Films/DVD Asylum

• Women in Love - djprobed 13:08:26 04/15/04 (2)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  I saw the film first, then read the book, expecting to get deeper into the story and characters with the book (as is often, though not always, the case).

  As it turns out, I found Lawrence's repetitive style to be pretty annoying, and have long since forgotten whatever the book contained that wasn't put into the film. Russell distilled it perfectly. The film is better.
  
  djprobed
  
  

  ---

  • Re: Women in Love - Harmonia 13:51:41 04/17/04 (0)
    In Reply to: Women in Love posted by djprobed on April 15, 2004 at 13:08:26:

    WIL was memorable in so many ways.

    This film contains my favorite male nude scene of all time.
    
    

    ---
  • Yeah, I had forgotten that one. You're right! nt - clarkjohnsen 14:01:59 04/15/04 (0)
    In Reply to: Women in Love posted by djprobed on April 15, 2004 at 13:08:26:

    d
    
    

    ---
• Bridge On The River Kwai and Planet Of The Apes - mishmashmusic 08:22:28 04/15/04 (5)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  both by Pierre Boulle, who was a capable author---his work was amplified by both films.
  

  ---

  
  
  

  ---

  
  
  

  ---

  • Re: Bridge On The River Kwai and Planet Of The Apes - Gee LP 21:36:43 04/15/04 (1)
    In Reply to: Bridge On The River Kwai and Planet Of The Apes posted by mishmashmusic on April 15, 2004 at 08:22:28:

    Don't forget another book by Boulle: The Poseidon Adventure!

    The book is pretty good, but features a weird subplot where the teenage girl is raped by a steward and later hopes that she is pregnant with his child, a child that will remind her of his hair and soft eyes.

    Uhhhh...okay!

    Prefer the film version's excision of that material!
    
    
    

    ---

    • Re: Bridge On The River Kwai and Planet Of The Apes - Ken Perkins 10:52:55 04/16/04 (0)
      In Reply to: Re: Bridge On The River Kwai and Planet Of The Apes posted by Gee LP on April 15, 2004 at 21:36:43:

      The Poseidon Adventure was written by Paul Gallico.
      
      

      ---
  • Re: Bridge On The River Kwai and Planet Of The Apes - Analog Scott 10:18:11 04/15/04 (0)
    In Reply to: Bridge On The River Kwai and Planet Of The Apes posted by mishmashmusic on April 15, 2004 at 08:22:28:

    Good call on Planet of the Apes. The movie was pretty far removed from the book and took on all kinds of social, political and religeous issues that were not addressed in the book. I think the movie also improved on the book just in plot lines and story telling in general. The movie was much better in that it goes full circle on it's running comentary on humanity. The turns in story are far more dramatic as well. A great movie.
    
    

    ---
  • Re: Bridge On The River Kwai and Planet Of The Apes - rico 10:13:28 04/15/04 (0)
    In Reply to: Bridge On The River Kwai and Planet Of The Apes posted by mishmashmusic on April 15, 2004 at 08:22:28:

    The DVD of "...Bridge..." is the first video transfer that has accurate lighting during the planting of the explosives.
    
    

    ---
  • The Bridge: Good one! nt - clarkjohnsen 08:23:55 04/15/04 (0)
    In Reply to: Bridge On The River Kwai and Planet Of The Apes posted by mishmashmusic on April 15, 2004 at 08:22:28:

    x
    
    

    ---
• AI - Alex Yakovlev 07:03:15 04/15/04 (2)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  Not that the movie is fabulous, but the original story was to my taste too primitive.
  
  

  ---

  • Thas' a good one. How 'bout Bladerunner? nt - clarkjohnsen 08:02:40 04/15/04 (1)
    In Reply to: AI posted by Alex Yakovlev on April 15, 2004 at 07:03:15:

    s
    
    

    ---

    • Movie is OK, but I never read a book. (nt) - Alex Yakovlev 08:22:54 04/15/04 (0)
      In Reply to: Thas' a good one. How 'bout Bladerunner? nt posted by clarkjohnsen on April 15, 2004 at 08:02:40:

      nt
      
      

      ---
• tough question - late 07:02:39 04/15/04 (0)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  Hi,
  if you were to ask me which Vonnegut book was my favorite, it would prob be Slaughterhouse-5. Didn't like the movie nearly as much. To each their own. This is going back a ways, but do you remember 'The Mouse that Roared'? It's been years and years, but I think maybe the movie was better. I'm not a big Elmore Leonard fan, so Get Shorty is an easy pick. I liked the movie a lot; never did get through the book.
  
