|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 269 responses total. |
aruba
|
|
response 21 of 269:
| 
Mar 31 20:57 UTC 2003 |
Re #18: Not much of Airplane in The Core, but it was a fun movie, if you
don't expect too much from the science. At least they *tried* to do a
different kind of science fiction.
|
mary
|
|
response 22 of 269:
|
Mar 31 22:10 UTC 2003 |
Two movies and a play over the past weekend - all were
interesting and worth seeing.
"Gerry" is about a minimalist as a film can get. I'm really
glad I knew almost nothing about it before seeing it so I
won't share plot here. Very cool film. Richard, you'd like
it, but I'm not sure about anyone else.
"The Russian Ark" left me wishing I'd listened to those few
brief moments of Russian history when they were offered, way
back when. The entire movie was taken in one long shot.
You are given a tour through the Hermitage and the past
300 years. Stunning.
|
remmers
|
|
response 23 of 269:
|
Mar 31 23:38 UTC 2003 |
About "Gerry", I'll note that it was directed by Gus Van Sant
("Good Will Hunting", "About Forrester") and stars Matt Damon
and Casey Affleck. Knowing these facts will tell you nothing,
however, about what the movie is like.
"The Russian Ark" is indeed spectacular and stunning. Over
2000 extras re-creating some eras in Russian history in real
time with nary a single slip-up. Eye candy of the highest
order. It's claimed to be the longest single-take movie in
motion picture history. I don't know about that -- Andy
Warhol's "Empire" might have it beat but certainly can't
compete in the eye candy department.
|
omni
|
|
response 24 of 269:
|
Apr 1 15:52 UTC 2003 |
I've been on a DVD acquisition kick.
Time Bandits is a recent addition, as is S.O.B.
I recently purchased VideoHound and am still pawing through it.
Cant wait to get Ben-Hur on DVD!!
|
goose
|
|
response 25 of 269:
|
Apr 1 22:46 UTC 2003 |
Rented "One Hour Photo" sunday night...not as creepy as the description
but Robin Williams was awsome. It makes a person think.....
|
mynxcat
|
|
response 26 of 269:
|
Apr 1 22:48 UTC 2003 |
yeah, it makes you vow never to send film for processing again
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 27 of 269:
|
Apr 1 23:24 UTC 2003 |
Manhunter already did that.
|
gull
|
|
response 28 of 269:
|
Apr 2 14:36 UTC 2003 |
I finally rented _Attack of the Clones_ last night.
It was worth seeing, but it could have been so much better. There's
clearly a pretty compelling story here, but it's largely one of
political intrigue. Lucas does not do drama well, and he sure as heck
can't write a love scene. The bad writing combined with some really
substandard acting by Hayden Christensen means that during the first
half of the movie, which should be full of suspense, you end up boredly
waiting for the explosions to start.
Once the fighting starts, things get fairly fun. The battle scenes are
exciting, and we get to see some fairly well-choreographed light saber
battles. Getting to see Yoda kick ass is probably worth the rental fee
by itself. Some of the scenes seem below Lucas' usual standards, though
-- the speeder chase near the beginning of the movie, while it's set
against some lovely backgrounds, lacks the energy of the cycle chase
from "Return of the Jedi", the pod race from "The Phantom Menace", or
even the police chase in "The Fifth Element". From most directors it
would be good enough, but coming from Lucas it's a bit disappointing.
|
tod
|
|
response 29 of 269:
|
Apr 2 18:21 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
scott
|
|
response 30 of 269:
|
Apr 2 19:20 UTC 2003 |
The only Star Wars movie with good fighting was "Phantom Menace" - "Attack
of the Clones" has actors with minimal coaching doing the fights, and it
shows.
|
scott
|
|
response 31 of 269:
|
Apr 2 23:01 UTC 2003 |
I need to see "The Two Towers" again - I realized that my Yoda voice could
be repurposed as a Gollum voice.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 32 of 269:
|
Apr 3 07:17 UTC 2003 |
This Star Wars geek really could care less.
|
scott
|
|
response 33 of 269:
|
Apr 3 14:09 UTC 2003 |
Which means that you do care, at least some? :)
|
gizlnort
|
|
response 34 of 269:
|
Apr 3 17:06 UTC 2003 |
I saw Ringu, a lovely Japanese film upon which the Ring is based. Fascinating
flick....deep story that involved an intersting look at spirtualism in
combination with modern views. Pardon the lack of details but I don't want
to spoil it for anyone who has not seen it.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 35 of 269:
|
Apr 3 23:04 UTC 2003 |
resp:33 Sure, but I decided to overlook the shortcomings.
My opinion?
Hayden Christiansen may have had a lackluster performance, but I think
it wasn't necessarily inaccurate of how awkward, impulsive, hot-
tempered teenage boys can be, actually.
