I heard that movie hasnt aged great. Just like production value-wise, but I never saw it. I don't think Carrie aged well. The infamous part with the blood prank comes off like slapstick to me. Oh no, it's gonna spill any second! Look out! They shouldnt even show the bucket until the last second as it happens.
Rosemary's Baby could have been made great by anyone, the book it's based off of was that good. Ira Levin wrote the books that a couple of great movies were based on - A Kiss Before Dying, Rosemary's Baby, The Stepford Wives, and the Boys From Brazil.
The movie is very dated - but any movie from that era is. It's a world that doesn't exist anymore. It's still revered because of Mia Farrow and Ruth Gordon's performances - I've never been a Mia Farrow fan, myself.
Polanski has talent, Chinatown being the prime example. I liked a lot of movies of his before I really knew about his scandal. He's a piece of shit, but that's Hollywood - utter pieces of garbage have made some of the best movies, ever. His reputation and reality taint his work, now.
Bonus: Levin wrote a more modern Brave New World book, "This Perfect Day" that's a fun read, the only sci fi he did.
Mostly in the directional choices like music and editing. Not the effects. Was more corny than scary leading up to the climax. If it were made today, I think it would be filmed differently. I know there was a remake within the last ten years but I don't remember much about it and it didn't get very good reviews.
I actually kind of despise the way movies are filmed today. Too visceral. I wish we could go back to movies just being movies instead being all hung up on how "realistic" they look and feel. Anyway that's just my take.
Totally depends on the movie. There's no right or wrong way. 1917 is what it is because of that visceral filming, Dr. Strangelove is a war movie that is what it is because it takes a serious subject matter but makes it kind of "feel" like a production.
I know he didnt direct Carrie. I'm just making a comparison because I never actually saw Rosemary's Baby to know how poorly it aged like another horror movie from around that time I have seen.
oh, got you wrong. It's been quite a while that I watched Rosemary's Baby, I remember it being pretty disturbing, whereas Carrie was rather ridiculous.
What's funny about carrie is how everyone freaked out that Joker was going to inspire shootings, when carrie has the same basic story elements and the original came out 45 years ago. But it's a girl who is bullied and kills people so they cant blame toxic masculinity and incels.
I heard that movie hasnt aged great. Just like production value-wise, but I never saw it. I don't think Carrie aged well. The infamous part with the blood prank comes off like slapstick to me. Oh no, it's gonna spill any second! Look out! They shouldnt even show the bucket until the last second as it happens.
Rosemary's Baby could have been made great by anyone, the book it's based off of was that good. Ira Levin wrote the books that a couple of great movies were based on - A Kiss Before Dying, Rosemary's Baby, The Stepford Wives, and the Boys From Brazil.
The movie is very dated - but any movie from that era is. It's a world that doesn't exist anymore. It's still revered because of Mia Farrow and Ruth Gordon's performances - I've never been a Mia Farrow fan, myself.
Polanski has talent, Chinatown being the prime example. I liked a lot of movies of his before I really knew about his scandal. He's a piece of shit, but that's Hollywood - utter pieces of garbage have made some of the best movies, ever. His reputation and reality taint his work, now.
Bonus: Levin wrote a more modern Brave New World book, "This Perfect Day" that's a fun read, the only sci fi he did.
Mark Levin wrote a book? if so may have to buy it and check it out.
My mistake, Ira Levin. Is it any good?
It's not Heinlein, but it's not bad. I liked it.
good enough for me, i'll check it out.
I didn't see anything in the production that particularly showed the age egregiously. It's mostly atmospheric, not too many special effects.
Mostly in the directional choices like music and editing. Not the effects. Was more corny than scary leading up to the climax. If it were made today, I think it would be filmed differently. I know there was a remake within the last ten years but I don't remember much about it and it didn't get very good reviews.
I actually kind of despise the way movies are filmed today. Too visceral. I wish we could go back to movies just being movies instead being all hung up on how "realistic" they look and feel. Anyway that's just my take.
Totally depends on the movie. There's no right or wrong way. 1917 is what it is because of that visceral filming, Dr. Strangelove is a war movie that is what it is because it takes a serious subject matter but makes it kind of "feel" like a production.
Carrie is not Polanski, lol. His movies are a complete other level.
I know he didnt direct Carrie. I'm just making a comparison because I never actually saw Rosemary's Baby to know how poorly it aged like another horror movie from around that time I have seen.
oh, got you wrong. It's been quite a while that I watched Rosemary's Baby, I remember it being pretty disturbing, whereas Carrie was rather ridiculous.
What's funny about carrie is how everyone freaked out that Joker was going to inspire shootings, when carrie has the same basic story elements and the original came out 45 years ago. But it's a girl who is bullied and kills people so they cant blame toxic masculinity and incels.