Review Cinema-Going

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lucas

Member: Rank 4
Last edited by a moderator:

Doctor Omega

Member: Rank 10
curtains_0.jpg


So, what you off to see?

And is cinema-going fun for you anymore?

Or are those flashing phone screens, crunched snacks, talking and people shouting out the plots getting you down? :emoji_confused:


db2f35c43319a9c854fc71dec215fcdb.gif


And have you ever been left fuming, bewhildered - or just plain shocked - by poor audience behaviour in the past?

Any anecdotes?

Feel free to vent here! :emoji_alien:
 
Last edited:

filmfan95

Member: Rank 3
There's a low budget "Wizard of Oz" film that I've been following for awhile. It strives to be a faithful adaptation of the book.

Trailer 1

 
Last edited by a moderator:

duzit

Member: Rank 6
There's a low budget "Wizard of Oz" film that I've been following for awhile. It strives to be a faithful adaptation of the book.

Trailer 1


Trailer 2

I was not aware of this. The original is one of my top favs. Is this coming to theater's?
There is a lame TV series 'Emerald City' that I abhor. Of course, they have put their own spin on the story which is lame. Anyway, tell more about the new movie. Thanks 4 posting this.
@Doctor Omega aka: Doc O
(I enjoy all your image postings. I'm a very visual person. ~ Means I like pictures ~)
 
Last edited:

filmfan95

Member: Rank 3
I was not aware of this. The original is one of my top favs. Is this coming to theater's?
There is a lame TV series 'Emerald City' that I abhor. Of course, they have put their own spin on the story which is lame. Anyway, tell more about the new movie. Thanks 4 posting this.
(I enjoy all your image postings. I'm a very visual person. ~ Means I like pictures ~)
I actually spoke with the guy who wrote the screenplay about a year ago, on the forum he made for the movie. He said that he doesn't know whether or not the film will be theatrical or straight to DVD. It will depend on how it does at festivals.

There's very little that's different between the movie and the book. Most of the changes made are to make the film more cinematic.

Here's what I've gathered so far (spoilers ahead):

- We're familier with Dorothy's gingham dress. But in the book, Dorothy wore a red dress (not mentioned by color in the text, but colored red in the original illustrations, which were authorized by the author, and which the filmmakers are taking inspiration from) at the beginning, and switched to the gingham one when she began her journey. She didn't wear the gingham dress for the entire journey either, but switched to white one once she arrived at the Emerald City. In the new movie, for the sake of keeping the story moving, Dorothy starts the story with the gingham dress and doesn't change her clothes before her journey. However, she still changes into a white dress at the Emerald City.

- Folks who read the book may know that the Good Witch of the North did not have a name, and Glinda was the Good Witch of the South. They were separate characters. The North Witch appeared at the beginning, and legitimately didn't know about the power of the magic shoes. The South Witch appeared at the end. In the new movie, the Good Witch of the North is named Locasta, which does not originate from the books, but is instead from one of L. Frank Baum's plays.

- The Tin Woodman is portrayed as being sarcastic and rude when the company first encounters him, in order to make the "heartless" aspect align more with the other two people who joined Dorothy (Scarecrow thinks he doesn't have a brain because he doesn't know much, and Lion thinks he's a coward because he feels afraid, so from that logic, the Tin Woodman should feel that he doesn't have a heart because he a grouch, even though he really does care).

- The Tin Woodman is named Nick Chopper. This name does not appear in the book, but it does in the sequels.

- Readers of the book will also know that the Wicked Witch of the West didn't appear in the book until the companions went out to kill her. In the new movie, her role is expanded again. The crow attack is movied to earlier in the story, so at they attack the companions as they're rafting down the river. The Scarecrow clims on the pole deliberately in the new movie, in order to scare the crows away. Also, he only snaps one neck of a crow, and the rest fly away, whereas in the book, he strangled all of them.

- The backstory for the Winged Monkeys is left out.

- The scene with the Kalidahs is more cinematic. The Kalidahs begin chasing the companions before they chop down the tree to cross the ravine, in order to up the stakes a little bit. Ive seen it done this way in some anime adaptations as well, so it's a common deviation, and I actually prefer it that way over the wait was in the original book. Also, when the Kalidahs try to croos the tree to come after them, the Lion shoves the trees into the ditch to kill them, instead of the Tin Woodman chopping the end of it off.

Those are the only differences I can think of right now. With one or two exceptions, the differences from the book are very minor.
 

duzit

Member: Rank 6
I actually spoke with the guy who wrote the screenplay about a year ago, on the forum he made for the movie. He said that he doesn't know whether or not the film will be theatrical or straight to DVD. It will depend on how it does at festivals.

There's very little that's different between the movie and the book. Most of the changes made are to make the film more cinematic.

