Sepiatone
-
Posts
23,768 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Posts posted by Sepiatone
-
-
Not me. I went to sleep, perchance to dream...
Sepiatone
-
I find it hard to believe that many people would still hold some kind of animosity to Heston because of his connection to the NRA and his stance on firearm ownership.
I totally disagreed with it, but that didn't diminish my respect for Heston as an actor. His efforts in the civil rights struggle overshadows his gun stance by miles.
Anyway, my brother was a member of the NRA, we had many heated discussions on the issue, but I didn't love him LESS because of it. In fact, I had and still have old and close friends who are on the polar opposite of my stances politically, but we still remain friends( with the exception of ONE).
It has always been my understanding that here in AMERICA, we're allowed to make and hold opinions and choices freely, with no unwarranted repercussions. Someone's stance on guns, abortion, gay marriage or any other political claptrap is only one aspect of a person's entire make-up. Believe it or not, there are even some who would take exception to the opinions that Jim Carrey isn't funny! (DON'T look at ME!)
Speaking of guns and Carrey...Addy, if those kids didn't force me to watch Carrey's "Grinch" by putting a gun to my head, I'd have told them to **** off!
Sepiatone
-
The only thing I know about Nader was his TV show *Shannon* in which he was some kind of private eye. It was the first time I ever saw a "mobile" phone. I thought THAT was cool!
Sepiatone
-
I think I know where Flyback is coming from, Jonas, and I disagree that just as many American films take the same apporoach to storytelling or the same style of presentation that Flyback calls "artsy" or "surreal". I too, think many foreign offerings tend to be too introspective and "full of themselves" ( a local film critic usually called them "multi-layered", which to me only meant "lacking coherent direction"). Many times to the point of being pretentious. But I DO agree with your "Judging the worth of anything based on how many people have heard of it is a poor way to approach culture" comment.
But I've thought about this notion, forwarded by an earlier poster about NOT wishing to see any movie with "representations of animal abuse" and the like.
How about WESTERNS, with their representations of PEOPLE being shot and killed? Or WAR movies, MURDER mysteries, SCI-FI movies with space invaders vaporizing whole cities?
I'm an animal lover, too, but let's not get carried away...the most ridiculous statement I've heard was a man I know who once said, "I HATE people who abuse animals. If I EVER saw a man kick a dog, I'd KILL him!"
Huh?
Let's all try to remember we're watching MOVIES, NOT news footage.
Sepiatone
-
TCM shows a lot of movies that I never see.
I must be in HEAVEN!!
Sepiatone
-
I think of that sort of thing often when it comes to famous people born in 1926, the year my Mother was born.
I have trouble reconciling her being born the same year as CHUCK BERRY and MARYLIN MONROE. 1926 is the only thing the three of them have in common!
Sepiatone
-
Who says there HAS to be a Father-son resemblance? Many sons favor their Mothers. That can be a good thing. Need another example? OK:
ED BEGLEY
ED BEGLEY JR.
Don't know who Mom is in this case, but she HAD to be tall!
And John Derek was a good lookin' ****, wasn't he? I often get mistaken for him.
Sepiatone
-
If this movie were made today, the caper would involve so many people, so much weaponry, and so much high tech equipment that if they succeeded in stealing a million, they'd barely break even. It would probably star Shia Lebouf and some model-turned-actress or other people who would fall way short of being able to portray the elegance and class of O'Toole and Hepburn. Or they might go the opposite route and dust off Deniro and cast him with some young thing that would seem more suited to play his daughter rather than partner in crime. Ed Norton would likely be in there somewhere. They would possibly have to deal with, ala *The Italian Job* , the Russian mob in competition with them. If they get caught at all, it would be because they tried to sell the piece of priceless art on eBay.
Sepiatone
-
I don't know about all day. There'd have to be some saturation point.
But if they did, I'd prefer some of the not usual suspects.
Or, they could have alternated between a Day movie and Brando movie. However bi-polar that would seem.
Sepiatone
-
Sending Doris best wishes today. Thanks for the heads up.
Sepiatone
-
I did say it was all for comic effect. Make of it what you will.
Sepiatone
-
THERE'S an idea for a thread!
Some humorous scheduling of movies...
DINNER AT EIGHT
GUESS WHO'S COMING TO DIINNER?
HANNIBAL
EATING RAOUL
WHAT MAKES SAMMY RUN?
MYSTIC PIZZA
You get the drift...
Sepiatone
-
Brynner had the right HAIR( or lack thereof) for the part!
What's puzzled me is this: Moses supposedly had his brother Aaron do most of the talking because Moses was believed to be somewhat poor at public speaking. Which makes sense to have the marvelous sounding JOHN CARRADINE play the part of Aaron. But HESTON had a wonderful speaking voice, too, which makes me wonder why he landed the role of Moses. IF "historical" fact is your goal, that is.
And wasn't it tragic that Moses, after wandering the desert for 40 years, would settle the Israelites in the only spot in the Middle East WITHOUT any OIL?
Getting back to *King Of Kings,* I suppose after seeing the '61 version, followed by *The Greatest Story Ever Told* and later viewing HISTORY CANNEL'S last segment of *The Bible,* I was probably "Jesused out", and couldn't view the silent "Kings" with any sense of seriousness.
