Cam Bert

True. I didn't stop to think that having a cowboy lead cry at the time would have been very bold choice.

I will say as much as I like the story of this movie every time I watch it I like it a little less and less and that's because of Gary Cooper. Kane should be a stoic man, however Cooper is almost too minimalistic and rather than reading as stoic it comes off more as wooden and stiff. A lot of scenes I would love to see a little more from him, or some brief emotional response, but we don't get that. I think in AlmostAGhost's case this would help sell the ending a bit more because we'd have more chemistry with Grace Kelly and a clearer reaction at the end. John Wayne would have been totally wrong for this role. Kane should have presence but a certain lack of machismo. I can't help but wonder what this movie would have been like with Jimmy Stewart as Kane.

I mean there is the obvious communist witch hunt metaphor going on here that plays into it all, but that aside I think it is more about responsibility. Kane is not trying to be a hero and save the day, he's simply doing what has to be done. Like the mayor tells him he could just leave and his life would be spared. However, this comes at the cost of having the town fall back into lawlessness. Frank Miller and his crew would just do what they want and it wouldn't be safe and they don't know who the next Marshall is so there is no telling if he will be able to stop him or care to stop him. Kane worked hard to make the town safe and livable, you'll notice the only people that don't think so are the ones up to illegal activity, and he stays to protect the town and the people who while not in immediate danger are in danger of losing what they have built. It is also mentioned that when Kane first took down Frank Miller they had a whole posse to assist. He's also seemingly in general against violence, as mentioned they would have been better off to kill Miller all the years prior but Kane took him in alive for trail. You could say he might have been hoping with a large enough posse he could have talked to Frank Miller and maybe talked him into leaving. There was that brief moment when he almost believed he could have changed in prison. Again, he could have confronted Frank Miller's crew and evened the odds ahead of time but he believe in the law and wouldn't arrest them for doing nothing. In the end Kane is not John Wayne. He's just one man, a ordinary man with a strong moral compass and he's determined to do the right thing no matter the cost so future generations can enjoy the shade of the roots he has planted. This is why he asks for help, because even though they are coming for him they are also coming for the town. He hopes others see the treat that Frank Miller poses to the town and not just himself, but everybody is to interested in their own safety and wants. In the end I wouldn't say he's shrugging off the town rather he is the only person thinking of the town. It is an appeal to the interests of the town itself and to a lesser degree his health and safety because he's not a swagging hot shot of a man. In the end yes Kane goes it alone but he's not confronting them in the streets. He sneaks up behind to kill the first guy, out smarts the second, his wife gets the third and finally with Frank Miller he goes out to confront him to save his wife rather than a quickdraw battle typical of other westerns. These aren't the actions of a typical "hero." He wants to stop them yet he doesn't want to die so he uses his wits and some luck to preserve. Personally I find the ending kind of bitter sweet. As I said he's the did this all for the town. He put his life on the line, his wife broke her non-violence code, he did this all for the town. Then the town immediately comes out of hiding and celebrates as if to mock him. They are taking credit and joy in something that wasn't a sure thing that they could have made a sure thing. The men that were betting he'd be dead in five minutes are celebrating. The whole town that turned their backs on him and by extension the town itself, are taking credit in joy in their act of self preservation worked out in their interests. Just like that jerk in your project group that gets an A on the assignment for all the hard work you and the others put in while they did nothing.

First, I have to disagree somewhat about the song. Yes, the lyrics are a bit overdone but the song has this underlying sound of a train slowly chugging along. The sound of the smoke pumping and the wheels turning. Every time the song comes on you hear the train coming, yet another reminder of Kane's impending doom. Even as he walks the streets we hear that train slowly coming for him. That combined with the clocks really drives home the ticking clock element of it all.

I knew of the movie but never knew it was so musically bent. Look forward to this but I'll be away for the weekend so may be late to the discussion.

A nose and a head tube? That's just silly

A noseless smurf is nightmare fuel.

When Kyle is in his "beastly" state he has all these open wounds. If you look at them, gross I know but just look quickly, there are metal bits in the wounds. At first I thought these were medical staples keeping the wound together but all of them are in the wound. A medical staple would be on either side and closing the wound but these are inside. What are they and why are they there? I found them horribly distracting.

