Posted by Tumbleweed on 09/22/40 11:35

"Damon" <google@dshawcross.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1134469303.555647.175170@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Tinkapace wrote:
>>> -- "Lets be honest here, if you have seen the 1933 version, there is no
>>> reason to see this version other than to see the cgi, and you'll need to
>>> see it at least once on the big screen."
>>>
>> ?????
>
> I pissed myself at that one too, He does come up with some tosh at
> times does our POD.
> Apparently making something first automatically means it is definitive
> (as if). He is letting is nostalgic love for the original ropey
> classic dictate how he should feel about the remake.
>
> Even die hard KK fans are dieing to see this, a great tale told with
> the aid of special effects that do it justice. You think that the
> original KK film maker would turn his nose up at CGI if it was
> available back then, they use what they have available at the time.
>


Hmm, isnt that what he said? Same story, better special effects so why go
unless you want to see the special effects?

--
Tumbleweed

email replies not necessary but to contact use;
tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com

[Back to original message]