FilmWise Forums
It is currently 23 Oct 2017, 10:43

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 85 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2005, 08:29 
Offline
Lead Actor
Lead Actor
User avatar

Joined: 17 Nov 2004, 12:48
Posts: 482
Location: I'm always home. I'm uncool.
Am I the only one who thought the first two movies were by far the best of the four? They definately stayed truer to the book than the last two. I enjoyed Goblet of Fire, even more so than PoA, but still felt that there were things left out, be it for time constraints or whatever, that were important to this plot and future plots. For example, will we see house elfs in OotP, seeing as Kreacher is relatively important to the events that unfold? I thought leaving out Winky was a pretty big omission, but even more so was Ludo Bagman. And the biggest omission I was disappointed in, although I understand it, was the maze in the third task. I was expecting blast-ended skrewts, a sphinx, and of course a giant spider, but instead got nothing but collapsing bushes and a psychotic Krum.
My thought is that it was a good movie if you read the book, and a better movie if you didn't. (And God, I miss Richard Harris; rest in peace, professor)

And I can't wait to see Madam Maxine in the next issue of Playboy.

_________________
The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2005, 09:11 
Offline
Director
Director
User avatar

Joined: 01 Jul 2005, 20:38
Posts: 968
Location: A van down by the river
That did confuse me...why was Neville so upset when he was abusing that weird looking thing? It made so sense to me.

_________________
Jake will be here until I feel more creative again.

Free iPod


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2005, 09:34 
Offline
Queen of FilmWise
Queen of FilmWise
User avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2001, 16:00
Posts: 27597
Location: Sweden
SweetCatastrophe wrote:
That did confuse me...why was Neville so upset when he was abusing that weird looking thing? It made so sense to me.


Barty Crouch Jr, along with three of his Death Eater friends, tortured Neville's parents to insanity wioth the Cruciatus curse. Fake Moody of course IS Barty Crouch Jr, so he knew full well what he was doing when he asked "Lognbottom, is it" to come up to the desk.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2005, 16:22 
Offline
Academy Award Winner
Academy Award Winner
User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2004, 13:48
Posts: 6193
Location: The Balcony
Just got back from seeing the film ... and I'll have to admit to being more than a little disappointed :(

Sure, it looked good, but there were two major gripes that let the film down, in my opinion. The first was Mad-Eye Moody. He was terrible. Nowhere near what I had wanted (or expected him to be). It's not that Brendan Gleeson was a bad choice, far from it, but he just didn't quite come across as this mental old auror that everyone was terrified of.

My second major problem was the acting. By now, you would have expected the main characters to be fairly good at their parts, but Emma Watson was atrocious. She was bad in Philosopher's Stone, a bit better in Chamber of Secrets, and better still in Prisoner of Azkaban. But WTF has happened? The rest of the kids were fine - Daniel Radcliffe had the odd wobbly moment, but he has come on in leaps and bounds since the first film. Roger Lloyd Pack was another terrible performance, and even the fantastic Michael Gambon's performance as Dumbledore had me hankering after Richard Harris to rise from the grave.

There were some excellent parts. The triwizard tasks, Voldemort's big comeback, Sirius in the fire, what was left of the Quidditch World Cup, Hagrid. The regular adult characters were great. It was a mammoth task to adapt such a long book for the screen, and I found myself wanting more and more. Maybe they'll do an extended edition for the DVD :roll:

So I think I'll have to give it :3.5stars: for the time being.

_________________
Statler: Well, how do you like the film?
Waldorf: I've seen detergents leave a better film than this.

Image Image Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Nov 2005, 11:41 
Offline
Queen of FilmWise
Queen of FilmWise
User avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2001, 16:00
Posts: 27597
Location: Sweden
Warner Brothers just released (good timing, seeing as how the movie has already been released :roll:) the first hi-res picture of Fiennes as Voldemort. He still creeps me out...

Click to see massive version.

<img src=http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/images/2005/11/voldemort.jpg width=900>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Nov 2005, 12:28 
Offline
FilmWise Dreamboat
FilmWise Dreamboat
User avatar

Joined: 15 Jan 2004, 10:36
Posts: 32277
Kinda' reminded me of this:
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Nov 2005, 12:42 
Offline
Academy Award Winner
Academy Award Winner
User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2004, 13:48
Posts: 6193
Location: The Balcony
My first , fleeting impression of Voldemort was "whoa - it's Gollum crossed with the Grim Reaper from Bill & Ted's Bogus Journey". :D

_________________
Statler: Well, how do you like the film?
Waldorf: I've seen detergents leave a better film than this.

Image Image Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Nov 2005, 22:29 
Offline
Academy Award Winner
Academy Award Winner
User avatar

Joined: 10 Feb 2005, 22:42
Posts: 4939
Location: Canada
Ok, apologies, but I'm going to post this without reading first. I want to be uninfluenced.

So, to me :4stars: but I really think that that could go up.

My biggest complaint was that it felt a little cartoon-y, both visually and emotionally. I think the visual had to do with the CGI - I really noticed it with the arrival of the delegations from the other schools, and in exterior shots elsewhere than Hogwarts - the Burrow and Riddle manse specifically. Also, details like Moody's eye, which was bothering me from the first time I saw the shot, fit in here. Sirius in the fire too, and resurrected Voldemort - more laughable than terrifying in terms of appearance.

However, it also had a kind of cartoon feeling to it, and I think that that had to do with pushing and heightening the emotions, in both directions. I certainly laughed far more in this one than any of the others to date, but I also think they were really going for dark emotions too - to the point where the Harry/Cedric relationship felt almost forced - like we didn't see enough to explain where whatever regard they had for each other came from.

I think this lack of subtlety also came into play with some of my smaller nitpicks - like in the first task, the implication was that defeating the dragon was part of the task, and I liked the way it played out overall in the book much better. This time, with the snapping chain and the chase around the school, it felt excessive. And I just thought that it was kind of a silly tournament, if the Champions could fly off and deal with the task elsewhere. What's the point of having a stadium? And were there no safety precautions in effect to prevent wayward dragons? Another instance of this was the World Cup attack, which was so much more serious and devasting than I had taken it to be in the book.

I think something that also creates this effect can be the (lack of) acting. Someone with more ability could take a character with broad outlines, and fill it in with some subtlety and nuance in their performance, and it doesn't come off so cartoonish - for instance, Rita Skeeter's character had huge potential to be a caricature, but I thought she was fabulous, thanks to Miranda Richardson. Unfortunately, most of the "younger sets" performances were nowhere near as accomplished, and so when they have emotional scenes, they tend to come off as less realistic and more excessive - thinking in particular here of Harry at the end, and Hermione after the Ball.

So that was my big, unifying rant. But I did love it. Thought that the plot worked well - better tips (and a less convoluted twist) than in the book. What I liked about particularly the first few books was that the clues were there to point to the real bad guy, if you read them right. But then, the plots started getting more convoluted, so that even if the clues were technically still there, one could hardly put the pieces together on a first run through. And that was one of the things I liked less about Goblet as a book - while you had the pieces (the attack at Moody's house, the references to the missing ingredients) what it added up to was so fantastical that no one was going to get it. But in the movie they pared down the story, didn't get into the details about how Barty Jr. escaped and made some of the references more explicit (Polyjuice twice - would be curious to know what anyone who didn't know the plot in advance thought was going on there), so in that way I thought it almost worked better than the book.

Loved a lot of the characters and performances: as mentioned, Rita Skeeter, Madame Maxime, the twins, Neville, whom I adore even more now. I couldn't get over how in some scenes, they had all these extraordinary actors hanging around in the background. Definitely not enough Snape, but what there was was quality. Really still not loving Gambon's Dumbledore.

I loved that they kept working with bits of the Hogwarts grounds that were revealed to us in PoA (although, nitpick, Owlery shouldn't be a seperate building).