Again this is where I get confused about things that happened in the movie. Was Kendra there to put a curse on him, or would that just naturally happen because of the way he is? Kyle never told Kendra about his father, so why is she going after him? Kyle bullied her for most likely a long time in school before she cursed him. So after a year and after he learns his lesson she's going after the father because she realized that's where he got it from? Yet the curse on Kyle seemingly stemmed from their antagonizing relationship. It just seems like an odd jump. Or is it merely a coincidence that she's going to intern at the station and happens to work for Kyle's father who is just as shallow and vain? I'm only curious because if she knows it is Kyle's dad and gives him the same curse, with Kyle in his new state wouldn't forgiveness, understanding and helpfulness towards his father be expected and thus the curse lifted quickly?

Fair enough. If money wasn't a factor I would say he'd pridefully not help him at the start because he "deserves it" and "has to learn." Kyle should be helping though which does kind of defeat the purpose. Now should he help him? Like you said he should have learned to be the bigger person and think of other and help. However, maybe the curse put on the father has a different out condition. Maybe his isn't as simple as having someone love you. Maybe he has to learn something slightly different.

According to some small research the annual income for a news anchor in New York can range anyway from $49, 665 a year to $352,347 with an average salary of $107,00 annually. The average annual income for a live in housekeeper is $35-60,000 and a live in tutor would cost run anywhere from $18-53,000 a year. Peter Krause wants to keep his sons condition a secret so he's either paying them on the high end or granting large bonuses. The school Kyle goes to is an elite private school in New York so add in another $25 for tuition. In addition to those costs we know he had the apartment in the city, the brownstone, and the lake house. While we don't know if he's paying monthly mortgages on all three each is worth a few million each. He would have also hired another maid for the apartment now that Zola is with Kyle. In conclusion if Peter Krause has to have some good real estate deals and be in the top 10% of news anchors to afford all of this.

Well the catch is if his father is cursed then he'd lose his job. They would never have somebody in his condition anchor the news. Out of job means no more income and the fact that he has three houses, a live in maid, a live in tutor, and who knows how many other expenses this would all come to an end. Kyle being the shallow and selfish prick he is, face it he didn't learn any lesson that won't be forgotten in a week, would only think about his well being and straight up help his dad for no other reason that he wants access to that cash and what it offers.

Exactly! She's also running for president right? Why not have her giving a speech at the beginning before his. Have it be about things that will be better for the environment or whatever the position is and have the people react positive to her. Then Kyle comes up and makes fun of her and gets people to turn against her because she's ugly and he's not. Boom, that simple. Sadly, a lot of the reason I don't think this is done is they were too afraid to have people actually dislike Kyle too much.

One of the things that really annoyed me about this movie and is was solidified in the alternate ending played was that Kyle really doesn't ever do anything that isn't for him. The whole point of this curse was to change him into a better person and for him to start thinking of others than just himself. He does this exactly once, when he asks for the Olson twin to cure NPH's sight and get green cards for Zola's kids. Yet when it comes to Lindy everything is about his want for her to fall in love with him. He's already stalking and obsessed with her when he steps in with her father to kidnap her. After he kidnaps her he starts showering her with gifts to make her like him. He builds a greenhouse not because she likes plants but again so she'll like him. It is not "Oh she likes this, I'll do it for her" rather it is "I'll make this so she thinks I'm into that too and she'll like me." Then after the whole letter debacle he stops talking to her flat out without a thought or care about her thoughts, feelings and wants. He unfairly lets her deal with that letter and the baggage that comes with it while dealing with her father dying all alone because "she called me friend and now my curse won't be lifted." If he had really changed he wouldn't have cared about the curse being lifted or not. He should have by that point learnt his lesson. At least in the alternated ending played he sacrifices himself for her, for once putting her ahead of himself and his wants. Yet it the version we get he decides he'll let her go on a trip she's been planning and saving for years for as an act of self sacrifice but only after it was too late to lift the curse anyway. I guarantee within a week of getting his looks back he's back to being a self obsessed asshole.

