MovieChat Forums > Cherubino1 > Replies
Cherubino1's Replies
Although the 1979 remake was also in color, and even the original film from 1921 was tinted in different colors to represent different times of day (blue for night scenes, yellow for day scenes, etc.). Unfortunately, there are numerous versions of the original that present the film in black and white or sepia, where the intended colorations by the filmmakers are missing.
Looks interesting, but I worry that the film might fall into the usual clichés of modern horror movies, like using CGI, relying on jump scares, using greenscreens instead of real landscapes and castles, and having an excessive, bombastic soundtrack. I hope that the film will offer a fresh interpretation of the silent movie while remaining faithful to the original, particularly in terms of its innovative camera work.
I would be satisfied with a source citation for each date. Especially entries like “October 2006” appear to be merely estimated and automatically taken by the program without verification. Does IMDb require references for entries, or can anyone freely edit them? (I’ve never been registered with IMDb).
Unfortunately, I don’t know of any other site that provides the exact shooting dates for a movie ...
In a 1990 issue of <i>Back to the Future</i> magazine, Robert Zemeckis and Bob Gale answered frequently asked questions, including the one you asked.
<blockquote><b>Q:</b> <i>Lea Thompson plays Maggie McFly, Marty’s great-great-grandmother, as well as Lorraine, Marty’s mom But Lorraine’s family name is ‘Baines. ’’ Why did Lea play Marty’s paternal great-greatgrandmother, when she’s really not part of that family? Is there something kinky going on in the history of the McFly family?</i>
<b>A:</b> Lea plays Maggie because we didn’t want to make a Part III without having Lea in it, especially in a “Mom is that you” scene! Of course, we thought about whether it made any sense — obviously, Maggie McFly and Lorraine Baines cannot be blood relatives. But we did come up with a satisfactory answer: It’s a well known adage that “men are attracted to women who remind them of their mothers.” Clearly then, when Seamus married Maggie, that insured that the McFly men would have a genetic trait that attracted them to women who bear a resemblance to Maggie or Lea Thompson (even Jennifer is the same physical type!)</blockquote>
It is true that there is no love story in Stoker’s novel, but I have not claimed that all the scenes shown in the film are from the novel.
Through the many contradictions in the narratives, the novel challenges the reader to critically question the text or the characters’ statements and memories. By presenting its story not as “truth” but as a kind of unreal dream in which one can never be sure what is true, the film comes very close to the author’s narrative style and intentions.
But it should also be remembered that Mina also seems to help Dracula in Stoker’s novel. One gets the impression that she develops sympathy for him after he bites her, and on a few occasions it seems as if she is being directed by Dracula, or even consciously helping him, for example by taking the carriage on many detours so that the vampire can reach his castle in time.
<blockquote>“Dracula was more or less a distant figure whose dark influence was felt/described in the story. […] This movie was more a romance story between DRacula and Mina Harker.”</blockquote>
I don’t like the love story, but Dracula still basically does what you describe: he uses (much like the vampire brides with Harker or the vampire Lucy with Holmwood) his “vampire magic” to win Mina over. He exerts his dark influence on Mina, think of his “See me” in the street or Mina’s reaction to his touch in the cinematograph. In another scene, he makes Mina drink absinthe. It may be a romance, but here too Dracula exerts his “dark influence” – which he also does in the novel, as Mina reports that when Dracula touches her, she strangely feels no need to resist. And after drinking Dracula’s blood in the film, she cries “Unclean! Unclean!” as if at that moment she is no longer under Dracula’s influence and realises what she has done.
The text becomes narrower because the answers are moved further and further to the right. I don’t like this system, also because it’s hard to see who answered whom.
I don’t know what’s so creepy about robots talking to robots.
I also wonder why the men don’t just buy these robots, or why these robots aren’t just offered without anyone getting killed.
(And I wonder why the main character doesn’t run away from her own robot at the end, but stops. After all, she just ran away from the villain.)
There’s a great episode of <i>The Twilight Zone</i> called <i>”Number 12 Looks Just Like You”</i>. Set in the year 2000, the episode depicts a society in which everyone undergoes a transformation on their 18th birthday, which consists not only of brainwashing people into permanently happy and uncritical idiots, but also of changing their appearance so that everyone looks the same. The main character, an 18-year-old girl, doesn’t want to undergo this transformation, but in the end she too is transformed and is a constantly smiling model – THAT’S creepy, because it’s the same person.
The best thing to do is to report these trolls and put them on the ignore list.
Trolls like you go on my ignore list. There you can continue trolling.
I was expecting such an answer. There are people who can discuss and trolls who cannot.
What are you trying to say with this GIF, other than you have no argument?
This is not proof that the events in the movie are real for two reasons. First, a movie is different from a book, even if it follows the book closely. A movie can retell the plot of a novel while reinterpreting it. In other words, even if Rosemary’s experiences in the novel were undeniably real, it could be that Polanski took a different approach in his film adaptation.
Second, the plot of a novel can be told in such a way that the reader doubts whether it is “true events.” In Bram Stoker’s <i>Dracula</i>, there are numerous passages full of errors and contradictions that make the reader wonder about the veracity of the text.
No, you can see that Dana’s TV is actually turned on. It WAS her TV.
I don’t know if it’s really that simple, because on the one hand, the scene you mention could just be Rosemary’s imagination, and on the other hand, Polanski still says that he’s leaving it unclear whether it’s imagination or not. Why would he give such a simple and clear explanation at the end of his movie and then say that he wants to leave the audience in the dark?
The <i>OED</i> defines science fiction thus:
<blockquote>Imaginative fiction based on postulated scientific discoveries or spectacular environmental changes, frequently set in the future or on other planets and involving space or time travel.</blockquote>
Even good science fiction films follow a certain logic within their universe. Especially the <i>Back to the Future</i> films are known for paying very close attention to the complications, contradictions and consequences that can arise from time travel.
If you read the interviews with the director and the writers, you’ll notice that they put a lot of thought into all kinds of details (including logical ones) and didn’t approach this project with the thought “Who cares, it’s just science fiction!”. When their attention was drawn (e.g. in letters from fans) to various holes in logic that they had not considered, they did not accuse the viewer of not having understood the concept of science fiction, but admitted their mistake.
I don’t know who to believe. Regardless, someone should revise the IMDb entry. (I’m all for trivia entries only being able to be made with sources anyway).
An extremely superficial review from someone who either hasn’t read the novel at all or has read it very superficially. The review contains numerous errors in content and conclusions based on them.
No, that would not have been possible. In his letter to Marty he wrote:
<blockquote><i>The lightning bolt that hit the DeLorean caused a jigowatt overload which scrambled the time circuits, activated the flux capacitor, and sent me back to 1885. The overload shorted out the time circuits and destroyed the flying circuits. (…) I set myself up as a blacksmith as a front while I attempted to repair the damage to the time circuits. Unfortunately, this proved impossible because suitable replacement parts will not be invented until 1947.</i></blockquote>