MovieChat Forums > midnightsun > Replies
midnightsun's Replies
It definitely is superior, IMO. This is my favorite installment of the series. I don't know why everyone likes the first one so much. Part 2 is okay, but things really started getting good with part III.
For me I think what makes part III so good is the atmosphere and also Richard Brooker's portrayal as Jason.
I like this one better than Jason X.
I have to wonder how much better it would have been if it was a Tarantino film.
I like the smell of nail polish remover (no, I don't huff it or anything like that). I mean to say, if the smell of it is floating around the room, I won't necessarily leave like a lot of people would.
They should have kept that scene in the movie. Not sure why they deleted it. Before seeing the delete scene, I had always wondered how the 'vette got wrecked. That was a bad editing choice if you ask me since part of the plot towards the end of the movie is them trying to get money to fix the car.
Leave It to Beaver
I like Ward's den as well.
At this point does she really need the money?
I too prefer the later seasons of Cheers. I don't like the Diane or Coach characters. Bringing in Kirstie Alley and Woody Harrelson was a good move. I don't bother watching the first 5 season episodes when they are shown on TV; for me, Cheers starts at season 6.
Hard to just pick one. It's a toss up between "Night Call" and "Valley of the Shadow". I am going with the latter.
6 of them.. and for the last 4 they couldn't even get one original cast member from the first two to have a role. What's up with that? AFAIK, most of the main actors from the first two films are still alive except for John Heard. They had many chances to do a proper sequel but they blew it. At this point it's too late.
Phyllis Kirk in the "A World of His Own" episode. Her character wasn't very nice, but she was a looker.
I watch this marathon every year. This year they're showing a lot of rarer episodes. A lot of these I've never seen before.
It's kinda like how Christian Bale's accent shows in "American Psycho" when he starts freaking out on the payphone towards the end.
But the cinematography feels like 2022. It's not the clothes or the hairstyles I'm talking about. I'm talking about the look of the movie itself. The original Christmas Story had a very vintage look and feel to it. If I didn't already know it and someone told me it was made in 1983 I would say No Way!. It's kinda like how the early seasons of the show "Happy Days" have a vintage 1950s "look" to them.
It looks and feels too modern. The original one looked and felt like it was actually taking place in the 1940s. That's the problem with modern films that are set in the past. They never capture the look and feel of the times they are trying to depict. It's a lost art these days.
It has nothing to do with major/indie. Take for example "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles" (the live action one from 1990). It looks like it's from 1990. "Die Hard 2" is another one. You can tell they're from 1990 by the picture quality. It's hard to explain. I am assuming it comes down to film stock and lighting. I am not an expert in the that sort of the thing.
Most likely edited to squeeze in more commercials. That's what it's all about these days.
The Grinch in this adaptation is too soft. But I'm not surprised in this day and age. Everything has to be positive. This ain't the 90s no mo'.
I definitely agree; overrated for sure. The problem with this installment is that it doesn't really have any likeable characters at all except for maybe Corey Feldman's character. It's an okay watch but it just has a different "feel" from the first three.
Personally, this one is my favorite of the series. I'm probably in the minority, but I don't care much for the first two films. I find them kind of boring. Part III is when things start to get interesting.
Starting with part IV is when you can tell the budget started getting bigger. Part IV doesn't "feel" like the first three at all. The opening scene with the helicopters looks very high budget.