Labyrinth's Recent Activity - Spout

Film:Labyrinth

Fri, 14 Aug 2009 04:57:36 GMT

Title: Labyrinth
Year: 2007
Director: Jim Henson
Plot: George Lucas produced and Jim Henson directed this gothic fantasy which pits living and breathing actors Jennifer Connelly and David Bowie (who, along with Trevor Jones, provides the film's music) against a motley collection of Muppet monsters. The film centers upon teenage Sarah (Connelly), who lives in a fantasy world of myth and magic, evil spells, and wondrous enchantment. She is baby-sitting her little brother when she cavalierly wishes that goblins would take him away. She gets her wish, and a coterie of goblins abduct him. She then encounters Jareth (David Bowie), the ruler of a mystical world one step removed from reality. He tells Sarah that the only way to get her brother back is to find her way through a M.C. Escher-like labyrinth and find the castle at the center. As she makes her way through the maze, she faces a number of horrific challenges (like the Bog of Eternal Stench) before she finds her way to the gravity-defying castle, where her brother is being held by the evil goblins. ~ Paul Brenner, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 58
Number of Lists: 78
Number of blog posts: 9
Number of discussion threads: 4
SpoutRating: 3

Spout Post: Spout user recommendations - laurabot - Wendy and Lucy

Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:53:35 GMT

Post By: Risselada
Post To: Risselada Blog
Post Date: 8/12/2009 12:53:35 PM
Body: I have asked certain users on Spout to recommend a movie to me. I will be blogging about these films as I watch them. This film was recommended to me by laurabot Wendy and Lucy I do not know laurabot all that well, but have conversed with her about movies on a couple occasions. She has her own distinctive taste which I appreciate. She gave me quite a few different suggestions for films to see, many of which I had heard of and have wanted to see anyways, so I kind of felt like she was in tune with what I was looking for. I was considering seeing Labyrith since I hear so many cultural references to it, even today and feel embarrassed I still have never seen it. And laurabot urged me so much that I do need to see it. I did however ultimately chose Wendy and Lucy since it had been stuck in my head ever since I saw the trailer for it. The sad scenario of a person with few friends, and apparently no real good friends, no home, and not many possessions striking out on a last hope to make a new life for themselves I found appealing. Of course in this society one little thing going wrong can cause a sequence of that show just how fleeting possessions can be. The movie turned out to be mostly what I expected, which was a good thing in this case. *SPOILER* The biggest surprise to me was that Wendy did make a major mistake of her own that could have been avoided, that being shoplifting. I can see why she would do it and the desperation of her situation. But now that I think about it, knowing was really wrong with her car, maybe the outcome would have been the same in the end whether she had shop lifted or not. *END SPOILER* One thing that I've been trying to come to terms with is the acting style in this movie. Although I sense that the movie is trying to be very realistic, some of the dialogue sounds a bit strange, or maybe the way it's delivered is strange. I'm not sure if it's just bad acting or writing, or if it's a deliberate attempt by the writer/director to write and direct actors in a way that is just kind of strange. Some of my favorite directors like Hal Hartley for instance do have very specific ways of writing and directing actors that gives them a deliberate style. I can't tell if it is deliberate in this case. Sometimes it is a bit charming, and sometimes it is a bit off putting. Either way, Michelle Williams stands out as a much better actors than the rest of the cast. Which although I'm guessing is quite true in general, I would think that the director would want everyone to fit together a bit better. Or maybe this too was deliberate to make her stand out and the other characters feel just slightly more alienating. This movie just goes to show how much more important strong human relationships are rather than money and possessions. Even though a dog is a nice friend to have, one is lost in the world without good human friends. Rating: 9/10