So, that's been the bad and the good, and now to the missing. I said that I wasn't going to reread so I didn't have all of the missing bits fresh in my mind, but there were still some things that I would like to have seen included:
Some World Cup footage. Felt like this hurt Krum's character - he was far more of a celebrity in the book, here it just felt a little random. It would have been nice to see him in action a little, so that we could actually see why people seemed to be in awe of him, rather than just having them tell us.
Also, his whole relationship with Hermione? Out of nowhere, and so, again, it seemed random. And I would have loved a "Her-mi-ninny" line.
Would also have like more with Rita Skeeter - like a revelation of her secret. I guess without the animagus set-up in PoA, they would have had to do too much work. But I would liked them to have shown more of the stories that she wrote, and the reactions like Hermione's hate mail. I thought general attitudes towards our heroes were too block - we see antipathy towards Harry initially, but even before he starts the first task, they're all chanting for him. And after that, no more mentions about fallout or perceptions, so would have liked more ongoing "general public" reactions to the tournament.
More of a Karkaroff and Snape reveal - wanted Karkaroff fleeing, and at least a shot of Snape's Dark Mark. Dumbledore in the Pensieve did reveal that Snape was originally in service to Voldemort, so it isn't like they need to hold off on that reveal. I think it would have been great to see it, to really bring it home - I was hoping that Barty Jr. would rip open his sleeve then he was guarding him. (Flip side: too much Lucius Malfoy revealed - just because it makes it muddy. Did Harry remember? If so, did he tell Dumbledore?)

One final unrelated note: Dan Radcliffe is starting to look a lot like Elijah Wood.

Whew. Have a feeling that Nunis may be the only one still reading. Well, that's everything that I remember at the moment, and enough for now.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Nov 2005, 22:45 
Offline
Academy Award Winner
Academy Award Winner
User avatar

Joined: 10 Feb 2005, 22:42
Posts: 4939
Location: Canada
Agrajag wrote:
Do you have anything in your notes of an example of something only Potterphiles would understand in the film?

KM~


One thing that really stood out for me is when Harry first visits Moody's office, and sees the trunk. Moody: "You wouldn't believe what was in there if I told you."

There were some definite reactions in the theater I was in to that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Nov 2005, 23:01 
Offline
Academy Award Winner
Academy Award Winner
User avatar

Joined: 27 Nov 2001, 16:00
Posts: 2620
Location: Georgia
My Random thoughts.


:4.5stars: I loved it and thought it was the best thus far. I have not read any of the books and I am one who would rank the movies from best to least as 4, 2, 1, and then 3. I really liked the overall feel of this one. The other movies always seemed they were trying to slow everything down to a crawl to mention every little thing in the books and they just seemed overly long. This one moved at a good pace.

I must be the only one who liked Dumbledore and it may be blasphemous but Harris' Dumbledore use to get on my damn nerves with the raspy I can bearly hear you voice. This Dumbledore seems a lot more authorotative. The acting doesnt bother me at all. No it's not great acting but these are kids story so it really isnt about high drama acting. I mean look how cheesy Jennifer Connely is in Labyrinth but you never hear any complaints about that.

Thank God this one didnt have a Quiditch match. The first three movies I was starting to get bored with as the plots seemed so "Scooby Doo" and predictable.

I will say this is the first of the Potter movies that has made me now want to read the next book.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 24 Nov 2005, 05:39 
Offline
Academy Award Winner
Academy Award Winner
User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2004, 13:48
Posts: 6193
Location: The Balcony
Oooh, forgot to mention in my post above that I really loved the Quick Quotes Quill. It was rather cute and quite funny :D

I'm going to see the film again this weekend, so I might change my feelings after that. I am a bit poorly and therefore not in optimum film-watching/appreciating mode :roll: :s

_________________
Statler: Well, how do you like the film?
Waldorf: I've seen detergents leave a better film than this.

Image Image Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 24 Nov 2005, 12:13 
Offline
Queen of FilmWise
Queen of FilmWise
User avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2001, 16:00
Posts: 27597
Location: Sweden
Good review, Maze. I agree with a lot of what you said, and my co-worker Karen (also rabid Snape-lover) would pretty much agree completely with everything you said. I actually found myself enjoying it a lot more second time around, when I could just watch it without comparing it to the book. It's hard not to, but comparing the two really is doing them both a disservice.

Mazer wrote:
(although, nitpick, Owlery shouldn't be a seperate building).


Was it a different building? It seemed to me it was one of the towers (although with the door going outdoors instead of into the castle). Maybe I wasn't watching closely.

