The movie It was a good remake of the original movie that came out in 1990. When I saw the movie I thought it was good Film but I did think some parts of the movie was dumb. I did think the kids were good actors especially when they feared of pennywise and well that’s because while acting because they were scared. In the 2017 movie pennywise is a very scary clown, but you see there is a reason why pennywise is a clown. Pennywise is monster that takes the form of a clown to lure in children and it did that in the 90s. But in the 2017 version the clown is too scary to lure anyone in his traps. That’s why pennywise in the new version doesn’t work here. I do think the story is better than the original, but you do question some things.
I enjoyed the beginning; it was realistic, made me believe that she was possessed by something. Almost like n exorcism, the devil inside the black crow, the gibberish they say because they are possessed, just like there is good in th...
I am not the type of girl that gets startled easily but, you can’t help but to get chills when you watch the film Candy Man and read the novel The Forbidden. Both perspectives of this scary yet insightful figure is enough to keep you on your toes while following each story. The Candy Man and The Forbidden keeps you intrigued with its turns and twist to the story. I found it hard to follow the story line but, this worked to the writers benefit. The twist and turns forced me to pay attention to things I would have missed if everything was clear. One aspect of both stories that was clear was, the difference between the image of the Candy Man in the Candy Man and The Forbidden.
is David, the leader of the group of Vampires, but is in fact Max, who
...t were much more dramatized in the name of Hollywood. For the sake of it being a horror movie, it did have some very gruesome and disturbing images of fear and death.. I did like that this movie showed the dark, scary, and disturbing world of schizophrenia. It shows that things don’t always work out for the best all of the time. Schizophrenia is a horrible disorder because it slowly deteriorates mental functioning. People with this disorder do loose everything they have and must face a very scary world alone. There can be times were they have violent rages and things almost seem as a horror movie. I felt that this film did have some relevance to this disorder and depicted the dark side very accurately. Although some parts of the film were exaggerated I feel that overall there was validity in portraying the world of a terrorized schizophrenic. Hopefully is the future there will be more films that share a more accurate side of schizophrenia on a day to day bases. I feel that the public should be more educated on this disorder because it does affect a lot of our population. Society as a whole has a responsibility in educating themselves in order to improve the care we give to others.
The pristine 1933 King Kong was constructed as a movie: to convey a story to entertain an audience. Peter Jackson’s 2005 remake took the substructure for King Kong and expanded upon it in virtually every way in order to “make again” the astoundment of the original for a modern-day audience. Audiences received the first King Kong very well. The stop-motion sequences of Kong were astounding for their time and the movie grossed over $90,000 in its beginning weekend. In order to bank upon its prosperity again, sequels were made and thus in 1976 a remake was made to amend upon the original. Paramount updated the movie to color, altered the story, and cast Jeff Bridges, a widely popular actor of the time, as the lead actor. Although the movie received stirred reviews, it did exceptionally well in the box office and tripled Paramount’s initial budget for the motion picture. Even though the movie wasn’t “as good” as the original, audiences still paid money to view it because of that hope that they would feel like they once did when they visually perceived the first King Kong. The remake add...
The movie was incredible. THe foreshadowing that was happening throughout the movie absolutely made it interesting. All of the character's emotion truly stood out in each scene. The setting was very spooky and magical, especially the forest. Even though the movie was incredible, the text educated us more. The text educated us in various of ways. It was in modern text which made it easy to understand. Reading along with the text helped us follow and keep track of the characters. We are able to reread
I had a basic understanding of the show before reading the script and imagined Pennywise and a domineering villain. Upon reading the script I realized this wasn’t the case. Initially, I saw Pennywise as an exhausted middle aged women who hates her job and is just trying to keep everyone in line. With further analysis and our Director’s vision, Pennywise became someone completely different. Pennywise has a unique position in the show because she lives between the poor and rich worlds. She hangs in the balance and is on the front lines responsible for maintaining order. Because of this, she cannot show even the slightest bit of exhaustion. James made this very clear comparing her to Mother Courage and a “brick wall” when people question or oppose her. She too lived through the Stink Years and is just trying to maintain stasis. Pennywise definitely has a softer side which was really fun to explore. It’s evident from the beginning of the script that she has a soft spot for Bobby. I soon realized that this is due to the fact that she had to give up her daughter, Hope, around the same time Bobby was born, so she acts somewhat maternally to him. This maternal side comes out when Hope’s life is threatened by her father’s selfish choices and, just like Josephine after Bobby’s death, Pennywise loses all her inhibitions and has one objective: to save her daughter.
