Mal ,'Bushwhacked'
A place to talk about movies--old and new, good and bad, high art and high cheese. It's the place to place your kittens on the award winners, gossip about upcoming fims and discuss DVD releases and extras. Spoiler policy: White font all plot-related discussion until a movie's been in wide release two weeks, and keep the major HSQ in white font until two weeks after the video/DVD release.
Re Jessica's complaint:
I don't think she was a moron or being a bitch. I think she had a strong image in her mind of someone with zero chance of attachment, and could not read the signals however strong they were because they were drowned out by her image of him. You don't have to be stupid to make that sort of mistake even though it leads to deeply stupid behavior. And he was just as delusional in his own way.
Holmes: I think the reason we should care if he's caught is that he's working against Holmes. I think the movie had pretty much gained that--however, there was no investigation of him outright, just tangentially. The movie meandered a bit towards the latter half, where I think we knew why we were there, but the characters didn't, but I didn't mind.
Saw Avatar with the fam today, we all loved it. I thought the villain(s) of the piece was(were) a little cartoonish in his(their) villainy, and one bit of dialogue/line delivery fell flat and cheesy, and I'd really like to see it without the 3-D, but I enjoyed the hell out of it.
James Horner's score remained in a supporting role for the most part, which is a feat for him (although I usually enjoy the hell out if his overblownness), but as much as I love his other scores, I don't actually want to want to be picturing Robert Gould Shaw and the 54th and Enemy at the Gates when I'm on Pandora.
one bit of dialogue/line delivery fell flat and cheesy
Hee - just one?
(I loved the movie too, but it needed a script doctor BADLY.)
I'd really like to see it without the 3-D
We're planning on seeing it tomorrow, and we've heard from quite a few people that 3-D is better.
Any other Buffista opinions? Juliebird, why do you want to see it without the 3-D?
why do you want to see it without the 3-D?
I felt blind watching it. It's been decades since I've seen a 3-D flick, and I don't think my eyes like it. For all the coolness and the weird moments where I wanted to lean forward to get a better view out the cockpit window only to remember that I wasn't actually in the cockpit, it was as equally distracting to me. So I want to view the movie without that distraction and see if it the loss of the distraction plus the loss of the extra coolness will even out.
I'm thrilled that Avatar is available in non-3D. I have monocular vision and the 3D technology just gives me a screaming headache.
Three hours of 3D was pretty rough on my eyes, but I'm glad I went for it anyway. It doesn't do much for the live-action talky parts of the film, but the action bits are AMAZING, and the final battle (i.e., the last 45 minutes of the film) takes incredible advantage of the depth of field.
That said, I wish someone would come up with a way to do 3D that allows for some head movement. The way it works now, tilting your head to stretch your neck muscles puts the movie out of focus so you really have to spend the entire three hours looking straight ahead at the screen.
So, Sherlock Holmes.
Credits roll, I turn to The Boy.
Me: "Some gay porn? Less gay."
Him: "Okay, I'll give you this one."
Me: "They were an old married couple!"
Him: "What do you think the 'barter system' was for borrowing clothes?"
Sherlock Holmes was good fun! I agree with ita re: still thinky with the punchy. I liked that aspect. It was more Holmesy than I expected.