I saw Interstellar tonight, in IMAX. I'm still digesting the movie, but I'll say that the last 30 minutes or so do require some pretty heavy suspension of disbelief, but that's not necessarily meant as a negative. Technically it's deeply impressive, not quite in the same league as last year's Gravity but still with plenty of striking shots and moments.
This was my first time seeing a movie at the Assembly Row IMAX theater, and I was a little underwhelmed, especially considering the ticket price ($17.50). The screen is only maybe 50% as large as the one at Jordan's in Reading, and there were a few times during the movie when the music was loud enough to obscure dialogue. Now that could just be how the movie's sound was mixed, or it could have something to do with the IMAX sound system.
I will say that the stadium seating lets you go up about four rows from the entry aisle and be vertically at the middle of the screen's height, which I find is ideal for seeing IMAX movies. And if you go to one of the earlier showings in the day it's cheaper; I think the first two shows are $12. (I just checked and for comparison, all the shows at Jordan's are $12.75.) If you can't get to Reading and you don't want to go downtown the IMAX at AMC Assembly Row is a decent option: it's T accessible, the theaters are clean, and the staff is pleasant. But with IMAX, I've found that bigger is better, plus you can get Richardson's ice cream in Reading.
Showing posts with label Movie-Going. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Movie-Going. Show all posts
06 December 2014
08 April 2014
Catching Up
I know there was no TWiA last weekend. We were busier than usual and I hadn't gathered much decent material for it during the week, plus Comcast did their "watch all the HBO stuff you want free online this week only" thing again. I decided to watch the first two seasons of Veep, which is an outstanding show and I'm really glad I did, but it took up a lot of time that I might otherwise have been spending online looking for interesting stuff for TWiA.
Then on Sunday we went to see Captain America: The Winter Soldier, which was excellent, really just as good as The Avengers. I'm not going to spoil anything, but I will say that plenty of significant stuff happens that will directly impact next year's Avengers sequel and the rest of the Marvel universe. And Guardians of the Galaxy, which is part of that universe and comes out in August, looks just ridiculous in the best possible way.
Then on Sunday we went to see Captain America: The Winter Soldier, which was excellent, really just as good as The Avengers. I'm not going to spoil anything, but I will say that plenty of significant stuff happens that will directly impact next year's Avengers sequel and the rest of the Marvel universe. And Guardians of the Galaxy, which is part of that universe and comes out in August, looks just ridiculous in the best possible way.
03 May 2013
A Look Back, Old Sport
You have probably seen an ad for, or at least heard about, the new movie adaptation of The Great Gatsby that's coming out next Friday. The publicity machine has been ramping up over the past month or so; next week Carey Mulligan (who plays Daisy) is scheduled to appear on The Daily Show, and the movie's director, Baz Luhrmann, is scheduled for The Colbert Report.
The movie was actually supposed to be released at Christmas but was postponed, probably due to production issues related to Mr. Luhrmann's decision to make it in 3-D. Yes that's right, a 3-D version of The Great Gatsby. Does that not make sense to everyone? (Don't worry, there will also be a 2-D version. There always is.) After all, this is the guy who made Moulin Rouge, and I'm sure he would have done that in 3-D if it was an option at the time.
Anyway, I'm very interested in seeing this movie, even if it's a complete disaster (which is a distinct possibility, and one which provides its own distinct sort of pleasure). It's one of my favorite books, and you may recall that I went to New York last year to see a six-and-a-half-hour play in which the entire text of the book is recited onstage.
With the release of the new adaptation, I thought it might be interesting to revisit the 1974 version starring Robert Redford and Mia Farrow. When it was released it was considered a flop; the director did not make another movie for almost a decade afterward. I saw it once, maybe 30 years ago, but I didn't really remember anything about it other than the cast, and that much of the filming was done in Newport, RI; as a child growing up in RI at the time, a movie production in the state was a big deal and it was covered pretty extensively in the media.
