Exactly. Or crediting Billy Dee Williams as having played Two-Face, even though he only played Harvey Dent.

And, just to be a stickler, “Sam” is Lois’s father’s name in the comics, not in the Christopher Reeve movie, which is its own thing. If it was up to me,the IMDB listing for 1978 movie would only refer to the…

Or just call him “Mister Lane” or “Lois’s Dad” since I don’t think he’s ever addressed by name in any actual dialogue.

Ideally, you would want to use whatever label was printed in the actual shooting script, but that would require research and access to the original document.

But that’s what so scary and/or depressing…

Speaking as a nitpicking editor, I would object to the latter approach because it’s misleading and inaccurate with regards to the actual real-world history of the property. Never mind “in-universe” consistency, the character did not exist in 1978 so it’s historically inaccurate to state that “General Sam Lane”…

Interesting. The nitpicker in me objects to the idea of listing the character as “General Sam Lane” retroactively, since that was certainly not the intention back in 1978 when the movie was being filmed. Sam Lane was generally portrayed as a horse farmer back then.

And does IMBD really spell it “Same” Lane? If so,…

IMDB identifies Lois’s father as “General Sam Lane”? Okay, some nerdy wiki editor is confusing the modern-day comic-book character with Alyn’s role in the movie. The idea that Lois’s father is an Army general wasn’t introduced in the comics until at least 1985 or so, several years AFTER the Christopher Reeve movie was…

So I’m guessing they’re NOT looking for a remake of DEMON SEED?

Hah! I wrote the cover copy for that book, but had completely forgotten about it until now. Yes, I’m responsible for “Something is ROTTING in the State of Denmark.”

Don’t judge me.

Glad to see that THE COMPANY OF WOLVES made the cut, but what about Cocteau’s BEAUTY AND BEAST? Or are we only counting movies made after 1980 or so?

Seriously, I think TIME BANDITS is the oldest movie on the list and that’s still a fairly modern film. What about THE THIEF OF BAGDAD with Sabu and Conrad Veidt? Or THE…

Whereas I’m am thoroughly jaded and suspicious when it comes to on-line “rumors” . . ..

A cautionary observation:

Note: this is not “news.” It’s just an unsubstantiated rumor.

I’ll wait until we hear something official.

Love the headline!

Clearly, the sequel has to be titled JUNGLE BOOK II: THE WRATH OF SHERE KHAN. :)

It’s funny. I’ll go out of my way to see some old 1950s classic like THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON or HOUSE OF WAX in the original 3D, for the novelty value as you say, but am perfectly happy to see the latest Marvel movie in 2D . . ..

THE LADY IN THE LAKE pops up on TCM periodically. It’s worth checking out at least once.

Love the hype on this old poster. Who knew this was the most “revolutionary motion picture . . . since Talkies began!”

Perhaps. But I’m picturing RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK if Indy was just a disembodied POV . . ..

Then again, what do I know? I still watch modern blockbusters in 2D. :)

Exactly. THE LADY IN THE LAKE suffers as a story because the protagonist is reduced to a disembodied voice and pair of hands for the entire movie (aside from the occasional reflection in a mirror), rendering the dramatic scenes inert. Imagine THE MALTESE FALCON if you never saw Bogart’s facial expressions and body…

Hollywood tried the first-person POV thing with a hard-boiled detective movie, THE LADY IN THE LAKE, back in 1947. It didn’t really work, mostly because the dramatic scenes fell flat when you couldn’t see the lead actor’s face when he was confronting a suspect or a seductive femme fatale.

But I guess this movie is…

Or maybe a headline along the lines of “WATCH the Evolution of Spider-Man Onscreen”?

I confess I have no idea what “Sploid” is. I was steered here by io9, whose coverage of comic books and comic-book movies I generally enjoy.

I admit, I was expecting a text article.

Maybe, at the very least, “video” articles can be labeled as such so we know what we’re clicking on.