View Full Version : Gremlins
I think most people on these boards are too young to remember what I'm talking about, but does anyone remember when Gremlins had just come out, whether it was the theatre, video or on TV?
Were you allowed to watch it?
Did you sneak and watch it?
Were your friends allowed to watch it?
I remember that I was the only person I knew who wasn't allowed to see it. Not when it was in theatres, not when it was on video, and not when it was on TV. They'd let me watch a few minutes, then tell me I had to stop watching. EVERYONE else had seen it but me.
I saw it recently and yeah, it's violent, but they let me watch Indiana Jones and that's violent, too. I guess it had what they would have considered "bad language" in it.
Just wanted to know if anyone else shared my experience.
Not That Guy
04-24-2009, 12:59 AM
Yep it was on TV2 wednesday just past at noon.
Hahaha I got the DVD. Funny thing is, after 20 or so years of wanting to see it, I have no desire to watch it again.
I guess everyone's too young?
jimmy
04-26-2009, 07:57 AM
No, I remember it. I saw it when it first came on TV, I think. My parents were a little lax, but not excessively. I think I could watch PG-13 stuff when I was 11? I could only watch R-rated stuff if it was in their presence and they'd already seen it, to determine if it had anything I couldn't handle. Or something.
I remember when I was 17 and my dad didn't want to let me go see "Saving Private Ryan." He did relent, and I don't know what the big deal was. The movie was insanely violent but it didn't warp me or anything. Shit, I was writing things that had more violence and profanity in them... but my parents never read any of that so they had no idea.
Gremlins was an OK movie, just very '80's. Problem is, the only good thing about the 80's was the music. The movies, by and large, remain products of their time.
It was actually rated PG when it came out; they created the PG-13 shortly after because of it and a few other movies I wasn't allowed to see, and my mom said, "I told you so."
I wasn't allowed to see Saving Private Ryan, either. But then we got to see it in school. *evilgrin*
i hate saving private ryan, it's a crap movie that uses motion blur to trick you into thinking the violence is making you sick, when really it's the fact that you can't focus on anything, plus the acting is utter rubbish.
jimmy
04-26-2009, 04:40 PM
It's got Tom Hanks, of course the acting is rubbish.
Tom hanks. Mwahahaha. NTG, did you pirate the new DaVinci Code movie yet, or have you had enough after the first one. "Oh. My. God. I've got to get to.... A LIBRARY."
Kirtan
04-26-2009, 11:47 PM
i hate saving private ryan, it's a crap movie that uses motion blur to trick you into thinking the violence is making you sick, when really it's the fact that you can't focus on anything,
motion sickness doesnt work like that
I've now seen the movie twice--it's definitely the shakiness of the camera and not the violence that makes you sick when you watch it. If you don't believe me, try watching Blair Witch Project, which has no violence, but a very shaky camera and the same effect.
They want to call it simulation sickness not motion sickness (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/346114/can_movies_like_the_bourne_ultimatum.html?cat=5), but apparently the new Bourne movie does it, too.
I also get incredibly sick when playing games like Halo, even for a few minutes.
jimmy
04-27-2009, 04:18 AM
Weird, I've never gotten motion sickness from a movie. The only time I even came close was with Cloverfield, but I was too immersed in awesome to care.
Gahhhhhh that movie was terrible.
And I didn't get motion sickness from it, for some reason.
I've never had motion sickness. Pussies.
theonenonlyrach
04-28-2009, 10:12 AM
Weird, I've never gotten motion sickness from a movie. The only time I even came close was with Cloverfield, but I was too immersed in awesome to care.
THIS MOVIE WAS AWESOME!!
I've heard from plenty of people that it reminded them of the Blair Witch project though and Cloverfield was NOTHING like it. (I fell asleep during Blair Witch because it was boring and not even remotely scary.)
Also, who can't like a movie where there isn't a happy ending? Not me.
Forgot to actually mention Gremlins. Oh, yes...I remember watching this movie. I can't even begin to watch it again. Another one of those movies that makes me remember why puppets make me all squidgy. *cringes*
jimmy
04-28-2009, 10:18 AM
Other than the POV and no-name actors, I don't get why people compare Cloverfield and Blair Witch. One is a fully-produced film where the POV was a stylistic choice, while the other was deliberately made amateurishly and tried to pass itself off as genuine (at least for a while.)
Cloverfield did a good job of pulling off an entirely first-person (and limited) narrative. I look forward to the sequel(s)...
I must be the only person in the world who disliked Cloverfield. It was bad and yes, I think Blair Witch comparisons are appropriate.
Firstly, both movies failed to get me to care about the characters at all. Bunch of stupid, shallow teenagers in both cases. I kind of wanted bad things to happen to them in both movies.
Secondly, the mystery about what the hell was happening drove me crazy, and not in a good way. Blair Witch at least had enough clues that you could figure it out 20 minutes after you watched the movie--ohhhh yeah, she made one child stand in the corner and watch while she killed the other. Cloverfield simply failed to answer them.
I didn't see the Blair Witch sequel and likely won't see the Cloverfield one, but it strikes me as filmmakers saying, "Wow, I made a lot of money off the last one. Let's make another." Maybe the Cloverfield sequel will make sense out of the first one, though. We can only hope.