Conveniently, the movie is on Netflix streaming, so I sat down to watch it one afternoon last week. (Still one of the best things about being unemployed: you want to watch a movie at 2 pm? Go right ahead.) It's kind of long, about 2 hours and 20 minutes, and it kind of bogs down about an hour in, right around the point in the story that Gatsby and Daisy are getting reacquainted. This is probably because their relationship has zero chemistry, and because the Daisy of the book, a passionate and impulsive wild card, comes across onscreen as a vapid, vain airhead.
I think some of the blame for this has to be directed at Francis Ford Coppola, who adapted the book for this screen version. The story plods along, feeling much slower than the book, and the sense of this world, which is supposed to come across as a giant money-filled playground, ends up as tedious and antiquated.
On the positive side, Sam Waterston gives a nicely understated performance as Nick, the narrator and moral filter of the story. Karen Black goes in exactly the opposite direction in her portrayal of Myrtle Wilson, the doomed mistress of Daisy's husband Tom, and succeeds beautifully in her excess.
One other detail worth noting, especially for those interested in style: the production design is suitably sumptuous, and the clothes in the movie are uniformly fantastic. All the outfits for both women and men were designed by Ralph Lauren, and you can tell just by looking at them. (Whenever I watch a period movie like this, I can't help but wonder how men were able to stand wearing three-piece suits with stiff shirt collars in the middle of summer.)
I'm very ambivalent about the choice of Leonardo DiCaprio as Gatsby in the new movie. I've never been that big a fan of his work, and I was going to complain that he's too old for the role, but then I checked IMDB and Robert Redford was basically the same age, maybe a year younger, when he played Gatsby. But he comes across as younger onscreen, so we'll see if the same is true for Leo.
Although they are lesser characters, I am looking forward to Isla Fisher as Myrtle and Jason Clarke as her husband George, mainly based on the other work of theirs that I've seen. As for Tobey Maguire as Nick and Carey Mulligan, I'll have to reserve judgment until I've seen their performances.
The movie was actually supposed to be released at Christmas but was postponed, probably due to production issues related to Mr. Luhrmann's decision to make it in 3-D. Yes that's right, a 3-D version of The Great Gatsby. Does that not make sense to everyone? (Don't worry, there will also be a 2-D version. There always is.) After all, this is the guy who made Moulin Rouge, and I'm sure he would have done that in 3-D if it was an option at the time.
Anyway, I'm very interested in seeing this movie, even if it's a complete disaster (which is a distinct possibility, and one which provides its own distinct sort of pleasure). It's one of my favorite books, and you may recall that I went to New York last year to see a six-and-a-half-hour play in which the entire text of the book is recited onstage.
With the release of the new adaptation, I thought it might be interesting to revisit the 1974 version starring Robert Redford and Mia Farrow. When it was released it was considered a flop; the director did not make another movie for almost a decade afterward. I saw it once, maybe 30 years ago, but I didn't really remember anything about it other than the cast, and that much of the filming was done in Newport, RI; as a child growing up in RI at the time, a movie production in the state was a big deal and it was covered pretty extensively in the media.
Conveniently, the movie is on Netflix streaming, so I sat down to watch it one afternoon last week. (Still one of the best things about being unemployed: you want to watch a movie at 2 pm? Go right ahead.) It's kind of long, about 2 hours and 20 minutes, and it kind of bogs down about an hour in, right around the point in the story that Gatsby and Daisy are getting reacquainted. This is probably because their relationship has zero chemistry, and because the Daisy of the book, a passionate and impulsive wild card, comes across onscreen as a vapid, vain airhead.
I think some of the blame for this has to be directed at Francis Ford Coppola, who adapted the book for this screen version. The story plods along, feeling much slower than the book, and the sense of this world, which is supposed to come across as a giant money-filled playground, ends up as tedious and antiquated.
On the positive side, Sam Waterston gives a nicely understated performance as Nick, the narrator and moral filter of the story. Karen Black goes in exactly the opposite direction in her portrayal of Myrtle Wilson, the doomed mistress of Daisy's husband Tom, and succeeds beautifully in her excess.
