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.

[JD10367]

Originally Posted by Miss Understood

I'll be going to see Angels & Demons this evening at an IMAX here. I'm sure it's probably been discussed. I apologize for my laziness in not reading back through the thread, but I'm going to ask.... Anyone seen this? What's your take? Worth the money?

It was just okay. Similar to "Da Vinci Code", interesting to see the sights of Rome.

On another note: "Angels and Demons" was not made in IMAX. Don't be fooled by the theater chains who might USE the IMAX theater to run regular 35-mm. films. It's a 35-mm. film, being run through a 35-mm. projector. It just happens to be showing on a large screen, where it won't fill up the screen and will look just as grainy and blurry as it would in a regular 35-mm. theater. It's about as "IMAX" as if you showed the film on the side of a building.

[JD10367]

Saw "The Hangover" the other day, and "Land Of The Lost" today. "Hangover" was good, but not as good as everyone's making it out to be. (Granted, the theater was empty, and it's hard to get into a comedy when no one is around you, laughing.) Conversely, "Land Of The Lost", while not heading to the Academy Awards, was better than people have been giving it credit for.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Originally Posted by JD10367

It was just okay. Similar to "Da Vinci Code", interesting to see the sights of Rome.

On another note: "Angels and Demons" was not made in IMAX. Don't be fooled by the theater chains who might USE the IMAX theater to run regular 35-mm. films. It's a 35-mm. film, being run through a 35-mm. projector. It just happens to be showing on a large screen, where it won't fill up the screen and will look just as grainy and blurry as it would in a regular 35-mm. theater. It's about as "IMAX" as if you showed the film on the side of a building.

God that movie was a turd compared to the book.

[JD10367]

Originally Posted by Raised On Riots

God that movie was a turd compared to the book.

Both of them ("A&D" and "DaVinci") were nowhere near as good as the book. In general, it's hard for a film to match a book's complexities or narrative ability, or to fully render what your own imagination can provide (which probably wasn't Tom Hanks with a mullet). But, conversely, I think if you read the books you'd probably enjoy (or, at least, tolerate) the films better.

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Originally Posted by JD10367

Both of them ("A&D" and "DaVinci") were nowhere near as good as the book. In general, it's hard for a film to match a book's complexities or narrative ability, or to fully render what your own imagination can provide (which probably wasn't Tom Hanks with a mullet). But, conversely, I think if you read the books you'd probably enjoy (or, at least, tolerate) the films better.

I read both, but I though DVC was the better film adaptation.

[QuikSsurfer]

Going to see Drag Me to Hell tonight with a lady friend... I'm looking forward to seeing it for the second time...
I'm also looking forward to having some birthday sex afterwards.

[Miss Understood]

Originally Posted by JD10367

It was just okay. Similar to "Da Vinci Code", interesting to see the sights of Rome.

On another note: "Angels and Demons" was not made in IMAX. Don't be fooled by the theater chains who might USE the IMAX theater to run regular 35-mm. films. It's a 35-mm. film, being run through a 35-mm. projector. It just happens to be showing on a large screen, where it won't fill up the screen and will look just as grainy and blurry as it would in a regular 35-mm. theater. It's about as "IMAX" as if you showed the film on the side of a building.

I was thinking it was on the IMAX. I was incorrect. Land of the Lost was playing on the IMAX. No thanks. I did see A&D though. I liked it better than the Da Vinci Code. I think Transformers is playing on the IMAX when it comes out. I definitely want to see it on IMAX.

[Reaper16]

Angles & Demons, just like Da Vinci Code, is as good as the book, imo. Which is to say, not at all.

[JD10367]

Originally Posted by Miss Understood

I was thinking it was on the IMAX. I was incorrect. Land of the Lost was playing on the IMAX. No thanks. I did see A&D though. I liked it better than the Da Vinci Code. I think Transformers is playing on the IMAX when it comes out. I definitely want to see it on IMAX.

Actually, "Land Of The Lost" would be pretty good in IMAX. In my experience, IMAX makes any movie better. Hell, even "Speed Racer" was enjoyable in IMAX.