Spout Post: 10 Defenses for Howard the Duck

Tue, 10 Mar 2009 22:01:08 GMT

Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 3/10/2009 6:01:08 PM
Body: If you buy the kids only one new video release this week, make it Pinocchio. Obviously. But if you have enough spending money to buy two, pick up Howard the Duck as well. Finally on DVD in America (with a Special Edition no less), the infamous flop is anything but a great film. Yet it is hardly one of the worst films of the 1980s, despite its reputation. For the past 23 years, I’ve stood by my childhood love for Howard the Duck, constantly acknowledging that I even owned Ellis Weiner’s novelization of the film. Technically, the best reason to defend the movie’s existence is that it directly led to the creation of Pixar. But this reason doesn’t influence anyone to watch the thing. So, in order to defend the movie’s onscreen worth, I’ve come up with ten points for why you should pick up the new Howard the Duck disc and not feel at all guilty about doing so. 1. It’s No Longer the Worst Lucasfilm Production Take your pick — there’s The Phantom Menace or there’s Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, either of which could certainly take the prize for being the worst movie to come from George Lucas in his 40 years producing films. Well, maybe not worse than More American Graffiti. But both films were far bigger creative and franchise disappointments than Howard the Duck (financial success is another story, of course), and so they have a relative sort of wretchedness that places them in the bottom of Lucas’ Sarlacc pit of a career. Even if you’re one of those defend-to-the-end Star Wars fanboys who will argue the pros of Menace, at least then consider Willow to be worse than Howard the Duck. The blatant Lord of the Rings rip-off has its historical relevance, but looking back on it now, it’s even more dated than Howard. And regardless of how groundbreaking it was, Willow’s visual effects don’t hold up quite as well as Howard’s old-fashioned, and oft-celebrated craftsmanship. But that’s another point… 2. The Special Effects Are Technically Brilliant Those of us who prefer go-motion and other non-CGI effects work will always pay respect to ILM’s achievements on Howard the Duck, particularly their efforts with the Dark Overlord creature in the movie’s final act. People unfortunately tend to focus on the $2 million duck suit (see point #3), but even then Howard didn’t deserve its Razzie for Worst Visual Effects. To compare it to digital creatures, the monster would fit in just fine in either of the Men in Black movies. And for its own time, it was a magnificent creation. So it existed alongside a silly costumed creature in an overpriced B-movie, it still deserved an Oscar nomination for F/X in 1987, a year the Academy recognized Little Shop of Horrors and Poltergeist II: The Other Side (and incomparable winner Aliens). 3. The Duck Suit is Still Better Than Most CGI Those of us who grew up with Muppets, Chewbacca and other non-computer-generated fantasy creatures had no problem with Howard the Duck’s titular fowl being represented as a dwarf in a duck suit. The issue with the effect, though, is that allegedly Lucas had wanted Howard to be a CG creation, but the technology just wasn’t there yet. So, costumes and robotics, all of which reportedly cost $2 million, were viewed as a relative disappointment. But think of how few great CG characters there have been in the past 20 years, and then seriously attempt to argue that Howard would have been any better if made in the years of CGI supremacy. Now, also remember that 1986 was a year that gave us fine puppetry, costumed dwarfs and robotics like that found in Labyrinth (also a Lucasfilm production), Little Shop of Horrors, Legend, Short Circuit, Flight of the Navigator, Troll (sure, why not?) and, yes, Howard the Duck. So really, the only thing disappointing about the duck suit is that it doesn’t really look like the comic book character upon which it’s based. Of course, it’s not likely that a CG version of Howard would have been any more faithful. 4. Parallels, Puns and Playful Philosophy Some fans of the original Howard the Duck comics could argue that the duck suit is hardly the worst offense of unfaithfulness. Other complaints might be the alteration of Beverly’s career or the occasional sacrifice of the comic’s tone in order to pander to younger audiences. But real sticklers may take issue with Howard’s origin, the inclusion of Duckworld (which did come from the comics but wasn’t Howard creator Steve Gerber’s idea of what the character’s home world was like) and the punny parallels that came with it. Yet for those of us who love corny jokes and puns, the idea of an alternate world where everything’s the same, just with descendants of ducks rather than apes, is a lot of fun. It’s the same appreciation that allowed me to enjoy the ska scene and the similarly parallel worlds of The Flintstones and Dinosaurs and the parodies in MAD Magazine. In the first few minutes, we get treated to the following cheesy but delicious sight and audio gags: a Rolling Egg magazine, a Playduck magazine, movie posters for “Splahsdance,” “Breeders of the Lost Stork” and My Little Chickadee (starring W.C. Fowls and Mae Nest), and commercials for feather fungus treatment and the Crazy Eddie spoof “Crazy Webby.” This, plus the opening credit narration and theory of Duckworld evolution were enjoyable to a kid in the midst of learning about Darwin and pondering the existence of alternate worlds. 5. Jeffrey Jones as Dr. Jenning/Dark Overlord Between Howard the Duck and Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, Jeffrey Jones was one of the biggest and best villains of the summer of ‘86. For kids, anyway. But even adults recognized the quality of Jones’ performance in Howard, as Dr. Jenning, the scientist who becomes possessed by the Dark Overlord. To cult audiences, he may have seemed like just another Dr. Lizardo/Lord Worfin (of The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension), but while John Lithgow was fine and nutty, Jones is much creepier and much, much more evil, even when he finds time to be deadpan hilarious during the greatest scene in the film, in the “cajun sushi” diner. 6. The Diner Scene Although it’s mostly thanks to Jones that this scene is so memorable, it’s not just his performance alone that makes it so terrific. Every time I watch the movie, I look forward to the entire episode, from Jones/Jenning/Dark Overlord’s exposition to the waitress’ interactions with the “family” to Howard’s pie and quack-fu fight with a bunch of rednecks. And I will always recommend the movie for this scene alone. It includes a lot of disturbing elements, such as Beverly’s claim that she’s Howard’s girlfriend and the angry mob’s desire to kill and cook a talking duck man, that might have worked better had Howard been represented as an animated character rather than a guy in a suit (bestiality and homicide is just fine in Who Framed Roger Rabbit? and Looney Tunes cartoons), but it’s also one of the weirdest and funniest scenes from any comic book adaptation ever. 7. Lea Thompson as Beverly Switzler I would go so far as to argue that Lea Thompson’s crimped-haired Beverly is the hottest female comic book character come to (cinematic) life, but that is certainly subjective. Plenty of people probably prefer Kirsten Dunst, Halle Berry, Jennifer Garner, Michelle Pfeiffer, Pamela Anderson or even Margot Kidder. But Thompson is definitely in there as one of the greatest physical incarnations of a comic book femme d’ fantasy, and the scene where she goes to bed with Howard wearing barely a bit of lingerie (as creepy as the scene is infamous for being) is up there with Dunst’s wet tshirt/upside-down kiss in Spider-Man and any of Pfeiffer’s bondage-bound Catwoman scenes in Batman Returns as one of the hottest moments from any comic book adaptation ever. 8. Cherry Bomb and the Howard the Duck soundtrack Beverly may not have been a rocker in the comics, but this was the 1980s, and you had to have a great synthpop soundtrack, so the character was given a change in career as the leader of a Runaways-inspired band called Cherry Bomb. And for having beaten out more musical contenders for the role, including The Go-Go’s Belinda Carlisle and Tori Amos (then of Y Can’t Tori Read), Lea Thompson does quite well singing such catchy tunes as “Howard the Duck” and “Hunger City.” Cherry Bomb’s music also had some help from Thomas Dolby, George Clinton, Joe Walsh and Stevie Wonder. As for the rest of the soundtrack, Oscar-winning composer John Barry (Out of Africa; the James Bond films) contributes a very fine score. 9. It’s For Kids Because everyone always defends the Star Wars prequels as being for kids, as if that’s really an excuse for faulty filmmaking, I’m going to do the same here. But to do that, I guess I have to also defend the idea that it is indeed a movie for kids. Watching the thing, it’s hard to tell, because there is a lot of content and humor that only adults can or should appreciate, and certainly one of the biggest criticisms with the movie is it’s fluctuations between wanting to be a biting, sarcastic comic book adaptation for older audiences and fans of the source and needing to be a silly movie for kids. But for all the duck nudity, sexuality and other material better suited to mature audiences, there’s not really anything harmful to a kid, and there’s millions of us ‘80s children who grew up okay to prove it. So, while you adults may not be able to enjoy Howard the Duck anymore, even as a nostalgic artifact, your kids will probably like it as much as you used to. 10. It’s Not Redundant Unlike some comic book adaptations, Howard the Duck isn’t a straight lift from the pages of the source material, and it’s better off for it. Some fans of the comic may be annoyed with Howard’s appearance or Beverly’s occupation or the absence of any of Howard’s usual foes, but those of us who saw the movie first can appreciate the differences, because these allow for a better introduction to and curiosity about the comic. In a way, it’s to the original Marvel series as The Incredibles is to the graphic novel of Watchmen (though it’s certainly not anywhere near as smart nor well-crafted as The Incredibles). Now, if you still aren’t sure whether or not you should get the DVD, watch some (or all) of the movie on Hulu: Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

