You're right! Wikipedia says it was released in 1973, but another source says 1977. What a strange discrepancy
I need to watch the movie again. When it was on last night, I wasn't really paying attention to the screen, but I kept it hearing voices I recognized. Eileen Brennan hit me immediately, followed by Ray Walston
This is only the second time I've watched it. I'm having a hard time getting engaged, but I haven't tried very hard. This great cast, combined with the reputation of the movie, make it deserving of my full attention
Mmm... aybe. Seems to make sense. But I'm running on just a few hours' sleep in the last two days, so I'm going to let it sink in a little bit. I'll get back to you :)
I almost typed that instead of "suspension of belief," but that phrase always has bothered me. It doesn't make sense. If you are going to immerse yourself in the movie and make a commitment and buy in to all the illogical stuff, aren't you suspending BELIEF? Seems like suspending DISBELIEF would be the opposite and would make you more critical of the facts
I see it like this: it's a movie. If I can buy 95% of the zombie shit actually happening, I can buy the viscera and so forth. Maybe try to become more immersed in the story. Suspend disbelief belief. That's one of the biggest reasons we go to movies in the first place
Defiant-Document4027 OP t1_j5lh2jq wrote
Reply to comment by Frankie6Strings in Announcer from The Sting by Defiant-Document4027
>It's older than 1977
You're right! Wikipedia says it was released in 1973, but another source says 1977. What a strange discrepancy
I need to watch the movie again. When it was on last night, I wasn't really paying attention to the screen, but I kept it hearing voices I recognized. Eileen Brennan hit me immediately, followed by Ray Walston
This is only the second time I've watched it. I'm having a hard time getting engaged, but I haven't tried very hard. This great cast, combined with the reputation of the movie, make it deserving of my full attention
Thank you for answering