What is even funnier to me is for such a popular and cool guy like Kyle he seems to only be talking to his friend Trey. Either they text a lot or he really doesn't have friends because he's an asshole.

That poor boy in the dance belt did not deserve to be on his murder list.

I haven't had a chance to rewatch E.T. again but I probably have not seen this movie since I was 8, so I'm very eager to see how I feel about it now. As previously mentioned I believe in the Titanic thread there is a popular term that some of us her have coined as the "Goonies Conundrum" as a way to describe a movie that people who watched in childhood seem to love and those that saw it for the first time out of childhood do not enjoy. You could say it is a form of nostalgia but I don't think that E.T. necessarily falls into the Goonies Conundrum. From what I can recall and what I've heard, read, and know this is a well crafted movie. Good effects, acting, etc. so empirically it is a good movie and not just a cause of "I liked it as a kid." As mentioned there seems to be a lot of backlash on the FB group over this movie. I don't go there but from what Sycasey said some of the complaints are that people are looking back at this too nostalgically. I would say I'm shocked but this is not the first time I've heard backlash for E.T. and specifically this critic. It makes me wonder if there is a certain layer of people just fighting back against it because it is something they've been told is great which either puts a different set of expectations on it or creates the "so impress me" attitude of viewing while going in. However, another part of me wonders if it is the victim of 80s over saturation. The 80s is hot right now with things like Stranger Things, movie and tv remakes and reboots, Atomic Blond, etc. that all cash in on this nostalgia for the 80s. Stranger Things lifts a lot from E.T. in particular, so I wonder if people that are viewing it now and disliking it is because they've seen it all repeated and copied that they are just tired of it.

So was the metal killer going to just kill everybody anyway? Don't we see him before the announcement of the play? So it is just coincidental that the killer he's paying homage to is also the main character of the play they are going to do that year? Also did he want to kill the kids because he hated them, that's why he had their head shots and was slashing them up, or did he want revenge on Meatloaf for his mother's death? Or was it two birds with one stone?

Thank you Cameron!

Am I alone in thinking that NPH was trying to backdoor his way into an audition for Daredevil? This movie would have been film shortly after the early success of the first few MCU movies and with new heroes popping up he saw this as a chance to play a character he liked. His character wears red sunglasses and is a snappy dresser just like Matt Murdock. He also seemingly good at darts, golf, and other activities that would be hard for a blind person unless they had some sort of radar sense. Also he uses a white cane which is topped with a large diamond just like the one used by Wilson Fisk aka Kingpin aka Daredevil's arch-nemesis. Given the target demographic for this movie wouldn't be interested in Daredevil I can only assume these were NPH's suggestions which paints him as a very Matt Murdock like figure.

I know it kinda goes without saying but their "kabuki" version of the play has as much to do with real kabuki as nacho Doritos have to do with authentic Mexican cuisine.

There was talk about Scorsese having three of this movies on the list and all three starring Robert Di Nero but what I also find interesting is he is not alone. Director John Huston also has three films in the AFI top 100 and all three star Humphrey Bogart. Oddly enough Frank Capra has three and Jimmy Stewart in two of them and Hitchcock has four and Stewart is in two of those as well. Jack Lemmon is also in two of the four Billy Wilder ones as is Fred MacMurray. All of this to say I don't think this a bad thing. Movie making is often a very organic thing and when creative people are feeding off the energy and inspiration of like minded people around them you get good end results. So I guess given all these combos, in your opinion who do you think is the greatest actor/director combo?

One of the other things that made me really uncomfortable with this movie that ties in with the sexual assault is the floating age question. The main girl, is ten years older since the opening so that puts her in her mid to late teens, but is the director guy suppose to be a teen as well? I thought he was staff which would put him in his twenties which makes his wanting to make out and sleep with teenage girls super gross. If he was just another camper why does he have deals with Meatloaf and why is he allowed to director and run the show every years. That combined with the casting couch stuff just made all of it feel very wrong. Then at the end the main girl is with the producer guy in a seeming couple-ish way. No thanks.

Yes. I feel like we owe it to Paul and his Human Giant days. Walter Neft for some reason gives me Crystal Pepsi vibes

Mind blown. Now who is 7 Up the uncola?