Spout Post: Re:Top 5 films from your childhood

Wed, 15 Oct 2008 13:36:18 GMT

Post By: filmgal81
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 10/15/2008 9:36:18 AM
Body: There are so many to choose from! So many that shaped who I am and that I enjoyed ( some of them I still do). So, in no particular order, here are my Top5: 1) Annie starring Albert Finney, and the ever brillant Carol Burnett. It never ceases to amaze me just how optimistic I used to be. 2) The Christmas Toy - this a Jim Henson film and was one of my favorite Christmas movies when I was a kid (along with Mickey's Christmas Carol). It is the story of a magic playroom that comes to life when no one's around. One of the toys, Rugby Tiger, tried to figure out how to put himself inside that year's Christmas toy box so the little girl that owned him won't have a new favorite toy for Christmas. He wanted to continue to be special in her eyes, which leads to some comedic and poignant results ending with the whole toy room learning about the spirit of Christmas. 3) Charlie and the Chocolate Factory- the Johnny Depp/ Tim Burton version was complete crap, I'm sorry to say, in comparison with this version. Gene Wilder was prefect for this role, lending just the right amount of dark humor to the very mysterious and benevolent candyman. My favorite scene was when he would warn Charlie, who now owns his chocolate factory, to remember what happened to the boy who suddenly got everything he asked for. Charlie, looking worried, asked what happened. Wonka smiles and says " He lived ahppily ever after." Priceless. 4) The Parent Trap- I was a bit of a Haley Mills freak. I was a big fan of Pollyanna too. 5) Beaches- Barbara Hershey, Bette Midler. For the life of me, I couldn't tell you why I loved it so much. [quote user="josephkuzma"] Obviously this one will span many an era depending on how old you are. I'm not going to ask for a certain type of film either. [/quote]

Spout Post: Dear Guillermo del Toro, Work your Hellboy Magic on These Seven Movies

Tue, 08 Jul 2008 19:01:14 GMT

Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 7/8/2008 3:01:14 PM
Body: (photo: La Jetée, Hellboy II: The Golden Army) Guillermo del Toro’s Hellboy II: The Golden Army hits theaters this Friday. Del Toro is a rare filmmaker who, despite his unique vision, often works on projects based on material from an outside source (Pan’s Labyrinth being a notable exception). Assuming all the legal issues get ironed out, he’ll next direct a two part film adaptation of Tolkien’s The Hobbit, the most prestigious property to date to get the del Toro treatment. Here are seven either failed or unjustly obscure movies ripe for being remade by Hellboy’s father. 1. Spawn - Todd McFarlane’s comic about a Hell-trotting anti-hero indebted to the Devil opened my young eyes to genuinely dark storytelling. While the 90s were a simpler time in terms of comic to movie adaptations, I was already dreaming about a big screen adaptation after reading the first issue. Unfortunately, my dream came true in 1997, when Mark A.Z. Dippé’s god-awful Spawn slumped into theaters. 2. The Never Ending Story - If you were to describe Pan’s Labyrinth as a story about a little girl with a cruel stepfather who escapes into a fantasy world with fairies and magical pan, it could sound like many tame children’s movies of the ’80s. The Never Ending Story del Toro style: the gnome is evil (or a least a little sadistic), the giant flying dog thing eats at least one sentient being, and the kid dies in the end. 3. The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari - This 1920 German Expressionist classic is one of the first horror films, and maybe the first ever movie with a twist ending. A black and white sound version was made by David Lee Fisher in 2006, where green screen was used to incorporate the original backgrounds. I picture del Toro’s version in color, with a few added plot flourishes. Who knows, maybe it could be the genesis of a new genre: Mexican Neo-Expressionism. 4. Jim Henson’s The Storyteller (watch the video, sorry it won’t embed)- While compiling this list, Adam Forrest started telling me about an episode of Jim Henson’s The Storyteller called The Heartless Giant. It felt like he was describing nightmares I had when I was seven (turns out the nightmare was actually a memory I had of watching this very episode). While still slightly goofy at times, it’s Henson at his creepiest, and I’d love to see del Toro pick up where the puppet master left off. Other freaky Henson classics like The Dark Crystal and Labyrinth (keeping David Bowie in the cast, of course) would also be great, but I picked The Storyteller because del Toro could really kill in this semi-episodic TV format. 5. La Jetée (entire 27 minute film is embedded above)- This 1962 French short film consists only of a series of black and white photos accompanied by narration. It’s a stunning post-apocalyptic downer and an absolute must-see. Terry Gilliam already remade it as Twelve Monkeys, where he added a lot of story content in addition to quadrupling the original run time. I’d like to see del Toro build something different, but equally good, using La Jetée’s bare-bones structure. 6. Dungeons & Dragons - In 2000, the undisputed king of tabletop role playing games became the undisputed king of shitty movie adaptations. There are inherent problems in adapting a game like D&D to the screen, for one thing, the game is really just a rules system, the players provide the story. That being said, there have been countless supplemental “campaign settings” published which describe immensely imaginative worlds. I would particularly like to see what del Toro would do with Keith Baker’s fantasy-noir Eberron. 7. The Wizard of Oz - It would be pretty ballsy of del Toro to take this one on. In 1985 Walter Murch, known mostly for his stellar editing work, directed the wonderfully dark Return to Oz. While not a perfect film, it exploited the more disturbing dimensions of the Oz story, namely a lost girl in a strange world targeted by a supernatural evil. If all goes well with del Torro’s take on The Hobbit, I think the world will be ready to go back to an Oz where munchkins hanging themselves would no longer be confined to shadowy backgrounds. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

