home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   rec.arts.sf.movies      Discussing SF motion pictures      28,343 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 27,818 of 28,343   
   Paul S Person to All   
   Re: "25 Best Science Fiction Book Movie    
   23 Apr 20 09:36:24   
   
   XPost: rec.arts.sf.written   
   From: psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid   
      
   On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 10:15:15 +1200, Your Name    
   wrote:   
      
   >On 2020-04-22 05:26:23 +0000, Alan Baker said:   
   >> On 2020-04-13 12:15 p.m., David Johnston wrote:   
   >>> On 2020-04-12 1:35 a.m., Your Name wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Minority Report   
   >>>>>     This was a good movie.  Never read the story.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Never seen it, never read it, but it's Tom Cruise again, so the movie   
   >>>> will be complete garbage.   
   >>>   
   >>> It wasn't.   
   >>   
   >> I have to laugh at those who judge a movie by who happens to be the star.   
   >>   
   >> What matters most in any movie...   
   >>   
   >> And it's not even close.   
   >>   
   >> ...is the writing.   
   >>   
   >> Write a good script, and you can make a good movie, and it doesn't   
   >> matter who the stars are.   
   >>   
   >> Write a bad script, and you will make a bad movie...   
   >>   
   >> ...and it won't matter who the stars are in it, either.   
   >   
   >You could write THE best movie script ever, but it can easily be   
   >completely ruined by choosing the wrong actor, director, producer, etc.   
   >For example, the next "James Bond" movie starring Pee Wee Herman (or   
   >Joe Pasquale is you want a British celebrity) would be insanely stupid.   
      
   Oh, I don't know.   
      
   The 1967 /Casino Royale/ worked pretty well.   
      
   You would just have to make the film a comedy.   
      
   Well, unless Pee Wee has a dramatic/action side that, in my mind, he   
   lacks hidden away somewhere and they hire a director able to bring it   
   out.   
      
   >Choosing to watch a movie *simply* because of who is in it is   
   >ridiculous - there's no point trying to watch a sci-fi movie when you   
   >don't like sci-fi just because Fred Bloggs happens to be the main   
   >actor. Choosing to avoid a movie because the main "actor" is uterly   
   >useless and ruins everything they are in is simple common sense.   
      
   If you haven't /seen/ everything they are in, how can you know that   
   they ruin everything?   
      
   It depends on the actor. But, yes, standards do tend to be higher for   
   genres that an individual does not particularly like.   
      
   This is why I define a /really great movie/ as a movie that most   
   people will enjoy /even if they happen to hate the genre/. Some films   
   transcend their limitations. But, of course, this is a matter of   
   individual opinion.   
      
   --   
   "I begin to envy Petronius."   
   "I have envied him long since."   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca