Gavaxeman
Well-Known Member
Doolittle is a passable family movie..although Robert Downey Jrs welsh accent is ..interesting
Are you trying to see Parasite in a theater, or just trying to see it?...because you can rent it now.Our theater decided to not have any showtimes during the game, so our plans to use free tickets for Parasite fell through. We'll probably rectify that tomorrow/Tues.
I kind of loved The Beach Bum...such a weird, fun movieInstead of the Super Bowl, I caught Harmony Korine's Beach Bum today on Hulu, which was pretty big bomb for NEON last year. I thought it was interesting, it's sort of his take on the stoner comedy or midlife crisis á la Knocked Up. I don't know if it works as well as Spring Breakers (which is my favorite of his I've seen) but it's a hell of a lot more wholesome. It's really his first non cynical film, almost flirting with being a feel-good picture. McConaughey is perfect as well, he avoids his recent issue of feeling like a self parody, by embracing the parody.
In theaters, ideally. Figure since we have free tickets, we'll use them on something extra good.Are you trying to see Parasite in a theater, or just trying to see it?...because you can rent it now.
I kind of loved The Beach Bum...such a weird, fun movie
Doctor Sleep Director’s Cut is coming today!
I liked this movie way, way more than I expected to, despite a rather flat third act. Looking forward to seeing how the extra run time fleshes things out.
I'm curious to know if you think it's worth it for a first time viewer. I was going to rent this title, but I see the director's cut is a purchase only deal.
Also from a bit of research it seems it's 1080p on disc, but 4K DV on digital? I don't love how the studios are handling these cuts recently, reminds me a lot of the Midsommar situation, where the DC is an iTunes Extra exclusive, and only in 1080p. Thankfully I was able to see both cuts theatrically. I found myself preferring the theatrical cut for that film due to the overall sense of ambiguity and pacing being a bit distrupted in the DC, but both were worth a viewing.
I think I also tend to lean towards shorter film cuts. Never really got the massive appeal of the LOTR Extended cuts, I grew up with them on VHS, but as an adult I'll take the theatricals every time. Of course in that case Peter Jackson has admitted he generally disliked the Extended cuts, and considered the theatrical ones his true DC.
I generally don't spring for Director's Cuts unless the original film is one I felt was considerably modified or edited down for theatrical release. I'm not a fan of more material just for the sake of more material, (though I tend to give book adaptations a lot of leeway here).
In the case of LotR, I think the first two movies are quite improved by the Extended Cuts (especially The Two Towers, which I did not like in its theatrical version). Much of what's added in deepens the characterization or allows the film a bit more room to breathe, and these are movies that exult in the vastness of their scope, so that all works for me. I like seeing book material adapted well.
Return of the King is the one that seems really perfunctory; half the time it feels like they were just inserting sequences of no particular quality in order to hit a new record run time, and I think that movie's both narratively and thematically more satisfying in its original incarnation.
From what I've read, the additional material in Doctor Sleep mostly serves to strengthen the film's existing themes rather than alter the narrative in any meaningful way. There are several sequences in the theatrical version that feel as though they were cut short for time (the movie ran over 2.5 hours!), and I think giving them some room to stretch their legs is not a bad idea. It's a somewhat languorous movie, and I felt that pacing was valuable. The theatrical cut felt a little rushed in the back third, and I'm hoping it feels less choppy this time around.
I read Mike Flanagan refers to this as his 'personal cut,' and I liked what he did with the original version enough to give him benefit of the doubt.
Based on your description the DS cut sounds a lot like the Midsommar one, which is up my alley, adding a bit without changing too much.
I'd have to say I largely agree on LoTR despite our differing preferences. I think Fellowship adds a little more dimension, TT adds scope, and ROTK is just plain bloated! I can see where you're coming from with the point that the movies benefit from the expanded dimension, but I guess overall I prefer the slicker pace of the theatrical. I think I just prefer tighter films tbh, but sometimes some are really butchered in the edit and need the additional length. As long as the scenes don't stand out too much. My biggest letdown is still Leone's OUATIA because the added footage is so obviously integrated including a really piss-poor color grading match. At that point the scenes are practically begging to be cut.
I haven't seen OUATIA, though it's been on my list for ages.
I will say that if I were watching in a theater, I would probably prefer the LotR theatrical cuts. But in the comfort of home, and with a built in intermission break between discs, the Extended Editions are the more luxuriant experience. They're movies I like to sink into.
I think the ultimate argument for Director's Cuts is something like Blade Runner, where the difference between the theatrical edition and the Final Cut is stark.