What was the problem with this movie again http://talk.dvdtalk.com/ubb/confused.gif I avoided this in the theater because of all the bad reviews. Again I didn't think much about it as a rental until the talk about Gladiator. I have to say I enjoyed this movie as much, if not a little more, than Gladiator. I think the character interaction/development was handled pretty well. Not to mention fight scenes you could actually tell what was going on http://talk.dvdtalk.com/ubb/wink.gif The ending was a bit curt though and the DVD leaves a lot to be desired http://talk.dvdtalk.com/ubb/frown.gif

I agree. I was scared off seeing this in the theaters or buying the DVD due to all of the negative reviews. I finally heard some positive feedback and pre-ordered it the day before it streeted on a whim. The night I received it I watched the movie twice, back to back, and have watched it three times since (helps that it's relatively short). I really enjoyed it and liked the characters and atmosphere very much. I guess I just have poor taste. http://talk.dvdtalk.com/ubb/wink.gif

------------------
Mugwump's DVDs

I thought it was a pretty good movie (I'm a fan of John McTeirnan), but I also had some problems with it.

I think some of the main bad reviews were from the people who had read the book. It is supposed to be an awesome Crichton book (The Eaters of the Dead), basically like a remake of Beowulf. McTiernan's version of the movie angered Crichton, so Crichton took over editing the movie, and it left us with a movie that (in my opinion) seems incomplete. I would liked to have seen more of the relationship between Antonio Banderas and that red head, more about the savages, and also what became of the King's "evil" son (it was an unresolved conflict). I was pretty disappointed with the ending too. I really hope that Disney decides to do a Special Edition DVD so that I can find out what exactly was cut from the movie.

Other than those small issues, the movie was very entertaining and I especially loved the scene where they were around the campfires and Antonio Banderas slowly learns to understand their language. The movie also had a pretty good score.

If you want to see a positive review, look up Lisa Swartzbaum's(sp.?) "Entertainment Weekly" review. She gave the movie an A-.

------------------
============================================

'Eritis sicut Deus, scientes bonum et malum.'

Shilex: Exactly my problem with the movie. I'd read the book long ago and considered it one of Crichton's best. The movie tried too hard to be a combination of Hercules (the TV show), Braveheart, and Indiana Jones to come across effectively.

Incidentally, the same problem plagued Sphere: FANTASTIC book, piss-poor movie. I strongly recommend the novel.

- David Stein

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by sfsdfd:
Shilex: Exactly my problem with the movie. I'd read the book long ago and considered it one of Crichton's best. The movie tried too hard to be a combination of Hercules (the TV show), Braveheart, and Indiana Jones to come across effectively.

Incidentally, the same problem plagued Sphere: FANTASTIC book, piss-poor movie. I strongly recommend the novel.

- David Stein<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've read both books, it been quite awhile ago now and I don't recall much of Eater's of the Dead http://talk.dvdtalk.com/ubb/frown.gif However, I didn't think Sphere was all that great of a book, and the movie just made it worse IMHO. Crichton does seem to suffer from the Steven King curse though, good/great stories/books, really bad movies. About the only really good combination from Crichton that comes to mind off hand is Andromeda Strain.

FWIW

Let's be fair here.

Good adaptations: The Andromeda Strain, Jurassic Park, The Lost World (didn't see it, but it killed at the box office), Rising Sun, Disclosure.

Bad adaptations: Congo, Sphere, Eaters of the Dead.

I can't remember any more, but that's a pretty good batting average.

- David Stein

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by sfsdfd:
Let's be fair here.

Good adaptations: The Andromeda Strain, Jurassic Park, The Lost World (didn't see it, but it killed at the box office), Rising Sun, Disclosure.

Bad adaptations: Congo, Sphere, Eaters of the Dead.

I can't remember any more, but that's a pretty good batting average.

- David Stein<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

IMHO I'll give you Rising Sun, I had forgotten about it actually http://talk.dvdtalk.com/ubb/redface.gif Also JP was a good book and an OK movie (the kids started getting on my nerves http://talk.dvdtalk.com/ubb/wink.gif ). However, LW was a book written like a screenplay which they in turn didn't actually use for the movie http://talk.dvdtalk.com/ubb/eek.gif Never saw/read Disclosure so I can't comment on that. Overall though I guess you are right, it's a better avg than King or Koontz.

To me "13th Warrior" was like a 2 hour
episode of Xena without the babes so
what's the point... http://talk.dvdtalk.com/ubb/smile.gif

Nothing happened in the 13th Warrior. A big expensive viking movie and I got BORED. that's not supposed to happen.