Underrated Movies
 

I was working on something late last night and had DVR'd the movie Dune,
which I had not watched in many years.

I thought the movie was absolutely fascinating. Not as "high tech" as
the Lucas or Spielberg sci-fi, but with some interesting effects, an
actual plot, a beginning, a middle, and an end, and with some really
heavy ideas.

Yet, I recall the movie was panned when it came out.

Another more recent sci-fi I like a lot is The Chronicles of Riddick,
for much the same reasons. Yet this one, too, did not get strong
reviews, if memory serves.

Anyone else like these two flicks?

Underrated Movies
 

On Aug 12, 4:06 pm, hk wrote:
I was working on something late last night and had DVR'd the movie Dune,
which I had not watched in many years.

I thought the movie was absolutely fascinating. Not as "high tech" as
the Lucas or Spielberg sci-fi, but with some interesting effects, an
actual plot, a beginning, a middle, and an end, and with some really
heavy ideas.

Yet, I recall the movie was panned when it came out.

Another more recent sci-fi I like a lot is The Chronicles of Riddick,
for much the same reasons. Yet this one, too, did not get strong
reviews, if memory serves.

Anyone else like these two flicks?

Hmmm, I read Dune and did not like it and ended up rooting for the bad
guys thinking "I hope they capture and torture this stupid little ****
Paul cuz I hate people with a messiah complex", so of course id did
not see the movie. I vaguely remember "Chronicles"

Underrated Movies
 

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:36:05 GMT, John H.
wrote:



Blockbusters gives a better deal, especially if you have a store close by.


They shut the close one down. Besides, I've had good luck with
Netflix and it's cheap.

--Vic

Underrated Movies
 

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 15:34:00 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:06:35 -0400, hk wrote:


I was working on something late last night and had DVR'd the movie Dune,
which I had not watched in many years.

I thought the movie was absolutely fascinating. Not as "high tech" as
the Lucas or Spielberg sci-fi, but with some interesting effects, an
actual plot, a beginning, a middle, and an end, and with some really
heavy ideas.

Yet, I recall the movie was panned when it came out.

Another more recent sci-fi I like a lot is The Chronicles of Riddick,
for much the same reasons. Yet this one, too, did not get strong
reviews, if memory serves.

Anyone else like these two flicks?

Riddick was ok. Just put Dune on my Netflix list.

--Vic

Blockbusters gives a better deal, especially if you have a store close by.
Blockbuster just went up to $5. You can stream 12000 movies free from
netflix if you have a membership. I just started playing with it and found
acceptable video ported from the laptop to a projector. Haven't tried it
with a TV yet. The video is noticeably fuzzy but still watchable.

Underrated Movies
 

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:06:35 -0400, hk wrote:


I was working on something late last night and had DVR'd the movie Dune,
which I had not watched in many years.



Speaking of DVR's and TiVo's ...

Those who plan to record the second night of the Democratic Convention are
advised to return their DVR/TiVo units for a hard drive upgrade for more
than double the recording space.

Bill Clinton will address the convention that night.

Eisboch

Underrated Movies
 

Eisboch wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:06:35 -0400, hk wrote:

I was working on something late last night and had DVR'd the movie Dune,
which I had not watched in many years.



Speaking of DVR's and TiVo's ...

Those who plan to record the second night of the Democratic Convention are
advised to return their DVR/TiVo units for a hard drive upgrade for more
than double the recording space.

Bill Clinton will address the convention that night.

Eisboch



Aargh...he'd better not do *that* again.




--
"The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade
and a woman's right to choose a safe and legal abortion,
regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts
to weaken or undermine that right."

Underrated Movies
 

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:06:35 -0400, hk wrote:


I was working on something late last night and had DVR'd the movie Dune,
which I had not watched in many years.

Which one - the Koop version (1973), the Lynch version (1984) or the
Harrison version (TV-2000)?

I thought the movie was absolutely fascinating. Not as "high tech" as
the Lucas or Spielberg sci-fi, but with some interesting effects, an
actual plot, a beginning, a middle, and an end, and with some really
heavy ideas.

Yet, I recall the movie was panned when it came out.

Ah - must be talking about the Lynch version.

Not really - "Dune" fans panned it as not being "true" to Herbert's
vision, but overall it was well received and resulted in David Lynch's
rise in Hollywood. Lynch's version, for it's day, was very much ahead
of it's time visually.

The problem with "general" acceptance was that it wasn't "Star Wars"
with all the visual gimmicks - it was much too character driven with a
smattering of visual eye candy. Plus Lunch was limited by budget
which crimped his style.

The Harrison version was simply gorgeous visually and it stayed
faithful to the novel (which I managed to slog through - it's tough
reading much like George R.R. Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire" silly
pretentious social commentary drivel thinly disguised as a fantasy
series ever published).

Another more recent sci-fi I like a lot is The Chronicles of Riddick,
for much the same reasons. Yet this one, too, did not get strong
reviews, if memory serves.

That's because it sucked compared to "Pitch Black" which was the first
Riddick movie. The whole concept was muddled in "Chronicles" and the
story/plot holes between the two are glaring.

"Pitch Black" is much better.

You want to see some interesting early scifi, look up "Silent Running"
(1972) with Bruce Dern.

That is early scifi at it's best.