Spout Post: Labyrinth (1986)

Mon, 09 Jun 2008 16:44:14 GMT

Post By: JJ79
Post To: JJ79 Blog
Post Date: 6/9/2008 12:44:14 PM
Body: Release Year: 1986Director: Jim Henson *****There is no time in movie history that was more creative, more free wheeling, more wacky than the 1980s. Every studio in the land wanted a fantasy film to cash in the success of Star Wars. Even Jim Henson, the Muppet Master. He had already given us the 100% muppet fantasy film The Dark Crystal and a couple years later, added humans and pop music to the equation with Labyrinth. Starring David Bowie and a very young Jennifer Connolly, Labyrinth tells the tale of Sarah (Connolly) wishing away her baby brother Toby in a moment of weakness and beginning a quest to recover him. Along the way, she befriends muppets...er, creatures from this strange land including a small trollish man and a big lumbering brute. Labyrinth succeeds in most of the places The Dark Crystal failed for one simple reason: humans are on the screen. Humans who can emote, who lend the finished product an air of reality, humans who aren't hamstrung by the limitations of puppetry. Their entire bodies are able to be seen within the frame without covering up the rods, strings and other gadgets used in puppets. It is a distinct adventage. That's not to say Labyrinth is a flawless movie. There are three musical numbers which have no purpose other than to pad the film and showcase Bowie's singing. The real world portions that bookend the film are hopelessly dated in terms of clothing. And the setup, with Sarah being a whiny teenager, are cliched. A fun diversion, yes, and a fascinating document of where we were film-wise before the advent of CGI. Thankfully, this is the last motion picture to make use of muppets for anything besides a Muppet movie. In this stage of their development and in this genre, they don't work on the screen precisely because we can't suspend disblief enough to buy into what Henson is selling.