Of all the "Life of Jesus" movies I've seen, the television mini-series *Jesus of Nazareth* is the one that makes more sense to me. Especially the crucifiction, which showed Jesus bearing a crossbar rather than a gigantic cross that's usually seen in classical artists renditions. Director Franco Zeffirelli felt this was more accurate, as that even though the crucifiction of Christ has more significance to modern day Christians, the crucifiction had NO significance to the Romans, and the sentence would have been carried out just like any other. Since the crossbars were used over and over due to the scarcity of wood in the region, the cross that's shown in most other Life of Christ movies would have been used over and over too, and Jesus wouldn't have been the only unlucky one to have been crucified on it.
Plus I've been told that the nails wouldn't have gone through the palms of the hands, as they couldn't handle the weight and would have torn through the sides. the nails, instead, went through the wrists of the condemmed. It is THIS little known fact that the Vatican uses to debunk false claims of stigmata. Most of the Testament movies show the victim's arms supported by ropes, which would give the nail-through-the-palms display credence, but I doubt even THAT insignificant consideration would have been given by the Romans. DeMille's Jesus didn't even HAVE ropes, and HE was the only one of the three who was nailed. Another misstep by C.B.
Sepiatone
Edited by: Sepiatone on Apr 2, 2013 12:25 PM
-
A slight digression: My wife, who usually sits quietly through most movies, piped up after a scene in *Demitrius and The Gladiators* (you'll know which one in a second) with the comment, "Wow...those RICHARD EGAN kisses were to DIE for!"
Sorry. just had to get that out!
Sepiatone
-
Years ago, I could never stand Pallette. I don't know why. Over the years I've come to look forward for his appearance in movies.
He never disappoints.
Sepiatone
Edited by: Sepiatone on Apr 1, 2013 9:32 PM
-
Movies are art ? Since when?
There's a famous work of art called "Leda and The Swan" that I consider a fine work of art despite my disgust for beastiality.
And I wouldn't really consider *Teladega Nights* as being "art".
Sepiatone
-
For a DeMille picture, it holds up much better for me than *King Of Kings*, his silent "masterpiece". Watched a bit of "King" early this morning, and was eye-rolling at the over emoting done by most of the cast. Yeah, I know in silents the eggagerated facial and body movements are required to get the parts across. But it really wouldn't have hurt to make Jesus NOT look like he's ready to burst into tears in almost every scene. Plus, some of the biblical accuracy didn't seem to be all that accurate.
But I WILL not say anything bad about it's cinematography! Outstanding doesn't even begin to do it justice.
As far as *The Ten Commandments*, well, I've said all I could about it in another thread. In spite of all the flaws I could point out, effects, plot or performances, I still think it's a wonderful movie.
Sepiatone
-
Euthanize the puppies first? Why?
What's "good" for the LOBSTER is good for the LAB!
Sepiatone
-
And now we're nearly back to square one!
I wouldn't categorize *the Ten Commandments* as a "reverent" movie. It's simply a movie made about a story in the Old Testament. Sure, the story is reverent, but that's as far as it goes. And the movie, despite all of the flaws and quaintness in comparison to today's special effects that were brought up here, is still a good movie.
All of the "extra" stuff that one here found objectionable usually comes in the form of ambient activity that's glossed over in scripture. Not a whole lot of dialouge in that book, for sure. But in the realm of talking pictures, most feel dialouge is an integral part of the proccess. Plus, more goes on in the course of a day or year or so than ever mentioned in the Holy Writ. If DeMille stuck stricky to the pages, he'd have given us a 45 minute "epic". So of course some "license" had to be taken. Many people might not have liked the license that was taken, but it seems, over all this time, that most viewers of the movie didn't retain it, and just let the main crux of the story register. THAT'S what's important. Whether you consider yourself a "true believer" or even if you don't believe in any of it, you cannot deny it is most excellent storytelling.
Furthermore, MARK TWAIN once said, "Man is the only animal with the TRUE RELIGION. HUNDREDS of them!" Which tells me there are millions of "true believers" in disagreement with each other.
Sepiatone
-
Oh, so THAT'S his name!
Yeah, the pics helped, otherwise I wouldn't know who the hell you were talking(?) about.
His birthday is July 28? Well, it seems me and him have SOMEthing in common!
Sepiatone
-
Well, when I first joined, I never had any of the difficulties I mentioned. UNTIL I got a new tower loaded with WINDOWS 7 Business. THAT'S when it all started.
I couldn't say if any of it was due to THAT, or something to do with the website. Logic tells me if it WAS the site, we'd ALL be experiencing the same trouble. But I'm as technically savvy about PCs as I am about helecoptors, so I couldn't say for sure.
Sepiatone
-
-
You know, Jake, in spite of our differences about the movie, I can't disagree much about the SCORE.
And even though the theme is oft repeated in *The King of Kings* (NOT the silent), I find that one, too, is pretty rousing.
Sepiatone
-
Wow...the power of suggestion must have had real power in those days! I don't like to sound like a new-age sensitive dweeb, but I can't see boiling puppies for some kind of ointment that probably didn't have any real medicinal value.
Of course, this doesn't diminish the desire, in the wee hours of the morning, to boil the puppies my neighbor lets bark their heads off all night long!
Sepiatone
HENRY V script....
in General Discussions
Posted
Y'know Fred, most of us slept or asked for the bathroom pass when they tried cramming THE BARD down our thoats in high school. WHAT makes you think our interest is more piqued after all these years?
Sepiatone