Movies

[irishjayhawk]

Yeah, so I saw a lot of movies this weekend.

Elizabeth: The Golden Age - Mediocre, at best. Slow and dragged on. Shorten it to 2 hours and it's golden. It's not, so it fails.

Michael Clayton - Amazing. Everything about it is awesome. However, it's VERY complex and mind bending. You have to think, so be prepared. I still feel like I'm missing key details of exactly what happened. Gotta see it again.

Across the Universe - Perfect is one word that comes to mind. It just works. And, contrary to many people I bet, the movie is best viewed sober. Trust me.

[Fire Me Boy!]

This is what Javert should have been....

[QuikSsurfer]

Originally Posted by ThaVirus

I didn't like VHS much. The short stories all started off OK with decent tension but ended up going the 'wierd' route, which I was not a fan of...

Oh, except the final haunted house story- that one was too legit.

Also, I may just be a bit mad because I Redbox'd it last night only to find out that its on Netflix instant today..

Damnit! It must have just gotten added.. Ah well, I liked it enough to own it.
I agree though, a few of the stories (one in particular - the frequency ghost thing in the woods) were a bit too strange.

[ThaVirus]

Total Recall was pretty good. To start, I'll say I love that they included the 3 tit chick and I'd give Kate Beckinsale the fiercest ****ing dickin' of her life. Other than that, the story was ok, I guess. Nothing major, the basic premise was a lot like the original (going to Rekall, wanting a secret agent memory and turning out to be an actual spy), but many, many things were changed or just completely different. I didn't really have a problem with that either, the whole Mars and alien oxygen generator thing were pretty weird to begin with...

Spoiler!

I will say I was half-expecting Matthias to have that little baby tumor dude on his chest though That was a bit of a disappointment.

Also, I know the movie was a complete farce and nothing in it was realistic whatsoever, but something that REALLY bothered my suspension of disbelief at the end:

Spoiler!

When Colin Farrell wakes up at the end and Jessica Biel's character is there (who actually turns out to be Kate Beckinsale in disguise), he throws her up against the wall for not having the gunshot wound on her hand. While he's holding her against the wall, the medic tries to grab him and Beckinsale's character, who's been trying to kill Farrell the entire ****ing film, stabs the medic instead of him.

What.The.****?

That made absolutely no damn sense. She was out for his blood from the moment we found out she was an agent, even going so far as to attempt to kill him against her orders to take him alive. Yet when she has him right there, off guard, she goes for the kill on the harmless medic (he was attacking Farrell, not her) and not the "best intelligence officer alive" who had successfully evaded her entire army for the previous 2 hours (of film).

Whatevskis though, it was an entertaining flick.

[ThaVirus]

The Watch was also pretty good. I'm normally not a fan of Vince Vaughn (he's the same dude in every damn movie- Vince ****ing Vaughn- it's lame) and I don't find Ben Stiller particularly funny (although he makes good movies), but it was still an entertaining watch..

Also, the soundtrack was pretty damn nice.

[KcMizzou]

Originally Posted by QuikSsurfer

Damnit! It must have just gotten added.. Ah well, I liked it enough to own it.
I agree though, a few of the stories (one in particular - the frequency ghost thing in the woods) were a bit too strange.

The first one was trippy as hell.

[frazod]

Originally Posted by Fire Me Boy!

This is what Javert should have been....

I wonder if they deliberately threw in some weak elements so as not to detract from people still going to see the stage play. While I enjoyed the movie and will certainly buy it when it comes out on blu-ray, that certainly won't stop me from shelling out big bucks to see the play the next time it comes to Chicago. Especially when you consider the top talent they had in the 10th and 25th anniversary concerts, pretty much everybody there completely blows away their movie counterparts.

The movie is no substitute for seeing the play. Not even close.

[La literatura]

Originally Posted by frazod

I wonder if they deliberately threw in some weak elements so as not to detract from people still going to see the stage play. While I enjoyed the movie and will certainly buy it when it comes out on blu-ray, that certainly won't stop me from shelling out big bucks to see the play the next time it comes to Chicago. Especially when you consider the top talent they had in the 10th and 25th anniversary concerts, pretty much everybody there completely blows away their movie counterparts.

The movie is no substitute for seeing the play. Not even close.

Have you read the book? You seem pretty passionate about Les Mis.

