Films Thread

[BobDylan]

Did you think they would present it any other way?

 

I figured they'd take the mystery/crime route. Shows you what I know.

 

Jude Law & Robert Downey Jr., IIRC.

 

I don't follow.

Edited July 18, 2009 by BobDylan

[BobDylan]

[Kyyle23]

I figured they'd take the mystery/crime route. Shows you what I know.

 

This is hollywood we are talking about here. They dont like to make movies by the book, they like to "Re-Imagine" them.

 

 

That said, I do have hope that this movie will be good. I am a fan of RDJ

[BobDylan]

That said, I do have hope that this movie will be good. I am a fan of RDJ

 

I'd save your money and wait to rent...

[Kyyle23]

I'd save your money and wait to rent...

 

You dont have to worry about that. I dont go to many movies nowadays, they come out on DVD pretty quick anymore.

 

In fact, I cannot even recall the last movie I saw that I didnt go to with my daughter. LOL, thats sad

[BobDylan]

You dont have to worry about that. I dont go to many movies nowadays, they come out on DVD pretty quick anymore.

 

In fact, I cannot even recall the last movie I saw that I didnt go to with my daughter. LOL, thats sad

 

And we can steal them online, too!

[southsider2k5]

The whole love story was just flat out hard to watch. "Shoelace Harry." The f***?

 

 

And god damn was the Twilight trailer the single worst trailer I have ever seen. How shameless and totally poorly put together. You know the movie will be god awful when they are basically admitting a cash-in with the trailer.

 

The first movie sucked. What are the odds the second will be any better?

[ThunderBolt]

I wasn't a big fan of the 6th one. I've enjoyed all of the HP movies but this one just didn't do it for me. I enjoyed it but it wasn't on par with the prior movies and seemed much more like a placeholder movie (to get them to the final two movies). Just not that much action, funny scenes, or cool effects and usually HP movies are loaded with all of them.

The director had a weird motif with staircases too, but it was a stunningly beautiful film to watch, the performances were pretty solid, and I thought the script was fairly decent for what the book offered.

[shipps]

I am a little biased because I tend to love any Iraq war movies or TV shows but I f***ing loved The Hurt Locker. The director found little subtle ways to shoot an explosion or gun shot a little different than what you normally see (there are only so many ways that you can do it). See it if you are into Generation Kill or the like.

[Brian]

I am a little biased because I tend to love any Iraq war movies or TV shows but I f***ing loved The Hurt Locker. The director found little subtle ways to shoot an explosion or gun shot a little different than what you normally see (there are only so many ways that you can do it). See it if you are into Generation Kill or the like.

 

Damn you! I wanna go see it so bad, but would have to go to Evanston. Hoping it goes wider soon.

[NorthSideSox72]

Finally got a chance to watch the trailers in this thread.

 

--The Sherlock Holmes movies looks awful.

 

--D-9 I am not sure, could be really good.

 

--Hurt Locker looks intriguing.

 

--Big Fan looks very good.

 

[HuskyCaucasian]

Finally got a chance to watch the trailers in this thread.

 

--The Sherlock Holmes movies looks awful.

 

--D-9 I am not sure, could be really good.

I agree on both.

[Chisoxfn]

yea, i didnt like it NEARLY as much as I loved HP5 (my fav of the HP movies).

 

6 tried to include the romance part way too much and didnt include nearly enough fighting. It just seemed herky-jerky and disjointed most of the time. Slughorn was annoying as hell in the beginning but got better as it went on.

 

oh... and not NEARLY enough Tonks.

Very disappointing flick

[Soxbadger]

I actually liked the new Harry Potter.

 

I also went at 10 PM in Chicago, so the crowd may have been different.

 

I mean it wasnt earth shattering, but I think it set up the final 2 movies. Ive never read the books.

[Leonard Zelig]

I actually liked the new Harry Potter.

 

I also went at 10 PM in Chicago, so the crowd may have been different.

 

I mean it wasnt earth shattering, but I think it set up the final 2 movies. Ive never read the books.

 

They left out some pretty big parts of the book.

[Balta1701]

They left out some pretty big parts of the book.

I've always found that evaluating this sort of film based on "What was left out from the book version" always, always makes the film look worse. Special efforts should be taken to try to evaluate those sorts of movies based on the quality of the film itself, because otherwise you're always left wanting. The only way to turn that much literature in to live action would be probably a 20 hour miniseries on television.

[Leonard Zelig]

I've always found that evaluating this sort of film based on "What was left out from the book version" always, always makes the film look worse. Special efforts should be taken to try to evaluate those sorts of movies based on the quality of the film itself, because otherwise you're always left wanting. The only way to turn that much literature in to live action would be probably a 20 hour miniseries on television.

 

Yeah, I know they couldn't include everything and obviously haven't in the other movies. But

the huge battle in Hogwarts and Dumbledore's funeral were pretty big moments in the book. I guess the director felt we needed two more Quiddich scenes.

