MovieChat Forums > ADBruno1985 > Replies
ADBruno1985's Replies
Good little catch, thank you.
Maybe we need a follow-up movie about Amy ;)
LMAO. Troll.
I don't believe for a second that someone who's so invested as to be mad about it being a "spoiler." We knew it was coming since before the show even began.
They wanted to be sure to expose me to the good stuff. They also showed me Halloween, The Fog, A Nightmare on Elm Street, The Birds, and so on.
I agree with you.
Also, yeah, a very generational preference. People who don't like it today don't like it because it's lame and not thrilling. You need to put yourself in the mindset of the day. Anyone who was around for its release and didn't like it, that I've encountered, thought it was "too much" and they just "don't care for those kinds of movies." You won't hear someone from back then saying they don' like it because it's underwhelming.
Fwiw I was born in 1985, I'm just a huge film buff. But I remember when I was around 10 and getting into scary stuff, my parents rented me a VHS copy of this. Watched it with popcorn, and all the lights off. Maybe a candle or two lit. Set the stage, make it spooky. I've loved it ever since, and have it on dvd, along with many other Hitchcock films. Mixed on the sequels. Loved the Bates Motel series even though I initially thought it sounded like a poor idea
Well there's a case for Last Crusade
I am 99% gay and she's one of those ladies that just, oh yes. Beyond being gorgeous, she's clearly intelligent and well-spoken, and even if she's not a wonderful person, she's a good enough actor to make you feel like she is
Nvm, you're right, I went to find it to show you and then discovered I'd seen an old one for The Force Awakens redone for this one.
I would guess because he didn't want to do that much of a deep dive. Explaining their motives would've taken time away from the already long movie. Maybe he couldn't find the right spot for it? Plus if it's not fully explained, it adds to the intrigue of the story. It was just narrative choice, and I think a sound one. Clearly QT doesn't shy away from racism in his movies, and I don't think he tends to pander to anyone, let alone conservatives. I don't make it a point to follow all celebs' politics, but if anything he strikes me as more libertarian
Thanks. Just baffled why I'm seeing stuff like it already occurred. And baffled why it hasn't.
I have Paramount+, just checked there, nada. All the specials they've done, and Bigger Longer and Uncut, but no regular episodes, new or old
You kind of disproved your own point there.
If one were made today, and it was with women and not men, it wouldn't be catering to the woke left. It'd be catering to the sleepy right because those kinds of men think "two guys is gross, but two girls is hot," and they can't fathom the idea of something being made without them being the target audience in mind. Because those people think that everything has to cater to them. Which is why minorities can't have anything without having to fight for it.
I know, that was so satisfying
Lmao that's horrible but I wish moviechat had a laugh react
Don't even put that in the universe. Can just imagine the marketing though, "In space, no one can hear you... SCREAM"
True, but also feels too late for that. 3 was when they should've done that if they were going to. MAYBE 4. But now it's been so long, so many times. Plus, Ghost Face must be defeated. But she's gotten her happy ending, married to Mark and with kids. So it would also make no sense. I think in 7, Ghost Face will be really after Mark (opening kill?) and her kids. So it'll be about her protecting them. Ghost Face will likely get Mark and none of the kids because Hollywood. Plus, it seems clear that the original intent was for Sam to finally go dark and be Ghost Face in 7, which reinforces the 3-film rule for turning into Ghost Face, a la when they should've done it with Sidney if they were going to. Especially with 3 being so tied to Maureen's back story. Which makes me wonder what, if anything, they would've done with Sam and Tara's mom in 7.
They'll flip the roles. Mark will die in the opening scene. Then, in a theme of being a better mother than she had, the rest of the movie will be about Sidney's motivation to protect her kids
The CGI is already dated, happens quicker and quicker nowadays
I'm in the middle. I enjoy the PT more than I don't. I'm generally of the belief that most movies are enjoyable if you just allow yourself to enjoy them. That doesn't mean they're *good,* there's a difference. But I've always liked PT. Certainly not as good as OT, but nothing ever can be. But sometimes it's just as popular to hate on something because it's new as it is to love it.
It's like Schrodinger's Did They?
In realistic adult terms, yes, they most certainly did.
But, these movies, being geared PG, just give adults enough to fill in the blanks, so kids can believe it's all just at face value, like a fairy tale where the prince rescues princess sight-unseen and they immediately fall in love because destiny
I think it was just different times, unfortunately. People were less inclined to get into others' business. Physical punishment was more accepted and overlooked. Not saying it's right, just the reality.