One other detail worth noting, especially for those interested in style: the production design is suitably sumptuous, and the clothes in the movie are uniformly fantastic. All the outfits for both women and men were designed by Ralph Lauren, and you can tell just by looking at them. (Whenever I watch a period movie like this, I can't help but wonder how men were able to stand wearing three-piece suits with stiff shirt collars in the middle of summer.)
I'm very ambivalent about the choice of Leonardo DiCaprio as Gatsby in the new movie. I've never been that big a fan of his work, and I was going to complain that he's too old for the role, but then I checked IMDB and Robert Redford was basically the same age, maybe a year younger, when he played Gatsby. But he comes across as younger onscreen, so we'll see if the same is true for Leo.
Although they are lesser characters, I am looking forward to Isla Fisher as Myrtle and Jason Clarke as her husband George, mainly based on the other work of theirs that I've seen. As for Tobey Maguire as Nick and Carey Mulligan, I'll have to reserve judgment until I've seen their performances.
10 November 2012
At the Movies
I really want to see Skyfall (naturally), but I decided I didn't feel like dealing with opening-weekend madness. We did go to a movie last night, though: Argo. It was kind of a make-up for planning to go see it the previous two weekends, and failing.
It's a really good movie, quite tense and suspenseful. I have to give credit to Ben Affleck as a director. He has demonstrated good instincts in the projects he's chosen to direct, and his execution of them keeps getting better. It also has the feel of a movie from the time in which it takes place: there's a certain graininess to the image on screen, and the colors are appropriately washed out and muted.
As for the Bond movie, I think it merits seeing on an IMAX screen, so we're going to plan to see it at Jordans.
It's a really good movie, quite tense and suspenseful. I have to give credit to Ben Affleck as a director. He has demonstrated good instincts in the projects he's chosen to direct, and his execution of them keeps getting better. It also has the feel of a movie from the time in which it takes place: there's a certain graininess to the image on screen, and the colors are appropriately washed out and muted.
As for the Bond movie, I think it merits seeing on an IMAX screen, so we're going to plan to see it at Jordans.
05 September 2012
The Picture Just Got Bigger
When's the last time you saw Raiders of the Lost Ark? Oh, excuse me, Indiana Jones and The Raiders of the Lost Ark? It was probably a DVD that you own, or maybe a Blu-Ray. Well, starting this Friday you'll have one week to see the 1981 classic on an IMAX screen, which is, you know, super-big and has awesome sound.
Go to the IMAX website for details and to find a theater near you.
Go to the IMAX website for details and to find a theater near you.
31 July 2012
See It.
We made it to see The Dark Knight Rises tonight. I'm certainly not going to spoil anything, but I'll say it was very very good. It's a little longer than the second one, but it doesn't feel nearly as long as it is. It was a very satisfying conclusion to the trilogy (and now it's pretty clear that the three Nolan films are meant to be taken together as such).
One other thing, for those of you in my area: Showcase Cinemas offers a Tuesday discount: all movies are $7 all day. I think tickets are normally $11 and change, so if you can make time to see a movie on a Tuesday, it's a decent deal.
One other thing, for those of you in my area: Showcase Cinemas offers a Tuesday discount: all movies are $7 all day. I think tickets are normally $11 and change, so if you can make time to see a movie on a Tuesday, it's a decent deal.
07 July 2012
Counting Down
Just a reminder: we're now less than two weeks away from the opening of The Dark Knight Rises. Somehow, I have not seen the assault of advertising for this movie that I expected. Where are the TV commercials? Shouldn't they be everywhere by now?
29 May 2012
Classic Movie Alert
As I've mentioned in the past, the 1984 movie Repo Man is near and dear to my heart. The Harvard Film Archive is kicking off a retrospective series of director Alex Cox's work this Friday, June 1, with a screening of Repo Man at 7 pm. If you've never seen the movie, or have never had the opportunity to see it on a big screen, this is an excellent opportunity to absorb its glorious 80's satire.
23 May 2012
Great?