[frazod]

Originally Posted by Literature

Have you read the book? You seem pretty passionate about Les Mis.

Nope. I love the play, but not that much.

[ThaVirus]

Lawless and Looper were both great..

[Fire Me Boy!]

Originally Posted by frazod

I wonder if they deliberately threw in some weak elements so as not to detract from people still going to see the stage play. While I enjoyed the movie and will certainly buy it when it comes out on blu-ray, that certainly won't stop me from shelling out big bucks to see the play the next time it comes to Chicago. Especially when you consider the top talent they had in the 10th and 25th anniversary concerts, pretty much everybody there completely blows away their movie counterparts.

The movie is no substitute for seeing the play. Not even close.

I can't imagine any director worth his salt would agree to make something less than stellar. But you're right, the movie is no substitute.

Have you seen the 25th anniversary version on stage? My wife and I saw it in Birmingham last year and were extremely disappointed. Aside from the performances (which weren't great), they completely redesigned the stage and set, using all the projected backdrops, no more turntable set; like the movie, they trimmed a little from many if not all of the songs, including completely removing Little People - which I still contend really undermines the effectiveness of his death scene/Little People reprise. We were pissed.

[frazod]

Originally Posted by Fire Me Boy!

I can't imagine any director worth his salt would agree to make something less than stellar. But you're right, the movie is no substitute.

Have you seen the 25th anniversary version on stage? My wife and I saw it in Birmingham last year and were extremely disappointed. Aside from the performances (which weren't great), they completely redesigned the stage and set, using all the projected backdrops, no more turntable set; like the movie, they trimmed a little from many if not all of the songs, including completely removing Little People - which I still contend really undermines the effectiveness of his death scene/Little People reprise. We were pissed.

Keep in mind, Macintosh was involved in this, and he still makes a ton of money off the play touring and probably didn't want to **** that up. (These things become so clear when you're completely cynical. )

The last time I saw it on stage I was also a bit disappointed. I probably saw the same one you did - definitely seemed like the JV cast, but I certainly didn't pay JV prices to watch them. One thing I noticed was that they sped up the tempo on some of the songs - it was almost like listening to an album on the 45 setting. And there were a few other tweaks I didn't care for.

The show was here a couple of months ago, and between my thoughts on the last performance I saw and anticipation of the film, I didn't go see it. Found out too late to get tickets that the production was much better than the last one. Oh well.

[Fire Me Boy!]

Originally Posted by frazod

Keep in mind, Macintosh was involved in this, and he still makes a ton of money off the play touring and probably didn't want to **** that up. (These things become so clear when you're completely cynical. )

The last time I saw it on stage I was also a bit disappointed. I probably saw the same one you did - definitely seemed like the JV cast, but I certainly didn't pay JV prices to watch them. One thing I noticed was that they sped up the tempo on some of the songs - it was almost like listening to an album on the 45 setting. And there were a few other tweaks I didn't care for.

The show was here a couple of months ago, and between my thoughts on the last performance I saw and anticipation of the film, I didn't go see it. Found out too late to get tickets that the production was much better than the last one. Oh well.

I'm not sure how much Cameron McIntosh was involved or if he just was given a credit because he produced the stage version... could be either. I guess I'm not as inclined to think there's some overarching conspiracy here.

The one we saw in B'ham was also really "up tempo." We figured the musical director had a hot date and needed to get out at a certain time.

We might give the stage show one more shot, but if it's as disappointing as the last time we saw it, I doubt we'll drop the coin again. Which is a major bummer, because between the two of us we've seen it 15 times on stage (me nine, her six).

[JASONSAUTO]

Talking about stage shows...

I saw The Lion King on Broadway and it was ****ing awesome.

I couldn't believe how cool the set up and everything was.
that was quote some time ago but I would go see it again in a heartbeat
Posted via Mobile Device

[Zebedee DuBois]

Viewed Hyde Park on the Hudson with the missus yesterday. I enjoyed it, though I wouldn't categorize it as 'must see'. The movie did a good job of conveyed the personal nervousness and tensions of the characters upon meeting and interacting with each other - and Murray as FDR charmingly gliding through the group, putting everyone else at ease.

[KCUnited]

I caught Lawless last night. I don't think they nailed the characters like Winter's Bone, but it was enjoyable.

Spoiler!

obviously wished the ending would've been more br00tal