Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sondra]

True, but you are looking at it from a sensible person's point of view. There's a ton of people out there that get off on the macabre. There are people who have the 'Faces of Death' collection on DVD. That's sick as hell. They remade 'Helter Skelter' how many years after the Manson murders/the first movie. There unfortunately will always be an audience for this kind of junk, though Chapman's story will likely be a little too esoteric for your average morbid bystander. I hope.

They remade Helter Skelter? When was that? I don't think that movie was exploitive of the dead though. The original. I mean, it was more of a documentary type movie. If they made a movie about Lennon's life, and stuck to the truth, I wouldn't object to it. I mean, he's had an interesting life and we all read about it all the time. This thing is completely different. John probably won't even be in it and it's going to be all speculation with a few facts. Why bother with that?? Jeez, I haven't heard about Faces of Death since High School. I wouldn't watch it then and I certainly wouldn't watch it now. I don't get that kind of fascination.

They remade Helter Skelter? When was that? I don't think that movie was exploitive of the dead though.

Of course it was. It was a remake of the original movie, and if it weren't for the Sharon Tate/LaBianca massacres, there wouldn't have been a story.

[Sondra]

I suppose. But they didn't glorify Manson or anything. I think it was a pretty big deal anyway because of the whole peace and lvoe thing and here come these hippies that are so violent and so on. But I guess any movie about a real event could be considered exploitve. I think the original tv movie was tastefully done, but who knows how the families feel. Maybe they should just leave these kind of stories alone. I can't believe they just put out a tv movie of the BTK killer. I mean, that just happened. All for a buck I guess.

[I am the Paulrus]

Producers said Lennon himself would have a relatively small screen presence in Chapter 27.

Lohan's character was created to help film-makers explore the motivation behind the killing, they added.

The film is the first project from director Jarrett Schaeffer, who also wrote the script.

It is being co-produced by Toronto-based Peace Arch Entertainment and 21 Grams film-maker Robert Salerno's company Artina Films.

"It's a psychological study," said Peace Arch's John Flock.

"I wouldn't call it a sympathetic portrayal of him, but you do kind of get into Chapman's head."

The film's title is said to be a reference to the 26 chapters in the JD Salinger novel The Catcher in the Rye, which Chapman said was an inspiration for the murder.

[Kevin]

I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. Obviously anything to do with Johns murder is a touchy subject around here, but I don't see why it would be anymore exploitive than a movie on say Lee Harvey Oswald or the Robert Kennedy / King murderers (unless of course you find all such movies exploitive, which is fair enough.) If they don't make too many assumptions, keep the Lennons out of it (until the crucial moment) and keep it tight it could make a crediable movie (if you're not a Lennon freak.)
I can see how a movie-maker would be tempted to do it.

[Sondra]

Yes but how can he say he's getting into Chapman's head? Did he interview Chapman? And even still, he could be lying. He's a sociopath. They're not know for being very truthful. I think it's ridiculous to try and speculate on his motivation. He's sick and that's it. You can't do anything about those kind of people because you will never know ahead of time what they are planning to do. They are brilliant at pretending to be normal. I think it's a waste of time. There's so many other movies that can be made that are more positive than this one. And I don't think a movie about any of those other killings really focused on the killer and his motivation. Mainly they seem to just stick to the facts and show it in more of an account of what happend. But if people are interested that's fine.

[Mairi]

I find all of these movies exploitive. Basically, you're making money off of death and that kind of trivializes it in my point of view. I'll be seeing this no sooner than the Karla Holmolka movie.

[Wayne L.]

With Lindsay Lohan in it it's going to be more like a comedy since she's a joke asan actress but I think they will recreate the murder of John near the end of the movie which will be heavy for Beatles fans like myself.

[I am the Paulrus]

there is a petition to sign to halt the filming of this film (if you call it that):
http://www.petitiononline.com/nochap27/petition.html

[Mean_Mr_Mustard]

'Don't you know that you can count me out/in' (J.L.)

But sometimes hate is a hard feeling to quell. If we don't know what hate is, how can we realise love? What's really bad is when hate engulfs us.

Isn't Revolution a song about Communism?

[GreenApple]

Isn't Revolution a song about Communism?

Is that rubbish I sometimes talk!? I mean, what you quoted that I said. Do I sound like a prat sometimes...or often!?

Anti-Communism, I would have thought. But, really, IMO, both Communism (capital C or small c), and hippyism are both stupid pipe dreams really. One of the good things about Capitalism is that it at least allows people to be their imperfect selves!

Yes guys - that's right - I'm tired of daft hippyism!

[Kevin]

Yes guys - that's right - I'm tired of daft hippyism!

Say what?

[Mean_Mr_Mustard]

Yeah it does allow people to exploit each other I agree. :p

Its anti-communism but he says "Count me out (in)"

It sounds to me like he thinks the idea of communism is good but he dosnt like the methods of some so called communists.

[Beatle Ed]

Sucks cus I liked Jared Leto, I'll never be able to look at him again after him play M***.. I don't think Linsday would be good in anything in connection with JOhn. Well she wouldn't be good in anything in connection with a toilet brush, but you get the point.

[raxo]

Lennon