  

  ---
• The Shining was much better than the book. - Hepcat 05:41:53 04/15/04 (1)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  Kubrick made a masterpiece from a rather hokey book...in my opinion.
  
  

  ---

  • Re: The Shining was much better than the book. - rico 07:38:49 04/15/04 (0)
    In Reply to: The Shining was much better than the book. posted by Hepcat on April 15, 2004 at 05:41:53:

    I agree except for the visible helicpter shadow and the non-visble maze in the establishment shot of the Overlook Hotel.
    
    

    ---
• Clearly much better than the book? "El Sur" (The South)... - orejones 03:44:15 04/15/04 (0)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  ...a Spanish film by Victor Erice which makes a not so good story into a wonderfully poetic film.

  At the height of the books, Huston´s "The Dead", and Mulligan´s "To Kill a Mockingbird" : both excellent films, both faithful to the original books.

  Regards

  BF
  
  

  ---
• For Whom the Bell Tolls (nt) - geoffkait 03:26:23 04/15/04 (1)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  nope
  
  

  ---

  • Aw c'mon... nt - clarkjohnsen 08:01:18 04/15/04 (0)
    In Reply to: For Whom the Bell Tolls (nt) posted by geoffkait on April 15, 2004 at 03:26:23:

    s
    
    

    ---
• Goodfellas...nt - Harmonia 00:07:24 04/15/04 (0)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  ny
  
  

  ---
• Re: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? - RGA 19:42:45 04/14/04 (0)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  Schindler's List

  Firestarter (such that it is), You could make the case for the Shining...some people don't like King's long windedness vs the tight fast paced Underrated Cut-throat Kubrick film. I hated the Kubrick movie but i've seen it several times on TV and I can't help watching - so I bought the DVD - damn good fun despite the flaws...the King made for tv version was atrocious...some themes don't work on screen.

  The English Patient(Though together they work better than stand alone pieces).

  Amadeus - though technically a play - so depending on the modifications??? - Since Shaffer wrote both the play and screenplay??

  You could make a case for One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Jaws, A Clockwork Orange(though I'm still reading the book).
  
  

  ---
• Lord of the Rings. - edta 19:06:21 04/14/04 (3)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  Yes, I'll catch hell on this.

  The hobbits on the lam? Yes, some things elided, were they really necessary?

  Ok, Bombadil didn't really fit into the book. He was developed and then in the later books dropped.

  The thing with Saruman? The Saruman battles were largely boring.

  I believe the movies really capture the spirit and imagination of the book(s), if not the literal and sometimes boring details.
  
  

  ---

  • Re: Lord of the Rings. - Analog Scott 20:47:22 04/14/04 (2)
    In Reply to: Lord of the Rings. posted by edta on April 14, 2004 at 19:06:21:

    I think the movies did the near impossible by bringing the books to life. But I don't think they improved upon the books. It was good enough that they were amazingly true to the books.
    
    

    ---

    • Yes, they're quite an accomplishment. - Audiophilander 22:48:25 04/14/04 (1)
      In Reply to: Re: Lord of the Rings. posted by analog Scott on April 14, 2004 at 20:47:22:

      Kudos to Peter Jackson for the love and care he gave the material, bringing the rich fantasy elements to life.

      AuPh
      
      

      ---

      • It's womderful...but it makes me fanatasise about unlimited budgets, and IMAX :) /nt\ - late 07:04:49 04/15/04 (0)
        In Reply to: Yes, they're quite an accomplishment. posted by Audiophilander on April 14, 2004 at 22:48:25:

        /
        
        

        ---
• The Wizard of Oz (nt) - dwill123 17:18:17 04/14/04 (0)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  .
  
  

  ---
• Without a doubt: Brideshead Revisited n - albee33 17:12:42 04/14/04 (0)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  n
  
  

  ---
• Re: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? - rico 16:45:55 04/14/04 (1)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  "The Bridges of Madison County" Sappy book, wonderful movie.
  
  

  ---

  • Boycotted both, but good answer. nt - clarkjohnsen 07:59:59 04/15/04 (0)
    In Reply to: Re: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by rico on April 14, 2004 at 16:45:55:

    s
    
    

    ---
• Re: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? - rico 16:42:43 04/14/04 (1)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  It IS on LD and I have long enjoyed it. It takes about ten minutes or so to get used to the jumps araound in time but from then on it's a brilliant tour de force. Bach music by Gleen Gould, YUMMY!!
  
  

  ---

  • Yeah, I'd forgotten the Bach! nt - clarkjohnsen 07:59:27 04/15/04 (0)
    In Reply to: Re: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by rico on April 14, 2004 at 16:42:43:

    a
    
    

    ---
• The Killers - Buckeye 16:16:03 04/14/04 (0)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  A very decent short story by the king of short stories, Ernie Hemingway...but a really great film noir classic.