Mazer wrote:
Agrajag wrote:
Do you have anything in your notes of an example of something only Potterphiles would understand in the film?

KM~


One thing that really stood out for me is when Harry first visits Moody's office, and sees the trunk. Moody: "You wouldn't believe what was in there if I told you."

There were some definite reactions in the theater I was in to that.


I loved that line, and I sniggered to myself (as did some other people), but that's not what I meant when I said "stuff only Potterheads would recognise", cause in the end we find out the real Moody was actually in there. What I meant were things that are never explained at the end of the movie, but which tie in well with the Potterverse and what is to come (Neville's reaction to the Cruciatus curse is here a prime example).

I'd also like to say that I like reading reviews of people who haven't read the books. I can see where fish is coming from, and I don't hate Dumbledore as a headmaster of a school. What I did hate was how it's so different from what he's supposed to be. It would be like making Gandalf a senile, weak old crackpot in the LotR movies. It just doesn't fit with his character.

I'm glad you enjoyed it fish. Do try to pick up the books, but don't start in the middle. If you're gonna read them, start at the beginning, or you'll miss a lot of stuff. Trust me on that one.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 25 Nov 2005, 12:28 
Offline
Academy Award Winner
Academy Award Winner
User avatar

Joined: 10 Feb 2005, 22:42
Posts: 4939
Location: Canada
Nunis wrote:
Mazer wrote:
(although, nitpick, Owlery shouldn't be a seperate building).


Was it a different building? It seemed to me it was one of the towers (although with the door going outdoors instead of into the castle). Maybe I wasn't watching closely.

I thought that it was. Immediately before the Cho/Harry scene, they had a shot moving up from Hogwarts to a seperate tower...which, as you pointed out about some of the other locations, seemed to actually be a bit of a distance away...no dashing off in the middle of the night to send an owl with them all there. I think that the distance was the reason I really twigged to it (and the fact that I had just listened to a Potter cast with a quiz question about the location of the Owlery). Have to check it out on the next viewing to see if I was making it all up.

Also wanted to reply to:
Nunis wrote:
First task: What I liked most about this was that we never get to see the other three champions battle their respective dragons. The books are always from Harry's point of view, and he only hears the crowd's reactions.

I would at least have liked to get some info about how they each proceeded. Especially because, as I mentioned, I thought that the scene implied killing the dragon was part of the task (despite their rare status...and would Hagrid ever have allowed that?).
I also thought that because of the beds and the medical boxes, we might see one of the injured champs being brought in. I know the scene with Diggory is after Harry completes the task in the book, and it probably makes more sense that way since the Champs weren't supposed to know what the first task involved, but I thought it could have been a cute scene.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 25 Nov 2005, 20:45 
Offline
Academy Award Winner
Academy Award Winner
User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2005, 19:44
Posts: 1167
Location: Philadelphia, PA
So I got around to seeing it. I got lucky, it selling out like the ticket after us and all. I barely got a seat, and it was a small theater. The previews didn't start right away; at one point, I thought the movie would never show. The previews themselves were mostly for stupid CGI kid's movies. These things did not bode well.

However. It turned out to be very good, but not much more than I was expecting. There were certainly some reasons to complain. First and foremost, of course, was the fact that they butchered it to the point where it was almost incomprehensible. But they couldn't have done it any other way, not without an hour more on this movie or a seperate movie altogether. It felt very rushed and jumped from plotline to plotline. Another well placed complaint was the poor acting by a one Michael Gambon. He completely hacked the most interesting character in the entire series. I don't remember the first two movies so well, but I know Harris was way better than this guy. Dumbledore just didn't feel right.

I didn't find the acting of the kids to be as terrible as I'd heard. Sure they could be better, but other than a few sorry attempts at emotion, they didn't do too bad. Although, this lack of acting could very well be the demise of the fifth and sixth movies, where Harry has a number of complete emotional breakdowns, among other things. They wouldn't be doing wrong if they hired a better actor(s).

Of course, the main focus of the movie was the Tournament. All in all, it was tremendous. While the challenges didn't look as I'd thought they would (especially the HUGE lake) I thought they were presented well. The CGI was awesome, the action was thrilling. This was the best part of the movie.