Here's what I've gathered so far (spoilers ahead):

- We're familier with Dorothy's gingham dress. But in the book, Dorothy wore a red dress (not mentioned by color in the text, but colored red in the original illustrations, which were authorized by the author, and which the filmmakers are taking inspiration from) at the beginning, and switched to the gingham one when she began her journey. She didn't wear the gingham dress for the entire journey either, but switched to white one once she arrived at the Emerald City. In the new movie, for the sake of keeping the story moving, Dorothy starts the story with the gingham dress and doesn't change her clothes before her journey. However, she still changes into a white dress at the Emerald City.

- Folks who read the book may know that the Good Witch of the North did not have a name, and Glinda was the Good Witch of the South. They were separate characters. The North Witch appeared at the beginning, and legitimately didn't know about the power of the magic shoes. The South Witch appeared at the end. In the new movie, the Good Witch of the North is named Locasta, which does not originate from the books, but is instead from one of L. Frank Baum's plays.

- The Tin Woodman is portrayed as being sarcastic and rude when the company first encounters him, in order to make the "heartless" aspect align more with the other two people who joined Dorothy (Scarecrow thinks he doesn't have a brain because he doesn't know much, and Lion thinks he's a coward because he feels afraid, so from that logic, the Tin Woodman should feel that he doesn't have a heart because he a grouch, even though he really does care).

- The Tin Woodman is named Nick Chopper. This name does not appear in the book, but it does in the sequels.

- Readers of the book will also know that the Wicked Witch of the West didn't appear in the book until the companions went out to kill her. In the new movie, her role is expanded again. The crow attack is movied to earlier in the story, so at they attack the companions as they're rafting down the river. The Scarecrow clims on the pole deliberately in the new movie, in order to scare the crows away. Also, he only snaps one neck of a crow, and the rest fly away, whereas in the book, he strangled all of them.

- The backstory for the Winged Monkeys is left out.

- The scene with the Kalidahs is more cinematic. The Kalidahs begin chasing the companions before they chop down the tree to cross the ravine, in order to up the stakes a little bit. Ive seen it done this way in some anime adaptations as well, so it's a common deviation, and I actually prefer it that way over the wait was in the original book. Also, when the Kalidahs try to croos the tree to come after them, the Lion shoves the trees into the ditch to kill them, instead of the Tin Woodman chopping the end of it off.

Those are the only differences I can think of right now. With one or two exceptions, the differences from the book are very minor.
Thank you 4 the info:)
 

Carol

Member: Rank 5
@duzit
Good evening - or whenever you come across this. Thank you for the comments on Emerald City. I've just watched the first episode and was pondering my next move, and your verdict of "lame" makes sense so far. I chanced on it with no advance hype, and might still stray to episode 2 tomorrow to confirm suspicions...
Is it just me or are TV companies who can't think of anything original or afford good writers playing a parlour game on these lines:
(1) get very drunk
(2) take a card from the pile of successful rival shows with very adult content - in this case, clearly Game of Thrones
(3) take a card from the pile of much-loved children's book
(4) commission series

Because if they are I can offer a few suggestions of my own.

House of Cards and Winnie the Pooh - he just wants all that honey for himself, doesn't he?
Breaking Bad and Down With Skool: You think Heisenburg was bad, whgat about Molesworth N. the chemistry student?
Homeland and Stig of the Dump: a caveman, living in the local dump - a likely story...

Maybe it's time for bed...
 

RepairedSpace06

Member: Rank 1
What do you think about IT, I think it looks amazing!


I've read the book twice and every shot of the town in this trailer looks almost identical to how I pictured, especially the leper house. Also I hope the piano music in the beginning is part of the movie because I really like that.
 

Doctor Omega

Member: Rank 10
2017 Summer Box-Office Hits A Major Low


2017-summer-box-office-hits-a-major-low-696x464.jpg


The Summer film season is officially over with overall ticket sales dropping to an estimated $3.8 billion this year – down 14% on last year and, unadjusted for inflation, the worst Summer film season since 2006.

Patty Jenkins’ “Wonder Woman” took the domestic box-office crown with $409 million, followed by James Gunn’s “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” with $389 million and Jon Watts’ “Spider-Man: Homecoming” with $325 million.

Worldwide ‘Guardians’ had the edge with $863M to Wonder Woman’s $813M. Other strong domestic players this season were “Despicable Me 3” ($258M), “Dunkirk” ($180M), “Girls Trip” ($112M), “Baby Driver” ($105M) and “Annabelle: Creation” ($90M).

Not helping were notable big-budget bombs like “The Mummy” ($80M), “Alien: Covenant” ($75M), “Baywatch” ($58M), “The Dark Tower” ($48M), “Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets” ($39M) and “King Arthur: Legend of the Sword” ($39M).

