Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in Thom' Luka's LiveJournal:

[ << Previous 20 ]

Thursday, May 13th, 2004
2:33 pm	Kill Bill vol. 1 - DVD Now it's really not fair judging only half of a movie, but.. Well.. does it want me to see vol. 2? Yes, but barely.. I know a lot think Tarantino's the greatest gift to cinema ever, but I've never been that impressed with him. It's competent movies, they're watchable, but... there's nothing new with him.. Kill Bill vol. 1 is very influenced by Sergio Leone and Asian films, but totally lacks the style and greatness of those. I think the major problem I have with Tarantino is that, it's all play for him. He loves movies, and wouldn't be fun to make your own movies? And he sets out to make movies, and they're sort of cool, but it's only skin deep. His movies might have dialouge that sounds cool, but what's the point. It's just.. well.. a piece of dialouge, nothing more. It doesn't bring anything to the whole. Also, when seeing Kill Bill vol. 1, I so sat and wished it had been done by Luc Besson, someone Tarantiono shares a lot with when it comes to style, because Besson has a way deeper sense of poetry and purpose, and more style and elegance in his toenail, than all of Tarantino has. Just look at that opening scene in "Leon" (US: The Professional), or "Nikita", and it's so better than the smallest part of Kill Bill vol. 1. Tarantino is good. He has his heart in the right place, but I really wish he could sort of grow up and use his talent for something that has some power. (1 Comment |Comment on this)
Tuesday, April 27th, 2004
12:17 am	Bowling for Columbine - DVD I'm halfway a fan of Michael Moore, sharing a lot of the views about things he has. Despite that, I'm not that impressed with "Bowling for Columbine". Actually, I'm not exactly happy with any of his movies. I think he works better in TV, even if I think he works the very best in his books. "Bowling for Columbine" is a strange beast. At times, it's incredibly effective, other times it's ok and some times it just want you to cringe. The main problem is that it's a very long movie. About 2 hrs, which is a very long time spending on one subject. The other problem is that it's a subject that can't be explained. Nobody has an answer why Columbine happened, except that you can't blame one thing. Nope. Rock music didn't do it, the access to weapons didn't do it, racism didn't do it, videogames didn't do it. Nor do I think bowling did it. It's all those things together. One of those things might be the trigger, but only for something that's already there. You might fire a weapon as many times as you wish, but if it's not loaded, nothing will happen. You have to make the cast and form the bullet. You'll have to add powder. Only then it will go off when you pull the trigger. Be it a movie, a song, an event etc. In Bowling for Columbine, Michael Moore sort of tries finding the trigger, and only at times touching upon finding the cast for the bullet. That make the movie go here and there, without really getting to a point. Maybe because there are non. What to blame? Racism? Yes, I think that's part of of the problem. Powerty? That's another thing that contributes. General fear? Yes, that too.. (Personally I think the main problem being a combination of American dream and a very egocentric society). By deciding to not have a certain cause, and spend the time trying to prove that point, it only becomes diffused, and as such doesn't become effective. Nothing that really affects. Only 2 hrs of "entertainment", and nothing more. A different problem, which is something his TV-series also suffers from, is the way the episodes range from "juvenile" pranks, through "beside the point" to the very effective, which take away from the seriousness of the issue. At times you feel Michael Moore want to look like some kind of folk hero, other times he seems to think that people aren't going to be interested unless he's entertaining. That takes away from the fact that the subject is a serious issue, and that he, more often than not, do know the causes of the problems. Ironically, in "Bowling for Columbine" he interviews one of the two "South Park" creators; Matt Stone, which has a similar worldview, but are far better at exposing truths in a very entertaining way. In the end, "Bowling for Columbine" is a movie with some very briliant and effective filmmaking, but as a whole could've been way more effective and to the point. (Comment on this)
Thursday, December 25th, 2003
9:54 pm	Lord of the Rngs Not having much to do, I watched the Extended Version of Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers.. Now I'm not overly entusiastic about the films.. Maybe because I treasure the Books so highly. It really is the main work of the 20th Century, and among the best ever.. The thing is. The films doesn't live up to that. It's not the films of all films, which they should be. Now, it's far from easy filming books like that, but.. I've seen better films, and these shuld really be up there. The books doesn't deserve less. The main film saga, still is Star Wars., which borrows heavily from Lord of the rings. The main difference being that Star Wars, very much, is what Lord of the rings should've been.. Now, I doesn't say the movies are bad. They're not. Some stuff, if not brilliant, is really good. Up there among the best, but that's only a percentage of the whole. The rest of it is daft, or simply bad. A lot of that I blame Peter Jackson. He simply wasn't the right person to do it, even if I can't say who would've been. Now, it's tricky for several reasons to film the the books. One reason is that they're not a fairy tale, as such. The movie, at times, do right, in treating it like "reality". Things that really happens. But, the book is epic in quality, and mythic. It has an atmosphere. Sadly, the movies lack that atmosphere, to a high degree. It's not "fairy tale"-like, except at times. All the scenes at Rivendel has that quality., They're extra-ordinary. A lot of scenes, such as Frodo and Sam walking, look only that. It's hard, at times, to not think about Monty Python and the Holy Grail. You only get the feeling that they've taken the camera, and that it's two people in costume walking across an ordinary field. Nothing more to it, at all. And it's sort of a ridiculous thought, you're able to bring up. It lacks magic.. The hunt that Aragorn, Legolas and Gimlin does, has a heroic quality in the book, and Peter Jackson totally misses that point by showing them running, insert some funny dialouge, shot from endless helicopter shots.. Only creating that stupid idea of 3 men dressed up, on a bright day, running across a field. Where's the magick, where's the heroic quality? The camera should've been on the ground, below them, showing their legs, fast pace in cutting. Almost all the time, the camera is real high, looking down on stuff, reducing things, people in size. There's only one single shot in the whole of the extended The Two Towers that stand out as brilliant. That's when Frodo is drawn to the Nangul, Sam