As far as Natalie Portman being miscast, well, hmm.. first of all, she
is supposed to be Leia's mom.. and she was much younger supposedly
when we last saw her.
The part I thought was lame was the cafe scene.. I would rather see
aliens be exotic-looking than try to emulate Heartland Americana.
The material is a bit more interesting when you get Expanded Universe
information.. such as is included in www.starwars.com. Supposedly,
Yoda heard Qui-Gon in the Force with Anakin's disturbance.
We still don't have the final product. If what a friend told me is
true, after Episode III runs through the theaters, all six Star Wars
movies will be available in a DVD boxed set with more goodies.
I also think that these current movies are just a cash cow to generate
bucks for other projects-- Lucas has admitted himself that he has
wanted to have money to do movies that might not get made otherwise.
The valid criticism is probably that Lucas is using too much CGI and
not enough real acting, which is taking away from the heart and soul
of the pictures. It was nice frosting on the old movies, but the new
ones are like eating mostly frosting.
There is, of course, scads of novels and comic books out there that
continue plotlines and fill in stories in between movies.. "Shadows Of
The Empire" is one I have failed to pick up and really would like to
read sometime.
Again, as a fan, I overlook the details. There is a comic book or two
where some storylines are pretty lighthearted and not part of the
canon.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 36 of 269:
|
Apr 3 23:05 UTC 2003 |
Is "Shangai Knights" any good?
|
furs
|
|
response 37 of 269:
|
Apr 4 02:51 UTC 2003 |
It's entertaining. It's not as good as Shangai Noon, but it's fun.
|
janc
|
|
response 38 of 269:
|
Apr 4 04:34 UTC 2003 |
I think Lucas suffers from a common problem: learning the wrong lessons from
an early success. Like he learned that he doesn't really need great actors.
Mark Hamill was good enough for Star Wars, why would he need good actors for
the prequels? (Never mind Alex Guinnes, Harrison Ford, and James Earl Jones).
Didn't need great dialogue for the first film, why would you need it for the
later films? People loved the special effects and sound in the first film,
let's focus on that instead.... Oh well.
|
remmers
|
|
response 39 of 269:
|
Apr 4 12:05 UTC 2003 |
For what it's worth, my favorite Lucas film is "American Grafitti".
|
janc
|
|
response 40 of 269:
|
Apr 4 13:48 UTC 2003 |
Which was packed full of unknown actors and actresses who quickly became
famous. (Well, Ron Howard was famous - but as "Opie" - he wasn't exactly
a bankable adult star.) I think this may have added to a "I can make my own
stars" attitude - which is fine, and partly true. Lucas doesn't need big name
actors to draw crowds to his films. But he still needs *good* ones to make
them work.
|
scott
|
|
response 41 of 269:
|
Apr 4 14:00 UTC 2003 |
The first Star Wars had some pretty impressive actors, and Carrie Fisher once
remarked she'd learned a lot just getting through some of the scenes with
Peter Cushing.
|
gull
|
|
response 42 of 269:
|
Apr 4 14:20 UTC 2003 |
Re #38: Sometimes I wonder, too, if he's gotten tired of the whole idea
of Star Wars movies and is just churning these three out to get them
over with.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 43 of 269:
|
Apr 4 22:14 UTC 2003 |
That's possible-- that's why I suggested the idea of them just being
money generators now.
|
jep
|
|
response 44 of 269:
|
Apr 5 02:29 UTC 2003 |
I've seen two movies in the last couple of weeks or so.
John and I saw "Piglet's Big Movie" last weekend, which is about
Piglet feeling unimportant but turning out to be pretty special to
everyone.
Do you know if you go to eBay and search for "Winnie the
Pooh", "books" as a category doesn't even appear?
I'm interested in correcting a misimpression. At age 6, my son is
right on the verge of being too old for Pooh movies. (At age 3, The
Tigger Movie was *fabulous*, though.) Were the Pooh books written for
preschoolers?
The other movie I saw was "Daredevil". It's much too violent for
John, but I enjoyed it myself. I think comic book themes make for
pretty good movies. This one was no exception.
|
janc
|
|
response 45 of 269:
|
Apr 6 04:12 UTC 2003 |
I think the original Winnie the Pooh books were meant to be read to children,
but they also seem popular with philosophers and mathematicians. I think the
target age range is possibly slightly older than the Disney Pooh.
By the way, Disney Pooh has very little relation to to the real Pooh. If you
search through all the original Pooh books, you'll find exactly one picture
of Pooh in which he might be smiling. Pooh is a perplexed bear, not a happy
bear. It is nearly impossible to find a picture of Disney Pooh in which he
is not grinning from ear to ear. Obviously an imposter. I suspect Disney
Pooh is really Mickey Mouse in a bear suit. At least we can be grateful that
Disney didn't give Eeyore a permanent smile.
|
