- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2
Posted on 3/19/13 at 2:04 pm to MrFreakinMiyagi
Siskel & Ebert review from February 1991.
LINK
Eugene Siskel was always a dick to Ebert. Of course Ebert had the last laugh because Hopkins and Foster both went on to win Oscars for performances which Siskel referred to as "decent" and "overplayed."
LINK
Eugene Siskel was always a dick to Ebert. Of course Ebert had the last laugh because Hopkins and Foster both went on to win Oscars for performances which Siskel referred to as "decent" and "overplayed."
This post was edited on 3/19/13 at 2:05 pm
Posted on 3/19/13 at 2:14 pm to MrFreakinMiyagi
I was just making the point that Hopkins is basically essential to the development of SOTL's plot and assisting Clarice whereas Cox plays more into the back story of Will Graham and his mental scars.
Because they serve completely different roles to each film, I think it's rather pointless to compare the two. It made more sense to me to compare Cox in Manhunter to Hopkins in Red Dragon because of the source material.
Because they serve completely different roles to each film, I think it's rather pointless to compare the two. It made more sense to me to compare Cox in Manhunter to Hopkins in Red Dragon because of the source material.
This post was edited on 3/19/13 at 2:18 pm
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News