I kind of had to post this... the first trailer for Baz Luhrman's 3-D version of The Great Gatsby hit the internet yesterday. It looks just as bonkers as I expected, maybe even kind of in a good way? (You can see how conflicted I am about this.)
I did detect dialogue that comes directly from the source material, and regardless of what's coming out of the actors' mouths, it's certainly going to look magnificent on a big screen. The movie opens on Christmas Day. Anyway, enjoy...
I did detect dialogue that comes directly from the source material, and regardless of what's coming out of the actors' mouths, it's certainly going to look magnificent on a big screen. The movie opens on Christmas Day. Anyway, enjoy...
17 March 2012
You Can't Refuse
Once again, deadline week interfered with my life and blogging. So here's the bit I'd planned to toss out yesterday: Thursday was the 40th anniversary of the original release of The Godfather. The New York Times's City Room blog did a piece on the essential New Yorkness of the movie, and included a link to the paper's 1972 review.
06 March 2012
Silver Screen
Movie buffs, take note: this year marks the 70th anniversary of the release of Casablanca, one of the most beloved movies ever. The actual anniversary date falls in November, but according to HitFix, Turner Classic Movies is presenting a one-day screening of Casablanca in several hundred theaters nationwide on Wednesday, March 21st.
It's described as a "new digital transfer" so I'm not sure if that means the showings won't be on actual film (and I'm going to leave that argument for the hardcore cinephiles), but I think what's important is the fact that it will be possible to see Casablanca on a big screen. I've seen the movie several times, but not for many years, and I honestly can't remember whether or not I ever saw it in a movie theater.
Here's the list of theaters showing Casablanca. In the Boston area, you can see the movie at the AMC Fenway and Framingham, the Showcase Cinemas in Dedham and Revere, and several other locations.
It's described as a "new digital transfer" so I'm not sure if that means the showings won't be on actual film (and I'm going to leave that argument for the hardcore cinephiles), but I think what's important is the fact that it will be possible to see Casablanca on a big screen. I've seen the movie several times, but not for many years, and I honestly can't remember whether or not I ever saw it in a movie theater.
Here's the list of theaters showing Casablanca. In the Boston area, you can see the movie at the AMC Fenway and Framingham, the Showcase Cinemas in Dedham and Revere, and several other locations.
02 November 2009
That Was Intense
(I had originally intended to post this during October, so it's not quite as on-target as it might have been, but I'm going to forge ahead anyway...)
25 years ago this autumn, I first became acquainted with a movie that came to mean a great deal to me: Repo Man. Directed by Alex Cox, the twisted, dark-hunored, low-budget punk/sci-fi satire quickly became one of my favorite movies, and it still is.
According to IMDB, Repo Man premiered in May of 1984, and the Boston Globe archives show a review from July (which I unfortunately can't read or link to because they still expect people to pay for access to their archives), but I became aware of it after returning to school in the fall, and I first saw it at the Nickelodeon Cinema near campus (now gone) at the beginning of October.
It's long enough ago now that I don't remember who I saw it with the first time, but I do remember that it made such an impression on me that, for the rest of the month of October, I convinced different groups of people to see it with me every Saturday night. I ultimately saw the movie more than a dozen times, and of course I own the DVD (a gift from a fellow admirer).
What I loved most about it was its attitude, the perfectly encapsulated gleeful nihilism expressed in lines like, "The more you drive, the less intelligent you are" and "Ordinary fuckin' people... I hate 'em." And also, it was sort of about the cars, which made it automatically of interest to me.
A couple of months ago, the car-nut site Jalopnik did an interview with Cox, which was what triggered the idea to write this. The interview is mostly about the cars used in the movie (no surprise on a car site), but it's also revealed that there is a sort-of non-sequel on the way: Repo Chick, according to IMDB, is scheduled for a 2010 release. I can't imagine how it can possibly live up to its antecedent, but I'll go see it anyway. "Let's go get a drink!"
25 years ago this autumn, I first became acquainted with a movie that came to mean a great deal to me: Repo Man. Directed by Alex Cox, the twisted, dark-hunored, low-budget punk/sci-fi satire quickly became one of my favorite movies, and it still is.