[ThunderBolt]

Yeah, I know they couldn't include everything and obviously haven't in the other movies. But

the huge battle in Hogwarts and Dumbledore's funeral were pretty big moments in the book. I guess the director felt we needed two more Quiddich scenes.

The director felt that the

Battle of Hogwarts

would render the one in Film seven rather pointless. I for one think he has a point.

[LosMediasBlancas]

I think I mentioned this film after seeing it at the show, but has anyone rented 'Two Lovers' with Joaquin Phoenix yet?

[HuskyCaucasian]

The director felt that the

Battle of Hogwarts

would render the one in Film seven rather pointless. I for one think he has a point.

did he say this publicly? or is this just a theory?

 

If it's true, I completely understand. Which makes me excited about 7, part 2. It's going to be epic!

 

The funeral needed to be in this movie though. Unless they plan on starting 7 with it.

[ThunderBolt]

did he say this publicly? or is this just a theory?

 

If it's true, I completely understand. Which makes me excited about 7, part 2. It's going to be epic!

 

The funeral needed to be in this movie though. Unless they plan on starting 7 with it.

It’s absolutely true and I’ll try to find the link. The producer and director have timed out the

last battle

to about 30 minutes, as of now, naturally, this is subject to change. I've heard rumours about them starting film seven with the funeral too. Although i felt the wand vigil served it's purpose.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Although i felt the wand vigil served it's purpose.

I heard a few people cry in the theater.

[BobDylan]

I've always found that evaluating this sort of film based on "What was left out from the book version" always, always makes the film look worse. Special efforts should be taken to try to evaluate those sorts of movies based on the quality of the film itself, because otherwise you're always left wanting. The only way to turn that much literature in to live action would be probably a 20 hour miniseries on television.

 

Not really.

 

I haven't seen/read any of the Harry Potter series, so I'm not going to comment on that specifically. Certain books are impossible to portray on screen well. Lolita comes to mind. In cases of these books, well, the audience is s*** out of luck unless they read the book. These books are rare. Adapting from text to screen is a simple process. Where it gets ruined is generally in the business side of things. I imagine if Hollywood was less worried about how much of a cash cow their movie is, they'd sacrifice less creativity to cater to a focus group and concentrate more on making a good film.

 

That said, filmmaking and writing are two different arts. A certain amount of the story is bound to be lost in translation, but that doesn't mean we need to cut out big, important chunks of a story to 'make it work' -- in cases like this, Hollywood should be required to open the film with: "Based on the Harry Potter novels."

[Kyyle23]

Not really.

 

I haven't seen/read any of the Harry Potter series, so I'm not going to comment on that specifically. Certain books are impossible to portray on screen well. Lolita comes to mind. In cases of these books, well, the audience is s*** out of luck unless they read the book. These books are rare. Adapting from text to screen is a simple process. Where it gets ruined is generally in the business side of things. I imagine if Hollywood was less worried about how much of a cash cow their movie is, they'd sacrifice less creativity to cater to a focus group and concentrate more on making a good film.

 

That said, filmmaking and writing are two different arts. A certain amount of the story is bound to be lost in translation, but that doesn't mean we need to cut out big, important chunks of a story to 'make it work' -- in cases like this, Hollywood should be required to open the film with: "Based on the Harry Potter novels."

 

I agree, I think "Theatre of the Mind" is the part of any book that is lost in translation. People see certain scenes happening certain ways, and get really pissed when someone else interprets it their own way. A believe a large portion of Stephen Kings books are ill-adapted to the screen because a lot of the books he writes are in the first person, and you are viewing what people are thinking rather than what they are doing. Sometimes it works ok, other times you have Dreamcatcher which was exactly what you said, a Hollywood exec worrying about the cash cow and bringing in more audience. That book was so much more than a simple alien invasion.

Edited July 21, 2009 by KyYlE23

[NorthSideSox72]

Not really.

 

I haven't seen/read any of the Harry Potter series, so I'm not going to comment on that specifically. Certain books are impossible to portray on screen well. Lolita comes to mind. In cases of these books, well, the audience is s*** out of luck unless they read the book. These books are rare. Adapting from text to screen is a simple process. Where it gets ruined is generally in the business side of things. I imagine if Hollywood was less worried about how much of a cash cow their movie is, they'd sacrifice less creativity to cater to a focus group and concentrate more on making a good film.

 

That said, filmmaking and writing are two different arts. A certain amount of the story is bound to be lost in translation, but that doesn't mean we need to cut out big, important chunks of a story to 'make it work' -- in cases like this, Hollywood should be required to open the film with: "Based on the Harry Potter novels."

All true, except that ALSO, some books have too much going on to really fit into a normal length movie. Any of Clancy's books come to mind, only one of which was made into a decent film (Red October), and that still was missing huge plot lines, major characters, etc.