Mar 242012
 

Christ.  If there’s anything that will make me stop going to the movies forever, it’s paying a higher price to not see a movie in 3-D.  I avoid watching new movies in 3-D whenever I can–I think it’s an expensive, gimmicky way to get people into theaters and it has very little payoff in terms of making it a more exciting experience (“Avatar” was a rare exception, though I still didn’t find it as mind-blowing as some did).

So, in a nutshell…  Fuck.  That.  Shit.

Writing for Screen Trade Magazine Joe Paletta, CEO of Spotlight Theaters, announces that cinemas will begin to eliminate the premium charges on 3D movies and raise the prices of 2D movies to make up the difference. This gives me the rage. 3D movies give me a headache and eye-strain, and I actively avoid them. I hate the idea that Id be charged a premium on the few 2D movies I can find in order to subsidize 3D screenings.

via Boing Boing

Mar 222012
 

This new review of “American Psycho” makes me want to see it again.  I forgot how funny it is, and I do love a black comedy.  It was adapted and directed by a woman, and who best to portray this misogynist Wall Street sociopath?  It’s a hoot, and probably my favorite Christian Bale flick.  (Something I didn’t know:  he studied Tom Cruise’s behavior to get that “smiling and laughing but utterly empty inside” look.)  I’ve read the book as well, and I have to say that the movie is easier to digest.  The book is a different animal–far more dense and grotesque, worth reading if you can get through it.

Based on Bret Easton Elliss novel of the same name and directed by Mary Harron, who also wrote the screenplay with Guinevere Turner, “American Psycho” is a brilliant and scathing satire of Reagan-era yuppies and their shallow, consumer-driven lifestyles. And in particular, of the behavior of Wall Street investment bankers in the 80s; all those privileged white males in designer suits – the same type whod later go on to crash the economy in 2008.

In terms of story and plot, its essentially a psychological thriller with horror, satire, and black comedy added to the mix. It focuses on a wealthy but unstable Wall Street yuppie named Patrick Bateman whos secretly a psychopath or sociopath driven to commit increasingly horrific and bizarre crimes in the wake of his mounting psychosis – from murdering a homeless man and his dog, to keeping a head in his fridge, while all the while striving to conceal the truth from others.

via blogs.suntimes.com

Jun 092011
 

The Alamo Drafthouse not only has a no-texting-during-movies policy, but they’re willing to throw people out if they don’t put their goddamn phones away.  This girl was recently tossed out and called back to bitch them out, so naturally they turned it into a brilliant YouTube PSA!

There are few things more annoying than someone so selfish she thinks its perfectly okay to text in the middle of a dark movie theater.  On the flipside, there are few things more amusing than when said texter gets kicked out of the theater and later calls back to leave a lengthy, profanity-laced rant on the theaters voicemail.

via The Consumerist

You know, if every theater had the guts to make texters leave the theater, I might just go to the movies more often.  The last thing I want to see is half a dozen assholes with their brightly-glowing little screens tapping away for two hours.  If you can’t switch off to enjoy a film without “multitasking”, just go home and watch a DVD or something.  Jesus.

Apr 072011
 

Last night we watched the latest Narnia movie, which was disappointing in many ways.  The “Dawn Treader” book (along with “A Wrinkle in Time”) kicked off my love of fantasy/sci-fi novels when I was in 6th grade, and it was a downer to see the story mangled into yet another Hollywood formula film with a contrived plot and an overblown mega-battle at the end.  What gives?  Here’s some of the stuff I had a problem with.

