| Author |
Message |
|
| billyweeds |
 Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 9:45 am |
 |
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
Me too. I loved IG, especially the incredibly suspenseful opening sequence in which Waltz earned his Oscar in one fell swoop.
And as Gary knows, I agree 100 percent with his assessment of the girl talk in Death Proof. |
|
|
| Back to top |
  
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 10:55 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
I got a kick out of how he made IB an homage to the history of film making and I enjoyed the scenes showing workings of the projectors and projectionists back before it all became robotic. And I have to say here that I have never run into more problems with films in the theatre than I have since the old projectors were replaced by the modern machines. I can remember only one time when there was a technical problem during movie and that was at the beach where an old wooden building was converted into a theatre and not really technical because the projectionist (probably drunk) mixed up the reels. Now I run into a problems about one in five times I go to the movies and it doesn't matter what theatre I'm at. The only time it was an enjoyable experience was when I went to see War of the Worlds with Marc, in Taos. He told me beforehand that things always went wrong at that theatre. After a series of crazy goof ups it finally projected the images upside down. Marc announced to the audience that the management advised the customers to stand on their heads to watch the movie.  |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 6:32 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
| I liked that he slipped in the lie that nitrate is so explosive, people weren't allowed to bring reels of film on public transportation. Minor truth imbedded in this: silent movie nitrate prints, if they are deteriorated, can be explosive. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Sun May 30, 2010 7:37 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
| They didn't claim it was explosive, they said that it bust into flame many times faster than paper. And they didn't explode in the movie theatre they burst into flame when the pile of film was ignited. The explosions occurred when the timed dynamite ? that Pitt's crew brought into the theatre. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2010 7:34 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
| Lovely & Amazing is everything its title suggests and more. Nicole Holofcener is truly a brilliant filmmaker. |
Last edited by billyweeds on Tue Jun 01, 2010 3:54 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2010 9:27 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
marantzo wrote: They didn't claim it was explosive, they said that it bust into flame many times faster than paper. And they didn't explode in the movie theatre they burst into flame when the pile of film was ignited. The explosions occurred when the timed dynamite ? that Pitt's crew brought into the theatre.
Partially wrong, Gary. The reel wasn't allowed on the streetcar because it was feared to be flammable. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Tue Jun 01, 2010 8:06 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Quote: Partially wrong, Gary. The reel wasn't allowed on the streetcar because it was feared to be flammable.
Isn't that what they said in the film? Or was that thing about it being not allowed on streetcars a fiction and that's what you were amused by?
Billy, I'm glad you finally saw Lovely & Amazing. Yes, the title is accurate in both senses. Among many other things, I just loved that affair with the clueless movie star. He was terrific. [/b] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Tue Jun 01, 2010 8:55 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
| It was/is only flammable if it's deteriorated, and even then it's impossible to tell which deteriorated print is dangerous and which is not. Whole cans of silent films are never opened for fear doing so will cause an explosion. But that has nothing to do with taking contemporary film onto streetcars, as IB pretended. A good joke, for those in the audience who caught it. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Tue Jun 01, 2010 9:19 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
| I don't know how many audience members would have much knowledge about that. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Tue Jun 01, 2010 10:19 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
marantzo wrote: Quote: Partially wrong, Gary. The reel wasn't allowed on the streetcar because it was feared to be flammable.
Isn't that what they said in the film? Or was that thing about it being not allowed on streetcars a fiction and that's what you were amused by?
Billy, I'm glad you finally saw Lovely & Amazing. Yes, the title is accurate in both senses. Among many other things, I just loved that affair with the clueless movie star. He was terrific. [/b]
It was Dermot Mulroney, and he always is. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marj |
| Posted: Tue Jun 01, 2010 11:21 pm |
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 10497
Location: Manhattan
|
For anyone who likes backstage stories, a documentary called, Every Little Step may be of interest. It's the audition process for the 2006 revival of A Chorus Line, and it's is filled, especially during the commentary, with backstage gossip. And before you ask Joe, there is some allusions to Michael Bennett's proclivity towards tyranny, but considering he isn't there to defend himself, that's kept to a minimum.
Still considering this had to be filmed with permission from all of the actors, it's quite a feat. And while it may not be the best film of its genre, it's certainly worth a look. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marc |
| Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 4:50 am |
|
|
Joined: 19 May 2004
Posts: 8424
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| gromit |
| Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 2:58 pm |
|
|
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 9016
Location: Shanghai
|
| Is the Cybill Shepherd-Elliott Gould remake of The Lady Vanishes (1979) worth bothering with? |
_________________
Killing your enemies, if it's done badly, increases their number. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:55 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
gromit wrote: Is the Cybill Shepherd-Elliott Gould remake of The Lady Vanishes (1979) worth bothering with?
Forgot it even existed. The word was horrible on its release. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:57 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