Spout Post: CG: Death to Imagination

Fri, 02 May 2008 20:00:25 GMT

Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 5/2/2008 4:00:25 PM
Body: When I saw the title of Olly Richardson’s rant on The Empire Blog asking if CG has killed our imaginations, I presumed he meant filmmakers’ imaginations and how special effects are less creative when done with the ease of computer graphics. But no, he’s really talking about our imaginations, meaning me and you and everyone we know. I’d never given it too much thought, but maybe modern audiences are really losing their ability to believe at the movies: We never used to be so picky. If somebody watches the original King Kong or any of the works of Ray Harryhausen, you will never hear them complain about how the skeletons were a bit jerky or that the big ape’s fur didn’t blow realistically when he was climbing the Empire State Building (if they do complain, however, you should feel free to shoot them on the grounds of wrongness and philistinism). You just watch the film, acknowledge that what you are seeing couldn’t possibly exist, admire the artistry it took to create it and choose to believe it anyway. That’s what suspension of disbelief is: ignoring the protests of your eyes and more logical parts of your brain in order to enjoy a good story. Yet I don’t think most complaints regarding the realism or believability of a film like The Incredible Hulk (which sparked Olly’s piece) is really focused on acceptance of the Hulk’s existence or even how realistic he looks in CG. It’s about believing a creature’s existence and tangibility within the world of the film and within the context of the filmmakers’ intentions. Ray Harryhausen effects were featured in a lot of movies that weren’t supposed to be taken seriously. Today’s blockbusters, however, come with the pretense that they contain more realistic effects. Otherwise, they would just use cell animation and puppets like they did in the old days. Speaking of which, part of the problem is that characters like Yoda and the Gremlins (look at that BT ad to see how puppets are still excellent) were already truly realistic more than 20 years ago, because they were made from real, tangible substances, and were able to be accepted within the worlds of their films. Meanwhile, a film like Labyrinth, in which the puppets and animatronics look more like puppets and animatronics than real breathing creatures, is still fine because it makes no claim to be anything but what it is. But ever since Jurassic Park, we’ve come to put up with a Hollywood that wants us to buy every little CG thing as photo-realistic. At least Olly acknowledges the present conditions: We’ve now arrived at a place where technology is capable of producing something so photo-realistic that if we can detect a small patch of skin that doesn’t fold in the right way or an eye that fails to glint with emotion, we cry foul and declare what’s on screen to be ridiculous and unbelievable. I’ve done it myself, huffing through Spider-Man 3 about the fact that the giant man made of sand just didn’t look like a real giant man made of sand. I base this complaint on precisely no experience of giant men made of sand, just a belief in what he should look like. Apparently my vision contrasted with those of the vastly more talented and able people at ILM (or whomever created it). So, why have we become so demanding? Why have our eyes taken over the job of filmic enjoyment from our brains? The issue is not with our visions not coinciding with ILM’s, though. That kind of thing was happening more than a 100 years ago to Verne fans watching a Melies film (and in 1902, they were believing everything on screen was real). And the belief of what a man made of sand looks like shouldn’t really vary too far from what an effects technician believes. Complaints about the detail and realism behind Spider-Man 3’s Sandman likely have more to do with where the effects guys cut corners and ended up failing to deceive our eyes. There is no way that Universal or director Louis Leterrier mean for the Hulk in their movie to not look realistic and tangible. Not after the criticisms against Ang Lee’s The Hulk. So, yes, fans do have a right to scrutinize the reboot for not looking any better, and it has nothing to do with a lack of imagination or ability to suspend disbelief. They could easily just go and read another Hulk comic or even watch the ’70s TV show, which may have been totally cheesy but at least had a palpable character in simply using a green-painted bodybuilder. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

Spout Post: Memories.....

Mon, 06 Aug 2007 13:58:55 GMT

Post By: galadriel
Post To: galadriel Blog
Post Date: 8/6/2007 9:58:55 AM
Body: I adored this movie when I was younger, I used to watch it all the time. I had not watched it for at least 15 years but just watched it last night and I still love it. It is a lot more "cheesy" now that I am an adult but it is just one of those movies for me that no matter how bad it might actually be will always remind me of being a kid.

Spout Post: Being lost sounds fun.

Sun, 29 Jul 2007 02:25:59 GMT

Post By: AlienLazer
Post To: AlienLazer Blog
Post Date: 7/28/2007 10:25:59 PM
Body: Wow, I didn't realize that this movie was from the 80s since I didn't see it until more that a decade after it was released. Sad. When I first saw this movie I was a young teenager and I totally wanted David Bowie's sexiness. I was disappointed with the ending because I believed that the Goblin King should have been able to win over the girl's heart as he won over mine. Grrr. Yeah, I did watch this movie agian years later, and I really had to ponder over why I found Bowie so attractive. LOL But this movie is still one of my favorites. I'm not a "muppets" fan, but Jim Henson did a wonderful thing for everyone with his mind's creations.