Others were down considerably on their predecessors. Some like “War for the Planet of the Apes” ($145M) and “Cars 3” ($151M) by a little – around 25-30%, and some like “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales” ($172M) and “Transformers: The Last Knight” ($130M) down by as much as 70% from their heyday a few films ago.

Overall yearly revenue has dropped to 6% behind last year’s totals as of the end of August, however September’s unusually strong line-up with “IT,” “American Assassin,” “mother!,” “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” and “LEGO Ninjago” are all expected to help things bounce back.



 

Doctor Omega

Member: Rank 10
MGM Relaunches Orion Pictures In 2018


mgm-relaunches-orion-pictures-in-2018-696x464.jpg


MGM is set to re-launch Orion Pictures as a standalone U.S. theatrical marketing and distribution company beginning with Michael Sucsy’s “Every Day” as its first feature on February 2nd.

Created in 1978 and going bankrupt by 1991, Orion Pictures released some of the most iconic and celebrated films of those two decades including the likes of “The Silence of the Lambs,” “Amadeus,” “The Terminator,” “Platoon,” “Dances with Wolves” and “Hoosiers”.

MGM bought the company in 1997 and revived it as a distributor in 2013. It has since teamed with Samuel Goldwyn Films as a co-distributor on several films recently, but this will take things much further.

Veteran executive John Hegeman has been hired as president of the new Orion Pictures and will assemble a theatrical distribution, marketing and digital team responsible for the marketing and distribution of four to six modestly-budgeted films a year.



 

Doctor Omega

Member: Rank 10
I haven't had a visit really spoiled recently, but flashing screens continue to be a nuisance.

Usually during a poignant or absorbing moment on screen as someone checks their Twitter account or Facebook updates! :emoji_confused:
 

Doctor Omega

Member: Rank 10
Pennywise Kills Tom Cruise At Box-Office


pennywise-kills-tom-cruise-at-box-office-696x464.jpg


Stephen King’s “IT” took back the box-office crown this weekend, marking the third of four weekends since its release where it has been at the top.

The film scared off Tom Cruise and Doug Liman’s “American Made” which scored solid reviews and was coming off good business of over $64 million overseas, but opened to just $17.3 million in the U.S. – Cruise’s worst wide release since “A Few Good Men” opened in the early 1990s. Even so, made for just a $50 million budget it will end up in profit.

Last week’s top spot holder “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” slipped to third but still pulled in a further $17 million with the top three being pretty close.

Dead on arrival was the “Flatliners” remake which was expected to flop and did so with just $6.7 million. The better reviewed “Battle Of The Sexes” also fizzled with just $3.4 million and sixth place despite a decent 1,200 screen opening.

On the limited release front both the Liam Neeson-led “Mark Felt” and the late Harry Dean Stanton’s “Lucky” were essentially ignored.
 

Doctor Omega

Member: Rank 10
Scorsese Is Not A Rotten Tomatoes Fan



scorsese-is-not-a-rotten-tomatoes-fan.jpg


Hollywood likes to use a scapegoat for its failures, and this year one of its biggest targets is that of Rotten Tomatoes – the critical aggregator that has been blamed for various films underperforming.

Of course any serious analysis shows that there’s no real correlation between a critical aggregate score and box-office, as seen this past weekend when “Blade Runner 2049” scored a strong 88% score on the site but has notably underperformed.

In an op-ed piece for THR, Martin Scorsese has shared his take on Rotten Tomatoes, the more audience-oriented CinemaScore, and the race by media to report on both box-office and review scores such as they recently did when Darren Aronofsky’s “mother!” received a rare F-grade CinemaScore. He says:

“The brutal judgmentalism that has made opening weekend grosses into a bloodthirsty spectator sport seems to have encouraged an even more brutal approach to film reviewing.

I’m talking about market research firms like Cinemascore, which started in the late 1970s, and online “aggregators” like Rotten Tomatoes, which have absolutely nothing to do with real film criticism. They rate a picture the way you’d rate a horse at the racetrack, a restaurant in a Zagat’s guide, or a household appliance in Consumer Reports.

They have everything to do with the movie business and absolutely nothing to do with either the creation or the intelligent viewing of film. The filmmaker is reduced to a content manufacturer and the viewer to an unadventurous consumer.

These firms and aggregators have set a tone that is hostile to serious filmmakers – even the actual name Rotten Tomatoes is insulting. And as film criticism written by passionately engaged people with actual knowledge of film history has gradually faded from the scene, it seems like there are more and more voices out there engaged in pure judgmentalism, people who seem to take pleasure in seeing films and filmmakers rejected, dismissed and in some cases ripped to shreds.

Good films by real filmmakers aren’t made to be decoded, consumed or instantly comprehended. They’re not even made to be instantly liked. They’re just made, because the person behind the camera had to make them.

The full piece can be found here. Scorsese’s most recent film, “Silence,” scored a strong 84% on Rotten Tomatoes but notably flopped at the box-office.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top