response 234 of 278:

Jun 10 18:31 UTC 2004

Probably due to special effects?

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.

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.

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

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.  :-)

response 246 of 278:

Jun 15 16:24 UTC 2004

        They should have gotten Gandalf to stand in for Dumbledore.

response 252 of 278:

Jun 17 19:46 UTC 2004

Are the King and Queen of Spain financing the next one?

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.

response 256 of 278:

Jun 19 19:41 UTC 2004

SAVED

My friend Kate wanted to see a movie this weekend. I let her choose 
because there arent any movies out there that I feel I just *have* to 
see. She chose "Saved". 

I hadnt even heard of it so I did a quick search on the internet. When 
I first read a plot synopsis I wasnt sure this would be a very good 
movie. I heard that it was about high school students at a Christian 
high school. One of them got pregnant . I figured it would be some 
weird drama about teen pregnancy in what I often view as the rigid 
world of fundamental Christianity. 

My little web search turned up two other tidbits about this movie. One 
was that it starred Macaulay Culkin which made me even more worried 
about how this film would turn out. I wasnt really sure how well he 
would be as an adult actor. The second thing I learned was that this 
movie was produced by Michael Stipe. I have long been a fan of Michael 
Stipe's and I have listened to interviews with him on the subject of 
religion. I also know that he is from the south which is a place often 
referred to as "The Bible Belt" by us yankees in our more rude moments. 
This had me curious. Maybe this wasnt the Christian melodrama I was 
expecting. 

It turned out to be quite different from my expectations. In a general 
way, while there were aspects of the dramatic and I found myself crying 
a couple of times, it was mostly a comedy. And quite a good one at 
least from my point of view which is one of an outsider peering into 
the world of fundamental christianity with it's christian rock groups 
and clean cut kids and "Jesus loves You" bumper stickers. 

I was also pretty impressed with the way it used satire to explore some 
of the more fundamental Christian values such as forgiveness, 
tolerence, kindness, etc. In a strange way, it was almost a modern film 
adaptation of that familiar bible story, The Good Samaritan.

Macaulay Culkin, btw, seems to have come into this own as an actor. The 
rest of the cast was pretty good too. All in all, I was pleasantly 
surprised and probably will let Kate pick the movie again ;)