rescue him and Frodo draws a sword on Sam. That angle of the camera etc, engage. It shows emotion etc.. Remember how The Matrix revolutionised image-making, with it's freeze-frame? It's images that stand out, which you remember. Are you ever gonna forget the way Carrie Ann Moss stands there on the roof, shooting the Agent? Are you ever gonna forget when Keanu Reeves flips between the pillars at the big shoot out? In Star Wars. Think about all the images it brings up, thinking about it.. The way the Millenium Falcon breaks out from the star, as Han Solo has rescued Luke Skywalker, the way the X-fighters prepare to fly in, the shot at the very start of A new hope, with that small ship close to the camera, with the big destroyer behind it, shooting at it. Who can't just close their eyes and see the first entrance of Darth Vader at the start of A New Hope.. The sound, the white corridors, and he coming through the gate.. That's one of the problem of Lord of the Rings. Not a single image sticks. Not even the great scene of Two Towers, with Gandalf and the riders coming down that slope. Great to look at, but it doesn't stick.. Now I'm spoiled by having read the books, but.. somehow.. Even if there's no pictures as such in the books, you're sort of able to close your eyes and bring up the images of your imagination from the book. The Dark Riders as they spot them the first time. The vivid description of them in the book. Sam's first sight of the Oliphants. You're able to close your eyes, and picture those. And then it was about 5 - 10 years since I read them the last time. At the same time, there's not a single image from the film, Fellowship of the Ring,I can bring up, even if it was only one year ago, since I saw it.. (2 Comments |Comment on this)
Sunday, September 7th, 2003
7:04 pm	Identity Now.. I did see this about 20 mins after having seen Pirates of the Carribean, and spoken with frida on the phone.. in the meantime. That way, I probably wasn't in the mood most suited for seeing "Identity". That way I can't say for sure, but I wasn't that impressed with the movie. Even if they're sort of trying to disquise the fact with some pseudo-psychological mumbo-jumbo.. it doesn't take away from the fact that it's a very basic and standard story about things that go bump in the night.. The main problem being that they've taken about all basic ingredients that's supposed to be in a horror-story, and not done anything special with it. They make sure the audience know they're trapped, isolated in that small motel. They make sure to have a major suspect (which one know right away isn't the one doing it). They even use the.. This motel is built on indian buraial ground spook. Nothing you haven't seen before. Actually, maybe being influenced by having seen Pirates of the Carribean before it, they used so much of the stuff, I sat and expected it to reveal itself to be a send up and they'd start playing things for laughs. Starting to throw in jokes about Norman Bates etc. Still.. I can't fell all bad about it. It features good actors, and it's a competent try with a knack for style. It does uses the ingredients, if in very basic forms, in a good way. The main problem is the fact that it's not the first movie of it's kind. That you've seen it all before. In "Psycho", "What lies beneath", "The Usual Suspects", "Friday the 13:th", "The Haunting", "The Twilight Zone", "Tales from the Crypt" etc.. In the end, the movie feels more like some TV-episode in something like "Tales of the Crypt" or "The X-files" rather than a feature movie.. (1 Comment |Comment on this)
6:35 pm	Pirates of the Carribean I so don't like the movies of Jerry Bruckheimer.. Whatever you could say about Don Simpson, when they worked together, the movies, if cheap, had something. When Simpson died, that something disappeared. The movies became predictable and boring. Just going for the lowest common factor. Having seen "The Rock" (slightly saved by Sean Connery), "Face to Face", Con Air (One of the worst movies I've ever seen) and Armageddon etc.. I wasn't at all sure about wanting to see Pirates of the Carribean, since it was a Jerry Bruckheimer-movie. The trailer, Johnny Depp and knowing it was the screenwriters that created "Shrek!" made me curious, and I thought I should see it. Thinking that it might be, at least, watchable. That it actually might be better than the other movies he's produced.. And it sure was.. Actually, I'm happy that he produced it, since it's a really good screenplay, good actors and done with the resources it needed. It would've been bad if it has been done without all those resources. As a movie, it closely follows both the old style pirate movies, as well as borrowing heavily from todays style as seen in their previous movie "Shrek!" and adventures such as "The Mummy". A sort of awarness of itself, but nothing that's used for laughs in itself. A sort of wink to the audience. I totally loved the movie. It's fun, without actually trying to be fun. As in.. it's played straight. I hate it when they're aware of how funny the dialouge is, and really wants you to understand that it's funny. Second.. it doesn't have a dull moment. Even if you don't have action all the time. Actually, there's neither that much comedy nor action, but what's there is so well timed, and the stuff between that interesting for the story. That way, despite being a long movie, it sure feels packed full. It starts, it entertains, it impresses.. and when you leave the theater, you're feeling real good. That's all you can wish for.. (Comment on this)
Tuesday, July 15th, 2003
7:25 pm	Forgot to post this one here.. I think.. Well.. I've presented which movies I've seen, of the AFI top 100 films, as well as the imdb top 250. ( To the list of my favorite 200 movies ) (Comment on this)
Monday, May 26th, 2003
5:11 am	imdb top 250 Hmm.. and right when I've done AFI's top 100 (They do have a 400 film list as well), paradisecowgirl (via montfort) did the imdb top 250.. [Unknown LJ tag] Those in bold, I've seen.. Those in italics I've got on video, but haven't seen yet.. Rating - / 0 / + to ++++ 1 The Godfather (1972) Cinema/DVD + 2 The Shawshank Redemption (1994) DVD ++++ 3 The Godfather: Part II (1974) DVD + 4 The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001) DVD (long version) + 5 Schindler's List (1993) Cinema/Video - 6 Citizen Kane (1941) Video 0 7 Casablanca (1942) Video - 8 Seven Samurai (1954) Video + 9 Star Wars (1977) Cinemax4/Video +++ 10 Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964) Cinema/DVD 11 Memento (2000) DVD 12 One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975) Cinema/DVD + 13 Rear Window (1954) DVD +++ 14 The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002) 15 Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980) Cinemax3/Video +++ 16 Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981) Cinemax3/Video +++ 17 The Usual Suspects (1995) DVD ++ 18 Amelie (2001) 19 Pulp Fiction (1994) DVD + 20 North by Northwest (1959) Video ++ 21 Psycho (1960) DVD + 22 The Silence of the Lambs (1991) Cinema/DVD + 23 12 Angry Men (1957) DVD ++ 24 Lawrence of Arabia (1962) DVD +++ 25 It's a Wonderful Life (1946) DVD ++++ 26 The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (1966) Cinema/DVD +++ 27 Goodfellas (1990) 28 American Beauty (1999) 29 Vertigo (1958) Video ++ 30 The Pianist (2002) 31 Sunset Blvd. (1950) 32 Apocalypse Now (1979) Video 0 33 Some Like It Hot (1959) Cinema/DVD ++++ 34 The Matrix (1999) Cinema/DVD ++++ 35 To Kill a Mockingbird (1962) 36 Taxi Driver (1976) DVD + 37 The Third Man (1949) Video 0 38 Paths of Glory (1957) 39 Fight Club (1999) 40 Das Boot (1981) Cinema/DVD (DC) - 41 L.A. Confidential (1997) DVD 0 42 Double Indemnity (1944) Video 0 43 Chinatown (1974) DVD ++++ 44 Requiem for a Dream (2000) DVD + 45 The Maltese Falcon (1941) Video + 46 Singin' in the Rain (1952) DVD ++++ 47 The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957) Video ++ 48 Sen to Chihiro no kamikakushi (2001)(aka "Spirited Away")* 49 Saving Private Ryan (1998) 50 All About Eve (1950) Video + 51 M (1931) TV 0 52 Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975) Cinema/DVD ++++ 53 Raging Bull (1980) Cinema/DVD +++ 54 Once Upon a Time in the West (1968) Video ++++ 55 Se7en (1995) Cinema/DVD ++ 56 Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon (2000) DVD ++ 57 The Wizard of Oz (1939) Video 0 58 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) Cinema/DVD + 59 La Vita e bella (1997) Cinema/DVD ++ 60 American History X (1998) 61 The Sting (1973) DVD ++ 62 Touch of Evil (1958) 63 The Manchurian Candidate (1962) Video 0 64 Alien (1979) Cinema/DVD +++ 65 Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939) Video +++ 66 Rashomon (1950) 67 Leon (1994) Cinema/DVD ++ 68 Annie Hall (1977) DVD +++ 69 The Great Escape (1963) 70 A Clockwork Orange (1971) Cinemax4/Video ? 71 The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948) Video + 72 Reservoir Dogs (1992) DVD + 73 The Sixth Sense (1999) DVD ++ 74 Jaws (1975) DVD +++ 75 Amadeus (1984) Cinema - 76 On the Waterfront (1954) 77 Ran (1985) Cinema/Video +++ 78 Braveheart (1995) DVD +++ 79 High Noon (1952) 80 Fargo (1996) Cinema/DVD ++++ 81 Blade Runner (1982) Cinemax2/DVD/Video ++++ 82 The Apartment (1960) ? 83 Aliens (1986) Cinema/Video/DVD ++ (Short Version) ++++ (Long version) 84 Toy Story 2 (1999) DVD +++ 85 Strangers on a Train (1951) + 86 Modern Times (1936) Video +++ 87 The Shining (1980) DVD - (Short Version) 88 Donnie Darko (2001) 89 Duck Soup (1933) ++++ 90 The Princess Bride (1987) Cinema/DVD ++++ 91 Lola rennt (1998) DVD +++ 92 City Lights (1931) Video ++++ 93 The General (1927) Video ++ 94 Metropolis (1927) 95 The Searchers (1956) 96 Full Metal Jacket (1987) Cinema/Video + 97 Notorious (1946) 98 Manhattan (1979) DVD ++++ 99 Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969) DVD ++ 100 Graduate, The (1967) Cinema/DVD ++++ 101 Big Sleep, The (1946) Cinema/Video ++ 102 Sjunde inseglet, Det (1957) Video ++++ 103 Nuovo cinema Paradiso (1988) Cinema/DVD ++++ 104 Rebecca (1940) 105 Cidade de Deus (2002) 106 Glory (1989) 107 Deer Hunter, The (1978) Cinema/DVD +++ 108 Best Years of Our Lives, The (1946) 109 Ladri di biciclette (1948) 110 Great Dictator, The (1940) Video ++ 111 Shrek (2001) DVD +++ 112 Patton (1970) 113 African Queen, The (1951) Video +++ 114 Green Mile, The (1999) 115 Ben-Hur (1959) Video - 116 Philadelphia Story, The (1940) Video 0 117 It Happened One Night (1934) 118 Mononoke-hime (1997) 119 Bringing Up Baby (1938) Video +++ 120 Cool Hand Luke (1967) 121 Straight Story, The (1999) 122 Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991) Cinema/DVD ++ 123 Grapes of Wrath, The (1940) + 124 Yojimbo (1961) Video ++ 125 Forrest Gump (1994) Cinema/Video + 126 Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (1983) Cinemax2/Video + (Original) ++ (SE) 127 Arsenic and Old Lace (1944) Video + 128 Wild Bunch, The (1969) 129 Unforgiven (1992) Cinema/DVD ++ 130 Christmas Story, A (1983) 0 131 Night of the Hunter, The (1955) DVD +++ 132 Young Frankenstein (1974) Cinema/DVD +++ 133 Gone with the Wind (1939) Cinema/Video - 134 Almost Famous (2000) 135 Stalag 17 (1953) 136 Hustler, The (1961) Video ++ 137 All Quiet on the Western Front (1930) 138 Monsters, Inc. (2001) DVD 0 139 Hable con ella (2002) 140 Conversation, The (1974) Video + 141 Elephant Man, The (1980) Cinema - 142 Being John Malkovich (1999) 143 Festen (1998) 144 Insider, The (1999) DVD + 145 Mulholland Dr. (2001) 146 Platoon (1986) Cinema - 147 Once Upon a Time in America Cinema/DVD +++ 148 Grande illusion, La (1937) 149 His Girl Friday (1940) DVD ++++ 150 Die Hard (1988) Cinema/DVD +++ 151 Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989) Cinema/Video ++ 152 Spartacus (1960) Cinema/Video 0 153 Gladiator (2000) Cinema/DVD -- 154 Back to the Future (1985) Cinema/DVD ++ 155 Magnolia (1999) 156 Sling Blade (1996) 157 Bronenosets Potyomkin (1925) Video + 158 Gold Rush, The (1925) ++ 159 Charade (1963) + 160 Toy Story (1995) DVD 0 161 Adventures of Robin Hood, The (1938) Video ++ 162 Brazil (1985) Cinemax2/DVD ++++ 163 Life of Brian (1979) Cinemax2/DVD ++++ 164 Streetcar Named Desire, A + 165 Amores perros (2000) + 166 Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, The (1962) 167 Witness for the Prosecution (1957) 168 Exorcist, The (1973) DVD + 169 Night at the Opera, A (1935) Video + 170 Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? 0 171 All the President's Men (1976) Video ++ 172 Others, The (2001) DVD ++ 173 Minority Report (2002) 174 Day the Earth Stood Still, The (1951) Video ++ 175 Roman Holiday (1953) 176 Stand by Me (1986) Cinema/Video + 177 Trois couleurs: Rouge (1994) 178 Killing, The (1956) 179 Twelve Monkeys (1995) Cinema/DVD ++ 180 Dog Day Afternoon (1975) + 181 Right Stuff, The (1983) Video + 182 Traffic (2000) 183 Smultronstället (1957) 184 Midnight Cowboy (1969) Video + 185 Quatre cents coups, Les (1959) 186 Terminator, The (1984) Cinema/DVD ++ 187 Shadow of a Doubt (1943) 188 Ed Wood (1994) Video + 189 Harvey (1950) Video +++ 190 To Be or Not to Be (1942) ++ 191 Gandhi (1982) 192 This Is Spinal Tap (1984) DVD +++ 193 Trainspotting (1996) 0 194 Bonnie and Clyde (1967) DVD ++ 195 Todo sobre mi madre (1999) 196 Lion in Winter, The (1968) 197 Rain Man (1988) Cinema/DVD + 198 Network (1976) 199 Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens (1922) + 200 Miller's Crossing (1990) Cinema/Video +++ 201 Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1998) 202 Stagecoach (1939) Video 0 203 Henry V (1989) 204 Snatch. (2000) 205 Groundhog Day (1993) DVD ++++ 206 39 Steps, The (1935) Video + 207 Laura (1944) 208 Beautiful Mind, A (2001) 209 King Kong (1933) DVD ++ 210 Die xue shuang xiong (1989) 211 Untouchables, The (1987) Cinema/DVD ++ 212 Strada, La (1954) ++ 213 8 1/2 (1963) 0 214 Fantasia (1940) Video + 215 MASH (1970) + 216 Iron Giant, The (1999) DVD ++++ 217 Good Will Hunting (1997) 218 Planet of the Apes (1968) DVD + 219 Beauty and the Beast (1991) DVD ++++ 220 Being There (1979) Cinema/Video ++++ 221 Clerks. (1994) 222 Road to Perdition (2002) 223 Rio Bravo (1959) 0 224 E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982) Cinemax4/DVD +++ (originally) + (Now) 225 O Brother, Where Art Thou? (2000) DVD ++++ 226 In the Heat of the Night (1967) + 227 Quiet Man, The (1952) 228 Deliverance (1972) DVD + 229 Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) DVD 0 230 Thin Man, The (1934) Video ++ 231 Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977) Cinema/DVD +++ / SE Cinemax2 + 232 Big Lebowski, The (1998) DVD ++ 233 Man Who Wasn't There, The (2001) 234 Red River (1948) 235 Man Who Would Be King, The (1975) 236 Jean de Florette (1986) Cinema/DVD ++++ 237 Ghost World (2000) 238 Birds, The (1963) Cinema 0 239 Passion de Jeanne d'Arc, La (1928) 240 Sweet Hereafter, The (1997) ++ 241 Moulin Rouge! (2001) DVD ++ 242 From Here to Eternity (1953) Video - 243 Man for All Seasons, A (1966) 0 244 French Connection, The (1971) Cinema/DVD ++ 245 You Can Count on Me (2000) 246 Sleuth (1972) 247 Killing Fields, The (1984) Cinema/Video ++ 248 Player, The (1992) Video + 249 Heat (1995) DVD + 250 My Fair Lady (1964) DVD + (Comment on this)
