|
|
Post by darksidebeadle on Jul 16, 2021 12:53:21 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by movielover on Jul 16, 2021 13:51:47 GMT
I like both. (Rate 7/10 for both.) I’ve also read the book. I guess I’ll go with 1990 by a hair, but I need to rewatch the 1963 one, it’s been too long.
I love the music at the end of the 1963 version, by the way.
|
|
|
|
Post by rudeboy on Jul 16, 2021 15:00:42 GMT
63 by far. The later film needlessly updates the story and features some poor acting. Great score, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by darksidebeadle on Jul 16, 2021 18:21:45 GMT
I like both but nod goes to 63
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jul 16, 2021 20:10:37 GMT
1963
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jul 16, 2021 20:22:10 GMT
63 by far. The later film needlessly updates the story and features some poor acting. Great score, though. I didn't even finish the 1990 version, because it wasn't doing much for me. I would have finished it, but I think the DVD was scratched up or something and it stopped working. I have just not felt the need to find it elsewhere to watch to finish it. I watched the 1963 version after the 1990 version and like it.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantomparticle on Jul 16, 2021 23:01:52 GMT
No contest. The 1963 movie.
The low budget and the cast of non-actors carry the verisimililtude of a documentary, as though the film makers set their camera down and let events play without their interference.
The remake is slick Hollywood and the threatening monochrome darkness of the jungle is replaced with the bright colors of a travelogue. .
|
|
