly apes the book. And yet both are so close to it that you could never mistake either for a different story.

Image

Brook’s creation of this film was a struggle from the beginning. I know better than to confuse low-budget with bad. In fact as a production professional I understand his shortcuts and why he took them. The film could have totally derailed. Instead, something serendipitous took over and propelled the film to be much better than the money would have ever promised. The budget was $250,000 1950’s dollars. Much more than it sounds like in 21st Century terms, but still not a lot of money even then to take with you on location with 37 kids for 3 months, plus all the support crew needed. And you’ve got to figure in the cost of answer prints, and editing table rentals, music production and so forth. In the Criterion release essay, Brook wrote, “In France, feature films have been made for $150. The $150 gets you through the first day’s shooting. By then, enough wheels are turning to let you get through the second day, and soon you have enough to show to justify credit for going on a bit longer. Our only question was how to get to the point of no return.”

It’s interesting to me that this was, as far as I’ve been able to determine, the first major motion picture on which the battery-powered portable Nagra synchronous field audio recorder was ever used. I drooled over the ones that I could check out of the equipment room in film school. Audio has always been one of my first loves in production. It’s amazing that I wound up doing video instead of engineering music recording sessions for a living.

Perhaps it’s good to conclude with a few more of Brook’s words about his Lord of the Flies production: “My experience showed me that the only falsification in Golding’s fable is the length of time the descent to savagery takes. His action takes about three months. I believe that if the cork of continued adult presence were removed from the bottle, complete catastrophe could occur within one long weekend.” Does this TV show bear out Brook’s suspicions?

Image

Here are some statements about what I like and do not like about Peter Brook’s 1963 rendering of Lord of the Flies:

LIKE: The general faithfulness to the book that Brook manages to bring to the screen via his screenplay adaptation of William Golding’s unparalleled masterpiece. Where the book is poetic in tone, the film is as poetic as you can make black and white be.

LIKE: The sound editing in the film. Although location audio was recorded, the sound of the surf where the movie was filmed in Puerto Rico rendered the spoken dialogue unusable. So, Brook had each boy with spoken lines re-read his lines at three different speeds each day after shooting. Brook’s sound recordists used close-miking for a very personal, realistic sound to the dialogue, rather than the distant ambience you get with a boom-mounted microphone. The sound editors used these recordings to completely re-build the dialogue, and match it to the lip movements the actors made on screen. A fabulous achievement. I’ve had to do similar technical feats in my day, but never to cover an entire 90-minute film! Plus, all the other sounds had to be reconstructed with Foley audio or wild sound in order to make the sound track seem “live.” This fabulous, brain-breaking work by Peter Brook, Gerald Feil and Jean-Claude Lubtchansky to reconstruct the spoken dialogue is why it took a year of post-production to finish the film. I’m on my knees, genuflecting to all their hard work every time I watch this movie! (And shaking my fist cursing the room-sound that blemishes some of the dialogue re-recording, darn it!)

Image

LIKE: The performances Brook got from his cast of 6-12 year old non-actor boys. One cast member had appeared in a commercial. The other 58 boys were—well, just 1950s boys. They were all English, but most lived in the U.S. And their performances are so realistic it’s scary. Which it is supposed to be.

LIKE: I generally find cinema verité boring and amateurish except in documentaries, where it is understandable. A smattering of the style here and there in an otherwise “under control” film experience is like deodorizer in a public restroom: it helps out the experience. Some directors are able to use the style quite well, and make what almost seems to be a documentary of a fictional situation (see Truffaut). Cinema verité works well in a subdued form in two of Kubrick’s films that I love (2001 and Dr. Strangelove). Brook makes excellent use of the cinema verité technique in Lord of the Flies. It pulls you into the film because your mind can believe that you’re seeing what is actually happening. I think the sometimes incompetent acting skills of a few of the boys would seem much worse if the film used traditional Hollywood guidelines for production.

Image

DON’T LIKE: There are a few scenes in the film that are taken directly from the book—for no apparent reason. This is a problem that galled me about the first Harry Potter movie, as well. It seems that the directors who love a book well enough to want to visualize it for the screen, often try to keep in details that are wonderful on the page but don’t translate well to the screen, if they translate at all. One such moment occurs early in the film when the camera does a tedious, laborious, pointless crab shot down the entire line of choir members as each says his name. It is painful as each boy waits until the camera slowly, slowly, slowly rolls into place, and you can see a production assistant or Mr. Brook (in your mind’s eye) pointing to the young amateur to cue him to say his character’s name. This one scene almost ruins the film for me. It recovers later. But the first time I saw it, when this scene played I almost thought, “Forget it. I’m not watching this crap,” and it tainted the whole movie with an amateurish ambience in my mind.

DON’T LIKE: In the book Simon is brown-haired, and brown-eyed. Whether Brook purposely cast a blue-eyed blond-haired actor for Simon, or it just turned out that a blond boy was the only one who auditioned (sarcasm needle goes full right) I couldn’t say. But I must admit that the blond hair helps the boy stand out in the absence of color.

