|
Grex > Cinema > #62: Grex goes to the movies-- the Spring Movie Review item | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 278 responses total. |
gregb
|
|
response 230 of 278:
| 
Jun 9 17:28 UTC 2004 |
Re. 225: I didn't "dislike" it. I was just dissapointed that it didn't
match the spirit of the first two. I'm glad that ther'll be another
film and I'll certainly be there opening weekend to see it.
|
glenda
|
|
response 231 of 278:
|
Jun 9 20:05 UTC 2004 |
Film 4 is due out in 2005, film 5 is scheduled to be out in 2007. That will
take it out to the current book.
|
pgreen
|
|
response 232 of 278:
|
Jun 9 20:06 UTC 2004 |
Hi, Glenda!
|
gregb
|
|
response 233 of 278:
|
Jun 10 17:01 UTC 2004 |
Re. 231: Any idea why not 2006?
|
anderyn
|
|
response 234 of 278:
|
Jun 10 18:31 UTC 2004 |
Probably due to special effects?
|
gregb
|
|
response 235 of 278:
|
Jun 10 18:55 UTC 2004 |
Doubtful, considering how many FX were in the last two films.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 236 of 278:
|
Jun 10 19:10 UTC 2004 |
My guess would be to avoid a 3-year gap between film 5 and film 6
(assuming there ever is a film 6.) The spacing between the books
has been growing greater and greater and the films take at least
a year of work to produce *after* the book has been finished.
Keeping the series relatively evenly spaced-out is probably somewhat
important to the producers.
|
glenda
|
|
response 237 of 278:
|
Jun 10 21:34 UTC 2004 |
Some of the extra time is so that the kids can actually spend some time at
real schools. I just read an article about the actor that plays Malfoy. He
said that he is putting college off for a year to finish filming #4. There
was a gap between 3 & 4 so that one of them could catch up on school work.
It has to be hard working around school and labor issues with kids of this
age on projects this big.
|
tod
|
|
response 238 of 278:
|
Jun 11 17:28 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
tpryan
|
|
response 239 of 278:
|
Jun 13 04:38 UTC 2004 |
Saw Shrek2. Okay, Love Potion No. IX. I got it.
Also saw Harry Potter. I wanna ride on the Magic Bus.
Saw "Saved" earlier tonight. A bit of commentary on "Christian Life".
|
remmers
|
|
response 240 of 278:
|
Jun 13 14:40 UTC 2004 |
I would like to report that "The Day After Tomorrow" is the best
movie I ever saw in Sedalia, Missouri.
|
gull
|
|
response 241 of 278:
|
Jun 13 16:01 UTC 2004 |
I'm guessing it's also the ONLY movie you've ever seen in Sedalia,
Missouri?
|
richard
|
|
response 242 of 278:
|
Jun 15 04:33 UTC 2004 |
Saw "Harry Potter and Prisoner of Azkiban"-- my feeling is that the movie is
too rushed, and certain details are sacrificed as a result. I know the studio
didn't want a three hour+ movie, but the books are so detailed that you can't
do them justice without enough time. It was still a good movie but I wanted
it to be more than it was.
I shudder to think that they might try to bring "Goblet of Fire" in at 2 hrs.
and 25 mins or less
|
mcnally
|
|
response 243 of 278:
|
Jun 15 05:43 UTC 2004 |
I also saw "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban" this weekend
and agree with Richard's criticism. Even at 2 1/2 hours it was rushed
to the point where substantial story cuts had to be made, eliminating
crucial exposition and obfuscating character motivations.
Discussing the movie afterwards with Cathy it was clear to both of us
that the problem is only going to get worse as the series progresses.
If you look at the books next to each other on the shelf each book is
noticably thicker than the volume that precedes it and the last couple
of books have taken a huge leap over the first three. This can't help
but be a problem for filmmakers trying to continue the series.
I thought that the new look for the series was interesting. A much,
much larger portion of this movie takes place outside Hogwarts' castle,
much of it in the outdoors. The protagonists wear "muggle" clothes
throughout all but a small part of the movie. The lesser characters
have largely slipped away into the margins; they get very little screen
time and do almost nothing to further the story. And of course the new
Dumbledore sucks, but what are you going to do when your original actor
dies?
|
albaugh
|
|
response 244 of 278:
|
Jun 15 15:01 UTC 2004 |
Took the boys to see Garfield. Not great. Good clean family fun, I guess.
