Quote:
Originally Posted by FryeDwight
Loved them when I was a teen, but not really crazy about any of them anymore, but have decent memories of DR NO, GOLDFINGER, FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE, LIVE AND LET DIE, NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN and THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS.
|
Agreed, some of them were fairly juvenile, cheezy, or just not very good. Some were very adult and had decent stories to go with the rest of the fanfare. Of the past ones, Goldfinger, Live and Let Die and Golden Eye were good. Of the new set with Daniel Craig, I thought Casino Royal was one of the best Bond films yet. I liked all four of the new ones, with the last one Spectre, being good as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FryeDwight
DAY OF THE DEAD (1985). Big disappointment when I first saw it and wondered what the hell George was thinking. A couple years later, saw it for rental and decided to check it out again and kind of liked it and grew to very much like it after a few more viewings and finding out the details involved in its making. There are just some films to have to see more than once to appreciate.
Watching it this weekend, still like it very much, but think NIGHT and DAWN are superior, although Savini's work in here is amazing, although there's too many shots of exploding heads and excessive gut shots(much the same for THE WALKING DEAD in many episodes). Not a lot of sympathetic characters other than Bub, although Joe Pilato's Captain Rhodes is SUCH an asshole, that he almost is likeable (Pilato is a lot of fun at cons, as he "stays in character") ****
|
Initially, I liked 'Day' better than 'Dawn', only because it seemed like more of a film with a story: beginning, middle and end. About 30 minutes after 'Dawn' hits the mall, it really peters out to me -- which of course, is what, 70% of the film?
I think Day had some really good qualities, like the realism, moving things along, and of course, experimenting with the zombies. I think it missed a great opportunity with the later. It really needed to center and expand on experimenting the zombies is it's own grotesque symbolic detail.