Image

DON’T LIKE: That Brook, in keeping faithfully to the letter of Golding’s novel, misses many opportunities to make this a movie, instead of a book-turned-screenplay. When you see the 1990 film, even though it violates the “letter of the book,” it creates a much more palpable feeling in me that parallels what I feel when I read the book. This film is a distant, intellectual translation of a literary work to celluloid. Perhaps this is a mark of 1960s films—a lot of them don’t engage me emotionally, but only intellectually. I have the same problem with George Pal’s 1960 The Time Machine, and the original The Manchurian Candidate outings, as well.

DON’T LIKE: The boys antics are fun to watch, and their acting performances are raw and excellent. But they aren’t as engaging as the boys selected for the remake. In other words, the Brook version gets me into the movie (I repeat, “Into the movie”) while the 1990 remake gets me into the story (yes, “the story” which is what I watch most movies for).

Image

DON’T LIKE: This version of the film engages my intellect. It makes me think, “Oh that would be awful for those boys; what a terrible thing to have happen; it’s a sad commentary on human nature” and “I don’t really think that’s what would happen.” But it doesn’t engage my emotions very often, and not very deeply when it does. I do care about the characters, intellectually, and I feel a twinge of discontent when certain characters meet their demise. Sometimes I feel a modicum of dread when I know what is going to happen next. But these are children I’m watching, and I should either feel deeply repelled by their behavior or have my heart-strings plucked mercilessly because their innocence is being raped. I merely get twinges. In my opinion I should at least get two to three lumps in the throat, and maybe an unmanly tear or two from such a story. Don’t you think?

DON’T LIKE: This film is like an amateurish college student film class production. Some of this is inevitable due to Brook’s choice to use inexperienced boys to play all the parts in the film. It was Peter Brook’s third feature film, and third credited screenplay. Although I can recognize the immense effort Brook and company put into making the movie, there are a lot of visual technical errors that I would grade off for (some quite a bit) if such a film were submitted to me as professor of a film class. All that means is that you don’t have to make a technically flawless film for it to be a great movie. As I wrote above, I don’t confuse “low-budget” with “bad.”

Image

A Caution to those who have not seen the film but who hate child nudity: This film was made when naked children were thought of as cute, rather than alarming; when people didn’t give much thought at all about stirring up the lust of a lurking pederast, so Brook was allowed to make and distribute a film where some (not all) of the boys cast off clothing as they do in the book. In the film the older boys are seen mostly-clothed, or wearing breech-cloths after they “go native.” A trio of the younger ones are allowed to gallivant in their birthday-suits (en traje de Adan), since almost all of Golding’s boys decided clothes were too much trouble, or too tattered to continue to wear. There are not a large number of such scenes (only 10 shots in total throughout the film), but if such pictures disturb you in general, brace yourself for the few brief (or should I say “brief-less”?) moments that occur.
Go back using these buttons.ImageImageImageImageImageImage
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
MrCarmady
Posts: 4749
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 1:29 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by MrCarmady » Sat Feb 12, 2011 3:14 am

I despise R+J, and I'm the guy who got a huge kick out of Australia and stuff. It's Leo, first and foremost, though a lot of your actual criticisms are valid as well.
User avatar
Gort
Posts: 9068
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:50 pm
Location: Reducing some planet to a burned out cinder.

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Gort » Sat Feb 12, 2011 3:33 am

MrCarmady wrote:I despise R+J, and I'm the guy who got a huge kick out of Australia and stuff. It's Leo, first and foremost, though a lot of your actual criticisms are valid as well.
If I understand your post, it's Leo who makes you despise Luhrmann's R+J. Is that right?

Would that be his very presence, the cachet he had with female filmgoers at the time (which is probably what got him in the movie) and so forth? Or is it his performance? Plus, it sounds as if you wouldn't have liked the general style of the film even if someone else played Romeo.

Are you a Shakespeare fan at all, and if so, do you consider yourself more of a purist? You might enjoy reading the review of Zeffirelli's Romeo & Juliet when it goes up...I just don't know when that will be.
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
JediMoonShyne
Posts: 22425
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 7:26 am
Location: Cittàgazze
Contact:

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by JediMoonShyne » Sat Feb 12, 2011 8:57 am

YouTookMyName wrote:Pete Postlethwaite
RIP :(
“Bisogna essere molto forti per amare la solitudine.” - P.P. Pasolini

WCoF I II IIIL'EtàL'Eau한국88ShadowsBerlin thırd ISOLATIONVistaVision
User avatar
Gort
Posts: 9068
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:50 pm
Location: Reducing some planet to a burned out cinder.

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Gort » Sat Feb 12, 2011 2:00 pm

JediMoonShyne wrote: RIP :(
I believe the '96 R+J was the first film I ever saw him in. And then he was in the second Jurassic Park flick. And then I started noticing him everywhere. He was around for a long time. I suppose you saw him in more things than I did, because a lot of his TV work didn't make it Stateside. I think his turn as Friar Lawrence in the Luhrmann film is very well done.
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
MrCarmady
Posts: 4749
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 1:29 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by MrCarmady » Sat Feb 12, 2011 6:40 pm

Gort wrote: If I understand your post, it's Leo who makes you despise Luhrmann's R+J. Is that right?