This screen version of eats, but he doesn't, can't, ... well, you'll just have
to see the film to understand what I'm hinting at. :-)
|
twenex
|
|
response 245 of 278:
|
Jun 15 15:15 UTC 2004 |
Didn't even know there was a Garfield film. Thanks for the warning.
|
tpryan
|
|
response 246 of 278:
|
Jun 15 16:24 UTC 2004 |
They should have gotten Gandalf to stand in for Dumbledore.
|
remmers
|
|
response 247 of 278:
|
Jun 15 17:19 UTC 2004 |
Re #241: No, I've actually seen two movies in Sedalia, Missouri.
"Day After Tomorrow" recently, and "Forces of Nature" a few years
ago. Didn't think either was particularly good, but "Day After
Tomorrow" was marginally better.
|
tod
|
|
response 248 of 278:
|
Jun 15 17:24 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 249 of 278:
|
Jun 15 18:09 UTC 2004 |
They've got to be concerned in Redondo Beach - they are onlly 59 feet above
MSL.
|
tod
|
|
response 250 of 278:
|
Jun 15 18:10 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
krj
|
|
response 251 of 278:
|
Jun 17 19:44 UTC 2004 |
Mike in resp:242 :: in press stories around the time of the first
Harry Potter movie, director/series producer Chris Columbus was saying
that the fourth book would have to be split into two films.
But I have not heard anything to indicate that this realization
is affecting the current filming of Potter #4.
|
twenex
|
|
response 252 of 278:
|
Jun 17 19:46 UTC 2004 |
Are the King and Queen of Spain financing the next one?
|
gull
|
|
response 253 of 278:
|
Jun 18 17:03 UTC 2004 |
Re resp:250: I thought it was pretty funny when the reporter got smacked
by the billboard.
|
richard
|
|
response 254 of 278:
|
Jun 19 02:40 UTC 2004 |
THE TERMINAL-- New Steven Spielberg/Tom Hanks movie about a tourist from
a small eastern european country who arrives at JFK airport in New York,
and finds out that while he was in the air, there was a coup d'etat in his
country. Since his government has been overthrown, his passport and his
visa are invalidated and he is not allowed to enter the U.S. He is also
not allowed to leave the U.S. for the same reasons. He is stuck in limbo.
This is like Tom Hanks' "Survivor" movie, except instead of being stranded
on a desert island, he is stranded in a big airport with no money (he
can't exchange his currency since his government was overthrown), no
friends and little command of english. We follow Hanks, as this eastern
european tourist, around as he tries to eat, sleep and survive in a
hostile, foreign environment where the authorities tell him that he
"doesn't count", that he has fallen into diplomatic limbo and is expected
to just disappear into the airport crowds.
The story sounds preposterous, to get stuck in an airport for more than a
year, but it is in fact based on a true story. There really was/maybe
still is a guy who got stuck in such limbo at DeGaulle airport in Paris
and ended up living there. The story is true, they just changed the
location to New York.
The movie is a bit long. A 2 1/2 hour movie where the entire movie takes
place in a busy airport can get tedious. JFK airport, where this takes
place, is my home airport and I've had my share of travel issues there
over the years. But anyone who has ever had to spend a night in an
airport due to missed flights, bad weather or airline snafus, will be able
to identify with this movie.
Hanks and Catherine Zeta Jones, who plays this stewardess who keeps coming
through the airport off of flights and befriends him, and Stanley Tucci as
the head of airport security, are all terrrific. The movie is I think
about the natural desire we all have to have identity and be acknowledged,
and the fear you can have of finding yourself becoming irrelevant and
disappearing into the system and wondering if anybody cares.
The ending is particularly poignant, which I won't give away except to say
Hanks's character has come to America to finish something his late father
started. Because by doing so, he can have closure and feel like he has
somehow expressed the importance of his father's life, that he was alive,
that he was somebody. The irony is that in the course of doing this, he
has seemed to lose his own identity, lose his country, his passport, his
money. This is a Spielberg film though, so you know it has a happy
ending. Spielberg would never leave one of his characters trapped at JFK
airport forever!
Good movie, as long as you don't hate airports.
|