MovieChat Forums > Maximum Overdrive (1986) Discussion > So ... a comet's ... magic dust? Light r...

So ... a comet's ... magic dust? Light rays?

posted 11 years ago by BlackDog123
3 replies | jump to latest

Cause every machine (well, not EVERY machine, but MOST machines) to suddenly become sentient, bloodthirsty, have a hive-mind, and be able to negotiate terrain as though they have vision or sonar (planes get a pass on this one). I love the gore and soundtrack in this movie, but every time I watch it (thanks, Netflix!!), I waste most of it trying to figure out how simple Walkman headphones manage to manipulate themselves in such a manner as to strangle their user, independently of any human intervention. Or why cars and semi-trucks are so very DIFFERENT. Or how the hell a dog managed to die by forcibly eating a toy (that is incapable of movement unless it's on the ground). I guess it's a personal problem, lol. Kind of wish they'd remake this one. I think someone like Paul W.S. Anderson could actually make it look good!

They're coming to get you, Barbara!

[–] micshinestryke 11 years ago

It does look good! Read the ending before the credits roll, a Russian weather satellite which "happened to be equipped" with class IV nuclear missles shot down a mysterious UFO. Take that for what it is, suspend your disbelief and enjoy this cult classic for what it is. Im all in favor of a remake with the right actors, script, director (I'd pick Frank Darabont), and practical FX over CGI.

[–] BlackDog123 11 years ago

I know, I know - I love horror but I do have a real problem suspending my disbelief:/ The "Russian satellite/UFO" thing is such a wtf to me. Personally, I really liked how in Night of the Living Dead/etc, there is never a concrete "reason" given for the zombie outbreak! The walkman thing cracks me up, too (I'm more amused than annoyed by it).

I have to agree that it looks great! I absolutely love the practical effects, and Netflix did a great job of cleaning the picture up (I have a normal, non-fancy flat screen, and the picture was still gorgeous). Frank Darabont could probably do a great job, I appreciated what he did with The Mist (which, though my favorite King novella, I always considered pretty much unfilmable due to content). I was thinking Paul W.S. Anderson because he generally does a good job of blending practical effects, CGI, and models. I do think Darabont does the best job of interpreting King's works, though.

They're coming to get you, Barbara!

[–] kngtmat 11 years ago

Good that you like it.

Some things were taken out of the film because of the MPAA. If I can remember right. The Bible salesman originally had part of his face falling off. Also the steamroller originally had blood on it before it was taken out.

(Family Guy)There is no Peter, only Zool.