According to IMDB, Repo Man premiered in May of 1984, and the Boston Globe archives show a review from July (which I unfortunately can't read or link to because they still expect people to pay for access to their archives), but I became aware of it after returning to school in the fall, and I first saw it at the Nickelodeon Cinema near campus (now gone) at the beginning of October.
It's long enough ago now that I don't remember who I saw it with the first time, but I do remember that it made such an impression on me that, for the rest of the month of October, I convinced different groups of people to see it with me every Saturday night. I ultimately saw the movie more than a dozen times, and of course I own the DVD (a gift from a fellow admirer).
What I loved most about it was its attitude, the perfectly encapsulated gleeful nihilism expressed in lines like, "The more you drive, the less intelligent you are" and "Ordinary fuckin' people... I hate 'em." And also, it was sort of about the cars, which made it automatically of interest to me.
A couple of months ago, the car-nut site Jalopnik did an interview with Cox, which was what triggered the idea to write this. The interview is mostly about the cars used in the movie (no surprise on a car site), but it's also revealed that there is a sort-of non-sequel on the way: Repo Chick, according to IMDB, is scheduled for a 2010 release. I can't imagine how it can possibly live up to its antecedent, but I'll go see it anyway. "Let's go get a drink!"
17 November 2008
Quantum Quibbles
So, Quantum of Solace was a decent Bond movie, but didn't quite live up to Casino Royale. For me it came down to a couple of things. First, the action scenes are really overedited, in such a way as to potentially induce dizziness. If you or someone you know is prone to seizures, it might be advisable to avoid seeing this movie. This was clearly an intentional choice by the filmmakers, but at times it's almost impossible to discern what is actually happening, which detracts from the overall moviegoing experience.
Second, the movie was devoid of any bit of humor. I'm not suggesting that it's necessary or desirable to return to the corny, campy, lecherous tone of the Roger Moore era, and I realize that this was primarily a revenge story so it's somewhat excusable, but I missed the element of wit. I'm hoping that next time out, Bond will feel like he can lighten up a bit.
Second, the movie was devoid of any bit of humor. I'm not suggesting that it's necessary or desirable to return to the corny, campy, lecherous tone of the Roger Moore era, and I realize that this was primarily a revenge story so it's somewhat excusable, but I missed the element of wit. I'm hoping that next time out, Bond will feel like he can lighten up a bit.
14 November 2008
Friday Afternoon
Deadline time looms once again, but on this dreary Friday afternoon my brain has decided it's pretty much done for the week. I may attempt to do a little work over the weekend, something I've done on occasion in the past.
Meanwhile, we're going to see Quantum of Solace tonight. Some of the early reviews don't seem too favorable, but we enjoyed Casino Royale so much that reviews probably don't matter. I'll post my two cents over the weekend.
Since I expect the theater is going to be quite busy, I went to the trouble to purchase tickets ahead of time. This is a silly modern frivolity, but at the same time it's nice to know the seats will be waiting for us.
Meanwhile, we're going to see Quantum of Solace tonight. Some of the early reviews don't seem too favorable, but we enjoyed Casino Royale so much that reviews probably don't matter. I'll post my two cents over the weekend.
Since I expect the theater is going to be quite busy, I went to the trouble to purchase tickets ahead of time. This is a silly modern frivolity, but at the same time it's nice to know the seats will be waiting for us.
24 July 2008
Now Showing
Last night we went to see The Dark Knight. We had tried to go on Sunday afternoon, but the theater was so crowded, we couldn't even find a parking space. I'd never seen the parking lot more than half full, except maybe back when Star Wars (Episode IV) got rereleased back in, um, '97 was it?
I'm not big on buying movie tickets ahead of time, mostly because I resent paying the surcharge, though I will admit that it's convenient, and it makes sense to do it for "event" movies with high demand. Also, I get discounted passed through my job, which you have to redeem at the box office. Anyway, I figured that going on a weeknight would be slightly less crazed, but still busy, so we left the house at 6:40 for a 7:35 show time. We got to the theater right around 7, and waited in line between five and ten minutes to buy our tickets.
