remakes are fine if original is missing something and can be improved on. But this is a classic and great the way it is - I don't see the need for a remake to be honest. But yes, dollars are the reason but still.....this is pathetic.
It's deliberately misspelled because the cemetary is built by children, and that's how they spelled the sign. Watch the movie.
You and I obviously have very different ideas of what a "classic" is. The movie sucked compared with the book. Which is interesting, because I enjoyed Kubrick's The Shining much better than the King novel. I'm odd that way.
Unless you're some kind of special effects/production values fanatic (or have no imagination) most horror/science fiction books are much better than the movies based on them. For the simple reason that world building is much easier on the written page rather than onscreen.
The new Winston Churchill (AKA "Church") They found a cat who looks more like the one on the novel cover. Damn, he's got a great angry looking little face too!
I always felt bad for Zelda. All she did was get spinal meningitis and have a horrible death, and yet she's played for creepiness.
Yes, and the warped perceptions of her young sister. But still, poor Zelda doesn't get a lot of sympathy.
Yes, you're right. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory isn't a remake of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, it's a new take on the original material.
The original had an eccentric Willy Wonka, the remake had a homicidal Willy Wonka. I liked the homicidal one better.
Good trailer! But, ya know, good trailer doesn't mean good movie. I have hopes, tho. It IS one of his scariest books.