Thursday, May 22nd, 2003
12:32 pm	AFI top 100 list montfort did this.. Of the AFI's list of the 100 best English Speaking movies (it seems). I've seen 80 of those.. 7 more I've got on Video, but haven't actually seen them.. 1 I might have seen, but not entirely sure... ( long list ) (2 Comments |Comment on this)
Friday, May 2nd, 2003
9:39 am	my movies.net I like how they display the trailers on this page.. with the screeen etc. http://www.mymovies.net/include/site/nav_pages/trailers.asp (Comment on this)
Thursday, May 1st, 2003
9:05 pm	latest order.. Orders new DVDs all the time. Mostly from discshop.se Now.. this is in Swedish, of course.. but.. well.. guess you understand most anyway.. the first is the number of the article.. the title of the movie.. then it's DVD region 2.. DVD2UK means it's an import from UK. then it's price in Swedish Krona (SEK) Which is about the same as (at the moment): [Error: Irreparable invalid markup ('<font="red">') in entry. Owner must fix manually. Raw contents below.] Orders new DVDs all the time. Mostly from <a href="http://www.discshop.se" target="_blank">discshop.se</a> Now.. this is in Swedish, of course.. but.. well.. guess you understand most anyway.. the first is the number of the article.. the title of the movie.. then it's DVD region 2.. DVD2UK means it's an import from UK. then it's price in Swedish Krona (SEK) Which is about the same as (at the moment): <font="RED">Euro1 = 9.10 SEK / £ = 13.00 SEK / $ = 8,20 SEK</font> Orderbekräftelse från Discshop (2003-04-30 22:39) Din order kommer att skickas i flera olika leveranser. Nedan ser du ordern uppdelad i den förväntade leveransordningen. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Art.nr Produkt Typ Pris ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 36861 About a boy (Import) DVD2 189:- 35312 Best Seller (Torpeden) (Import) DV2UK 119:- 36214 I vildaste laget (Something wild) (Import) DV2UK 129:- 31456 Legal Eagles DVD2 99:- 31448 Mad Dog And Glory DVD2 129:- 37113 Mona Lisa (Import) DV2UK 149:- 37747 Mystery train (Import) DV2UK 229:- 37296 Romeo is bleeding DVD2 129:- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Totalt: 8 varor <i>(Total: 8 Articles)</i> Summa varor: 1172:- <i>(Total Sum:)</i> Frakt: 0:- <i>(Cost of Freight:)</i> Att betala: 1172:- <i>(To Pay:)</i> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Art.nr Produkt Typ Pris ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 37365 Possession (2003-05-14) DVD2 189:- 38189 Wild at heart (Import Sv.Text) (2003-05-14)DV2UK 159:- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Totalt: 2 varor Summa varor: 348:- Frakt: 25:- Att betala: 373:- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Art.nr Produkt Typ Pris ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 38197 Edge of darkness - Complete se (2003-05-28)DV2UK 229:- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Totalt: 1 vara Summa varor: 229:- Frakt: 15:- Att betala: 244:- (Comment on this)
Tuesday, April 1st, 2003
12:10 am	Ying xiong ( * HERO * ) - Cinema - 554 * In order to review this movie, I kinda have to tell a lot about the plot, which might spoil things if you want to see it (Which you should!!!), even if it's not that vital to not know the plot. Just a warning! * Obviously, this movie is compared with "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon", which is a bad thing, since, even if they share poetic beauty, martial art and are based in Chinese tales, isn't the same. It would be like comparing "Blade Runner" with "Total Recall" because they're both Sci-Fi, both are based on Philip K. Dick-stories etc. The comparison thing having to do with most of the people in the West only knowing "Asian" films through "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon", at least when it comes to dramas. Now, Hero and "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" do share a lot of things, and to some degree, I do think Hero is very much a result of the success of "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon". Hero is a strange film, that is a natural evolvement from Yimou Zhang's earlier films, at least "Raise the Red Latern", "Ju Dou" and "The Story of Qui Ju" (Which is the ones I've seen), towards a style closer to the epics of Akira Kurosawa ("Ran" and "Kagemusha"). Hero shares the stunning beauty of his earlier films, both when it comes to using textiles and colours. Who, of those having seen "Raise the Red Latern" can forget the rows of those red laterns lining the darkish blue-gray street? or the swirling colored textiles of "Ju Dou"? Yimou Zhang loves those elements, and they're heavily used in Hero. The whole movie is colour-co-ordinated in Black, White, red, blue and green and a vital part of the story, as it goes from Dark to white enlightment, and passing the others on the way. What makes this different, is the scale of it. It's an epic story, on a scale that haven't been seen before ever. Not even Kurosawa in "Ran" reached the scale of this one when it comes to size. The story is interesting. *spoiler* It deals with an assassin having came to the emperor in order to kill him, and the only way is to get within 10 steps from the emperor, which he only can through rewards. Pretending to be the saviour of the emperor, by having killed other assassins. That way, you first see the story how he killed the other three, as told by him, then the emperor being suspicious, tells it how he think it really was and then ending it with a couple of variations of the very truth. Which is interesting from a "Thriller" point of view. Now, the version running in Sween is 99 mins long, while the one in USA is 96 and the one in China 93 mins. I don't know what's missing from the others, but a long lenght might not always be a good thing. I felt this version was a touch long in the running in the first half of the story. Mostly in when the assassin tells his version of how he killed the other three, while substancially picking up speed towards the end. Some of it having to