Underrated Movies
 

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:06:35 -0400, hk wrote:

I was working on something late last night and had DVR'd the movie Dune,
which I had not watched in many years.

Which one - the Koop version (1973), the Lynch version (1984) or the
Harrison version (TV-2000)?

I thought the movie was absolutely fascinating. Not as "high tech" as
the Lucas or Spielberg sci-fi, but with some interesting effects, an
actual plot, a beginning, a middle, and an end, and with some really
heavy ideas.

Yet, I recall the movie was panned when it came out.

Ah - must be talking about the Lynch version.

Not really - "Dune" fans panned it as not being "true" to Herbert's
vision, but overall it was well received and resulted in David Lynch's
rise in Hollywood. Lynch's version, for it's day, was very much ahead
of it's time visually.

The problem with "general" acceptance was that it wasn't "Star Wars"
with all the visual gimmicks - it was much too character driven with a
smattering of visual eye candy. Plus Lunch was limited by budget
which crimped his style.

The Harrison version was simply gorgeous visually and it stayed
faithful to the novel (which I managed to slog through - it's tough
reading much like George R.R. Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire" silly
pretentious social commentary drivel thinly disguised as a fantasy
series ever published).

Another more recent sci-fi I like a lot is The Chronicles of Riddick,
for much the same reasons. Yet this one, too, did not get strong
reviews, if memory serves.

That's because it sucked compared to "Pitch Black" which was the first
Riddick movie. The whole concept was muddled in "Chronicles" and the
story/plot holes between the two are glaring.

"Pitch Black" is much better.

You want to see some interesting early scifi, look up "Silent Running"
(1972) with Bruce Dern.

That is early scifi at it's best.


Oh, sure...that was a great movie. Dern at his spookiest. I read several
of The Dune novels, and thought they were pretty well done. Not the best
sci-fi by far, too ponderous, but interesting and well done.

My idea of "early" sci-fi apparently goes back much farther. As an
example, I thought Gene Barry's 1953 War of the Worlds was far, far
superior to the recent Tom Cruise version. Of course, I also liked
"Them!" even though it transcended hokey.

The all-time classic for me, though, is the collaboration between
Kubrick and Clarke, aka 2001: A Space Odyssey. Best "space" sci-fi ever,
including the bizarre and unexplained ending.






--
"The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade
and a woman's right to choose a safe and legal abortion,
regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts
to weaken or undermine that right."

Underrated Movies
 

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:43:40 -0400, hk wrote:

My idea of "early" sci-fi apparently goes back much farther. As an
example, I thought Gene Barry's 1953 War of the Worlds was far, far
superior to the recent Tom Cruise version. Of course, I also liked
"Them!" even though it transcended hokey.

Personally, I liked the Orson Welles rdio version better, but the
Barry film was great.

The all-time classic for me, though, is the collaboration between
Kubrick and Clarke, aka 2001: A Space Odyssey. Best "space" sci-fi ever,
including the bizarre and unexplained ending.

Eh - stoner movie in my opinion.

Now you want early scifi, can't beat "The Day the Earth Stood Still"
(1953) with Michael Rennie and directed by Robert Wise. Great story
with lots of fore shadowing of the Cold War. Some even claim it's
Christian allegory with it's message of universal peace, etc.

A very interesting comparision to the original story, "Farewell to The
Master" by Harry Bates which, as a historical sidenote, put the
magazine "Astounding" on the pulp scifi map.

Another of my early favorites, pre-CGI, was "Day the World Ended"
directed by Roger Corman of all people. Very campy.

And what list of early scifi wouldn't include "The Time Machine"
(1960) starring Rod Taylor and Alan Young (~~ snerk ~~). Or "When
Worlds Collide" (1951) which is a hoot viewed by today's perspective.

Underrated Movies
 

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:43:40 -0400, hk wrote:

My idea of "early" sci-fi apparently goes back much farther. As an
example, I thought Gene Barry's 1953 War of the Worlds was far, far
superior to the recent Tom Cruise version. Of course, I also liked
"Them!" even though it transcended hokey.

Personally, I liked the Orson Welles rdio version better, but the
Barry film was great.

The all-time classic for me, though, is the collaboration between
Kubrick and Clarke, aka 2001: A Space Odyssey. Best "space" sci-fi ever,
including the bizarre and unexplained ending.

Eh - stoner movie in my opinion.

Now you want early scifi, can't beat "The Day the Earth Stood Still"
(1953) with Michael Rennie and directed by Robert Wise. Great story
with lots of fore shadowing of the Cold War. Some even claim it's
Christian allegory with it's message of universal peace, etc.

A very interesting comparision to the original story, "Farewell to The
Master" by Harry Bates which, as a historical sidenote, put the
magazine "Astounding" on the pulp scifi map.

Another of my early favorites, pre-CGI, was "Day the World Ended"
directed by Roger Corman of all people. Very campy.

And what list of early scifi wouldn't include "The Time Machine"
(1960) starring Rod Taylor and Alan Young (~~ snerk ~~). Or "When
Worlds Collide" (1951) which is a hoot viewed by today's perspective.


Forgot "The Day...". Also one I like a lot.

--
"The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade
and a woman's right to choose a safe and legal abortion,
regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts
to weaken or undermine that right."