Jump to content
Devon Malcolm

DVDs and Films You Have Watched Recently 3 - The Final Insult

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, johnnyboy said:

Stuck Netflix on and RoboCop 2 popped up.  As I'm home feeling poorly I thought, why not?

Mainly it looks much better than I remember the VHS looking in 1992, however, the final battle would not look out of place on MTV Celebrity Deathmatch.

I'm going to jump on YouTube now to look for a RoboCop series advert compilation.

Edit: there we go.

 

OHH my evening sorted! There's a few scenes I don't remember in it.. I also had a vhs and dvd copy.. Anyone know what version this is? Is it a uncut version? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Devon Malcolm said:

There's a bit about him on the Video Nasty documentaries as well if I remember rightly. Brilliant documentaries, by the way.

Both of them are great but I'd say the first one was better. Second one features a lot of films that are a bit strange and unknown and shouldn't be on any list. Still good though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watched 1922 on Netflix on Saturday.

I've not read the Stephen King novella it's based on, though the young lady I watched it with insists it's much better than the film.

It had its moments of being wonderfully atmospheric and well shot, but doesn't really go anywhere. It reminds me of King's criticism of Kubrick's The Shining, in that the story is supposed to be about how an ordinary man can be driven to madness, but Nicholson is clearly deranged from the outset. In this film, I didn't really get the impression that I saw a man struggle with sanity, with grief, or with his own conscience, because it felt like the character at the start of the movie was capable of all the horrible things he did, and by the end it didn't feel like he'd learned anything from his actions or been changed as a character. It was just an hour and a half of a thoroughly unpleasant man, and supporting characters popping up at random. Plus, the framing device of the central character as the narrator means you know he survives it all.

Not terrible, but no desire to watch it again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BomberPat said:

Watched 1922 on Netflix on Saturday.

I've not read the Stephen King novella it's based on, though the young lady I watched it with insists it's much better than the film.

It had its moments of being wonderfully atmospheric and well shot, but doesn't really go anywhere. It reminds me of King's criticism of Kubrick's The Shining, in that the story is supposed to be about how an ordinary man can be driven to madness, but Nicholson is clearly deranged from the outset. In this film, I didn't really get the impression that I saw a man struggle with sanity, with grief, or with his own conscience, because it felt like the character at the start of the movie was capable of all the horrible things he did, and by the end it didn't feel like he'd learned anything from his actions or been changed as a character. It was just an hour and a half of a thoroughly unpleasant man, and supporting characters popping up at random. Plus, the framing device of the central character as the narrator means you know he survives it all.

Not terrible, but no desire to watch it again.

Stephen King is the Bob Dylan of Horror...His stuff is far better when someone else takes it off him or just uses elements of his stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's an interesting take on Stephen King, makes a lot of sense, although I wouldn't agree with that 100%, simply because The Dark Tower series is one of my favourites, the film wasn't good, and to be honest, I don't think anyone can really do it justice unless it's made into a TV series.

That said, I did enjoy Maximum Overdrive. I know he didn't strictly base it completely on a novel, it was a film he wrote specifically for him to direct, but I think it would count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Carbomb said:

That's an interesting take on Stephen King, makes a lot of sense, although I wouldn't agree with that 100%, simply because The Dark Tower series is one of my favourites, the film wasn't good, and to be honest, I don't think anyone can really do it justice unless it's made into a TV series.

That said, I did enjoy Maximum Overdrive. I know he didn't strictly base it completely on a novel, it was a film he wrote specifically for him to direct, but I think it would count.

Oh, I'm not saying everything that is taken off him and changed is better because there's some absolute dross made from his stories. I wonder if anyone has ever done a breakdown of his films and how close they were to his original story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think King is a fountain of ideas and sometimes the books slightly suffer from that as there is soooo much in there.

