SmileyGirl
Guest
It is very true that the mood you are in will affect how you feel about a movie. I don’t like a couple of movies just because I saw them at a bad time etc.
What Poseidon movie do you like?
- Thread starter Dan Kappes
- Start date
It is very true that the mood you are in will affect how you feel about a movie. I don’t like a couple of movies just because I saw them at a bad time etc.
Arun Vajpey
Member
When I saw the original The Poseidon Adventure I was 18 years old and escapism was more important than realism or common sense. At that time, I liked disaster films like this one, The Towering Inferno and God help me, even When Time Ran Out. But with passing time I began to see through the artificiality and improbability of such films and now they don't even have much nostalgic interest. Now, whenever I think of TPA, the things that come to mind are Carol Lynley's simpering and whimpering, Shelly Winters holding up her old swimming medal every other minute and that teeny bopper's puppy adulation of Gene Hackman. Sorry, but there it is.
SmileyGirl
Guest
I feel the adulation of Gene Hackman is needed but not the other stuff you mentioned 
Eric Paddon
Member
The original is the only one worth watching. The "sequel" was just an exploitative gimmick by producer Irwin Allen to come up with another project and he never had much of a coherent idea in mind if the various recollections of certain actors are to be believed.
1-Gene Hackman, guesting on the Tonight Show in 1974 says he turned down a sequel pitch in which the film would have begun with the survivors in the helicopter and then suddenly he emerges and asks, "Did my brother make it?"
2-Carol Lynley on the DVD commentary track alludes to a sequel pitch in which the survivors would be traveling by train in Europe to go to the hearings into the disaster and then get stuck in an avalanche in a tunnel or something to that effect (same characters different disaster)
3-Paul Gallico, the author of the book before his death then gave Irwin a potential property by writing a novel that was written as a direct sequel to the film rather than the novel, and it had Rogo suddenly going back when he sees salvors headed to the wreck and Rogo it turns out had this big security job he was on board for. For even more bizarre reasons, Martin and Manny go back with him! There is only the barest resemblance in this to the treatment Irwin went with in his deservedly forgotten "sequel."
The 2005 miniseries was no better than so-so but at least an acceptable so-so. The 2006 film was just terrible on all levels. They missed a golden chance for a perfect inside joke if they had only made Richard Dreyfuss shout at one point, "This was no boating accident!"
1-Gene Hackman, guesting on the Tonight Show in 1974 says he turned down a sequel pitch in which the film would have begun with the survivors in the helicopter and then suddenly he emerges and asks, "Did my brother make it?"
2-Carol Lynley on the DVD commentary track alludes to a sequel pitch in which the survivors would be traveling by train in Europe to go to the hearings into the disaster and then get stuck in an avalanche in a tunnel or something to that effect (same characters different disaster)
3-Paul Gallico, the author of the book before his death then gave Irwin a potential property by writing a novel that was written as a direct sequel to the film rather than the novel, and it had Rogo suddenly going back when he sees salvors headed to the wreck and Rogo it turns out had this big security job he was on board for. For even more bizarre reasons, Martin and Manny go back with him! There is only the barest resemblance in this to the treatment Irwin went with in his deservedly forgotten "sequel."
The 2005 miniseries was no better than so-so but at least an acceptable so-so. The 2006 film was just terrible on all levels. They missed a golden chance for a perfect inside joke if they had only made Richard Dreyfuss shout at one point, "This was no boating accident!"
In terms of philosophical and ideological implications and insights, 1972 film is already much much clearer (and better) than the other two. Probably similar to 2001: Space Odyssey (1968). But demanding too much for audience to think is increasing a burden, and it is known that many did not know what Space Odyssey means . The "end" of Cold war and diversifying society inevitably led to the blurring of philosophy implications in Hollywood movies, and the compensation seems to be exciting scenes produced with high-tech . In terms of shocking and terrible scenes, thanks to technology advance, 2006 film is better. 2005 film is also horrible as the crowd were sucked to death underwater after the Christmas tree collapsed.
Went to see the 1972 film 6 Times in a row with my mates, loved it
Similar threads
