The old version is it's own special kind of strange. But the remake is very scary, especially if anyone watching it understands how this world actually works
@@solodolo7767 there’s so much going on and people question nothing. After their television tells them “ Trust the Science “. They trust people like Fauci who killed people with AZT , got away with it. And then he was hired for COVID. He’s a paid murderer.
The original film is scarier because it was too close to everything that happened with Trump, his connections to Putin, and the erosions of our democracy.
@@jimmerhardy the only fact here is that her physical apperance made her look like Hillary. You claimed it was an impersonation of her, which is complete bs. Just take the L and move on
@@IllIllIllIllIII No. Many claimed it was an impression of Clinton. There were so many articles about it, Streep was forced to say it was not an impression of her. Now that's the real BS and please do something more productive with your life.
@@jimmerhardy unlike you i have plenty of productive tasks to complete. "Many" delusional viewers share the same view as you, this movie reminds everyone with a normal functioning brain, to the Kennedy incident. Streep plays a mother of a vice president in a movie and she ends up getting shot with her son, no such thing has ever happened to Clinton and she has never been a mom of a president. Kennedy was a puppet and got killed, whoever was in control of him was portrayed by Streep. Whatever makes you sleep at night tho, you clearly lack braincells
I always found this movie intriguing when I watched it when I was younger and it blew me away and it’s still like it to the day there’s a remake different scenarios but it holds up to so that
The remake is weird, it was edited to sh*t and doesn’t flow very well, as though the studio butchered the final cut to make it more mainstream. Also the whole conspiracy is very lame compared to the original with Sinatra.
@@reneedennis2011 I hope you check it out. Frank Sinatra who was a good friend of then President Kennedy had the film pulled for a number of decades because the following year in 1963 Kennedy was gunned down and Mr. Sinatra felt either guilt that a film was somehow responsible for causing his friend's death, or because perhaps he felt concerned for the Kennedy family, or that life imitated art, or maybe a combination of each of those. It's a bizarre film with some interesting camera work and techniques by John Frankenheimer.
I think that Frank Sinatra did a passable job on the original Manchurian Candidate, but I think he was cast because he was Frank Sinatra. Another actor could have done a much better job than Sinatra's one-note performance. The heart and soul of the original film was Angela Lansbury, who really does come across as the most intelligent, ruthless person in the room, disregarded by the moronic men in power around her, and very nearly succeeds in her mission of revenge against the world. You can almost empathize with her in her quest, and that's a very hard feat for a villain to achieve, especially one who uses her own son as a disposable pawn in her plans.
Rob Ford was murdered by them. Jimmy Kimmel even tweeted "Rob Ford looks like JFK" , they couldn't have done the propaganda of 2020 with him alive. He had too much power & they couldn't control him.
The old version is it's own special kind of strange. But the remake is very scary, especially if anyone watching it understands how this world actually works
Am I the only one that think the vaccine will activate like on this movie
@@solodolo7767 yes, go for a walk outside .
@@solodolo7767 there’s so much going on and people question nothing. After their television tells them “ Trust the Science “. They trust people like Fauci who killed people with AZT , got away with it. And then he was hired for COVID. He’s a paid murderer.
@@solodolo7767 no it’s a legitimate fear never let someone coerce you into filling your body with unknown and suspicious chemicals
The original film is scarier because it was too close to everything that happened with Trump, his connections to Putin, and the erosions of our democracy.
I just watched it and was floored by Streep's impersonation of Hillary Clinton. Good film.
It's not an impersonation of Hillary at all. Whatever makes you sleep at night tho
@@IllIllIllIllIII It may not have intentional, but her evil character triggered many to make the comparison. That's reality. That's a fact.
@@jimmerhardy the only fact here is that her physical apperance made her look like Hillary. You claimed it was an impersonation of her, which is complete bs. Just take the L and move on
@@IllIllIllIllIII No. Many claimed it was an impression of Clinton. There were so many articles about it, Streep was forced to say it was not an impression of her. Now that's the real BS and please do something more productive with your life.