The Showcase chain, in an attempt to swank things up a little (and to get people to spend more money), has tagged a few of the screens in the Revere multiplex with the "Director's Hall" designation. Basically, this means you get to choose specific seats, which is done via a little touch-screen display at the ticket counter. When you then go into the theater, there are actual ushers who show you to your seats, and they will also take your concession order, go and get the goodies for you, and bring them to you at your seat before the movie begins. Oh, and the seats are a bit nicer than the ones in the "regular" theaters: they're leather, and have thicker padding.
For these privileges, you pay $2 above the standard ticket price, which I believe is now $10.25. However, I get those aforementioned discount passes for $7.75 each, so even adding on the extra to see a movie in Director's Hall, it's still costing me a bit less than standard price. This was our first time trying out this frillery, but we figured we should give it a try. The movie was showing on at least three other screens in the theater, so it wasn't like we had to do it. The start time just happened to be convenient for us. What I'd really like is to be able to get a beer or a cocktail to go with my movie, like you can at the Somerville Theatre, and while we're at it, why not make the booze-serving screen an over-21 theater?
Oh, the movie? Yeah, it rocked. A bit long at two and a half hours, but very little of it felt extraneous. I missed some bits of dialogue because the music was very loud in places, but this is certainly not the only movie or TV show to be guilty of that. The visuals were often stunning, and Heath Ledger was nothing short of amazing, making his death that much more of a shame.
I'm not big on buying movie tickets ahead of time, mostly because I resent paying the surcharge, though I will admit that it's convenient, and it makes sense to do it for "event" movies with high demand. Also, I get discounted passed through my job, which you have to redeem at the box office. Anyway, I figured that going on a weeknight would be slightly less crazed, but still busy, so we left the house at 6:40 for a 7:35 show time. We got to the theater right around 7, and waited in line between five and ten minutes to buy our tickets.
The Showcase chain, in an attempt to swank things up a little (and to get people to spend more money), has tagged a few of the screens in the Revere multiplex with the "Director's Hall" designation. Basically, this means you get to choose specific seats, which is done via a little touch-screen display at the ticket counter. When you then go into the theater, there are actual ushers who show you to your seats, and they will also take your concession order, go and get the goodies for you, and bring them to you at your seat before the movie begins. Oh, and the seats are a bit nicer than the ones in the "regular" theaters: they're leather, and have thicker padding.
For these privileges, you pay $2 above the standard ticket price, which I believe is now $10.25. However, I get those aforementioned discount passes for $7.75 each, so even adding on the extra to see a movie in Director's Hall, it's still costing me a bit less than standard price. This was our first time trying out this frillery, but we figured we should give it a try. The movie was showing on at least three other screens in the theater, so it wasn't like we had to do it. The start time just happened to be convenient for us. What I'd really like is to be able to get a beer or a cocktail to go with my movie, like you can at the Somerville Theatre, and while we're at it, why not make the booze-serving screen an over-21 theater?
Oh, the movie? Yeah, it rocked. A bit long at two and a half hours, but very little of it felt extraneous. I missed some bits of dialogue because the music was very loud in places, but this is certainly not the only movie or TV show to be guilty of that. The visuals were often stunning, and Heath Ledger was nothing short of amazing, making his death that much more of a shame.
06 June 2008
No Cameras Allowed
Our friend Sunny got us a pass to see the preview screening of the new Adam Sandler comedy You Don't Mess with the Zohan. The showing was last night at the big multiplex across from Boston Common. The movie started at 7, so the Mrs. and I agreed to meet in front of the theater. I arrived around 6:10, and she arrived about ten minutes later.
We went inside and upstairs to where the line had formed. The staff was already letting people into the theater, so we didn't have to wait too long, but it did seem that the line was moving rather slowly. As we got closer, we heard a voice saying, "Please have your cellphones out and turned off." The Mrs. thought they were just going to check our phones to see that they were in fact turned off, but I realized that they were collecting everyone's phones in an attempt to prevent illegal copying of the movie.