But "Land Of The Lost" isn't in IMAX, either. Again, don't confuse a movie chain using its IMAX Theater to run 35 with an actual IMAX presentation. They might advertise "...in the IMAX theater!" but unless they actually say "in IMAX", they're fooling you. A regular film shown on a regular projector in an IMAX theater will look just like a regular film; it'll just have a lot more unused screen around it. Consider it like serving a McDonald's hamburger on a giant china plate, LOL.

The most recent IMAX films were "Star Trek" and then "Night At The Museum 2". "Transformers 2" will be in IMAX, with some scenes filmed using the IMAX camera like they did with "The Dark Knight" and, in addition, I believe "Transformers 2" will have IMAX-exclusive extra content (a few more minutes of robots fighting or something). After that will be "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince", which will not only be in IMAX but will have select scenes in IMAX 3D; for the last Potter film, the last 20 minutes or so was in 3D, but I don't know if they're going that route again or doing what they did for "Superman Returns" (where they had short scenes interspersed throughout the film, such as the airplane rescue and the boat rescue). After "Prince" there's nothing on the IMAX docket until Disney's Jim Carrey version of "A Christmas Carol" in early November, and then James Cameron's "Avatar" in December. That's a big hole, so something else will probably be in IMAX--perhaps "G.I. Joe" in August, no one knows right now.

[irishjayhawk]

Originally Posted by Raised on Riots

I read both, but I though DVC was the better film adaptatio

True but it doesn't say much.

Originally Posted by Reaper16

Angles & Demons, just like Da Vinci Code, is as good as the book, imo. Which is to say, not at all.

Doesn't mean you can't enjoy the books while realizing they aren't great fiction.

[JD10367]

Originally Posted by QuikSsurfer

Going to see Drag Me to Hell tonight with a lady friend... I'm looking forward to seeing it for the second time...
I'm also looking forward to having some birthday sex afterwards.

"Drag Me To Bed"?

[JD10367]

Originally Posted by Reaper16

Angles & Demons, just like Da Vinci Code, is as good as the book, imo. Which is to say, not at all.

I enjoyed the books as well as the films. They weren't life-changing, they were simply a novel historical-speculation-based twist on the spy/chase mystery, much as "National Treasure" was.

[Reaper16]

Originally Posted by irishjayhawk

True but it doesn't say much.




Doesn't mean you can't enjoy the books while realizing they aren't great fiction.

Likewise with the movies.

[JD10367]

Originally Posted by Reaper16

Likewise with the movies.

That's the thing about movie critics which bug me. They can never be an accurate judge of how you'll like a film because, number one, they don't know your intellect. I'm not saying how "smart" or "stupid" you are, more like, "what you think is funny". And, number two, it also depends on your mood. Sometimes I want a burger, sometimes I want a fancy meal. Sometimes I want deep reading, sometimes I want a fluff sci-fi or mystery novel to kill time. Sometimes I want classical music, sometims I want heavy metal. And sometimes I want a dumb-ass movie like "Land Of The Lost", other times I want soul-moving cinema like "Schindler's List" or the first half of "Saving Private Ryan" or something.

[Reaper16]

Originally Posted by JD10367

That's the thing about movie critics which bug me. They can never be an accurate judge of how you'll like a film because, number one, they don't know your intellect. I'm not saying how "smart" or "stupid" you are, more like, "what you think is funny". And, number two, it also depends on your mood. Sometimes I want a burger, sometimes I want a fancy meal. Sometimes I want deep reading, sometimes I want a fluff sci-fi or mystery novel to kill time. Sometimes I want classical music, sometims I want heavy metal. And sometimes I want a dumb-ass movie like "Land Of The Lost", other times I want soul-moving cinema like "Schindler's List" or the first half of "Saving Private Ryan" or something.

You can do easy-going summer movies the right way... or you can make Land of the Lost. The relatively mindless summer movie needs to actually be entertaining. And if you found Land of the Lost entertaining, then... um... I don't know how to respond to that.