  One of the best opening scenes/first ten mintes in any film, imo. Charles McGraw and William Conrad, with that "bight boy" dialogue, are so perfect!

  regards,

  Gary

  
  
  

  ---
• unarguably: The Godfather [nt] - ephemere 15:13:55 04/14/04 (1)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  
  
  

  ---

  • You mean "inarguably," and you're wrong. Luca - tinear 17:38:38 04/14/04 (0)
    In Reply to: unarguably: The Godfather [nt] posted by ephemere on April 14, 2004 at 15:13:55:

    wasn't some big oaf in the book...he was REALLY terrifying.
    I didn't find Brando's paper-in-the-mouth Godfather particularly scary,either.
    Read the book, however, and the evil of these two men will grip you.
    
    
    

    ---
• arguably: The Shining, The Dead Zone [nt] - ephemere 15:12:27 04/14/04 (13)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  
  
  

  ---

  • Re: arguably: The Shining, The Dead Zone [nt] - Analog Scott 20:39:39 04/14/04 (0)
    In Reply to: arguably: The Shining, The Dead Zone [nt] posted by ephemere on April 14, 2004 at 15:12:27:

    I agree with The Shining which was a major revisionist interpretation of the book. I think the Dead Zone was just a very good adaptation of one of King's best books.
    
    

    ---
  • Re: The Shining? - Buckeye 16:09:21 04/14/04 (11)
    In Reply to: arguably: The Shining, The Dead Zone [nt] posted by ephemere on April 14, 2004 at 15:12:27:

    I'd be interested to know who here finds the Kubrick version of The Shiing a great film? SK admited he couldn't develop many of the special effects needed to his satisfaction...and although there are glimpses of scenes that reflect the original ending (the "boiler" scenes)...the "new" ending of the film is very lame (imo).

    Jack Nic. is very good in the film, but Shelly Duval? The woman was born to play Olive Oyl, and nothing else.

    I remember reading and enjoying the book in paperback form just before the film was released...it mentioned "soon to be major motion picture...dir. by Kubrick, starring Jack Nic." It didn't come any bettr at that time...and I couldn't wait to see it.

    I went to a theater the first night it played in town...soooo disapointed! I know there are Kubrick fans who think he could do no wrong...and The Shining has a few good moments...but this thing is flawed by virtually any directorial standard.

    Of course, that's my opinion...any others?
    REDRUM,

    Gary
    
    

    ---

    • Re: The Shining is briliant - rico 16:47:18 04/14/04 (1)
      In Reply to: Re: The Shining? posted by Buckeye on April 14, 2004 at 16:09:21:

      Who cares if King and you don't like it? It is a brilliant movie, great Kubrick as well.
      
      

      ---

      • Re: The Shining is briliant - Buckeye 17:13:21 04/14/04 (0)
        In Reply to: Re: The Shining is briliant posted by rico on April 14, 2004 at 16:47:18:

        
        Rico,

        Who cares if I don't like it?

        Who cares if you think it's brilliant!

        To each, their own.

        Strangely enough, I usually agree with most of your reviews/opinons posted on films. I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree on this one...the differnce between your "brillant" and my own opinion are far to great to even debate.

        BTW, I know you're a laser disc collector...this is the only laser disc that I've bought and then later traded in...I'll never watch the film again.

        Regards,

        Gary
        
        

        ---
    • Re: The Shining? - ephemere 16:40:19 04/14/04 (8)
      In Reply to: Re: The Shining? posted by Buckeye on April 14, 2004 at 16:09:21:

      It doesn't have to be "great" to be "better". The Shining and The Dead Zone are both above average King, but still operate largely as well spun (and exceedingly enjoyable) yarns. Of course, if you love the novel, you may be disappointed in the movie, as Kubrick chews it up and spits it out as a fresh creation quite different from the book and arguably with much more psychological depth and thematic interest.

      I think The Dead Zone is a closer call, as neither book nor film particularly stands out. But after both repeated readings and repeated viewings, I find that Cronenberg's understated darkness speaks for itself and is hence much more effective than King's literal ruminations on destiny.
      
      

      ---

      • Re: The Shining? - Buckeye 17:06:27 04/14/04 (7)
        In Reply to: Re: The Shining? posted by ephemere on April 14, 2004 at 16:40:19:

        I see your point about "better," and agree on Dead Zone: so-so novel, pretty good movie (starring Chris Walken didn't hurt).

        However, I thought/think that The Shining was a pretty good book within its genre, and imo Kubrick hosed it up...mostly by chaging the ending, and secondly by casting Shelly D. Even Scatman, who I usually like, doesn't fare well here.

