Remember the old tv show? Well, this movie finally pays tribute to some of the timeless cliques of the tv show, and does them well. Thoroughly enjoyed my time spent with this movie and loved how it ended with a future and a positive spin. Word of warning, if you have any vertigo problems, hold on tight during the Dubai building scenes. lol
It looks fun to me. It helps to have great source material and characters. It feels like they whipped off the sequel too quickly. Didn't the first one just leave theaters? Oh, well - I'll check it out at some point over the holidays. Here's my favorite review so far - from a Finnish film critic who seems to be writing for stoners.
I am a Colorado College graduate who has spent about half my adult life developing The River Why as well as co-writing the screenplay. I also mortgaged my house to help pay for it. Critics certainly have the right to hate the film, but it might be nice to remember that there are real people behind it who risked a great deal to attempt to create something of value.
To the letter writer friend of the author who (rightfully) defends the novel: please do not "assume" anything about a movie you have not seen. I urge you to see the movie (available on DVD or VOD almost everywhere) and decide for yourself. The author of the novel has, purposefully, not seen the movie, and has not read the screenplay since an early draft in 1985.
I can assure you that we have talked to, and heard from, dozens of audience members who have read and adored the book who also, having actually seen the film, feel that the movie is a splendid adaptation. The River Why Facebook page contains some of these comments.
I look forward to hearing more from Colorado Springs.
Hey check out an amazing interview with the original "Ren McCormack" Kevin Bacon at: http://culturecatch.com/vidcast/kevin-baco…
I know of a local film submitted to the Indie Spirit that was written, shot, and shown in Colorado Springs that was not accepted. Yet this film was a finalist in the Las Vegas International Film Festival
What a fantastic movie! Great story and great cast.
I believe when Dumbledore indicated that Harry could go "on," he meant that's what would happen if Harry decided to board a train and leave King's Cross station, as it were, rather than going back to fight Voldemort and save Hogwarts and the wizarding world at large. That's how I interpreted it anyway.
I'm not sure you can call the Serpent/Skyscraper scene coherent. My reasoning is as follows:
1. Our heroes slide from nearly the top floor down to just before the building bends before they fall back inside.
2. When they fall inside, they slide across white linoleum until one of them falls out the other side and alerts Shockwave to send his serpent up to get them. (coherent so far.)
3. The serpent starts squeezing the building at the bend point and our heroes start sliding in the opposite direction across blue/grey carpet. The building is still falling in the same direction. This is forgivable if it were a reverse shot, but where did the blue carpet come from?
4. When the serpent finally squeezes the building enough that it falls with the top landing on a near-by building (creating essentially a building bridge) our heroes fall out of the top of the now sideways building to land safely on the fire escape of the other building. If our heroes decided to go upstairs in a falling building this would explain the change in floor covering, but there is no reference made to them climbing crazy sideways stairs (at least 10 flights) in the 45 seconds it takes the serpent to cut the building in 1/2.
In the first four points above I consider physics and time to be the enemies of coherence. My next two points are based on my opinion of survival instincts and their effect on coherent action sequences.
5. If I'm on a crack special forces team & I want to get high up in a skyscraper to shoot at a target, in Chicago, why do I choose the only bent skyscraper?
6. When the serpent is climbing the building, there is a quick-cut to office workers (not our heroes, but extras so someone did this on purpose) ducking behind desks and fleeing for safety. Here's my thought. If decepticons took over my city the night before, I'm not coming into work today, especially if my building is bent! I am not thinking, "Yeah, Megatron is scary, but... those TPS reports aren't gonna file themselves."
I'm open to other coherent scenes if anyone finds them, but I don't remember any.
Fantastic, whimsical, dreamlike
All screen geeks should go see Kal's 510 hero's journey over at http://www.clickok.co.uk/index4.html
Yes - great movie and Mel is a dynamic performer. Simply put, there is no one out there that has his presence and can make things work onscreen the way he does. Maybe I am projecting too much, but Mel really seems to want to better himself. The guy grew up in a screwy environment, he's an alcoholic and bipolar - lots of hurdles to try and overcome. None of his actions come across to me as someone who truly feels in his heart what he blurts out in times of distress.
Yes! This was a good movie! I hope it was therapudic and some what true to life for Gibson in the characters ability to return to his old self and pick up where he left off to grow. I always loved his movies, and he seems like such a nice (though lately troubled) guy, it's nice to see him back up and at it again, instead of going the Charlie Sheen route. To me those tapes and drunken statements represent a rough time in a private life I know damn little about, not an overall picture of a person. Always found it funny Hollywood damns Mel Gibson and "forgives" and even championizes Roman Polanski, whop drugged and raped a 13 year old girl, but I'll get off my soap box.
It's just nice to see Gibson seeming to rise above it. Lead the way man. And Jodie foster did a damned good job directing, wow. It was interesting, awakening and... fun, the way movies used to be.
Excellent review. Why this film (or anything Wright has done for that matter) gets respect from critics who should know better is beyond me. You really nailed the movie's core follies. Thanks.
No doubt the "bro" morality is deeply troubling.
The post-modern "it's all relative" has been replaced by "it's all relative as long as it benefits me". It's a very selfish ethic.
Amanda Seyfried can't hold a candle to Kristen Stewart, which will be adequately proven with this movie's receipts at the Box office. Btw, congrats on a review which is an outlier and therefore irrelevant.
We saw Barney's Version yesterday, at Kimball's. AWESOME story. I won't spoil it, but at the end of the movie a 30-year old mystery is solved. Pay attention to everything in the story and you will solve the mystery too. HIGHLY recommend this movie.
Justin Strout is not worthy of rating films, he's a MUSIC reviewer. Pay NO attention to what's stated above. Read his bio on Yahoo, he was an "office assistant" in Hollywood.
SEE THE MOVIE, it's well worth it, and Kimball's is always a great place to patronize.
So, why isn't this movie listed on their "showtimes" menu? When is it showing at the theater?
This is a wonderful opinion. The things mentioned are unanimous and needs to be appreciated by everyone.
What a moving, well-crafted story! We want to hear more from this writer. Sheri Lutz
Could someone please keep MaryAnn Johanson away from martial arts movies? Her contempt for even the concept of them and assumptions of over-testoneroned fans prevents a fair review of them as she casually consigns any and every one of them to the trashbin. See her Karate Kid review for an example of a very good movie that she barely watched and what she saw was jaded with her preconceptions.
All content © Copyright 2013, The Colorado Springs Independent
Website powered by Foundation