Spout Post: Top 5 films from your childhood

Wed, 25 Apr 2007 10:10:53 GMT

Post By: josephkuzma
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 4/25/2007 6:10:53 AM
Body: Obviously this one will span many an era depending on how old you are. I'm not going to ask for a certain type of film either.Mine:1. The Adventures of Mark Twain. This is forever part of my childhood memories. Love it, love it, love it. If you haven't seen it I'll forgive you so long as you rectify that immediately - it's been on DVD since January 2006, so you can easily get ahold of it now. 2. Labyrinth. Another one permanently imbedded in my memory banks. This, along with Legend, were my first "fantasy" movies and can more-than-likely be blamed for turning me into a nerd. 3. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. This was my generation's Pokemon. Everyone had action figures, posters, Halloween costumes, etc. I'll refrain from including #2 but I have the same soft spot for it as well.4. The Addams Family. I loved this when I was a kid and I still have to watch it when it comes on telelvision.5. Clerks. Not exactly "childhood" fare but this was my first "grown-up" movie. My sister introduced me to this and Mallrats at the same time and despite Mallrats' potty humor my 12 year-old brain was transfixed by Clerks. This was the genesis of my internal filmmaker.

Spout Post: Ahh...

Sun, 01 Apr 2007 21:17:04 GMT

Post By: blissful-imagination
Post To: blissful-imagination Blog
Post Date: 4/1/2007 5:17:04 PM
Body: Aside from being bombarded with David Bowies genitals every so often, this movie was awesome. It's got great music, puppets, a huuuuuuuuuge maze, and of course the awesome David Bowie. Sweet. I love this movie. <3

Spout Tag:family

Wed, 23 Dec 2009 05:51:34 GMT

family
Number of films tagged: 6289

Number of people who tagged: 227

Number of times used: 1140

Spout Tag:awesome

Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:23:33 GMT

awesome
Number of films tagged: 187

Number of people who tagged: 158

Number of times used: 291

Spout Tag:fantasy

Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:54:25 GMT

fantasy
Number of films tagged: 1044

Number of people who tagged: 128

Number of times used: 480

Spout Tag:musical

Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:03:25 GMT

musical
Number of films tagged: 174

Number of people who tagged: 109

Number of times used: 356

Spout Tag:comingofage

Sun, 28 Jun 2009 22:51:56 GMT

comingofage
Number of films tagged: 1186

Number of people who tagged: 72

Number of times used: 219

Spout Tag:magic

Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:58:47 GMT

magic
Number of films tagged: 818

Number of people who tagged: 69

Number of times used: 173

Spout Tag:favorite

Sat, 15 Aug 2009 02:22:58 GMT

favorite
Number of films tagged: 85

Number of people who tagged: 62

Number of times used: 127

Spout Tag:kidnapping

Sun, 16 Aug 2009 05:39:42 GMT

kidnapping
Number of films tagged: 2851

Number of people who tagged: 49

Number of times used: 172

Spout Tag:monster

Thu, 24 Sep 2009 00:22:02 GMT

monster
Number of films tagged: 1143

Number of people who tagged: 41

Number of times used: 95

Spout Tag:80s-classic

Thu, 23 Oct 2008 04:37:46 GMT

80s-classic
Number of films tagged: 44

Number of people who tagged: 34

Number of times used: 108

Spout Tag:imagination

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 21:57:20 GMT

imagination
Number of films tagged: 545

Number of people who tagged: 31

Number of times used: 52

Spout Tag:rescue

Mon, 03 Aug 2009 18:39:36 GMT

rescue
Number of films tagged: 4080

Number of people who tagged: 31

Number of times used: 142

Spout Tag:king

Tue, 30 Jun 2009 13:07:18 GMT

king
Number of films tagged: 619

Number of people who tagged: 29

Number of times used: 54

Spout Tag:babysitter

Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:53:16 GMT

babysitter
Number of films tagged: 77

Number of people who tagged: 17

Number of times used: 27

Spout Tag:fantasyworld

Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:42:51 GMT

fantasyworld
Number of films tagged: 247

Number of people who tagged: 15

Number of times used: 22