|
|
Post by trashcanman on May 13, 2008 11:14:02 GMT 2
|
|
|
|
Post by The Curmudgeon on May 13, 2008 11:22:32 GMT 2
Well, hey, for a first time review that was pretty damn good. Having the DVD screen in the background is a simple but very effective touch. One thing which you've probably ironed out by now (I've not looked at your other reviews yet) is either to not hold the DVD case in your hands when you talk, because you do exactly the same thing I do - play around with shit in your hands when you talk. And while you're talking you can hear this constant "chung, chung" noise of you tapping the DVD case.
Great film, too, by the way. I had never seen it until about five years ago and I loved it. And you have a SWEET TV set too, Trashy.
|
|
|
|
Post by trashcanman on May 13, 2008 11:52:22 GMT 2
I got a great deal on that TV because it was the last floor model of a dying breed. Everything now is flat screen and monstrosities like that one are nowhere to be found. Damn, I'm good. But, yeah, I love that DVD menu. Fire is pretty! I do the DVD tapping thing a lot, it's impossible for me to sit still and I typically have about 15 minutes to get a decent take before the fam gets back and the house gets loud again -and that's if the phone doesn't ring and throw me off. If I can get a decent rap going in that time, I have to take it warts and all.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Curmudgeon on May 13, 2008 16:08:56 GMT 2
You rap as well?!
That I GOT to see.
|
|
|
|
Post by Benjamin Haines on May 13, 2008 21:08:08 GMT 2
Good review. I understand the limitations of doing (what I'm assuming is) quick-capture video, but you seemed to ease right into talking about the movie with comfort, which I guess should come naturally when reviewing something that you love. When I saw this thread title I was expecting to see you lambast the 2006 remake. Nice touch in mentioning it too. I haven't seen it, and while I normally am against pre-judging the quality of movies and feel like I should see any film myself before forming an opinion on it, the remake of The Wicker Man is one sound exception for me. I love the original film (I've got the very same DVD as you reviewed sitting on the shelf about seven feet away from me), and I know that if I see the remake it'll only sit badly with me, and I've got no problem avoiding that.
One thing I really hate about the remake is that it's honestly ruined the experience of seeing the original film for anybody who's seen only the remake (my mom and a few of my friends). The thing that's key to what makes The Wicker Man effective is the mounting sense of mystery and the feeling of tension that grows throughout the movie as the plot draws you in, and then it springs that horrifying ending on you out of nowhere. The ending does feel inevitable and built-up, not forced or contrived, but it's that sense of surprise that really leaves you feeling awestruck when you first see it. Now, for anybody who's seen only the remake, that sense of growing suspense and surprise if they ever see the original is effectively squashed, because they know how it ends already. It's a terrible shame.
|
|
|
|
Post by trashcanman on May 14, 2008 4:19:21 GMT 2
Do NOT bother with the remake. It's a pointless, misogynistic piece of shit. Unlike our host here, I usually don't care to review things I don't like because I feel like I already wasted too much of my life on them and I prefer to expunge them from my memory. You made very good points on the original.
If you want your ears to bleed from the sound of me rapping, Curmudgeon, I sing some of Faith No More's "Epic" on the Rock Band video game review. You'll be doing yourself a favor by skipping it, but curiosity always kills the proverbial cat, doesn't it?
|
|