do with longing too much on "poetic" visuals. It's nice seeing swords ripping through water, from below the surface, but only for so long. The 2nd minute you see it, for the 12th time in a row, it gets a bit tedious, and you wish for the movie to move on. Especially since it sets it up as a thriller, in the sense that you want to know what happens. The story of the movie kinda clashing with the intention of the movie, since you kinda need the poetic visuals in order to get the emotional impact you need, but those stopping up the story which you are gonna feel about. Or how one should describe it. It's a story that, in the end is leading up to a certain emotion, the way you're gonna feel about it, but to get that, you have to stop the story. In the end, tho. As I said, both the emotional impact (I was on the verge of crying) and the pace pics up, and maybe the slow build up really is needed. One thing that Kurosawa was good at, was to inspire westerns. His Yojimbo, which was based on a Dashiel Hammet Gangster story, was re-made as "A Fistful of Dollars" by Sergio Leone (And later transferred to an Iceland story, as well as returning full circle to the Gangster setting of "Last Man Standing", while his "The Seven Samurais" became "The Magnificent Seven". In a similar way Hero is ridiculously much a western in many ways. In some sense, you feel it as if they've looked on Sergio Leone's interpretion of Yojimbo and used that as a inspiration for this movie. As if Kurosawa had re-made "A Fistful of Dollars" instead of the other way around. You could exchange Jet Li with Clint Eastwood, and the message from "Unforgiven". As I said, it's really stupid to compare it with "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon", becuse they are very different movies and not doing any favor to any of them. Hero is, by far, a more epic story, and lots and lots more beautiful. To hail "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon", would be to forget that it's only a "western" interpretion of a lot of movies most of us never gets to see, of which I'd includes Yimou Zhang's earlier films. That way, it's extremely hard to say who mimics who. They're both really great movies, and as it happens, in the long run, I do prefer Hero for various reasons. It's not as much vignettes, but more story-based. It's very smart in the way it moves from the dark to the enlightment, with colours representing various emotional values of the story. Red for the passionate drama etc. Some might not agree with my choise, preferring the more poetic visual poems of "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon". As I said, see both, and if not, you can't go much wrong with Hero. I promise you, you'll not see such a beautiful movie in a very long time, with as cool scenes, such as when Jet Li moves faster than the falling water drops, breaking through them. http://www.herothemovie.com/ (2 Comments |Comment on this)
Saturday, March 8th, 2003
2:05 am	Chicago - Cinema - 452 For some reason, it's extremely hard reviewing this movie. It's a dazzling movie, for sure, and very entertaining most of the time. At the same time it's not exactly original or revealing any major truths. Now it's based on a very old story, having been adapted both for a play and films before, as well as having been turned into a musical which this film is based on. Not having seen the musical, or being that familiar with it, it's impossible to compare the film with the stage-version. I'm not sure the need for doing that, since it's a movie and as such, should stand on it's own feet. The comparison thing is only for those having seen both, unless someone really wants to decide which version to see. At the same time. Since one know it's based on a very famous musical, it's hard not to wanting to compare the two, since such a lot in the movie, obviously, is dependent on the musical. For some reason, I couldn't stop thinking about, if there was a really great sequence in the movie, if that was the movie, of stolen from the stage. It's such a great movie visually and edited, you really start to admire the filmmakers, but then you think.. What if they've done nothing.. if it's, basically, just something they've "stolen". When seeing it, I often found myself wondering how the heck that could be done on a stage, which I think is a good thing. That means, probably, unless my imagination is extremely poor, the movie is taking liberations with the Musical, and using the extended tools avaible, at other times you do feel as if they've simply lifted the scene right out from stage-version. Obviously mostly in the musical numbers. Since one could say it belongs, even if it's an old musical, to the new wave of musicals, and musicals really is something very special and original, it's hard not to compare them, and of course, Chicago let itself be compared to Moulin Rouge, and I'd say Chicago is the winner hands down.. The story might be far more interesting and emotional in Moulin Rouge, but Chicago is way better told, has a higher share of dazzlement, better songs and is generally more entertaining. Originally, I've done my research :P, Chicago was an extremely moralistic story, but going through the Musical-wash and now becoming a movie, it's reduced to pure entertainment, a show, as most musicals are. Chicago, the musical, is, my guess, an entertaining night out.. some good songs, great choreography.. lots of lights.. show.. and the movie, of course, reflects that. The only "truth" that comes out of it, is that people do love sensations, especially if they're "dirty", and all media is nothing more than part of the entertainment, wanting to make a buck out of people's lust for it and people lend itself to it by, more or less willingly, by wanting to become a part of the sensation. Chicago is 113 minutes of entertainment, nothing more or less, which is the reason why it's hard writing about the movie. You come to the cinema, you see the movie, and leave the cinema with a vague, positive feeling only, while the movie in itself doesn't leave many traces of itself in your memory. As for the movie.. yes.. it's really entertaining, it's extremely well-done. It's one of the visually most stunning movies I've ever seen, the way the action "flows" in one long chain of stunning images (Everyone having seen the stunning "Roxanne"-number in Moulin Rouge know what I'm talkinga about. In MR it was just that number, while the whole of Chicago is made like that) . Richard Gere's number "Razzle Dazzle" being a fine example.. (you can see a clip from it here: http://entertainment.msn.com/Movies/Movie.aspx?m=532814) In just one number, they're able to mix a song in Roxie Hart's (Renee Zellweger) imagination that tells all about how the trial plays out. Yes, that's the idea of a Musical, but a movie that allows for intercutting between different things, lets itself to that extremely well, if they know what they're doing, and with Chicago they've done that, creating a movie that feels "designed", more than anything. It's as if the creators has set up a 113 min long, flowing, stage-show