  1. First off, check out the movie poster.  What’s with Aslan’s HUGE mouthlines?  Were they trying to give him an enormous grin or something?  Lions don’t have that kind of mouth, it just doens’t open that wide.  He’d have a flip-top head if his mouth opened like that.  Truly bizarre!  There’s a different version in which he looks like an actual lion, not some freakish gaping-mouthed monster, so I wonder why this version is so common.
  2. The green mist and those human sacrifices to appease it:  what utter horseshit!  Why was this necessary?  The characters were tempted by many things in the story, and they didn’t need this mist following them around to cause that temptation.  The mist was only a plot device which ultimately led the characters to…
  3. The Dark Island.  In the film this is the Big Enemy Which Must Be Destroyed.  The book clearly lacks a central enemy, it’s simply a string of encounters and adventures for the characters, who in turn learn and grow from the experiences.  The Dark Island only one of many things the characters encounter on their voyage.  The filmmakers obviously felt the need for some kind of boogeyman which must be defeated, so they picked this island and added an extremely disgusting sea serpent for the Giant Battle towards the end.  (The book does have a sea serpent in it at some point.)
  4. When Eustace is caught stealing food by Reepicheep, the mouse swats the hell out of him with the flat of his sword up and down the length of the ship.  He doesn’t use it as an opportunity to coach Eustace in swordplay, he simply humiliates him because he finds him extremely irritating (which he was, much more so in the book).
  5. The Dufflepuds are entirely pointless in the movie.  There’s all this buildup with them when they’re invisible, then once you can see them, the old man Coriakin shoos them away so you don’t get any explanation as to who/what they are.  And the reason they were invisible?  To protect them from the bullshit green mist, of course!  Coriakin is also turned into a grim old man with a grim message about defeating the Dark Island, whereas in the book he’s kind of a dottering old eccentric.
  6. The way Aslan removed the dragon curse from Eustace is not nearly as dramatic or meaningful in the film.  In the book, the thick dragon skin is literally torn from Eustace’s body by Aslan’s claws, then he is lowered by Aslan into a pool of water which heals and cleanses him.  It’s clearly a reference to baptism and the washing away of sins.  But in the movie, Aslan just paws the ground a little and roars the dragon curse away.  YAWN.  Yeah, I can see how this scene might have been too disgusting for film, but it makes for quite a scene in one’s mind.  Too bad.
  7. The scene at Ramandu’s Island was nearly pointless, since the film didn’t show Ramandu at all, only his shiny daughter the Star.  This means they also couldn’t do the whole bit with the birds coming down from the sun, etc.  What a shame, it’s kind of beautiful in the book.
  8. The last leg of the voyage to the End of the World is completely missing from the movie:  the crystal-clear waters, the merpeople (?) who follow and try to tempt Lucy into joining them, the feeling of rejuvination the characters feel when they drink the seawater, which is sweet and “like drinking light”, etc.  They do mention the water being sweet in the movie, and the scene where they slowly row through the water lilies was kinda neat, but that’s about all we got.
  9. For a series with such Christian overtones, the movie left out the biggest Aslan=Jesus bit from the book:  when the lamb welcomes them to the end of the world and then turns into Aslan the lion.  Too obvious for moviegoing audiences, maybe?  (The film did retain the bit where Aslan tells the children he is in their world but they must learn to know him there by his other name.)

Having said all that, I do think the movie got a couple of things right.  Eustace was a huge prick (though still not as bad as in the book), and the Dufflepuds looked just as I’ve imagined them.  But mostly the movie just rushed from one special effects scene to another, all strung together with a boilerplate plot.  What a shame.

Nov 022010
 

Frankly I’m disappointed that so many of my fellow gaywads are offended by this “electric cars are so gay” joke.  *massive eyeroll*  Seriously–you can’t find something more relevant to get worked up about?  Why are we so goddamned sensitive about such minor stuff?  This “gay=lame” joke has been around for 20 years, it’s dumb and douchey but we should be able to handle it.  I know that every homo in the world has the hots for Anderson Cooper (*another eyeroll*), but come on.  Get over yourselves and start being outraged by things that actually deserve the attention, people!

The latest film to find itself on the wrong side of the funny fault line is “The Dilemma,” the upcoming Ron Howard movie that took a big PR hit late last week after CNN anchor Anderson Cooper complained about its trailers use of the word “gay” in a joke.

The trailer, which Universal pulled from theaters on Friday, opened with Vince Vaughn making a presentation about electric cars in which he says: “Electric cars are gay. I mean, not homosexual, but my-parents-are-chaperoning-the-dance gay.”

Cooper, who had been hosting a weeklong CNN series about bullying against gays and a series of suicides by gay teens, appeared on “The Ellen DeGeneres Show,” where he said that he was “shocked” to see the trailer in a movie theater. Although the joke probably falls into the category of mildly amusing and not so horribly offensive, Cooper said he was disturbed that “they thought that it was OK to put that in a preview for the movie to get people to go and see it.”

“The Dilemmas” gay gag hardly broke new ground. Gay jokes are lobbed back and forth all the time on TV and in comedy clubs. And Ive always been a stout defender of the rights of artists to speak their minds without censorship or cultural restraints.

via Seattle Times Newspaper

Sep 232010
 

One of the reasons I don’t go out to movies very often anymore is that there are too many distractions.  You’ve got people chomping loudly on snacks, plastic wrappers crackling, children (sometimes clueless adults) yapping, and 20 minutes of brain-melting commercials before the show.  The latest annoyance?  Cellphones.  Or, rather, people who insist on using them during the movie.  The screens light up the entire area around them, drawing peoples’ eyes involuntarily away from the entertainment they paid an outrageous price for.  If you can’t go two hours without checking your goddamn Facebook/Twitter/texts/whatever, why the hell did you pay $10 to come sit in a dark room with dozens of other people who can?  Put your phone away–it’s fucking rude and it makes you look like a royal twat.  Which you are.  (I don’t know if you can tell, but these people really irritate me!)

Anyway, one theater chain in Snottsdale Scottsdale, AZ is putting up posters which make it clear that texting during movies is makes you a Grade-A annoyance.  However, I don’t think posters are quite enough, since people like this will gladly ignore them.  I think the usher should go over and shine a flashlight right in the faces of these self-absorbed pricks so they get the message.

