Page 2 of 2
Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 1:14 am
by Malcolm
I can't recall anything besides LotR in the past two decades at least. Really, it's just been complete shit in that category for as long as I can remember. Mayhaps it's cos they're expensive to make (gotta make all sorts of period shit, make-up, costumes, etc.) if you want a convincing fantasy world. How much was the prop/costume budget for them three flicks? Fucking HUGE. I'm certain some accountants were sweating before the first return of "Fellowship."
Why invest a large amount of capital in a gamble? Why not settle for a more conventional setting w\ less exotic shit & see more profit?
Adults are less willing to settle for shitty reality immersion. Probably cos the imaginations of most adults I know are completely dead.
Edited By Malcolm on 1203920209
Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 9:25 am
by Leisher
Excalibur was in no way, shape, or form a "kid's movie". That shit was adult.
Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 1:32 pm
by Malcolm
Leisher wrote:Excalibur was in no way, shape, or form a "kid's movie". That shit was adult.
Yep. Also older than two decades. I figure that in the '70s, everyone was on a lot of trippy drugs, so it was easier to get weird things by studio execs.
Posted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 7:13 pm
by Vince
Leisher wrote:Excalibur was in no way, shape, or form a "kid's movie". That shit was adult.
The definitive King Arthur movie.
Posted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 7:19 pm
by GORDON
Having a sword flung at you by a watery tart is no mandate to start a government.
Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 12:17 am
by Leisher
Listen, if I proclaimed myself Emperor just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd lock me away!
The definitive King Arthur movie.
I agree. Magnificent film that does not get enough credit. Was that Liam Neeson and Patrick Stewart's first film?
Edited By Leisher on 1204348878
Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 1:02 am
by Vince
Leisher wrote:Listen, if I proclaimed myself Emperor just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd lock me away!
The definitive King Arthur movie.
I agree. Magnificent film that does not get enough credit. Was that Liam Neeson and Patrick Stewart's first film?
Patrick Stewart had done a couple of movies before then, but mostly TV. Neeson had done 4 or 5 movies before.
Was odd to go back and watch it again and realize who they were (tho I remembered Stewart).
It was only Gabriel Byrne's second film though.
Posted: Sat Oct 18, 2008 8:31 pm
by Malcolm
The acting in this film (especially from the two leads) is beyond wooden. It's fucking petrified.
& you remember the special effects from "Dragonheart?" Looks like they used those.