talkmagic.co.uk

kolm wrote:I've never liked Spielberg's films, they're too sickly in my opinion. Loved his cartoons though

1942, Schindler's List, Jaws, Duel, Empire of the Sun, Jurassic Park, Jurassic Park 2, the Indiana Jones trilogy...

All relatively schmaltz-free.

But I agree that he has a habit of turning on the sickly sugar.

Always was unforgivable.

Pete

Jurassic Park would be much better if it had a deeper plot and got rid of that bloody ET-esk soundtrack

I should try Jaws, I've never seen that for somebody who likes films

But going back on topic, I'm probably gonna try and watch it, hopefully it's not all hype but I've heard really good things about it. I'm willing to forgive James Cameron for Titanic (because it was well directed)

James Cameron put a crapload of work into this film. I think it cost him like 500 mil or something and they essentially did things like hire Linguistics Professors to come up with a completely new language for the Nav'i in the film, then he hired Botanist to come up with new ways to describe how each plant works in the film. It was like an insane amount of work into it, we will most likely not see any of that stuff in the film at all.

Surely that will all only matter if it makes the film better?!

Favourite CGI film, easy: Forrest Gump.

Randy wrote:James Cameron put a crapload of work into this film. I think it cost him like 500 mil or something and they essentially did things like hire Linguistics Professors to come up with a completely new language for the Nav'i in the film, then he hired Botanist to come up with new ways to describe how each plant works in the film. It was like an insane amount of work into it, we will most likely not see any of that stuff in the film at all.

Whether you like James Cameron's movies or not, you have to admit he's passionate about his work and I can respect that.

Ian The Magic-Ian wrote:...you have to admit he's passionate about his work and I can respect that.

So was William Topaz McGonagall.

His work is... quite something.

Pete

I love The Thing..... kept me awake for about a week when I first saw a vhs copy as a kiddie. Does anyone else like Big Trouble in Little China? For some reason it really hits the spot for me. Chinese mysticism, state of the art ILM effects, Kurt Russell doing a great comedic turn... what's not to like? (if you have the time, listen to the commentary on the dvd from John Carpenter and Kurt Russell.... they barely stop laughing long enough to describe anything... just as amusing as the film itself!)

Farlsborough wrote:Favourite CGI film, easy: Forrest Gump.

Now there's a fine example of a film where CGI has been so well integrated that it's virtually seamless. You might have strong suspicions that a scene uses CGI, but it's not obvious because it's so well done.

I think Big Trouble in Little China is a movie that you either get or you don't.

I absolutely love it.

It's revels in its own absurdity and achieves everything it sets out to do.

The people that don't like it are probably the ones who can't accept that something can be fun for its own sake.

I've yet to listen to the commentry, but I'll make time for it now you've mentioned it.

And yes, The Thing also deprived me of a couple of weeks' worth of sleep when I first saw it on video as a kid. It's still one of my all-time favourite movies though.

I also unashamedly admit that I loved Vampires - although that was probably because James Woods gave such a great performance.

Pete

"You've got to be f****** kidding..." Classic. Absolute classic.

pcwells wrote:I still remember the sense of shock I felt when I heard that Clash of the Titans was the only movie in which Ray Harryhausen had an animation team behind him. All the effects in his other films were done single-handed.

Huckin' Fell!

Pete

And Lo, they are now creating a remake of said classic replete of Ray's awesome skills... but DAMN if it don't look good

It does look lovely.

Hell, I forgave myself quickly for enjoying the remake of Dawn of the Dead. I'm sure I can weather this dishonour.



Pete

They are supposedly going to do a prequel to the thing. It's supposedly going to show what happened to the Norwegians at the beginning of the first film. My only problem with that is that they could ruin the movie by making it in CG and what made the original so good was that at the time they used Animatronics that made it look it extremely real. (so to speak.)

Randy wrote:They are supposedly going to do a prequel to the thing. It's supposedly going to show what happened to the Norwegians at the beginning of the first film. My only problem with that is that they could ruin the movie by making it in CG and what made the original so good was that at the time they used Animatronics that made it look it extremely real. (so to speak.)

Urgh... I just have to remind myself that I thought the Dawn of the Dead remake would be pants until I saw it.

I'm happy to be surprised, but I don't expect wonders from this one. IMO It's one of those movies that should be left on its own.

Pete