It’s easy enough to talk about those "newer" movies, but have you ever actually sat through a silent film that runs longer than three hours? I'm talking about things like Griffith's One Nation or Erich von Stroheim's Greed—which was originally nearly nine hours long, though we mostly only have the four-hour version now. Or even Napoleon, where the only surviving version is just under five hours. These are all fascinating, groundbreaking pieces of cinema. Everything you see in them was being done for the very first time, from filming in the Valley of Death in 100-degree heat to pioneering widescreen by literally mounting three cameras side-by-side. Still, you definitely need some serious patience to sit through a four-hour silent movie.
Man, if they played the whole Road Salt One album... but I doubt it. They’ll probably just stick to Undertow and Ending Theme. Still, I’d give anything to hear the entire 😁 set, and the whole be ( 2005 ) Scarsick too. Honestly, I'm showing up regardless. What am I even saying? I’d probably go even if they just played Dream Theater covers :P
Good grief, what on earth were they thinking... Anyway. Remakes should exist either to upgrade the special effects or to fix a flawed narrative that the original couldn't quite pull off. Personally, I think remakes of Japanese horror films work well because Western audiences sometimes struggle to digest them. For instance, I actually liked the remake of King Kong—the one from the 70s. This Jackson version felt like garbage to me; it was dragged out way too long and relied too heavily on CGI. The original is just a classic, and everyone needs to see it. But honestly, these massive American horror remakes feel completely unnecessary to me. Anyone claiming a remake is better than the original clearly doesn't understand cinema; they probably just want more gore and mindless violence, and frankly, those people shouldn't be hanging out in threads like this. :P
Haha. I saw him at the Sundance Film Festival a couple of years back in a small town. Even Taylor Swift showed up to that one, acting as the "lead actress." The best part about being at the theater during the screening (Spoiler) was the way they handled the subtitles. They’d show the English translation first, then the character would speak, and only then would the American translation pop up. It was dead silent in the room while the English text showed that line about him biting that woman's clitoris—everyone just sat there, trying to keep it together. Then, the American translation hits the screen, and the entire theater just absolutely loses it.😁
Dada Topic, I was actually thinking about posting this exact same question myself. Hmm. For me, Opeth and Porcupine Tree are absolutely top-tier. Gordian Knot is great too. As for ISIS, I wouldn’t really count them as prog; that was my previous point. Then you have King Crimson, which is that classic 70s prog rock. Katatonia leans much more toward doom. I think Pain of Salvation is amazing, though their latest album feels a little weird to me. Dream Theater is basically the pioneer of progressive Metal, but I just can't get into them—I don't know why. Green Carnation is also awesome, and Symphony X is fantastic. There are so many underground progressive bands out there with one or two killer albums, but I don't feel like listing them all here. I'll just mention our local band, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe; they have one, let's call it, album called Birth of Pozoj, and it's honestly pretty incredible.
I have a quick question. I just finished downloading Service Pack 2 and I'm getting ready to install it. My hard drive is split into two partitions: one holds my Windows setup and all my software, while the other is strictly for my movies and music files. I've heard rumors about this really annoying bug that can wipe out all your MP3s during the process. I know there is a fix available, but I'm a little nervous. If the patch happens to fail for some reason, will my music still be safe since it's on that separate partition?