txa1265 Posted July 27, 2004 Share Posted July 27, 2004 Originally posted by Darth Groovy Nobody ever played Dracula better than Gary Oldman in Bram Stoker's Dracual, NOBODY! Oh that is a sad, sad commentary on the youth of today. I liked Oldman in Dracula, he was th ebest part of an otherwise mediocre movie. But to even *compare* that to Christopher Lee in the 60's, or the one true Draculatm that is Bela Lagosi ... sad. But not as sad as Catwoman. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted July 27, 2004 Share Posted July 27, 2004 Originally posted by txa1265 Oh that is a sad, sad commentary on the youth of today. I liked Oldman in Dracula, he was th ebest part of an otherwise mediocre movie. But to even *compare* that to Christopher Lee in the 60's, or the one true Draculatm that is Bela Lagosi ... sad. But not as sad as Catwoman. Mike aw c'mon mike, classic as they may be, Lee's or Lugosi's Dracula performances were bordering on camp in retrospect. He he he , you might as well have added 'gramps' from The Munsters in there.... Oldman's count is far closer to the character in Stoker's remarkable book.... There is still great scope for a wonderful movie to be made of this book, Coppola had a good try, but was let down with bad actors *cough*Keanu*cough* mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted July 27, 2004 Share Posted July 27, 2004 Originally posted by Chase Windu This was a good review at rotten tomatoes. WTF is the lady doing comparing it to Van Helsing? That movie kicked major @$$. I loved it. The Punisher was complete and utter crappola and probably still shouldn't be compared to Catwoman because Catwoman looks like it gives crap a bad name. Even the 10% "good" reviews don;t say things that make me want to watch it. Van Helsing was the worst film i have seen in years (honestly). Just dire. I was looking foreward to it too as i quite liked the mummy and wolverine. Can't tell about the punisher, as i don't think it is even going to get a cinematic release over here. But a lot of the reviews i read said the dolph lundgren one was better (yay dolph! ) and the whole thing sounded like an 80s steven segal movie (out for justice?) The thing is, they basically used a script-by-committee and a mtv director to make a film that they knew would suck, but relied on the overactive hormones of teenage boys to get people to go. That costume isn't actually sexy, it looks silly and cheap and tarty. Halle berry looks gorgeous, but her personality (earnest complete drip) is so dull that she is in no way sexy, and totally miscast for this role. Pfieffer (and even earther kitt) were cool and sexy. This just comes off as cheap and tacky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txa1265 Posted July 27, 2004 Share Posted July 27, 2004 Originally posted by Astrotoy7 aw c'mon mike, classic as they may be, Lee's or Lugosi's Dracula performances were bordering on camp in retrospect. Bordering on camp? Bordering? Have you never seen "Abbot & Costello Meel Frankenstein"?!? How they don't even have to change character to blend with the comedy? Originally posted by Astrotoy7 you might as well have added 'gramps' from The Munsters in there.... No, that's comedy, very different from over-the-top camp. Originally posted by Astrotoy7 Oldman's count is far closer to the character in Stoker's remarkable book.... There is still great scope for a wonderful movie to be made of this book, Coppola had a good try, but was let down with bad actors *cough*Keanu*cough* Perhaps. But while it may be arguable that Oldman played a better classic Dracula, the original is better in pretty much every way from any remake, IMO. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Groovy Posted July 28, 2004 Author Share Posted July 28, 2004 Originally posted by Astrotoy7 aw c'mon mike, classic as they may be, Lee's or Lugosi's Dracula performances were bordering on camp in retrospect. He he he , you might as well have added 'gramps' from The Munsters in there.... Oldman's count is far closer to the character in Stoker's remarkable book.... There is still great scope for a wonderful movie to be made of this book, Coppola had a good try, but was let down with bad actors *cough*Keanu*cough* mtfbwya Oh GAWD yes! Thanks for pointing out the obvious there. Keanu, and Winnona Ryder were HORRIBLE in what could have been an otherwise AMAZING film. I still love the film, but if I had to redo it, neither of those two people would have been involved. And yes, i've seen versions of Dracula starring Christopher Lee, legend of the Hammer Horror classics. The Bela Lagousi version was made in a time where it was quite easy to scare people, and THAT particular movie was not scary at all, in fact it was kind of corny and boring. Now F.W. Murnau's Nosferatu, THAT is a scary movie! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapNColostomy Posted July 28, 2004 Share Posted July 28, 2004 Originally posted by Darth Groovy Now F.W. Murnau's Nosferatu, THAT is a scary movie! Werd. "Youth of today", indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Posted July 28, 2004 Share Posted July 28, 2004 Originally posted by acdcfanbill brings to mind a certian scene in spaceballs... "You idiots! These are not them! You've captured their stunt doubles!!!!!!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txa1265 Posted July 28, 2004 Share Posted July 28, 2004 Originally posted by Darth Groovy Now F.W. Murnau's Nosferatu, THAT is a scary movie! Oh, that is just one of my faves ... who needs words to scare the sh*t out of you ... Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Groovy Posted July 28, 2004 Author Share Posted July 28, 2004 Originally posted by txa1265 Oh, that is just one of my faves ... who needs words to scare the sh*t out of you ... Mike Watch a movie called "Shadow Of The Vampire", THEN watch Nosferatu! Makes it even scarier! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kain Posted July 28, 2004 Share Posted July 28, 2004 Personally, silence speaks volume. I'm 19 and I LOVE Nosferatu. Then again, the only vampire movies I have a problem with are: 1: Dracula 2000. I just didn't like it. 2: Queen of the Damned. Jonathan Davis shoulda been Lestat. Trent Reznor would have been the perfect Lestat though. And screw anyone who thinks Interview With A Vampire was boring. Expand your Imagi-Nation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Groovy Posted July 28, 2004 Author Share Posted July 28, 2004 Originally posted by Kain Personally, silence speaks volume. I'm 19 and I LOVE Nosferatu. Then again, the only vampire movies I have a problem with are: 1: Dracula 2000. I just didn't like it. 2: Queen of the Damned. Jonathan Davis shoulda been Lestat. Trent Reznor would have been the perfect Lestat though. And screw anyone who thinks Interview With A Vampire was boring. Expand your Imagi-Nation Dracula 2000 was just positively dreadful. Can't speak for Queen of the Damned, but then again I did not watch it for two reasons. 1. Everyone I know says it is terrible. 2. Aaliyah's last movie?! It is sad when an artist's last project has to suck so bad. Unlike The Crow, which was Brandon Lee's swan song, Queen of the Damned is not what Aaliyah should be noted for, but rather her music. I am reminded how unfortunate it was that Raul Julia's last film was in fact "Street Fighter". Seriously though Kain, I think you would love "Shadow Of The Vampire". It is VERY different, not quite your typical horror movie, but definitely scary and makes you think alot about the premise of vampires. If you like Nosferatu, it is almost a companion piece to that film. "Shadow Of The Vampire" is based on the filming of "Nosferatu". I will tell you nothing more, because I will spoil everything. Have a look at it, and let me know what you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted July 28, 2004 Share Posted July 28, 2004 Dracula (the oldman one) was interesting, but not at all scary. I don't think it was even supposed to be. Olman was ok i guess (better than keanu, thats for sure) but he bacically played dracula as the same as most of his villain roles, so it hardly stood out. Kieffer sutherland in the lost boys was the best vamp I have to say that the only really good dracula is the book. I thought the book was SOO much more interesting than any of the films i have seen. I especially liked the whole jonathan harker trapped in the castle bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pie™ Posted July 28, 2004 Share Posted July 28, 2004 Originally posted by Kain And screw anyone who thinks Interview With A Vampire was boring. It's pretty good, but I think Kirsten Dunst ruins much of it :\ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kain Posted July 28, 2004 Share Posted July 28, 2004 Everytime I tried to watch Shadow of the Vampire, I've ended up having to leave. It sucks! Expand your Imagi-Nation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.