but at the same time having been able to make it 4-dimensional, by seeing the possibilities with filmic images with various angles, and editing. Taking it off the stage, which is always a problem when it comes to filming things originating on a stage, play or musical. Chicago in that sense, is the first movie taken from a stage, that's able to blend the stage and the movie together. Still, it's far from perfect. As I said, it's very vague, very much thanks to being just a 133 min flow of images. It doesn't have fixed point that ties it all together. At times, it's a touch boring. Even if it's based on Bob Fosse's choreography, I actually think the choreography, most of the time, sucks (Which is a bad thing for a song & dance musical. The dance is nicely filmed, but the choreography in itself is unoriginal "old stuff" and maybe better suited for a stage in some senses. The same goes for the Art Direction. Even if it's looking great, it's "traditional". That way, the movie, a lot of the time plays out as expected (Which seems to be a sickness of movie right now.. Everything looking the way you expect it to look. Lord of the rings is exactly "right" as an example). Instead of experimenting with style, they settle for the immediate and proven. It lacks humour. The story and dialouge is humorous, but not the movie in itself. A good thing with Moulin Rouge was it's smartness when it came to borrowing stuff, a post-modern musical, and knowing that the audience knew they were doing that. Chicago uses references too, but plays it out seriously, as if we don't know they've "stolen" it and kinda hope we'll not find out they've done it. It's noticeable it's borrowing from a lot of sources. It's in many ways inspired by Moulin Rouge when it comes to style, it borrows a lot from Potter's The Singing Detective and Lipstick on my collar etc. The main problem with the movie is that, whatever center of gravity it has, is the main character, Roxie Hart, and she's simply "not there". I'm not sure who's fault it is, the screenplay or Zellweger, but you never get the feeling of the persona. Zeta-Jones as Velma Kelly and Richard Gere as Billy feels a lot more defined as persons. When the main character is so vague, and boring, a movie entirely based on her, and her imagination has a serious problem. It's not easy to say if it's the way the story plays out, with the mix between her imagination and RL, or Zellweger which is the problem, or a combination of them. As of the acting. I've never been a fan of Renee Zellweger and I'm not one know. I think she's really bad in this movie, especially when you see the rest of the cast. Her performance feels, well.. not natural. She's acting, and it's visible she's doing that, it looking more like a performance than a person. Catherine Zeta-Jones on the other hand, doesn't seem to act at all, and feeling entirely natural. Richard Gere, if uneven thanks to what he has to do, is.. well.. Richard Gere. Queen Latifah is quite good, but doesn't have a lot to do (Her part looks as if it has been really cut down compared to what it might be in the stage-version, thanks to the movie not spending much time in the prison, while the stage-version is, more or less, all set in the prison). The important question.. Will I buy it on DVD. Sure. It's a must. (and yes.. it will, most likely, win the best picture Oscar, most likely adapted screenplay. Catherine Zeta-Jones has a really good chance to get one. Photography is dead sure, in my view.) (11 Comments |Comment on this)
Saturday, March 1st, 2003
8:06 pm	Yes.. yes.. Stupido!!! Posted about creating my Oscar Guessing Group.. What I did forget, was to include a link to it.. :( That way.. here it is again, with the link. :) **** Well.. And the game is on.. finally.. Join my group.. Guess the Oscar Winners.. Yahoo! Movies Awards Challenge Group ID: 733 Password: luka91 Let the best woman or man win!! Ê (2 Comments |Comment on this)
Tuesday, February 25th, 2003
8:41 am	Oscar Challenge Well.. And the game is on.. finally.. Join my group.. Guess the Oscar Winners.. Group ID: 733 Password: luka91 Let the best woman or man win!! (Comment on this)
Monday, February 17th, 2003
9:59 am	Movie Survey Found this in the LJ of bertrande Darn.. shouldn't do these.. It's like 200 movies in every answer, and I still think I miss too many movies I love.. First Movie you ever saw in the theater: an Astrid Lindgren movie.. “Tjorven, Batsman and Moses” maybe.. it was a “Vi på Saltkråkan” (“Seacrow Island”) Fav movie as a kid: Not sure.. Either The Djungle Book or some Astrid Lindgren.. Pippi Longstocking or Emil.. Movie you have seen the most times: Tricky.. Star Wars probably.. Biggest Movie Star crush as a kid: I’m not sure I had any.. Fav 80's teen Movie: Some kind of wonderful Fav song from a movie: “Footlose” I guess.. if not in Footlose at least in Romy & Michelle’s High School Reunion. “I’m gonna be (500 miles)” from Benny & Joon maybe.. oh.. “Suddenly Seymour” - Little Shop of Horrors. Fav Love Romance Movie: depends.. I do love both Romantic comedies as well as dramatic.. The Bridges of Madison County, Starman, The Piano, Roxanne, Cyrano de Bergerac, The Big Blue, Les Amants du Pont Neuf, Shakespeare in Love, 9 1/2 Weeks Fav Horror Movie: The Hitcher, Aliens - Special Edition, Cat People (1942), The Haunting (196?), Dead Calm, Repulsion. Fav Drama: La Belle Noiseuse, Cyrano de Bergerac, Jean de Florette, Glengarry Glen Rose, Housekeeping, Brassed off, Bound, 9 1/2 Weeks Fav Sci Fi movie: Silent Running, Blade Runner, Brazil, The Fifth Element Fav Musical Movie: Blues Brothers, The Commitments, Brassed Off, Little Shop of Horrors Fav Comedy Movie: Groundhog Day, Scrooged, Dark Star, The Naked Gun, His Girl Friday, Galaxy Quest Fav Action Movie: Die Hard, The Long Kiss Goodnight, Lethal Weapon, Nikita, Leon/The Professional, The Fifth Element, The Matrix Movie that Scared you as a child: don’t know.. Movie that makes you cry every time you see it: Starman Worst movie you ever saw: Hollow Man, The Horse Whisperer, Swordfish, Göta Kanal, Gladiator, Cobra Movie you walked out on in the theater cause it was so bad: None.. but Cobra was darn close.. if I hadn’t got in for free, I’d left after about 10 seconds.. Most sexual movie you ever saw (NON PORN): Bound, 9 1/2 Weeks (and Caligula) Most Disturbing movie you ever saw: River's Edge Movie that supposedly sucks but you love it: Caligula Fav Actors: Jeff Bridges, Bob Hoskins, John Lithgow, Brian Donnehy, Gerard Depardieu, Bruce Willis, Kevin Bacon, Clint Eastwood, Dustin Hoffman, Johnny Depp, Alan Rickman Fav Actresses: Julianne Moore, Amanda Plummer, Isabelle Huppert, Isabelle Adjani, Nicole Kidman, Jodie Foster, Susan Sarandon, Catherine Deneuve, Geena Davis Fav Porn Star: Don’t have any.. Traci Lords maybe.. Fav sex scene from a movie (NON PORN): Bound Movie you wanted to see the most as a child but were not allowed to: No idea Sexiest movie star of all time MALE: dunno.. Johnny Depp maybe.. Sexiest movie star of all time FEMALE: Susan Sarandon, Catherine Deneuve.. maybe.. Jennifer Tilly Movie that could/might as well been written about your life: Monster in the closet maybe :P Actually.. not seen one that feel that way.. not even close.. Fave Villain in a movie: Rutger Hauer in either Blade Runner or The Hitcher Last movie you saw on TV/rented?: don’t remember.. seen parts of a lot of movies only.. Last movie you saw in theater: Possession (1 Comment |Comment on this)
