response 310 of 342:

Mar 9 13:01 UTC 2006

And they'd have to offer something comparable to Netflix's huge catalog.
 Movie Beam restricts you to 100 current offerings, Netflix offers
thousands of movies.  They're simply not comparable services.

response 312 of 342:

Mar 9 15:03 UTC 2006

This weekend (+ 2 vacatgion days) was busy for movies... Saw a tv-aired
version of 'Gone in 60 Seconds' (when visiting someone with cable) and
it was okay. The cars were awfully pretty.

Also saw 'Unleashed' with Jet Li, Morgan Freeman and Bob Hoskins. The
story is that a small time Godfather (Hoskins) raised Li's character to
be a weapon- a dog to be unleased on those who didn't pay their debts.
Li even wears a collar and when it is removed he goes straight to
ass-kisking mode, until his 'Uncle' calls him off and replaces the
collar. This goes well until Danny (Li) meets up with a blind piano
tuner (Freeman). That meeting begins Danny's journey down the path of
redemption and discovery- of course. It's an entertaining movie, though
nothing particularly new in plot or dialogue. The fight scenes are fun
to watch- especially when remembering that Jet Li alters his fighting
style for every role, to work with the personality of the character he's
playing. That was fun to watch in The One wherein he played two
characters and both fought differently due to their personality
differences.  Anyway, 'Unleashed' was entertaining with some fun fight
scenes.

Oh, actually went to the theater and saw 'Chronicles of Narnia.' As the
hubby put it 'It was better than I expected.' I really enjoyed it, and
as one reviewer put it- the humans looked almost as real as the animals!
Aslan was fabulous! Oh, and I discovered that my new eyeliner is indeed
tear proof. ;) The characters were a great deal of fun, even when I
wanted to smack one or two- or just hurry them up. Tilda Swinton was, as
usual, wonderful. I love the story as well, the concept of having a
wardrobe that can take you to a magic land, and they did a wonderful job
in making the movie.

My brain did hurt though... First watched 'Domino' with Kiera Knightly.
It was more twisted than I expected, though not more violent (however, I
had better warning about that part). I'm not really sure I could say if
I liked it or not, but there were some aspects that I really liked.
Watching someone on screen with a wicked right jab- used on people many
in real life would like to hit- was fun. That said, I wouldn't want to
know that person in real life.

Then I watched the newly made 'Pride and Prejudice'- also staring Kiera
Knightly. The brain went ow. This adaptation... there were bits that I
really enjoyed- the casting for Mr Collins, as well as his
characterization decisions, was excellent. The giggliness of the Bennets
was nice to see, and Kiera Knightly did a fine job as Elizabeth Bennet.
Wickham... had the look, but he didn't come across as sympathetic enough
to me. Plus so much of it felt rushed to me in the beginning, even the
speed at which the characters spoke seemed rushed. From the middle to
the end it was better in terms of pacing. There were some extractions-
Mr & Mrs Hurst were no where to be seen, nor was Kitty Lucas. Those I
could live with. Overall I DID enjoy this version quite a bit. Matthew
MacFadyen did an admirable job as Mr. Darcy, even if he is no Colin
Firth. ;)  Rosamund Pike as Jane was very well cast, though I spent much
of the movie trying to figure out where I'd seen her before (as the
hubby did when I made him watch a few snippets). Turns out she was in
'Doom.' That probably would have hurt my brain more, but as I didn't
realize this while watching the movie I was okay. Jena Malone, seen in
'Saved' did very well as Lydia. Judi Dench as Lady Catherine was just a
fabulous choice.

