Quote:
Originally Posted by neverending
To Scouse:
Hah- no it won't- Cinerama theatres no longer exist. The last one in existance- Omaha's Indian Hills was torn down several years ago to make way for- yes- a parking lot, despite efforts from the Omaha City Council and a group that included the likes of Ray Bradbury and Leonard Maltin to have the building declared a historical landmark.
|
Unless you are talking about something different that I am not aware of...
http://www.cinerama.com/TemplateHome.aspx?contentId=1
Seattle most definitely has a Cinerama. It *was* closed, but Paul Allen bought it and paid for it to be refurbished. It's an amazing theater. A little less so now that all these new theaters have the IMAX thing, but the screen is still an absolute behemoth....and I usually choose to see the big movies there when I can.
As for the topic of this thread:
I think it's interesting that so many of you don't consider *when these movies came out* and measure them against their contemporaries at the time. Sure, by todays standards some of them might be "overrated", but a lot of the classics are deemed as such because of what they did at the time. I'll use Star Wars as an example, because it's easy....Sci-fi was completely DEAD at that point in history. Obviously Lucas openly admits to borrowing concepts and styles from even older movies and radio serials, but the fact is it made a *huge* impact when it came out. Stuff like that, Excorist, 2001 etc may be "boring" or "cheesy" or any other adjective you want to use compared to a lot of modern day filmmaking, but they aren't overrated, imo. They deserve the "classic" status as far as I am concerned. Every bit of it.
Maybe a proper term would be something such as "popular movies that you hate".
For me, I will definitely agree with the Cannibal Holocaust mention. That movie just plain sucks. It serves it's purpose in horror history, but it's just not a good flick.