Thursday, January 9th, 2003
8:52 pm	Eric Schlosser: Fast Food Nation - Book (Non Fiction) Since this is, at heart, a political book, it's tricky to review it. I guess, if you agree, you're more likely to like the book than if you don't. Now I, to some degree, happen to agree with the author's view of life. Now it's a rather smart book, since it avoids trying to be propaganda and demanding a major change, and only at times, the authour show where his heart is. Now, you can always question facts presented, but without doubt, all facts presented are, mostly, true, and Scholosser trust the facts enough to let them speak very much for themself. What he does, is that he puts them in a context. In a wider perspective. Now, that's where the problem is. Facts and statistics can be selected and presented depending on what you want to say. Still, the conclusions he makes (out of the facts you get in the book), is hard to interpret in any other way. You get a feeling that he's absolutely right, and it's not a pretty picture he paints. The book as such, is hard to describe. It's called "Fast Food Nation" with the subtitle: "What the All American Meal is doing to the world", which, to some degree explains what's the book is about, but only to some degree. Even if the Fast Food industry is the main target of the book, he could've chosen a lot of other industries to tell the story he wants to tell. The main purpose of the book is to expose the state of, mostly, USA, where old-fashion values are replaced by a total corporate greed, where every single dollar in profit is counted, no matter what effect it has to human life or the enviroment. It does that by telling about the fast food industry, which might be the best, and most total, example. Since it's very much something most people come in contact with, as well as it affects most aspects of life by the sheer size of it. Thanks to all meat, potato, pork and chickens needed to extremely low cost, for all that fast food, it affects how land is used, it affects how farmers are able to survive or not. It affects the way animal are slaughtered, and by whom. Since McDonalds, Burger King, Domino's, Taco Bell etc, is such big companies, who buy their food from a selected few, and demanding uniformity, the food has to be processed in strict industrialized processes that creates exactly the same taste and shape over and over again. The food processing, as well as the restaurants in themself, affects million of people working. The fast food restaurants, as an example, is the only ones that doesn't have to pay their workers according to the minimum wages, and they fight real hard to keep it that way, even if raising the wages with $1/hour for someone working at a McD or BK meant a 2 cent increase to the price of a hamburger, and that, in an indirect way, affects crime and education. You'll most likely find kids from poor families working at a fast food restaurant, which often affects their ability to get high exams, meaning they'll most likely be trapped in poverty, since they need to work there to get money, but that work stops them from getting an education that might take them to better work in the future. It affects how cities are built and expands. It affects healtcare, since the cutting of corners when it comes to producing the food, means food that doesn't always live up to the lowest health regulations. It's kinda ironic that, that big producer of animal food, Pedigree, refuses to buy their meat from a lot of the slaughterhouses producing meat for the fast food restaurants, since they don't live up to the health regulations. There has been scares of terrorist-attacks, killing thousands of people.. Contamination of water etc. The truth is, more people die every year of the result of meat filled wtih bacteria etc. USA boasts that there's not been a case of Mad Cow Disease in USA, which might have to do with only an estimated 15,000 cows has been tested for it since 1990, out of 375 million having been slaughtered, while Belgium with a production of just 1/30 of that in USA, tests 400,000 every year. In USA they don't want any more restrictions since no case has been found. When they found the first 2 cases in UK, which caused the big scare, 60,000 cows were already infected. When the first case might be discovered in USA, who knows how many other might be infected already? That way, the book really is much more than just about the fast food industry, or.. rather.. it's not at all about the fast food industry as much as it's about how we choose to live our lives etc. Or really, the way our lives has been affected by the growth of the industrial revolution when it comes to services such as the fast food industry. Even if you might not agree with everything in the book, and have objections to some, it's really a book everyone should read, because it opens one's eyes to a lot of things one might not have thought about, or didn't want to think about. Does the book stops me from eating at a fast food restaurant? Nope, not really. Now I don't eat there that much, in the first place. I might stop at that Burger King at Centralstationen in Stockholm the next time I go to Stockholm, but the book does make me think a touch more about it. Whatever.. Read it! (1 Comment |Comment on this)
8:52 pm	The Others - DVD - 224 I've got a problem with movies that's based on mystical events. More often than not, they're unable to disguise what it tries to hide. That could be said of The Others. It set itself up to be mystical, as in trying to keep the audience in the dark, as well as going for a twist (which, in some sense, is the main point of the movie. At least, it feels like that). Now I do know that this movie, the "twist" comes as a realy surprise to a lot of people, who are able to, well.. buy the set up. The thing is, when a movie goes to lenghts in being mysterious, I can't stop myself from thinking about the solution, instead of buying what the movie tries to make you believe. The Others is a scaringly good movie. It has atmosphere, great acting etc. It's just perfect, but when you know the main point of the movie about 20 mins into it, it's hard to engage in it, and appreciate what's there. Instead seeing everything from the opposite side of what the movie presents, and looking at all the clues the movie scatters around. It's the same as with "The Sixth Sense", where, once you know the Bruce Willis character is a ghost himself, is able to see that he doesn't speak to anyone else in the movie, as an example. Only the kid. It's very much the same with The Others. It's unable, simply, to keep you guessing, to keep you in the dark, once you've started thinking of the solution. That's, in a lot of ways, sad. It sets itself up as a mystical ghost story, at the same time as it tries to tell a story about a woman, her morals and relationship with her kids. Something that would have worked as well, as a movie in itself, without the gimmic of the ghost story. It's as if they've not trusted the material they've got on their hands, thinking of.. how on earth are we gonna get people to see this. We need something to sell that story. The thing is, if you figure out the mystery early on, you're occupied with that, if you doesn't, you're too busy with the ghost story to really notice as well. (24 Comments |Comment on this)