I haven't been to a preview screening in a long time; I think the last one we went to was the first Harold & Kumar movie back in 2004, and things have changed a lot since then. Not only do most people now have a cellphone with a camera, but many of those cameras can record video, and there are other types of video cameras that are small enough to be easily concealed.
The guy behind us in line grumbled to his companion, "What's the big deal? The movie's going to be out tomorrow." But with the right equipment and a fast internet connection, a pirated copy of the movie could be online an hour or so after the screening ended, or copied onto DVDs a couple of hours later, so to the movie studios, the potential lost revenue is kind of a big deal. (I'm not necessarily defending the studios' general business practices, but I do think they have the right to protect their copyrighted material.)
We surrendered our phones and were given tickets that matched up with numbered brown paper bags arranged on tables. We went into the theater and discovered that the upper section, with the more viewer-friendly stadium seating, was already filled. There was no place in that whole section with two adjacent available seats. The first two rows were empty but reserved, presumably for reviewers and assorted "VIPs." That was a total of about 50 seats, and I couldn't help but wonder if it was really necessary to hold aside so many seats at such an event.
The five rows in the forward section of the theater were nearly empty, because most people understandably don't like to sit so close to the screen. Given the choice of sitting there or not seeing the movie, I was content to sit close, but the Mrs. wasn't. I took a spot in the last row of the front section, and I thought at least she would sit down with me to see if the viewing position was tolerable, but she was already somewhat irritated by the whole scenario, so she left. I felt badly about it, but it was her choice.
And the movie? Good, not great. Could have been a little tighter and thus a little shorter, and the last 20 minutes were kind of a limp across the finish line, but the basic conceit--Sandler as an Israeli superspy who is tired of war and violence and just wants to be a hair stylist--works, and there are quite a few good laughs and funny bits. And since it is an Adam Sandler movie, of course it has the general air of pervasive raunchiness for which he's known, so if you like that sort of thing, you'll probably have a good time.
We went inside and upstairs to where the line had formed. The staff was already letting people into the theater, so we didn't have to wait too long, but it did seem that the line was moving rather slowly. As we got closer, we heard a voice saying, "Please have your cellphones out and turned off." The Mrs. thought they were just going to check our phones to see that they were in fact turned off, but I realized that they were collecting everyone's phones in an attempt to prevent illegal copying of the movie.
I haven't been to a preview screening in a long time; I think the last one we went to was the first Harold & Kumar movie back in 2004, and things have changed a lot since then. Not only do most people now have a cellphone with a camera, but many of those cameras can record video, and there are other types of video cameras that are small enough to be easily concealed.
The guy behind us in line grumbled to his companion, "What's the big deal? The movie's going to be out tomorrow." But with the right equipment and a fast internet connection, a pirated copy of the movie could be online an hour or so after the screening ended, or copied onto DVDs a couple of hours later, so to the movie studios, the potential lost revenue is kind of a big deal. (I'm not necessarily defending the studios' general business practices, but I do think they have the right to protect their copyrighted material.)
We surrendered our phones and were given tickets that matched up with numbered brown paper bags arranged on tables. We went into the theater and discovered that the upper section, with the more viewer-friendly stadium seating, was already filled. There was no place in that whole section with two adjacent available seats. The first two rows were empty but reserved, presumably for reviewers and assorted "VIPs." That was a total of about 50 seats, and I couldn't help but wonder if it was really necessary to hold aside so many seats at such an event.
The five rows in the forward section of the theater were nearly empty, because most people understandably don't like to sit so close to the screen. Given the choice of sitting there or not seeing the movie, I was content to sit close, but the Mrs. wasn't. I took a spot in the last row of the front section, and I thought at least she would sit down with me to see if the viewing position was tolerable, but she was already somewhat irritated by the whole scenario, so she left. I felt badly about it, but it was her choice.
