Kevin's Watch

dANdeLION wrote:Dead Zone? Ugh. Wotta piece of crap that was.....

www.thedarkking.com/

I think that list is way off; there's no mention of Shawshank or the Running Man at all!

What about the wonderful television adaptations? Langoliers anyone? eh?

dANdeLION wrote:I think that list is way off; there's no mention of Shawshank or the Running Man at all!

Or Maximum Overdrive or Silver Bullet.

We are soooo far off BLADE RUNNER!! (I contributed too) - prolly King stuff should be split!!

You mod your way, I'll mod my way. Capeesh?

dANdeLION wrote:You mod your way, I'll mod my way. Capeesh?

I said "Prolly" - that's "probably" for those of you without kids ...

NOW ... if I said ... Split this thread NOW - then you could justifiably respond as you did!!

I certainly NEVER would step on your modly toes in you own forum!! Please accept my humblest apologies if I did!!

You respond your way, I'll respond my way. Capeesh?

dANdeLION wrote:You mod your way, I'll mod my way. Capeesh?

dANdeLION wrote:You respond your way, I'll respond my way. Capeesh?

...Sorry dAN, I tried. I really did try to stay out of this. But O-gon-cho just loves any opportunity to give Astavyastataa Kadna a hard time given their current conflict in Game...

:::snickering:::

...feel free to delete...

Menolly wrote:It will be my first time seeing it on the big screen, period. The only time I ever saw it, it was playing in the back ground while I was in a meeting of the organizing committee of Omnicon many years ago. So I have never actually totally experienced it.

And, as far as I know, Beorn has never seen it either. I'll be glad to introduce him to it via the big screen.

I hope you and Beorn have a wonderful experience seeing Blade Runner on the big screen! (Not that he's obligated to like the movie.)

I think Blade Runner evoked the most complicated emotional response from me of any theatrical film I saw in '82, perhaps not too surprising being that I was a 12-yr-old watching this mature-themed movie. It didn't blow me away the way that the action-packed Wrath of Khan did in that same year; what Blade Runner did was mesmerize me with this intensely sinister yet beautiful world that Ridley Scott created on film. I just kept thinking about all those dazzling images I'd seen - they were permanently etched into my brain. Sure, you can criticize Blade Runner for being style over substance if you want, but I know what I like.

dANdeLION wrote:You respond your way, I'll respond my way. Capeesh?

Hmmmm ... another good scrabble word!! Capeesh?

Matrixman wrote:I hope you and Beorn have a wonderful experience seeing Blade Runner on the big screen! (Not that he's obligated to like the movie.)

Thanks MM. I'm looking forward to it and with Beorn just completing the Asimov bibliography, I think he'll enjoy a movie feauring androids as well. I think I'll introduce him to Do Androids Dream after we see the movie though.

Matrixman wrote:I think Blade Runner evoked the most complicated emotional response from me of any theatrical film I saw in '82, perhaps not too surprising being that I was a 12-yr-old watching this mature-themed movie. It didn't blow me away the way that the action-packed Wrath of Khan did in that same year; what Blade Runner did was mesmerize me with this intensely sinister yet beautiful world that Ridley Scott created on film. I just kept thinking about all those dazzling images I'd seen - they were permanently etched into my brain. Sure, you can criticize Blade Runner for being style over substance if you want, but I know what I like.

I am hopeful the same will happen to Beorn, as he is close to the same age. But, with his condition, things like that tend to fly right past him. Perhaps this film will be the first to speak to him in that way.

I think the closest film he's gotten to such cinematography was Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban which was directed by Alfonso Cuaron (sp?). I was enthralled with the look of that film compared to the first two. Beorn's never really commented on it, but it came out what, three years ago? He would have only been ten then. Perhaps a bit too young to have picked up on such things...

I just remember when seeing BR in the theater when i was a tot, drinking too much Coke and feeling sick with all the shots of ships landing on little strips, going round, and round and round and...

Okay...test time. Write down on a piece of paper all of the movies that were GOOD (doesn't have to be excellent) where it was adapted from a book faithfully, and then another list where they took more creative license.

My list pretty much shows more films on the creative license side. It really is a different medium, and needs to be treated as such. Like Peter Jackson said, he was going for the spirit of the books instead of page for page. My opinion is that this is the right way to go about adaptations. I think the first two Harry Potter books were pretty faithfully represented, and ran a little boring. Then again, they are also the lesser of the books. But the third took more license, and was much better for it. Sure, it didn't ever go too off the riggings like LOTR did at times, but I hold that it typically is better for the changes. Hell, if you want to read the book, read the book and don't bother with the movies. What I liked about LOTR is that it made the most of the medium, and it made the familiar a bit surprising. Bakshi's LOTR was pretty true to the book, dialogue-wise. It, for the most part, sucked. Jackson's worked (most of the time...still some things I'll probably never forgive, such as making Helm's Deep so damn long that it mashed Return of the King so much).

With that said, don't think BR kept the spirit of the book, but it was certainly interesting in its own right. And it almost always helps when you see the movie first before reading the book. If you've read the book, you are typically either bored or disappointed. Unless you haven't read the book(s) in a long time and have a mind like a sieve. Like me and the Harry Potter films up until now.

Cagliostro wrote:With that said, don't think BR kept the spirit of the book, but it was certainly interesting in its own right.

Exactly what I've been saying.

Uhh, yeah; we all get what you've been saying.

All righty then.

dANdeLION wrote:Uhh, yeah; we all get what you've been saying.

*snort* thank you dAN, for my first chuckle of the morning.

I'm still a bit unsure as to whether or not Cail preferred the book to the movie, or vice-versa.......

Personally, I think the comic book version is the best version out there.



...which I found a few months ago during the movie....

dANdeLION wrote:I'm still a bit unsure as to whether or not Cail preferred the book to the movie, or vice-versa.......

The sock-puppet theater version is to die for.