        This is the ONLY laserdisc that I've owned and traded in...I just can't are to watch it. Even the suck-up critic Leonard Maltin, who never met a major motion picture he didn't like, gives the Shining a medioccre two star rating.

        Ah, well, to each, their own.

        All the best,

        Gary
        
        

        ---

        • The Shining is a comedy - Bulkington 08:46:21 04/15/04 (6)
          In Reply to: Re: The Shining? posted by Buckeye on April 14, 2004 at 17:06:27:

          "Pink and gold are my favorite colors!"

          The movie, that is.
          
          

          ---

          • Re: The Shining is a comedy - rico 10:16:28 04/15/04 (5)
            In Reply to: The Shining is a comedy posted by Bulkington on April 15, 2004 at 08:46:21:

            Did you ever slo mo the tour Ullman gives the Torrences and check out all the young women he has obviously had relationships with during the dummer? Subtle but there
            
            

            ---

            • No - Bulkington 11:36:58 04/15/04 (1)
              In Reply to: Re: The Shining is a comedy posted by rico on April 15, 2004 at 10:16:28:

              but thanks for the tip. We've got the Shining somewhere in our over-long netflix queue. So we'll definitely be watching it sometime within, I don't know, the next year or so.

              I read something not too long ago about parallelisms between The Shining and 2001. Worth checking out as well, perhaps.
              
              

              ---

              • Re: No - rico 12:06:32 04/15/04 (0)
                In Reply to: No posted by Bulkington on April 15, 2004 at 11:36:58:

                It actually begins when Ullman is welcoming the Torrences near the front door. Watch how he can't take his eyes off the young thing leaving.The (again in slow motion) watch how he is distracted by other young things all through the tour.
                
                

                ---
            • Re: Typo, s/b "Summer" of course (nt) - rico 10:26:44 04/15/04 (2)
              In Reply to: Re: The Shining is a comedy posted by rico on April 15, 2004 at 10:16:28:

              x
              
              

              ---

              • Re: FWIW - Buckeye 11:50:33 04/15/04 (1)
                In Reply to: Re: Typo, s/b "Summer" of course (nt) posted by rico on April 15, 2004 at 10:26:44:

                
                Rico, et al,

                Apparantly, there are many fans of The Shining here at the asylum...so i guess, if everybody tells me I'm sick, I'd better go lay down.

                I've been thinking about the film, and there are two scenes that really stand out to me:

                The "baseball bat" scene ("give me the bat, Wendy")...Jack is great here, and so is the camera work and direction...Shelly, as usual, is not up to the rest of the company.

                The "bar" scene ("Lloyd, I'm the kind of man that likes to know who's buying his drinks)...I can't think of the name offhand of the veteran character actor playing the bartender, but he and Jack are really working it here.

                Overated scene..."Here's Johnny." (improvised, I believe, by Jack). Funny at the time, but hasn't worn well imo.

                Thanks for the tip on the lecherous manager of the Overlook...now I MIGHT have to watch it again.

                Regards,

                Gary
                
                

                ---

                • Re: Joe Turkel is the bartender - rico 12:04:43 04/15/04 (0)
                  In Reply to: Re: FWIW posted by Buckeye on April 15, 2004 at 11:50:33:

                  He is also one of the three men condemmed to die in Kubrick's "Paths of Glory" So cool that he's in "The Shining" as a ghost from the Overlook's past.
                  
                  

                  ---
• Re: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? - Analog Scott 14:58:57 04/14/04 (0)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  Big Fish
  
  

  ---
• "The Hours" (nt) - JefferyK 14:51:28 04/14/04 (3)
  In Reply to: What movie has improved on the *book* from which it was drawn? posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:50:03:

  NT

  Jeffery
  
  

  ---

  • Have not seen. nt - clarkjohnsen 14:53:01 04/14/04 (2)
    In Reply to: "The Hours" (nt) posted by JefferyK on April 14, 2004 at 14:51:28:

    a
    
    

    ---

    • I think Michael Cunningham is an overrated novelist... - JefferyK 14:54:41 04/14/04 (1)
      In Reply to: Have not seen. nt posted by clarkjohnsen on April 14, 2004 at 14:53:01:

      ...an opinion not shared by many others. :)!

      Jeffery
      
      

      ---

      • That might explain the movie... nt - clarkjohnsen 14:57:13 04/14/04 (0)
        In Reply to: I think Michael Cunningham is an overrated novelist... posted by JefferyK on April 14, 2004 at 14:54:41:

        a
        
        

        ---

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

VH Audio

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---