MovieChat Forums > CoriSCapnSkip > Replies
CoriSCapnSkip's Replies
Yeah, it sucks. If it hadn't been in development for so long it would have come out before the allegations.
I am convinced it will come out but it may not be in our lifetimes. Neil Gaiman and I are the same age and they'll probably at least wait for him to die and be dead awhile.
If movies in development count, I really wanted to see <i>The Graveyard Book</i> but would feel guilty paying money for anything which would benefit Neil Gaiman.
A Complete Unknown for the second time in the theater on February 2
The Trouble With Girls on February 3
Cry of the Banshee (1970) on February 5
Till on February 6
Here Comes Peter Cottontail (1971) on February 7
Antonio and the Mayor on February 8
As usual, my reviews are on each movie's page.
I think had the ending been done differently it might have been given the appearance of making sense but as it is it totally misses the mark and is ultimately not salvageable. I just watched a slasher film for nothing.
As with <i>House on Haunted Hill</i>, it makes NO DAMN SENSE either as a paranormal picture or as having a logical explanation. I hoped for a logical explanation until the last minute and my hopes were dashed.
This is true.
I just want to know one thing. Did the film start out making sense before it was butchered, or did it always make NO DAMN SENSE?
I wonder if the book ending also makes NO DAMN SENSE.
The clips were some of the best parts.
Yeah. If he had survived the fire how did he get out of the room with no one knowing and where did he hide before appearing in Herbert's home? It had to be paranormal. Or maybe...it just made NO DAMN SENSE!
Also assuming he was filming during the fire, why did the police not know he survived? Were they too stupid to view the film before turning it over to Herbert? I thought it was a setup and Paul was going to confront Herbert and then the police were going to step in and say, "Gotcha," which would have at least made some sense, but no, so it ended up making NO DAMN SENSE!
It might have been an homage to <i>House of Wax</i> but it made no sense for this film. Also the scene where everything in the rec room went haywire seemed like an homage to <i>House on Haunted Hill</i> which also had scenes which made NO DAMN SENSE!
I just came here to say...THAT MADE NO DAMN SENSE!
Either she died or she didn't. If that was her dead body, it should have burned like a dead body and not a wax dummy and what's more she should have turned up alive afterwards. Who would have the time and skills to make a dummy of her and why would they do it?
NONE OF IT MADE ANY DAMN SENSE! I've seen movies where the ending made no sense but this made about the least sense of any I'd seen.
I'm looking for you to post the next thread.
I don't know if it ever aired after its presentation in 1975 but someone somehow got a copy to put on YouTube.
Carolyn Bryant herself stated years later, I believe on tape, that she made up the entire part about Emmett grabbing her or touching her in any way. SHE LIED UNDER OATH, COMMITTING PERJURY IN COURT, FOR WHICH SHE WAS NEVER PUNISHED. Emmett never had physical contact with her. He may have said something or displayed some mannerism which set her off, and capped it off by whistling (accounts vary, everything from he whistled to clear up a speech impediment, whistled at the card game taking place, or gave an all-out wolf whistle at Carolyn Bryant. The movie went with the all-out wolf whistle, but left out the detail given in some accounts that some boys other than his cousins dared him to whistle--I don't know whether these boys were ever identified.) If Emmett had any predilection of violent behavior toward females, it was almost certainly heredity only. His mother raised him with love and would never have told a child how his father really died. The movie reflects that, she simply wouldn't have advertised it. I don't know how old Emmett was when the parents split up. There was domestic violence in the relationship he may have witnessed at a young age. He certainly had no motivation to physically accost a stranger and even the accuser later admitted that he did not.
I was at least seven and probably eight or nine when I saw it. I agree four is too young.
As far as I know.
Kewl.
I have disliked Will Smith ever since I heard he was rude to Kevin Kline on <i>The Wild Wild West</i> and I am unlikely to change or to see anything he is in unless it was hugely significant or included someone I really like.