Paper 2: I chose to compare these two films after noticing Apocalypse Now on our suggestion list. I had heard of Platoon, but had never had the opportunity to see it. I am interested in films about the Vietnam War because my Grandfather served two tours in Vietnam as a pilot. Francis Ford Coppola’s Apocalypse Now (1979) and Oliver Stone’s Platoon (1987) both are very powerful films that have their separate and distinct ways of interpreting warfare.
Another Tyler Perry comedy movie with our favorite character, none other than Madea. Who wouldn’t love another Tyler Perry movie? If you’re planning on seeing this movie, I must say - DO NOT watch the trailer unless you're the kind of person that loves knowing every detail in the movie before you even watch it. The trailer kind of ruined the comedic flow of the entire movie because I knew everything that was going to happen.
I don’t think there was ever a time that I was bored and wanted to turn it off. I was completely immersed in the plot by the end of the movie. There were so many jump scares in this movie that I had nightmares for a week after it. I would recommend this movie to anyone who is looking for a good horror movie that will actually scare you. I don’t scare very easily and this movie scared me to death. I absolutely loved the movie and will probably watch it at the very least three more times. I don’t think i’ve ever enjoyed watching a movie more than I enjoyed Insidious Chapter 2. It was completely worth my time and money to watch
The movie lacks a lot of insight onto the other characters in the book, it mostly focuses on Ponyboy. For example, in the movie there was a lack of detail on characters such as Darry and Sodapop even Dally. Dally was a major character in the book but his death in the movie seemed a bit minor because there wasn’t much detail for viewers to get attached to his character. I felt as if his death was glazed over and easily forgotten in the movie while in the book it was described for at least two pages.
I have to disagree with both these reviews. I believed that the story was brilliantly written and the cinematography was beautiful. This movie touched me and had me in tears which believe me is hard to do. I do agree with the New York Times and New Yorker that it was a little dragged out and that Kiera Knightly acting was over rated. Other than that I would defiantly recommend this movie.
Beauty and the Beast is a traditional fairy tale written by French novelist Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve and published in 1740 in La Jeune Américaine et les contes marins. Her lengthy version was abridged, rewritten, and published by Jeanne-Marie Leprince de Beaumont in 1756 in Magasin des enfants to produce the version most commonly retold. In France, for example, Zémire et Azor is an operatic version of the story, written by Marmontel and composed by Grétry in 1771, which had enormous success well into the 19th century; it is based on the second version of the tale. Amour pour amour, by Nivelle de la Chaussée, is a 1742 play based on Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve's version. According to researchers at universities in
I was overall pleased with the movie, because it stayed fairly close to the book's descriptions and the storyline. The storyline didn’t change except for the Hound dieing. The book and movie had many more differences and a lot of similarities yet they had the same storyline.
Dracula, the most famous vampire of all time, which readers were first introduced to by Irish author Bram Stoker in 1897 with his novel Dracula, which tells the story of the mysterious person named Count Dracula (Stoker). The book is an outstanding masterpiece of work, which is why it has been a prototype for various movie releases over the decades. Whenever a film director decides to make a movie on behalf of a novel the hope is that the characters concur from the novel to the movie, which leads to the exploration of the resemblances and modifications between the characters in Dracula the novel by Bram Stoker and Bram Stoker’s Dracula 1992 movie directed by Francis Ford Coppola.