And that I believe sums up the weekend. I'm sure others may like doing
more exciting things on their vacations- but I'm a fan of snuggling on
the couch with my hubby and watching movies. :)

response 314 of 342:

Mar 9 16:34 UTC 2006

That's right, I'm sure I've seen that Bond movie too. Just wasn't coming
to mind- it's been awhile since I'd seen that movie, and only about a
week since I'd seen "Doom." She's quite pretty.

response 316 of 342:

Mar 9 21:04 UTC 2006

Aside from Colin Firth (...takes a moment...) the BBC/A&E version also
has what, 6 hours to tell the story- not 2-3. That's a big advantage
right there. I've seen just about every version I can get my hands on...
the strangest Darcy I've seen was when he was played by Laurence
Olivier... All I'll say is that he would have made an excellent Bingley.
;) Hubby knew MacFayden from MI5- and just thinks he's brilliant, so he
didn't quite agree with my about Colin Firth. But what does he know? ;)

There's a modernized version, titled Pride & Prejudice, wherein the
characters are roughly college age, and I'm guessing Mormon. It was
actually a lot of fun. The 5 girls are roommates not sisters (well,
Lydia is Kitty's older sister), along with a few other changes, but it
worked for me.

response 318 of 342:

Mar 9 21:23 UTC 2006

Very true. As far as modernized versions go- I have to go with Bride &
Prejudice as my favorite. All the way. With the colors and the dancing... 

response 320 of 342:

Mar 9 21:41 UTC 2006

*laughs*

response 322 of 342:

Mar 10 15:37 UTC 2006

I'm not real fond of people making a fool of themselves, over and
over... So Bridget Jones was fun once, but not something I'd want to see
multiple times. Though, I did, of course, love Colin Firth. ;)

response 324 of 342:

Mar 10 18:17 UTC 2006

One of the funniest reviews I read about the latest Pride and Prejudice 
was that they thought Kiera Knightly was a bad choice for Lizzy because 
she was too pretty. While Elizabeth Bennet isnt ugly, she was generally 
considered less beautiful than her older sister Jane. But, I have to 
admit that I thought Knightly was well cast in the role. I think she is 
very beautiful by today's standards but I think a more soft look was 
preferred in the early part of the 19th century. She has angular 
features. She also did a very good job getting Elizabeth's personality 
across. 

response 326 of 342:

Mar 10 20:30 UTC 2006

Looks aren't everything

response 328 of 342:

Mar 10 20:54 UTC 2006

Simply based on opinions of the viewers.

response 330 of 342:

Mar 12 19:22 UTC 2006

Last night I saw Harry Potter IV. Since the third one, which I thought was the
worst of the first three, was critically acclaimed for the very things I
thought were reprehensible and this was critically acclaimed for being more so
in them, I didn't expect to like it. After seeing it, I did like it. The "dark"
aspects of the previous one are finally appropriate here, and are much less
extreme than the previous one. The only thing keeping me from saying that this
one was the best one is that it was too rushed -- two movies would have been
better, if they could have shot that fast. (For what it's worth, I am *not*
treating any of the movies except the first one in isolation. They are series
movies, and there had better be some onscreen explanation for any breaks
between each one and the previous one; in addition, they are adaptations of
novels, and there had better be an obvious good reason for making changes or
additions [cuts are given more leeway because it's nearly guaranteed to be too
long anyway]. The job of adaptation so far has been very good, but part of my
problem with the third is that it broke abruptly with the second one in setting
and tone. Getting rid of the moving staircases was a good idea, but it should
have happened in the design stages for the first one, not in the third one.)

response 332 of 342:

Mar 13 20:06 UTC 2006

That reminds me of an earlier prophetic movie about television, "A Face
in the Crowd" from 1958.  It foresaw the power of television to
transform political campaigning into "selling" and "marketing"
candidates, the same way you'd sell soap or toothpaste.  Written and
directed by Budd Schulberg and Elia Kazan, respectively, the same pair
that did "On the Waterfront", and starring Andy Griffith as a sleazy TV
show host who combines the worst characteristics of Arthur Godfrey,
Elvis Presley, and Pat Robertson.  Great performance by Griffith.  I'd
like to see both that and "Network" again.