I was just thinking recently how uniform all the guys look now. I can't tell them apart. All their perfect teeth and stuff. I guess it's that metro-sexual stuff. Boring.
So... this is saying that tweenage girls in the 60's went and saw "Good the Bad and the Ugly"? Can't help but feel like this is comparing apples to oranges.
Personally, I thought the movie heroes of today looked more like Bruce Willis.
Yeah, not so much. Compare Clint Eastwood of then to Bruce Willis or Kurt Russell or Val Kilmer or Brad Pitt (oops, that one slipped through) or Matt Damon.
These are the quintessential action stars of today. Yeah, Clint may be better than some, but can you tell me honestly that Val Kilmer's role in "Tombstone" was ever even gotten close to by the likes of Clint in his spaghetti western days?
A fair comparison to the twinkly little vampire guy would be whatever the tween girls in Clint's day were swooning over - so what, the Beattles? Yeah, I'm not sure which is worse - the Fab 4 or a sparkly gay vampire. I think what this proves more than anything is that young girls have absolutely awful taste and should be reminded of that daily as they pick boyfriends to date and clothing to wear.
I have a (now) 20-year-old adopted daughter who looks like she stepped off the cover of a glamor magazine.
Some of the boys she'd bring home to meet me. . . I just shook my head.
The good thing was that they were all scared shitless of me--veteran, former lawman, gun-owner, hunter and definitely "not a pretty face."
Boys came and went. The young man she has now? Hunter, shooter, car guy, college grad (business degree), does his own home repair (bought his first house at age 23 by being smart, saving, shopping and planning). He treats her like royalty while still managing to not take any gruff from her. He's not a pretty boy, but has looks my wife calls "ruggedly handsome."
I like this guy. My young lady does too.
Says he reminds her of me.
Our kids are generally a reflection of their parents, which might explain why the Twilight pansy has so many teenage girls swooning.
The new True Grit may be a remake, but it's a far better movie than the original. I like John Wayne, but the original movie does notstand up to the test of time.
The Outlaw Josey Wales, now that one is still a great movie, saw it again recently and I would recommend it.
As for True Grit - the John Wayne version was too disneyfied for my taste - just like all John Wayne movies were that dealt with dark subject matter. Yeah, they'd let him be a drunk as long as his drunkeness was harmless and funny, but he was still the white-hat hero.
In the book, Rooster cogburn was not a very nice man. He was a drunk, and a mean, nasty one at that. He ended up being the hero at the end, but that was definitely in question throughout the story. Jeff bridges did a far better job as Rooster than John Wayne did. The new version is much more true to the book, which was pretty dark and did not have a very happy ending.
Little things, like leaving LaBeouff behind when he was wounded to fend for himself in the new movie were more true to the book. In the John Wayne version, they couldn't reconcile the good guy leaving his buddy behind to fend for himself, so they had LaBeouff die instead of allowing the good guy to ride away and leave him. Read the book some day, i think you'll find you like the new version better.
8 comments:
I was just thinking recently how uniform all the guys look now. I can't tell them apart. All their perfect teeth and stuff. I guess it's that metro-sexual stuff. Boring.
So... this is saying that tweenage girls in the 60's went and saw "Good the Bad and the Ugly"? Can't help but feel like this is comparing apples to oranges.
Personally, I thought the movie heroes of today looked more like Bruce Willis.
Don't know about heroes, but I found the whole Twilight phenomenon very edutational
Yeah, not so much. Compare Clint Eastwood of then to Bruce Willis or Kurt Russell or Val Kilmer or Brad Pitt (oops, that one slipped through) or Matt Damon.
These are the quintessential action stars of today. Yeah, Clint may be better than some, but can you tell me honestly that Val Kilmer's role in "Tombstone" was ever even gotten close to by the likes of Clint in his spaghetti western days?
A fair comparison to the twinkly little vampire guy would be whatever the tween girls in Clint's day were swooning over - so what, the Beattles? Yeah, I'm not sure which is worse - the Fab 4 or a sparkly gay vampire. I think what this proves more than anything is that young girls have absolutely awful taste and should be reminded of that daily as they pick boyfriends to date and clothing to wear.
I have a (now) 20-year-old adopted daughter who looks like she stepped off the cover of a glamor magazine.
Some of the boys she'd bring home to meet me. . . I just shook my head.
The good thing was that they were all scared shitless of me--veteran, former lawman, gun-owner, hunter and definitely "not a pretty face."
Boys came and went. The young man she has now? Hunter, shooter, car guy, college grad (business degree), does his own home repair (bought his first house at age 23 by being smart, saving, shopping and planning). He treats her like royalty while still managing to not take any gruff from her. He's not a pretty boy, but has looks my wife calls "ruggedly handsome."
I like this guy. My young lady does too.
Says he reminds her of me.
Our kids are generally a reflection of their parents, which might explain why the Twilight pansy has so many teenage girls swooning.
Have you ever seen THEIR dads?
Explains a lot. Unfortunately.
--AOA
The new True Grit may be a remake, but it's a far better movie than the original. I like John Wayne, but the original movie does notstand up to the test of time.
The Outlaw Josey Wales, now that one is still a great movie, saw it again recently and I would recommend it.
As for True Grit - the John Wayne version was too disneyfied for my taste - just like all John Wayne movies were that dealt with dark subject matter. Yeah, they'd let him be a drunk as long as his drunkeness was harmless and funny, but he was still the white-hat hero.
In the book, Rooster cogburn was not a very nice man. He was a drunk, and a mean, nasty one at that. He ended up being the hero at the end, but that was definitely in question throughout the story. Jeff bridges did a far better job as Rooster than John Wayne did. The new version is much more true to the book, which was pretty dark and did not have a very happy ending.
Little things, like leaving LaBeouff behind when he was wounded to fend for himself in the new movie were more true to the book. In the John Wayne version, they couldn't reconcile the good guy leaving his buddy behind to fend for himself, so they had LaBeouff die instead of allowing the good guy to ride away and leave him. Read the book some day, i think you'll find you like the new version better.
Post a Comment