ghostrunner wrote:
Having said that, Barry Lyndon at 92 seems like a good argument to not listen to critics.
How so? I'm thinking you think it's a tad overrated.
It's been a while, but at the time I thought it was one of the worst movies I'd ever seen, and I don't like Ryan O'Neal anyway. How Kubrick made it, I don't understand.
Just now thinking about it, I realize there's an odd paper-scissors-rock relationship to be devised here:
Stanley Kubrick beats Peter Bogdonavich
Peter Bogdonavich beats Ryan O Neal (see Paper Moon)
Ryan O'Neal beats Stanley Kubrick
i loved paper moon
Yeah, that's the point I was awkwardly trying to make. Somehow Bogdonavich got an interesting performance out of O'Neal, whereas (for me) O'Neal managed to make Stanley Kubrick suck. Yet Kubrick is the better director.
yeah, but look at the characters O'Neal was playing.. in one he's playing a depression
era con man, in another he's trying to pull off a sophistocated Irish rogue. i think he
was terribly cast in Barry Lyndon.. whoever was in charge of that failed miserably
I can't watch a movie sitting on the couch by myself. I don't think I have ever done that. I have to watch a movie with someone OR I take it to the gym and run or do the stairclimber or whatever with my portable DVD player.
