?

Log in

Cinema as Art
 
[Most Recent Entries] [Calendar View] [Friends]

Below are the 8 most recent journal entries recorded in cinemaasart's LiveJournal:

Wednesday, December 15th, 2004
3:45 pm
[hankchinasky]
unfortunate event
i went to the advance screening of "Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events" (when does this movie come out anyway? is it already out?) this weekend. here are my two cents.

i didnt really know what to expect from this movie. i am not a fan of mr carrey's or the book series, but i am a huge fan of free movies, so that was the major deciding factor to get my ass up at 9am on a saturday morning to go see this film.

i felt as if this movie was a little confused, was this movie supposed to be a "kids movie" or a movie for a wider "teenage/adult" audience. most of mr carrey's dialogue was inteniously and speedily delivered. it was spiced with some heavy accents from time to time which made it extremely difficult for me, an "adult", to comprehend. i would imagine a 6 or 7 year old to experience the same problems. but then again, i am not familiar with the books. maybe the 6 or 7 year old's have read the books so many times they know all the dialogue by heart?

mr carrey is either brilliant or boring in his mulitple playing roles in the film. you are either a huge fan of mr carrey and his antics or you are bored to tears with seeing him do the same old schtick he always does in his films and stand up work. the Violet character played by the excellent Emily Browning stole the movie. she is a real talent and i hope to see more from her in the future.

the two worst things about this movie was that the great Luis Guzman is in this film for about 90 seconds and only has three words of dialogue and they are unintelligible. and the other is the whole film looks like a blatant rip off of a tim burton/barry sonnenfield "addams family" film. if you are a 12 year old goth girl who really wants to make a duct tape dress to prom (like you are even going to prom anyway), you will love this movie.
Friday, December 10th, 2004
10:20 am
[hankchinasky]
deja vu
i went to the advance screening of "the life aquatic" last night, and let me tell you how much of a disappointment it was.

i first heard of mr anderson in 1994 when "bottle rocket" came out. it was a cute little film from a first time director/writer, but it was just a short 13 or 15 minute film. then, two years later in 1996, the short "bottle rockets" was now a major full length motion picture and boy was it just an impressive little gem. mr anderson really impressed me and i was eager to see what he would show as his softmore attempt.

"rushmore" came out two years later and was a critical and somewhat finacial success (with a cult following with the young kids). i did enjoy "rushmore" but still felt that "bottle rocket" was by far a stronger film.

another three years later in 2001 mr anderson came out with "the royal tenenbaums" which i was not thrilled or impressed with at all. it seemed like a slightly altered carbon copy of mr anderson's first commercial success "rushmore". the only thing that was different were the characters names and a few of the actors. this movie should have been called "rushmore pt 2". to be honest, i was disappointed.

last night i went to the advance screening of "the life aquatic" and guess what, its "rushmore pt 3". there was nothing sweet or special about "life aquatic". it is just a cut and paste re-rendering of "rushmore". sometimes when directors find a groove for themselves, a style that they are known for, that is all they ever do for the rest of their careers. and its so very sad really. mr anderson is turning into the thomas kinkade of film.

p.s.- the two best things of this movie are owen wilson not being the stock asshole owen wilson character that he is always in in every single film he does and seeing bill murray rock out and dance for 5 seconds while in a wet suit.
Thursday, September 23rd, 2004
2:24 pm
[madape]
Goodbye Lenin
I keep seeing the recent foreign hit "Goodbye Lenin" in the video store and I thought it looked pretty interesting. Last time it was out of stock but I think I will rent it the next time I go to the video store.

Is this a good idea?
Monday, September 20th, 2004
4:22 pm
[absentesse]
Zatoichi
Has anyone seen the new Takeshi Kitano film "Zatoichi"? if so, what do you think he does with the swordplay genre? I love it personally, I think he subverts it in slight but affective ways, particularly at the end.

Current Mood: creative
Saturday, June 19th, 2004
9:01 am
[galactic_jack]
Hello :)
I stumbled across this journal and thought I'd join, hope that's all good and well!
As film is one of my most long cherished interests, I thought it might be a good idea.

As an introductory question (not an amazingly original one I admit, sorry!) but I was wondering what film would you consider as a good/bad, debatable or interesting example of film as art? Sometimes the distinctions can be blurred regarding art and commerce/entertainment, but if a film can blend both together in a universal and interesting way, then sometimes I feel that this can be a successful example.
Thursday, May 13th, 2004
3:55 pm
[kris_moore]
Introduction
I'm glad to see that were people interested in this community.

I apologize for taking so long to welcome you; I just started a new job that required me to flip-flop my sleep schedule.

Feel free to (as I probably will) comment on any movie you feel compelled to. If we haven't seen it, we get a recommendation or if we have, a discussion starts.

Welcome aboard.
Sunday, May 9th, 2004
4:38 pm
[twotrees]
I definitely love cinema for the entertainment value but definitely think that it is sublime when it becomes art. How do I define that? I don't know. Perhaps it is in the care with the language of the film(the writing),the acting and definitely either beautiful or innovative cinematography. Just wanted to introduce myself and share. My user name comes from the film Unforgiven which I ironically have never seen. Someone else gave me the appellation.
12:16 am
[armsgravy]
Introductory Discussion
Pauline Kael's idea of cinema as a supreme form of entertainment (that is, self-declared serious films are the only "art") and not a philosophical discussion vs. the idea that film is an entertainment form, as well as something that can be good for you.

I find myself agreeing more towards the latter.

(This whole post assumes you know what the hell I'm talking about anyway)
About LiveJournal.com