It is now June 7th. On this fateful day 25 years ago an action masterpiece was released in theaters. Directed by Michael Bay and produced by Jerry Bruckheimer, it launched the action hero career of Nic Cage and was a fitting sendoff for Sean Connery, who starred in a bunch of shit afterwards. It also marked the pinnacle of Hans Zimmer's music career.
Unfortunately, the movie got overshadowed by a roided up faggot wrestler with eyebrow issues.
Here's the full movie on YT (it's blocked from being viewed in embed):
The Rock is his best movie - although I don't think Pain and Gain is bad. Faggots complain about that one, but I think it has a demented energy that makes it memorable.
Adapting King novels faithfully is asking for trouble - Kubrick and De Palma had it right.
Bad Boys is kinda lame. BB2 is good as how over the top it is. I don't know if The Rock is Bay's best, but it's definitely up there. Great soundtrack.
King’s film adaptations follow a strange pattern: the worse the book is, the better the movie adaption will be and vice versa. Carrie and The Shining are both quite meh books, but they have the best movie versions. Pet Sematary is possibly his greatest book, but the movie is a terrible disgrace of the story (still somewhat entertaining and Zelda sure is one classic horror movie monster). It is an exception, it's a terrible book and terrible movie.
When passing through the Valley of Humiliation, slaves and dastards, exposing their sores, sob aloud for consolation and sympathy.
King’s film adaptations follow a strange pattern: the worse the book is, the better the movie adaption will be and vice versa.
The vast majority of film adaptations are like that. Good books don't generally make good films. Trash-to-average books, on the other hand, often make great films. The Godfather, for example, was a pretty average book but it's a masterpiece of film. Crime and Punishment, on the other hand, was a masterpiece of literature that has never once been adapted well
The Rock is definitely Bay's best but that's not saying very much at all. It's still got the Bay trademarks, his love affair with explosions and his obnoxiously shaky cam. It's just that the story and the performances, particularly Sean Connery's, seem to overwhelm Bay's flaws as a director.
Rock is definitely one of his most kino movies.
I think what ruins his modern stuff is too easy access to special effects. Now he can make his movies so dense; every frame has so many explosions going on.
King’s film adaptations follow a strange pattern: the worse the book is, the better the movie adaption will be and vice versa. Carrie and The Shining are both quite meh books, but they have the best movie versions. Pet Sematary is possibly his greatest book, but the movie is a terrible disgrace of the story (still somewhat entertaining and Zelda sure is one classic horror movie monster). It is an exception, it's a terrible book and terrible movie.
I think the adapations of the terrible books tend to get a competent bloke at the helm who takes one look at the source material and goes "Yeah, I think we can do better than that".
Autism attracts more autism. Sooner or later, an internet nobody will attract the exact kind of fans - and detractors - he deserves.
-Yours Truly
Pet Sematary is possibly his greatest book, but the movie is a terrible disgrace of the story
The only difference of note i remember between the movie and the book is the fact that the old man had a wife in the latter who dies of old age halfway through, the old man confesses to the protagonist that when he was young he was cucking her with hookers, and the big reveal ripped off from the Exorcist when the undead kid tells him with her voice that she was also cucking him with their neighbours in retaliation, and now she sucks cocks in Hell.
That, and the novel talking about a Wendigo and a floating head in the woods (or maybe the Wendigo was the floating head, don't remember) being connected with the resurrections, but they never really show themselves, while the movie shows the dumb floating head with no explanation.
King isn't really that good of a writer and he's very repetitive, the only novels of his i found interesting are some of the short ones like the story about the mutated rats which created an entire ecosystem in the underground caves below a mine/factory.
