![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Soleil d'hiver
Sep. 5th, 2005 09:08 pmWe rented movies this weekend, and we watched "Eternal Sunshine of The Spotless Mind" last night. Nicole wasn't that enthused about it at first, but things picked up after the opening credits. (Not-really-a-spoiler: after the opening credits you jump back in time, and don't get back to the (teaser? prologue?) until later in the movie.) Jim Carrey plays against type, and does it very well; Elijah Wood is almost unrecognizable. Kate Winslet is very good, and Kirsten Dunst likewise. But the real star of the movie is, of course, the phenomenal script--soft SF, wonder of wonders, dealing with the consequences of the ability to have someone removed from your memories entirely.
We also rented "The Core", which I expect to be fairly mindless, and "Aladdin" for the boys. Simon has pronounced this his favourite movie ever, despite the fact that he's refused to consider watching it for months. (He grudgingly allowed that "Harry Potter And The Philosopher's Stone" could also be his favourite movie.) On impulse, I grabbed "Heist" from the library as well, which we can probably renew for another week if we need to.
We got "Harry Potter And The Prisoner of Azkaban" from the library a couple of weeks ago. Watching it again after having so recently reread the books, I was much more disappointed in it than I was when I originally watched it. At that time, I remembered the vague outline of the plot and had completely forgotten about other bits, which came as pleasant surprises. Now all I can think about when I watch it is how badly it was gutted--whole scenes reduced to hurried conversations, subplots removed entirely, and yet some sequences(like the Knight Bus)almost stretched out. Now I'm wondering if it'll even be worth seeing "Goblet of Fire" in the theatres, since they opted not to do a five-hour version that would actually include a substantial portion of the book. The first two movies compressed a few things, but remained basically faithful, but they were much shorter.
I continue to assert that today's fantasy novels, with their inflated sizes, are best adapted as TV series, not as movies. Now all we need is for somebody to actually do it, and do it well, like Peter Jackson did for the LOTR movies. Grumble.
We've moved into Season 7 of Buffy in our DVD-watching. I hear that this is a bit more light-hearted than Season 6, which can't help but be a good thing, because that was pretty dreary, overall.
We also watched the beginning of "Prison Break"...or tried to. Because apparently it was actually two hours, and we unwittingly stopped watching after the first hour, thinking it was done. I mean, seriously, there was no indication that there was another hour worth there. I don't remember the TV Guide mentioning it, for one thing. I've gotten into the habit of shutting off a lot of one-hour shows before the closing credits(unlike half-hour shows, which often have a little bit at the very end), and I probably turned it off at 9:53 or something.
Oh, well. We didn't need another bloody show to watch anyway, intriguing as it was. And yet, I'm curious enough to give "Reunion" a try. Maybe that one'll suck, bomb and get cancelled, like so few of the shows we tried were considerate enough to do last year.
We also rented "The Core", which I expect to be fairly mindless, and "Aladdin" for the boys. Simon has pronounced this his favourite movie ever, despite the fact that he's refused to consider watching it for months. (He grudgingly allowed that "Harry Potter And The Philosopher's Stone" could also be his favourite movie.) On impulse, I grabbed "Heist" from the library as well, which we can probably renew for another week if we need to.
We got "Harry Potter And The Prisoner of Azkaban" from the library a couple of weeks ago. Watching it again after having so recently reread the books, I was much more disappointed in it than I was when I originally watched it. At that time, I remembered the vague outline of the plot and had completely forgotten about other bits, which came as pleasant surprises. Now all I can think about when I watch it is how badly it was gutted--whole scenes reduced to hurried conversations, subplots removed entirely, and yet some sequences(like the Knight Bus)almost stretched out. Now I'm wondering if it'll even be worth seeing "Goblet of Fire" in the theatres, since they opted not to do a five-hour version that would actually include a substantial portion of the book. The first two movies compressed a few things, but remained basically faithful, but they were much shorter.
I continue to assert that today's fantasy novels, with their inflated sizes, are best adapted as TV series, not as movies. Now all we need is for somebody to actually do it, and do it well, like Peter Jackson did for the LOTR movies. Grumble.
We've moved into Season 7 of Buffy in our DVD-watching. I hear that this is a bit more light-hearted than Season 6, which can't help but be a good thing, because that was pretty dreary, overall.
We also watched the beginning of "Prison Break"...or tried to. Because apparently it was actually two hours, and we unwittingly stopped watching after the first hour, thinking it was done. I mean, seriously, there was no indication that there was another hour worth there. I don't remember the TV Guide mentioning it, for one thing. I've gotten into the habit of shutting off a lot of one-hour shows before the closing credits(unlike half-hour shows, which often have a little bit at the very end), and I probably turned it off at 9:53 or something.
Oh, well. We didn't need another bloody show to watch anyway, intriguing as it was. And yet, I'm curious enough to give "Reunion" a try. Maybe that one'll suck, bomb and get cancelled, like so few of the shows we tried were considerate enough to do last year.