Predictably, one person quoted in the story makes it a free speech issue.  Nice try, but sorry–this isn’t about freedom of speech, it’s about you being a royal twat!

Officials at Harkins Theatres hope to gently steer patrons away from what has become an all-too-common practice. The Scottsdale-based chain is accelerating a campaign against texting during movies.

The campaign includes replacing promotions of coming attractions in poster cases with “No Texting During Movie” signs. The Arrowhead Harkins near Bell Road and Loop 101 had one inside the lobby this week. More are expected the weekend of Sept. 24.

Harkins’ nationwide campaign will run through Christmas.

“We’re asking that moviegoers have respect for other guests around them,” Harkins spokesman Bryan Laurel said.

The chain has heard from “plenty of people” whose moviegoing experience was ruined by texters, he said.

“People feel they aren’t disturbing others but someone getting on Facebook or Twitter, that quick burst of light can be distracting,” Laurel said. “You wouldn’t text in church or in an important meeting, and we’re trying to create some social rules here, too.”

via azcentral.com

Sep 052010
 

Fascinating:  a fan edit of the 2nd and 3rd Matrix movies which cuts out all the Zion crap and refocuses the attention on the main characters, thus making two crappy sequels into one decent movie.  I haven’t watched it but the comments say it’s very well done and a LOT more enjoyable than the actual sequels.  I do have to say, though, that by not including Morpheus’ death as well as Trinity’s (temporary) death, it may be lacking a certain something.  But I just might check it out anyway.

After the fantastic movie “The Matrix” everyone was awaiting the sequels, but somehow the writer/directors were not able to continue the epic they started in the way they began.  In our humble opinion they lost themselves in detail, wanted to much and definetly to show off with effect orgies.  We tried to continue the Matrix withing the Matrix wherever possible. Leaving out the Zion scenes was a major improvement of pace and plot development and the most interesting thing about it is that these scenes are not missed when left out.  We tried to be smart and reduced the Matrix sequels to the max.  Also we cut out several scenes that just did not feel right or felt to be unnecessary, e.G. when Morpheus talks to Link about trust, it just feels wrong and Morpheus seems to become a stereotype of himself.  When Trinity dies on the rooftop and is saved by Neo with an inside heart massage, it just is to much to take (at least for the men in our group).  The ending scene that most people criticised about Revolutions becomes real, when the Zion battle is just not fought.

via Fanedit.org

Aug 062010
 

I was as wowed by “Avatar” as everyone else, but the one big problem I had with it was the 3-D.  It really didn’t add much to the film for me.  My imagination is good enough that I can immerse myself in a film without having to wear a pair of plastic glasses, thank you very much!  It also made the colorful, lush CGI environments look dark and muddy.  I had the same regrets after watching Pixar’s “Up” in 3-D–it sucked the visuals dry.

This is why I’ve sworn that I’ll never see another movie in 3-D.  I just can’t do it.  The whole thing is simply a gimmick to raise ticket prices while giving you a mediocre “experience” with muted, drowned-out colors and a merely passable 3-D effect.  To me it’s a huge distraction from the film, so until they can do this without the need for glasses, I’m out.

Besides, once a movie like “Jackass 3-D” comes out, doesn’t that pretty much signal the end of the fad?  The Consumerist seems to think so.

When the blue-skinned do-gooder hippies of Avatar were unleashed on movie screens last December, nearly three quarters of its opening weekend revenue came from people watching it in 3D.  Since then, just about every major action or animated movie has been released in 3D, but often to diminishing results.

via consumerist.com

Aug 052010
 

Holy shit, what a movie!  It's been a long time since I've seen such an engaging and complex story, one that challenges you rather than spoonfeeding you the answers.  At one point the movie has four simultaneous storylines, one nestled within another like an onion, all skillfully arranged and edited together to be easily followed if one pays attention to the details.  The special effects were incredible but not overused, and the use of time-warped musical cues within the "story onion" is genius.  It's also a very long movie, clocking in at around 2.5 hours, but it's well worth the time.

If you haven't seen it yet, do it now!  Even if you're at work, just drop what you're doing and go grab a ticket.  Your boss will understand.  Then come back and read these for more insights:

Jun 292010
 

Ebert reviews “Eclipse”, and as expected, he’s gleefully bitchy. Even when he doesn’t exactly hate a movie, he knows how to review it with the withering mockery it deserves.

Much leads up to a scene in a tent on a mountaintop in the midst of a howling blizzard, when Bella’s teeth start chattering. Obviously a job for the hot-blooded Jacob and not the cold-blooded Edward, and as Jacob embraces and warms her, he and Edward have a cloying cringe fest in which Edward admits that if Jacob were not a werewolf, he would probably like him, and then Jacob admits that if Edward were not a vampire — well, no, no, he couldn’t.  Come on, big guy.  The two of you are making eye contact.  Edward’s been a confirmed bachelor for 109 years.  Get in the brokeback spirit.

via rogerebert.suntimes.com