MovieChat Forums > AmeriGirl26 > Replies
AmeriGirl26's Replies
It's interesting you should mention that. In the 80s, when my parents had HBO, VCR's, and blank video tapes, they took advantage of many movies being broadcast with little to no commercials, and Rudolph was one of them at the time. So I grew up with the version of Rudolph that had the "Fame and Fortune" song with Rudolph and Hermey.
Now just a few years ago, we got the DVD of "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer," and I was surprised to hear a reprise of "We're a Couple of Misfits" in that spot of the story instead of "Fame and Fortune." Curious, dad and I watched the special features, and it was there instead.
Check the special features on your DVD, if it's the same one I'm thinking of.
Don't need to. We have it on dvd and can watch it any time we want ;)
It's a plot hole. Now that I think about it, I'm amazed they didn't burn her at the stake before heading off to the castle. I guess they were too distracted by the confrontation with Gaston.
Exactly. As a reward for redeeming himself, he was transformed back into a human, and free to marry Belle and carry on a normal life with her.
The reason the Beast spared Gaston was not completely due to compassion. It was the fact that he had spent the last few months regaining his humanity through his interactions with Belle, and he realized in that moment that if he killed Gaston, he was no better a monster than the man he was about to drop over the edge. It didn't matter if Gaston deserved to be spared or not. The fact that the Beast was willing to back away from his animal desires to murder him, made him the better man than Gaston. It was a defining moment in the movie.
No, this is a story about redemption, it is NOT about having sex with an animal. To accuse Belle of being a Furry or committing bestiality is a shallow, lazy, stupid description of this film. It's similar in stupidity to comparing every person you hate to Hitler.
I'd just as soon watch one of those Razzie-winning sci-fi films than this one again.
At the time, the company was being more daring after their success with Little Mermaid, and it's a common gamble movie studios do where they take talented nobodies for cheap, market them as characters in the movie, and if they do it right, all those nobodies turn into instant stars and earn the studio a good profit.
See, it isn't always a good idea to cast only famous people for roles, because the more famous an actor is, the more you have to pay THEM, as opposed to the rest of the people working on the film. Plus, having them in the film isn't a guarantee that it'll be a hit. I could name a number of movies that were total flops, regardless of what big celebrity names were in them. It's cheaper to cast lesser known actors to start with, and if the film does well, it looks good on everyone's resume, not just the producer's.
It kind of all boils down to money, really.
I never thought he was attractive either. Even my 5-year-old self didn't like him when I saw the movie in the theaters. I have issues with men who are arrogant, have evil-looking eyes, and a chin that could sink the Titanic.
Of course, we the audience got the benefit of seeing what kind of a person he truly was, whereas not everyone has that luxury in real life. Quite often appearances are deceiving, and nowhere is that more obvious than with the villagers, who aren't exactly intelligent to start with. The Bimbettes are just the "cream of the crop" when it comes to intelligence in that town. All they see is a handsome, muscular guy who fits their idea of attractive and desirable, whereas Belle watched his actions and behavior and easily saw what kind of a jerk he was.
It was cut for time, and didn't really add much to the story. In fact, upon watching it in the director's cut of the DVD, it actually re-iterated some things the castle servants had already said or sung about. It's a fun song, but superfluous as well.
Are you aware that on opening day of TLJ, he received no less than 3 million [confirmed] death threats, which have been mounting ever since?
He is a terrible writer and film-maker, and should be horse-whipped for what he did to this movie. The only reason he ever got anywhere was because JJ Abrams was stupid enough to be friends with him and give him free reign over the story. I would cheer if Rian Johnson was publicly executed SW style.
Anyone who thinks that shit film "Moonlight" is better needs to have their head examined. And I can think if quite a few films that were absolute dog crap that didn't deserve Best Picture Oscar, but got it anyway.
I was actually surprised at the symbolism Del Toro put in this film, and because it was my first viewing, it totally went over my head.
The two main colors in the film were green and red. Green was meant to represent isolation, and you see a lot of green things to go along with that (as well as items that were "sort of" green). Like Eliza's wallpaper, her uniform for work, the candy the bad guy was eating, the Amphibious Man's skin, the lighting in the room he was chained up in, the jello pie Eliza's next door neighbor kept eating, the jello in the advertisement, and the bad guy's car.
Red stood for connecting, like when Eliza wore red shoes after her first night with the fish guy, or the red coat she wore in the final scene.
If you look at the hallway between Eliza and her neighbor's apartments, you can see half of it is red, and half is green, symbolizing a balance between the two.
You're right, I never thought about it.
There might be several areas of thought on this:
1.) It's mostly just an urban legend told around the neighborhood, and as we found out later, it was all just gossip. You can tell Buzz took pleasure in getting an audience, considering he enjoys being the center of attention. It's not enough that he's the favored son in the family, but he has to have all the attention too.
2.) Buzz is pretty dumb. Even by teenage standards, he's pretty stupid, especially if he believes in urban legends to be true. He's not creative when it comes to anything, even when bullying his little brother or spreading gossip about the neighbors.
3.) Buzz is a selfish ass. It's pretty obvious he only cares about himself and was very irritated in Paris when everyone was worrying about Kevin and not paying any attention to him. Plus, he could care less about about how "safe" Kevin was all alone back in Chicago. Heck, Kevin could have been killed by the Wet Bandits and Buzz would have just muttered "good riddance" without any remorse.
4.) Buzz's belief that their neighborhood was boring and safe is [sadly] a common subconscious belief among suburbanites who have never had any problems for a long period of time, and have never had any major disasters happen to them. They start believing that nothing bad ever will happen because it hasn't so far. All it takes is one disaster, be it natural, or man-made, and it totally changes your perspective on just how "safe" your neighborhood truly is.
It would have worked in the 70s and 80s too. The early 90s had a lot of the same tech as the 70s and 80s, even after the internet became available in '94.
She stands around a looks good for the camera. That's pretty much what the royal family does these days. Ever since Victoria, the British Royal family hasn't had any real influence on what's going on in their country. They ceded all power to parliament and became figureheads; living mascots, as it were.
I'm actually surprised it didn't win any, considering how crappy it was.
If you're gonna train medieval knights, or decide who's "worthy" of being the king's champions, that ain't it.