Wednesday, December 18th, 2002
9:24 pm	Possession - Cinema - 453 Now I've not read the book, not yet at least, but I do plan on it.. Saw this in York, UK, as in without subtitles, and I did have a very lovely girl at my side.. (Both may have had some effect on how I saw the movie, of course.. ) It's a very charming, entertaining and engaging love story.. Now, it's extremely hard to really define this movie. It's fun, and follows the patterns of a romantic comedy, but it's got to much passion and drama, to really be considered as a romantic comedy. At the same time, it's too entertaining and fun to really be considered a passionate drama. At the same time, it's a kind of detective story, and costume drama.. Yes.. it's a mix of a lot of things, and.. that's both it's strenght and it's "problem". That it's hard to define, makes it refreshing, and of course, containing such a lot of stuff, there's always something you can like about it. At the same time, it's hard getting everything into a movie that doesn't have a running time of an epic, without things getting in the way of each other.. The nature of this movie, as well as great actors and a director who seems to know a thing or two, makes the pieces work surprisingly well together, and flow in a very natural way.. At the surface, it's a detective story, where a man and a woman is searching for proof of a love story some 150 years earlier, searching for letters, diaries etc, and following in the footsteps of that couple. Yes.. I guess you can guess what happens.. The story is predictable, and some events in the movie are "typical", as in following the norm. That way, it might not be as engaging all the time, not as much as it should be. In that sense, the detective story is a great help, since it move the action forward. In the end, it's a really entertaining movie, with very passionate drama. Even if it does't work all the way, I really liked this movie a lot, and sure reckommend it for others to see. (Comment on this)
Monday, October 21st, 2002
10:37 am	John Irving - My Movie Business (A Memoir) : Book This is a weird book. It mostly details John Irving's work with getting "The Ciderhouse Rules" to the screen, and some notes about the other movies he's been "involved" in. He describes the work, his feelings and a lot of comparison between the novel and the screenplay/movie. It's an ok read. Still, I can't really find the point of the book. Who's gonna read it, and think it's interesting? It's not a self-biography as such. Only his thoughts about the movie. It's not exactly an instruction in how to convert a novel into a movie. It's written before the final version of the movie were done, so he nicely avoids having to actually having to say anything about how he thinks the movie turn out, and of course, no comments on the Academy Award he got. Since the novel, and the movie, is about abortions, the book is briefly interesting as it touches on that question, and his views about it etc, but only then, really. As I said, in a lot of ways, it's a totally pointless book. It's purpose isn't to entertain you, it's not to teach you something or provoke thoughts. If anything, it more or less, seems to be some kind of defence speech (Yes, I do think abortions should be allowed! and Yes, the movie isn't the novel, because you have to change things around to various degree, to fit into the running time etc, in a movie). It's as if he wants us to see his view on abortions, and "avoid" a discussion with, what he calls, religious zealots. He also want's to avoid the criticism the movie might get from fans of the novel, who'd say that the movie has destroyed everything the novel is. Yes, it's possible to read the book. No problem. You'd not suffer, actually it's interesting and entertaining at times, and maybe, if you're a total novice when it comes to the understanding of the moviemaking process you might even be able to pick up some. Still, by large, it's a book you read, it doesn't make you feel any different, and you put it down and forgets about it, as simple as that. (Comment on this)
Saturday, October 19th, 2002
5:52 am	DVDs Ice Age I so love this movie. It's both touching the way only animated movies seems to be real good in. It's nice that it's that way in, often, very subtle ways, and several times. You've got the growing trust in the "partners", you have very tragic events as well as big emotional scenes. It's a plus with the "Cave Wall Paitings" coming to live, and showing something that make you sit straight up and silence as your heart starts to ache, in the middle of all the fun, and make you kinda carry that somber mood with you for the rest of the movie, without letting it shadow the fun etc, going on later. Then, of course, it's totally stupingly hilarious. I love the "mean" comments, that's rare in movies. Not even the "cynical" Shrek, were able to reach that level of sarcastic and biting remarks, Ice Age is filled with. The DVD contains tons of nice extras, including a "missing" Scrat episode, which is totally hilarious. If you've not seen a ballet with a "whatever" and lots of nuts in the air, you sure has missed something. I think Stanley Kubrick would have wished he'd been able to do something like that in 2001. The Piano Not sure what to say about this movie. It's extremely beautiful in both images and thoughts, and it has real great music by one of my favorites, Michael Nyman. Now, it really is a "chick's movie", in a way that simply doesn't register with a male audience. It's hard to explain, but it has to do with the way males and females dream. Still, it's hard to not admire this movie for it's passionate love story, at the same time as it shows the injustice of a lot of things. Back To The Future Trilogy All the three movies, in one box. It's great fun, and real good action, and.. it totally has the best endings of any movies. Even if it's a cliffhanger ending, the ending of the second movie is.. well.. it goes beyond anything, with the car been hit by thunder and disappearing, the Wells Fargo man turning up, until Fox knocks on Doc's shoulder and he faints.. It's such a total rush that whole sequence. Seeing it on repeat, since movie 2 and 3 were written together, makes you notice a lot of stuff that's referred to each other that makes not much sense on it's own, since you don't get them, but.. seeing them all, it has a lot of really nice moments that you'd miss if you hadn't seen all of the movies. (Comment on this)