(Feb 21, 2026 04:57 PM)Magical Realist Wrote: I watched it again and realized how "playlike" it is. Driven by strong dialogue and characters, all generally happening in one setting.
Apparently Shannon even played Peter in some stage productions a decade prior. I've never seen Friedkin's "Jade", so that's something to add to my list (and maybe revisit more of his films).
Quote:But then that's why I love films based on plays. The dialogue and the acting. So missing in today's CGI-driven blockbusters.
Yah, it's ironic how the best movies don't make money like the "comic book" and "shoot'em slash blow'em up" box office champs. And as a result, the former
should make it to the "free with ads" market faster or more frequently. And films from decades past are superior (excluding today's independent films).
Too bad that doesn't apply to top echelon TV programming. The free services do feature AMC shows like "Breaking Bad", "Mad Men" and so forth on their "live channels", but they're presented in that helter-skelter binge mode of multiple episodes in a row. If they're available in the "On Demand" section at all, that's usually limited to one or two seasons.
But occasionally there's an arguably good, low-ranker like "Mr Robot" or "Bates Motel" (
at CW) deposited fully in "On Demand". And as old as it is, all seven seasons of "The Shield"
had better be on Tubi. I'm surprised that "Lost" -- which wasn't even a cable-tv product, has never appeared on the free services. Is it really that revered all these years later? (But OTOH, formulaic "Supernatural" also has that status.)
Even though "Hemlock Grove" received poor ratings from critics, it's still a sick, twisted jaunt into "classic monsters" land (Frankenstein daughter,
upiórs, lycanthropes). A kind of "Gilligan's Island" version of horror where the viewer is merely looking to mindlessly relax and not have to think about much.