Cloverfield is the better movie of the two--I didn't throw up while watching it, at least, and the special effects were good, unlike the low-budget crap in Blair Witch. But yeah, they're pretty similar.
jimmy
04-28-2009, 04:47 PM
You're not the only person who hated it, Jen, reviews were actually pretty mixed. People either loved it or hated it. I thought it was awesome. My wife hated it. So it goes.
theonenonlyrach
04-28-2009, 08:53 PM
Secondly, the mystery about what the hell was happening drove me crazy, and not in a good way. Blair Witch at least had enough clues that you could figure it out 20 minutes after you watched the movie--ohhhh yeah, she made one child stand in the corner and watch while she killed the other. Cloverfield simply failed to answer them.
I found the fact that they didn't answer questions to be the beauty of the whole thing. Where does it say in movie etiquette that all questions must be answered? I must have forgot about that. The people running the camera DIED. What did you want them to do? Go up to the big scary monster and say, "We are people of Earth. What the hell do you want?" Fuck, I sure as hell wouldn't have. I'd be running like a little bitch.
Although, I will grant you one thing. If I was running like a little bitch...the camera would be the LAST thing on my mind. Maybe a 30 second piece to say, "We're fucked!! Running like a little bitch now!!" and then I'm done. *shrugs*
The thing is, it wasn't raw footage, it was a movie. The fictional characters in the movie didn't need to know what was happening, but there could have been some sort of clues built in so that the viewers could know by the end.
I probably could have forgiven not knowing had I cared about the characters. The problem is, they were just so rabidly stupid, as evidenced by the scenes that took place before the disaster occurred, that I couldn't make myself care about them no matter how I tried.
jimmy
04-29-2009, 04:40 PM
Actually, there were clues, even if they were subtle. The final flashback shows a splashdown in the water--a satellite crashing into the ocean, which awakened the creature. The movie didn't come out and say so but that's the "official" backstory.
theonenonlyrach
04-29-2009, 08:30 PM
Actually, there were clues, even if they were subtle. The final flashback shows a splashdown in the water--a satellite crashing into the ocean, which awakened the creature. The movie didn't come out and say so but that's the "official" backstory.
See, I didn't know that and I still loved the movie.
Actually, there were clues, even if they were subtle. The final flashback shows a splashdown in the water--a satellite crashing into the ocean, which awakened the creature. The movie didn't come out and say so but that's the "official" backstory.
Well, maybe I should watch it again; that's the sort of thing I thought would have saved it, but I must have missed it. The problem is I was so indifferent to the supposed protagonists that there's hardly any point to watching it again.
Not That Guy
04-30-2009, 01:52 AM
Cloverfield, i was so late in seeing this movie and yet no one told me a thing about it prior to viewing.
I remember about 5 minutes into it thinking god i hope its not this hand held home movie all the way because this movie sucks.
By the time the movie ended i was all Fuck that was so fucking awesome...
The special effects were good and it uses the handheld camera effect much better than Blair Witch did. I just didn't care what happened to those characters after the first 5 minutes. They were so stupid I was kind of hoping they'd die. Of course, I got my wish. Maybe I should have liked the movie.
jimmy
04-30-2009, 04:09 AM
Well, maybe I should watch it again; that's the sort of thing I thought would have saved it, but I must have missed it. The problem is I was so indifferent to the supposed protagonists that there's hardly any point to watching it again.
I dunno, I didn't worry about the protagonists because the way it was presented, it was almost a send-up of monster attack movies. You never care about the people in those, you just wanna see the monster wreckin' shit, and we got a good amount of that.
Considering most of Hud's dialogue was humorous, I don't think we were really supposed to care so much as enjoy the ride. It wasn't trying to be any kind of deep character exploration.
theonenonlyrach
04-30-2009, 11:04 AM
Oh, man. Hud is hilarious. "Hug?" "No, Hud!"
And I'd like to say that it is not quite the same on my dinky little television set as it was in the BIG theaters. (Which by the way, saw it three times.)
jimmy
04-30-2009, 01:36 PM
I agree, the theater experience was particularly crucial for that movie. I saw it on a big, beautiful screen in digital quality. Watching it on a computer or TV screen just isn't the same.
Ah, ok. I watched it on the big screen TV at home.
It took too long "developing" the characters, and then expected me to care when the one guy was whining to his mom that his brother had died.
theonenonlyrach
04-30-2009, 11:53 PM
Ah, ok. I watched it on the big screen TV at home.
It took too long "developing" the characters, and then expected me to care when the one guy was whining to his mom that his brother had died.
Really? I think that part that you are talking about and the part where Hud is freaking out about....well, whatshernut, is the most "character building" of the entire movie. The only part that I truly gave a shit about the characters. And now, I'm making a post about the events of the evening...Ah shit...
I didn't like the movie, so I can't say I remember every second of it.
I'm talking about the party scene at the beginning. I see no purpose to that unless it was to get us acquainted with and caring about the characters. Later, there is a scene where one guy's brother is killed on a bridge and he calls his mom crying.
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.