Personally, I still think The Shinning is a better book than film, however the TV version they did with King that was closer to the book was awful. So maybe its best that things get changed, as what works in one medium, does not necessarily work in the other (I know that this is in no way an original thought)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something interesting that @Chris B mentioned to me when we were discussing The Shining was that King apparently was very upset by

Kubrick's portrayal of Jack as an outright psychopath beyond redemption until the end, when in the book he finally recovers some sanity and spares his wife and child before he is killed. This was largely because King had effectively (and perhaps subconsciously) based Jack upon himself when he was in the worst throes of his alcoholism, and so was angry at Kubrick for essentially writing 

him off as a person for the sake of the storyline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's some really interesting elements to that - early on in the movie, Jack drives past a wrecked red VW Beetle on the side of the road. There's no car crash in the original book, nor is it really relevant to the plot of the movie - but in the book, Jack drives a red Beetle, in the film he doesn't. So that's been interpreted by a lot of people as a "fuck you" to Stephen King, effectively Kubrick saying, "this isn't your story". 

At the same time, it could be a nod to Jack having been there before, and being doomed to live out the same story over and over again - depending on your interpretation of the 1921 photograph. 

 

I prefer the film to the book, but can completely understand why Stephen King hates it, and it does often feel like Kubrick is consciously fucking with the source material for no reason other than that he could - though in a film about losing your grip on sanity, why not fuck with the people who have already read the book, so that they're as unsure as to what's going on as anyone else?

While I don't buy into all the mad theories thrown out in Room 237, or necessarily to the idea that Kubrick was so flawless that any inconsistency or weirdness in his movies must have been by design and carried a hidden message, I do think that The Shining is so full of symbolism and overt oddness that, especially given the subject matter, there's a lot more going on than appears on the surface.

 

In a lot of ways, the movie seems to actively avoid the usual Stephen King mode of storytelling. King tends to follow the classic modern horror mode of storytelling, wherein he starts by establishing normality, then introduces one element of abnormality, and gradually expands from there. The movie starts at full intensity, and pretty much never lets up from there. At no point do you ever suspect that anything you're watching is happy and ordinary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stephen King was better when he was coked up to the eyeballs.  Under The Dome was an awful read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BomberPat said:

 

While I don't buy into all the mad theories thrown out in Room 237, or necessarily to the idea that Kubrick was so flawless that any inconsistency or weirdness in his movies must have been by design and carried a hidden message, I do think that The Shining is so full of symbolism and overt oddness that, especially given the subject matter, there's a lot more going on than appears on the surface.

 

It's been discussed on here before, probably in this thread, but the levels people think Kubrick went to on that film are insane. I totally agree that there's loads of symbolism and intentional oddness in there but the theories about the layout of the Overlook really annoy me. From a technical point of view they've tried to make a set that looks bigger than it is but people screaming that there's walls to nowhere or the layout doesn't make sense...that's how sets work!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with a lot of what you say @BomberPat but I do think King has a point with Nicholson's portrayal in the role. Then again, I'm of the belief that Nicholson was pretty hammy after One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, everything else seemed to be an impression of that.

@LokiI really loved KUJO , which is when he was at his most coked up to the nines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Factotum said:

I agree with a lot of what you say @BomberPat but I do think King has a point with Nicholson's portrayal in the role. Then again, I'm of the belief that Nicholson was pretty hammy after One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, everything else seemed to be an impression of that.ÔĽŅ

I agree - he spent decades playing "Crazy Jack Nicholson" after Cuckoo's Nest, and is definitely bringing that to the table here. And I can really see why King hates that - we don't get the sense of a normal man driven to insanity, we get an uncomfortable time spent with an already insane man. 

It's that constant state of intensity and anxiety that I love the film for, though. What it sacrifices in adherence to King's story, it more than makes up for in a completely unparalleled cinematic experience, because I don't think any other movie can just keep you on edge from the opening credits all the way to the end quite like it does.

I do wonder about Kubrick's relationship to adaptations in general, though - he was fairly mercenary with the way he treated source material, from adapting Red Alert into Dr. Strangelove, chopping and changing half of Full Metal Jacket, and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stephen King's continued inability to understand what a film adaptation is after 38 years still amazes me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've very recently changed my mind on Full Metal Jacket. As a now 39 year old man, I can safely say it's better than Platoon and possibly the greatest war movie I've ever seen.
Quite a contrast from "That's a load of my bollocks!" which is what I greeted it with initially.

D-Mal is to blame for my sudden turn into a lust and thirst for all things Kubrick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×