Would that be his very presence, the cachet he had with female filmgoers at the time (which is probably what got him in the movie) and so forth? Or is it his performance? Plus, it sounds as if you wouldn't have liked the general style of the film even if someone else played Romeo.

Are you a Shakespeare fan at all, and if so, do you consider yourself more of a purist? You might enjoy reading the review of Zeffirelli's Romeo & Juliet when it goes up...I just don't know when that will be.
I'm OK on Shakespeare, though I consider Romeo and Juliet to be one of his weaker works I've read/seen performed. I haven't seen Zeffirelli's version. I hate West Side Story too, TBH, which is not a good sign.
I dislike Leo in general, so I think I would have liked the film a bit more (read: hated a bit less) if he wasn't in it. He just irritates me, there's no singular reason for that.
User avatar
Gort
Posts: 9068
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:50 pm
Location: Reducing some planet to a burned out cinder.

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Gort » Sat Feb 12, 2011 7:08 pm

MrCarmady wrote: I'm OK on Shakespeare, though I consider Romeo and Juliet to be one of his weaker works I've read/seen performed. I haven't seen Zeffirelli's version. I hate West Side Story too, TBH, which is not a good sign.
I dislike Leo in general, so I think I would have liked the film a bit more (read: hated a bit less) if he wasn't in it. He just irritates me, there's no singular reason for that.
West Side Story just had me agape the whole time. I couldn't believe the juxtaposition of musical numbers and dancing, with the content of the play. Overall, I don't care for it (it is a musical, after all) but it is a thing of interest. I am glad I saw it once. I wish I hadn't bought the expensive DVD in order to do that. :(

The nice thing about posting reviews of Shakespeare adaptions is that I don't have to worry about spoiler tags! I'm thinking about putting up the last two prepared reviews today, but I'm also thinking maybe some more essays and reviews next week.

We'll see what happens.

If Romeo & Juliet is the weakest Shakespeare you've seen/read, what is the strongest, for you? Also, what makes it weak in your view?
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
User avatar
Derninan
Posts: 7547
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 9:24 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Derninan » Sat Feb 12, 2011 7:21 pm

Every time I pop in here, I try to wrap my head around everything that's happening. So many colors and pictures and text and cool graphics! It's wonderfully overwhelming.

Lord of the Flies was one of the first books I really loved as an adolescent, so I think I'm gonna start there with all the reading and such, even though I haven't seen either film.
User avatar
MrCarmady
Posts: 4749
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 1:29 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by MrCarmady » Sat Feb 12, 2011 9:59 pm

My favourite, shamelessly, is probably Much Ado About Nothing, I prefer Shakespeare's comedies (though I haven't read King Lear or Macbeth, which I must do one day).
Romeo and Juliet is just not affecting at all, seeing as the main characters are young idiots, and most of the rest are grumpy old assholes.
Mod Hip
Posts: 14065
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by Mod Hip » Sat Feb 12, 2011 10:50 pm

Macbeth > pretty much everything ever
User avatar
YouTookMyName
Posts: 2227
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:53 am

Re: YTMN Presents a Remake Rematch Thread

Post by YouTookMyName » Sun Feb 13, 2011 1:49 am

A Comparison of The Time Machine (1960) and The Time Machine (2002):

Image A memorable quote or two from The Time Machine 1960

George: Aren’t you the least bit interested in who I am, where I’m from?
Weena: Should I be?


George: Only little children are frightened of the dark—and you are a little child, aren’t you?

George: What have you done? Thousands of years of building and rebuilding, creating and recreating so you can let it crumble to dust. A million years of sensitive men dying for their dreams... For what? So you can swim and dance and play.

The IMDb quotations page for the 1960 version of The Time Machine
WikiQuotes from the 1960 film.

Quotations from moviequotes.com for both films.

Image A memorable quote or two from The Time Machine 2002

Filby: Okay, we’ll continue this conversation in a week. (He walks out of the laboratory)
Alex: In a week we’ll never even have had this conversation.


Alex (to Kalen): Well, I guess you’d call us “New Yorkers.”
Kalen: New Yorkers. Are they friendly?
Alex: Until you talk to them.


The IMDb quotations page for the 2002 version of The Time Machine
WikiQuotes from the 2002 film.
Go back using these buttons.ImageImageImageImageImage
Gort/YTMN left the forum due to trolling on August 25, 2018.
I had fun. Thanks for reading!

"The wealthy and powerful always remind us that cream rises to the top.
What they fail to acknowledge is that pond scum also rises to the top.
And there is a lot more pond scum in the world than there is cream.
If you become rich and powerful, I hope that you will be cream rather than pond scum." --YTMN

Rematch Resurrection Catalog for Rounds 1-4 New post 180721 -- YTMN's Remake Rematch Thread.
Thread Resurrected 21 Jul 2018. Thread abandoned 1 Aug 2017. Thread COMPLETE 25 May 14 (2d time!)


The Future Unreels
Post Reply