About
All feedback (479)
- moretreasures4you (10585)- Feedback left by buyer.Past 6 monthsVerified purchaseGreat Customer!! Thanks for your purchase!!
- mczilla35 (4251)- Feedback left by buyer.Past 6 monthsVerified purchaseGood Buyer!!!!!!!!!!
- *****- Feedback left by buyer.Past 6 monthsVerified purchaseThank you for your purchase from Tickle Chicken Ranch, Enjoy
- powelltrader (2905)- Feedback left by buyer.Past 6 monthsVerified purchaseSuper fast payment, great to deal with! Thanks so much!!
- lowman1967 (1327)- Feedback left by buyer.Past 6 monthsVerified purchaseSuper fast pay! Great communication! Pleasure doing business! Thanks!
- dlaw1128 (498)- Feedback left by buyer.Past 6 monthsVerified purchaseThank you for your purchase and prompt payment! Hope to do business in the future!
Reviews (3)
Aug 20, 2020
Vibrant, poetic, delightful.
ThaMuseMeant's third and, in my opinion, best album. The performances feel live, vibrant, immediate, but there is a special tonal quality in the production that I've never heard in any other record. The songwriting is intellectually and poetically engaging if you opt to read the lyrics; the music is transcendent if you just want to enjoy the folk-rock-country-funk goodness. There is no other band in the history of music quite like ThaMuseMeant, and this is their greatest and most essential achievement.
Apr 20, 2021
Superb design with fun action features and excellent extras!
The MotU Origins line is an exceptionally well-made series of toys in general, with superb details in the sculpting and design, flexible articulation and gorgeous bright colors. This particular toy is a deluxe version that comes with a vintage-style head (you can easily pop off all the figure's hands, arms, head and torso!), an extra hand for holding both weapons simultaneously, a more metallic finish on the Power Sword, and a "blast effect" piece that attaches to the blade... in addition to the already outstanding "battle armor" feature which, just like the 1984 version, rolls over to show 1 slash, 2 slashes or 0 slashes on the breastplate! An exceptional toy for the adult collector or the kid that just wants to play!
Nov 20, 2009
Count Dracula BBC (1977)
2 of 2 found this helpful Directed by Philip Saville, written by Gerald Savory and starring Louis Jourdan as the Count, this BBC movie is the closest to Stoker's novel any adaptation has ever approached. Dracula, unlike in the book, is of indeterminate middle age, clean-shaven with black hair; yet while he looks normal, his words and demeanor positively throb with malevolence. Apart from a few minor changes, the story, characters and even the dialogue are nearly exactly as presented in Stoker.
The performances are typical of 1970s BBC “novels-for-television” in that they are engaging but not overpowering, credible but rarely exceptional, and intense where appropriate, without resorting to scene-stealing or scenery-chewing. From the ensemble only two performers emerge as notable: Judi Bowker, known to fantasy fans from her turn as Andromeda in Clash of the Titans, is a stand-out as Mina, all limpid blue eyes and white, swan-like throat; her dreamy reveries as a vampiress-in-training, and her outcries of dread and remorse at Lucy’s passing and at her own acceptance of the Count’s vile ministrations, possess an emotive quality that elevate her performance above her fellows. And Louis Jourdan as the Count is the picture of aristocratic restraint; even when we can sense his rage, he is calm and controlled, confident in his looming triumph. Early in the movie, Dracula’s discourses with Harker are warm, welcoming, even friendly, but these soon decompose into icy double-speak as he browbeats and cajoles his captive in the most polite manner imaginable. His toothy smile, described by Stoker as “charming”, is as politic as it is threatening.
At 2 ½ hours, the movie is a bit long, a langud slow-build punctuated by moments of startling horror that last just long enough to pique our appetite for the next shock. There is a degree of theatricality in the actors’ mannerisms and in the staging of some of the scenes, but overall the realism and naturalism of the images lends a very convincing air to the story, including the use of realistic-looking blood, location exteriors and natural lighting. Bizarre video effects and surrealistic editing techniques heighten the horror at certain points, such as when Dracula’s menacing face is polarized with red-rimmed eyes and lips, but apart from these brief instances, and the occasional use of thick scarlet blood, the movie is almost entirely free of special effects.
I cannot stress enough how excellent this movie is, my personal favorite of all film adaptations of the novel. I first saw it on PBS in the late 70s, on Halloween night no less, and it spooked the living bejeezus out of me. There I was, at 9 or 10 years old a diehard fan of Lugosi and Lee, Karloff and Cushing, shrugging off scenes of gruesome gore like they were nothin', and sitting there in the dark watching my father's little 10" TV, I was scared to my soul by this moody masterpiece of modern terror. The only films that rival it for cinematic aplomb are, IMO, the Spanish-language 1931 version and the 1992 Coppola film, but those versions are more fun than scary. This one is deeply unsettling in its depiction of evil, and especially in the degradation of Lucy from a sweet ingenue to a lusty, hissing weirdo of the night.
It is not a perfect adaptation of the novel, but it's probably the best, and is at least more subtle and nuanced the the florid 1992 film by Francis Ford Coppola.