And the movie? Good, not great. Could have been a little tighter and thus a little shorter, and the last 20 minutes were kind of a limp across the finish line, but the basic conceit--Sandler as an Israeli superspy who is tired of war and violence and just wants to be a hair stylist--works, and there are quite a few good laughs and funny bits. And since it is an Adam Sandler movie, of course it has the general air of pervasive raunchiness for which he's known, so if you like that sort of thing, you'll probably have a good time.
23 April 2007
Weekend Wrap
At the risk of sounding overly mundane (I hope to never do a blog post solely about the weather), it was great to finally get some real spring this weekend. It was warm enough to open the windows and get some air flowing through the apartment.
Friday evening we went to see Grindhouse. It was insane, in lots of very good ways. Whether you revere Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino or despise them, you have to acknowledge their shared love of movies and film history that inspired and pervades this project. Everyone I've talked to about it has had different reactions, but everyone also said the same thing: when it was over, we were all exhausted. It's the kind of thing you need a while to decompress from, preferably with a couple of drinks.
Saturday night I went to see a music show with a couple of friends, the gravel-voiced country guitar slinger Junior Brown. It was the first time I'd been out to see a band since Christmas week, but that was an atypically early performance by a friend, and we were able to sit down; this was the first time I'd been out to see a club show with a typical late starting time in about six months. I think this might be as frequently as I can handle them at this point. The opening act came on at 9:45, and the headliner didn't hit the stage until almost 11:30. By midnight all three of us were tired, our feet and legs hurt from standing, and our attention was starting to wander, so we decided to call it a night.
Sunday the Mrs. and I went for a late breakfast at one of our favorite spots, the venerable SoundBites in Ball Square, Somerville. (I've been remiss in not giving the place the "Monsters of..." food post it deserves.) The place is tiny (the seating capacity is probably around 40) and on weekends there is typically a line to get in with a 15-20 minute wait. This time there were only about four people ahead of us in line, possibly because it was such a nice day and people were off doing other things. We noticed that since the last time we'd been, the Mexican place next door had closed, after being open for only about 18 months.
We were chatting with SoundBites' owner, as we usually do, and he mentioned that he is moving the restaurant over into the adjacent space, which is at least twice as large, and it should be ready in about two months. This is great news, as anyone who has been there can attest; while the food is excellent, the experience has always been slightly diminished by the cramped space and non-decor. So I'm going to delay my write-up until the new space is up and running.
Friday evening we went to see Grindhouse. It was insane, in lots of very good ways. Whether you revere Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino or despise them, you have to acknowledge their shared love of movies and film history that inspired and pervades this project. Everyone I've talked to about it has had different reactions, but everyone also said the same thing: when it was over, we were all exhausted. It's the kind of thing you need a while to decompress from, preferably with a couple of drinks.
Saturday night I went to see a music show with a couple of friends, the gravel-voiced country guitar slinger Junior Brown. It was the first time I'd been out to see a band since Christmas week, but that was an atypically early performance by a friend, and we were able to sit down; this was the first time I'd been out to see a club show with a typical late starting time in about six months. I think this might be as frequently as I can handle them at this point. The opening act came on at 9:45, and the headliner didn't hit the stage until almost 11:30. By midnight all three of us were tired, our feet and legs hurt from standing, and our attention was starting to wander, so we decided to call it a night.
Sunday the Mrs. and I went for a late breakfast at one of our favorite spots, the venerable SoundBites in Ball Square, Somerville. (I've been remiss in not giving the place the "Monsters of..." food post it deserves.) The place is tiny (the seating capacity is probably around 40) and on weekends there is typically a line to get in with a 15-20 minute wait. This time there were only about four people ahead of us in line, possibly because it was such a nice day and people were off doing other things. We noticed that since the last time we'd been, the Mexican place next door had closed, after being open for only about 18 months.
We were chatting with SoundBites' owner, as we usually do, and he mentioned that he is moving the restaurant over into the adjacent space, which is at least twice as large, and it should be ready in about two months. This is great news, as anyone who has been there can attest; while the food is excellent, the experience has always been slightly diminished by the cramped space and non-decor. So I'm going to delay my write-up until the new space is up and running.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
