Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crimson" data-source="post: 347089" data-attributes="member: 5079">Last night, an 80s fantasy double-feature: DRAGONSLAYER and CLASH OF THE TITANS (both 1981).&nbsp;&nbsp; These were both pillars of my childhood, and I&#039;m happy that they both hold up reasonably well to my adult scrutiny. DRAGONSLAYER has always had one major flaw for me: Peter MacNicol.&nbsp; Even as a kid, I disliked him in this movie without being able to articulate why.&nbsp; Now, I can: he&#039;s too American and too contemporary.&nbsp; (Matthew Broderick in LADYHAWKE is even more vexxing.)&nbsp;&nbsp; It&#039;s a testament to how good the movie is that it manages to overcome its lead actor.&nbsp; The rest of the film is superb; the screen&#039;s best fantasy for my money.&nbsp;&nbsp; Far better than, say, those bloated, interminable LOTR movies.[ATTACH=full]41954[/ATTACH]Harry Hamlin was also too contemporary American for CLASH, but the role didn&#039;t require as much from him; he just had to look handsome and heroic.&nbsp; The movie is given a dose of class with its prestigious cast (Olivier, Claire Bloom, Maggie Smith); they all had the good taste to approach their parts with bemused dignity.&nbsp; As a kid, I greatly favored CLASH (it was probably one of my top 5 favorite movies), but my adult appreciation of them has now flipped.[ATTACH=full]41953[/ATTACH]Both films special effects are now charmingly antiquated, although DRAGONSLAYER&#039;s has aged better.&nbsp; I suspect Ray Harryhausen&#039;s stop motion techniques were old fashioned already by 1981, whereas Industrial Light &amp; Magic was breaking new ground.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crimson, post: 347089, member: 5079"] Last night, an 80s fantasy double-feature: DRAGONSLAYER and CLASH OF THE TITANS (both 1981). These were both pillars of my childhood, and I'm happy that they both hold up reasonably well to my adult scrutiny. DRAGONSLAYER has always had one major flaw for me: Peter MacNicol. Even as a kid, I disliked him in this movie without being able to articulate why. Now, I can: he's too American and too contemporary. (Matthew Broderick in LADYHAWKE is even more vexxing.) It's a testament to how good the movie is that it manages to overcome its lead actor. The rest of the film is superb; the screen's best fantasy for my money. Far better than, say, those bloated, interminable LOTR movies. [ATTACH type="full" width="392px" alt="p4412_p_v8_aa.jpg"]41954[/ATTACH] Harry Hamlin was also too contemporary American for CLASH, but the role didn't require as much from him; he just had to look handsome and heroic. The movie is given a dose of class with its prestigious cast (Olivier, Claire Bloom, Maggie Smith); they all had the good taste to approach their parts with bemused dignity. As a kid, I greatly favored CLASH (it was probably one of my top 5 favorite movies), but my adult appreciation of them has now flipped. [ATTACH type="full" width="379px" alt="71j3FmnLp7L._AC_SL1000_.jpg"]41953[/ATTACH] Both films special effects are now charmingly antiquated, although DRAGONSLAYER's has aged better. I suspect Ray Harryhausen's stop motion techniques were old fashioned already by 1981, whereas Industrial Light & Magic was breaking new ground. [/QUOTE]

Verification

6 + 4 =