@@jimmerhardy unlike you i have plenty of productive tasks to complete. "Many" delusional viewers share the same view as you, this movie reminds everyone with a normal functioning brain, to the Kennedy incident. Streep plays a mother of a vice president in a movie and she ends up getting shot with her son, no such thing has ever happened to Clinton and she has never been a mom of a president. Kennedy was a puppet and got killed, whoever was in control of him was portrayed by Streep. Whatever makes you sleep at night tho, you clearly lack braincells
No comparing Streep to Landsbury. Lansbury for the win.
yes, comparing. it's a matter of taste.
Always love hear Roger's take--ty
'Your life counts for something.' 😎
Have to watch both!
I would have kept the title as is, but I wouldn’t have given the corporation the name “Manchurian Global”; I would have made it more subtle.
US,and the rest of the world have to wake up
to the deceptions
this movie blew. 1962 all the way.
I always found this movie intriguing when I watched it when I was younger and it blew me away and it’s still like it to the day there’s a remake different scenarios but it holds up to so that
I like Rogers commentary on *Citizen Kane and Casablanca.*
The original version is light years better.
In no way was Streep remotely in the same universe as Lansbury. I loved Ebert, but sometimes his judgment switch was toggled to "off."
Clickbait. It's not "THE TRUTH!!111!!", it's an opinion. It may be a good opinion, but it's not "THE TRUTH!!111!!"
The remake is weird, it was edited to sh*t and doesn’t flow very well, as though the studio butchered the final cut to make it more mainstream. Also the whole conspiracy is very lame compared to the original with Sinatra.
I like the 1962 film a lot more.
Me too.
I haven't seen the original, except for the last 10 minutes.
@@reneedennis2011 I hope you check it out. Frank Sinatra who was a good friend of then President Kennedy had the film pulled for a number of decades because the following year in 1963 Kennedy was gunned down and Mr. Sinatra felt either guilt that a film was somehow responsible for causing his friend's death, or because perhaps he felt concerned for the Kennedy family, or that life imitated art, or maybe a combination of each of those. It's a bizarre film with some interesting camera work and techniques by John Frankenheimer.
@@Gravyballs2011 Thanks for the advice and the info!
I think that Frank Sinatra did a passable job on the original Manchurian Candidate, but I think he was cast because he was Frank Sinatra. Another actor could have done a much better job than Sinatra's one-note performance.
The heart and soul of the original film was Angela Lansbury, who really does come across as the most intelligent, ruthless person in the room, disregarded by the moronic men in power around her, and very nearly succeeds in her mission of revenge against the world. You can almost empathize with her in her quest, and that's a very hard feat for a villain to achieve, especially one who uses her own son as a disposable pawn in her plans.
Another remake that only highlights the lack of creativity of Hollyweird.
Jill Biden was inspired by this movie, poor old Joe!
His wires have been cut. Something is going to happen regardless of who wins the election.
I like the recent version more ..
I like both versions & both have believable satirical undertones...1962 was an allegory to Communism, whereas the remake is more Corporations
@Randy White no it's not the recent one was more realistic because that's what actually happens and it was a scary truth
@@ScoonertunaI love the old movie , and I feel like the new one is extremely accurate as to what goes on behind the scenes in Washington DC
A good arbiter of taste if you prefer the ridiculous newer version.
She's no Angela Landsbury.
Did Shaw kill in 1962 but get killed in 2004?
weak remake......did not have angela L...
fed
Such a boring remake. "Oh no, a big influential corporation is trying to get slightly more influence than they already have!"
lol!!!
fed
Okay Roger, if you do say so yourself lol
Wow
why Shaw shot the wrong target in the end? don't quite understand
Shaw is shot or the shooter? Marco killed Shaw
Damn, I never noticed how old Roger must have been when he died. I like to watch the old clips from the 80s. This ain’t that.
Heck this is before the thyroid cancer destroyed his chin and glands. He had a roof exit from life.
6666 views lol
This movie got Demme killed
He died like 14 yrs later
🤔
Cancer takes a long time
Rob Ford was murdered by them. Jimmy Kimmel even tweeted "Rob Ford looks like JFK" , they couldn't have done the propaganda of 2020 with him alive. He had too much power & they couldn't control him.
OBAMA AND KAMALA
1962 acting actually sucked
Have you actually seen the film?
🤣
Please go sit at the kiddy table.