There were a few other things. I did like the addition of Crouch Jr. in the beginning, did not like the tongue thing, and didn't mind the eye. The lack of some characters (Snape, Sirius) was disappointing, but again, it's 734 pages in 2 1/2 hours.

Overall, a great movie, but felt a little too rushed and jumpy to be as good as the third. I give it :4stars:. I'd like to see it again in IMAX, because the screen I saw it on was a bit underwhelming; didn't do too much justice to the action scenes.

_________________
Image Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 25 Nov 2005, 21:00 
Offline
Sheila1313 Memorial Award Recipient
Sheila1313 Memorial Award Recipient
User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2003, 14:22
Posts: 38032
Location: San Francisco
Jimothy wrote:
They wouldn't be doing wrong if they hired a better actor(s).

Yes they would. It would cost them more money, but earn them little more profit -- everyone is going to go see HP5, 6, and 7, too, even if they don't put in better actors. (See also: Star Wars prequels, scripts.)



Also:

Rickman: underused.

Oldman: woefully underused. (At least Rickman got a little screen time ... well, very little.)

No mention of Fleur (et al.) being a Veela (and what Veela is).

No Barty/Barty confusion on the Marauder's Map.

Isn't Fudge's hat green in the book?

Is this the book where Skeeter is turned into a ladybug?

_________________
It's such a fine line between stupid and clever.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 25 Nov 2005, 21:08 
Offline
Academy Award Winner
Academy Award Winner
User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2005, 19:44
Posts: 1167
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Well I kind of meant doing wrong to me, not the rest of the world.

_________________
Image Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 25 Nov 2005, 21:27 
Offline
Sheila1313 Memorial Award Recipient
Sheila1313 Memorial Award Recipient
User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2003, 14:22
Posts: 38032
Location: San Francisco
Jimothy wrote:
Well I kind of meant doing wrong to me, not the rest of the world.

Well then. I too would like actors that suck less.

_________________
It's such a fine line between stupid and clever.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 26 Nov 2005, 04:12 
Offline
Queen of FilmWise
Queen of FilmWise
User avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2001, 16:00
Posts: 27597
Location: Sweden
Mazer wrote:
Also wanted to reply to:
Nunis wrote:
First task: What I liked most about this was that we never get to see the other three champions battle their respective dragons. The books are always from Harry's point of view, and he only hears the crowd's reactions.

I would at least have liked to get some info about how they each proceeded. Especially because, as I mentioned, I thought that the scene implied killing the dragon was part of the task (despite their rare status...and would Hagrid ever have allowed that?).
I also thought that because of the beds and the medical boxes, we might see one of the injured champs being brought in. I know the scene with Diggory is after Harry completes the task in the book, and it probably makes more sense that way since the Champs weren't supposed to know what the first task involved, but I thought it could have been a cute scene.


Agree on the "getting some info about how the others fared" bit. I liked us not seeing it, but it would have been cool to hear what they all did. I also agree with your killing-the-dragons comment. It was definitely not within the scope of the tournament, nor were they supposed to be able to break free. They were merely supposed to be chained down, and the champions have to find a way around them. That part sucked.

Also, did you see at the end of the credits, it said "No dragons were harmed in the making of this film". Cute.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 26 Nov 2005, 04:17 
Offline
Queen of FilmWise
Queen of FilmWise
User avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2001, 16:00
Posts: 27597
Location: Sweden
Jimothy, I just wanted to say that you summed up my thoughts perfectly, without having to resort to a massive review (wd me :roll:). I agree with everything you said.

Also, smithee:

1. :green:
2. :green:
3. I didn't even reflect on that; guess it's not really important.
4. That was one of the best bits in the book.
5. Yes, his hat is :green:
6. A beetle, actually, but yes. And near the end, Hermione captures her after figuring out her disguise. More un-explained unregistered Animagi stuff.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 26 Nov 2005, 04:19 
Offline
Sheila1313 Memorial Award Recipient
Sheila1313 Memorial Award Recipient
User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2003, 14:22
Posts: 38032
Location: San Francisco
Nunis wrote:
Jimothy, I just wanted to say that you summed up my thoughts perfectly, without having to resort to a massive review (wd me :roll:). I agree with everything you said.

Also, smithee:

1. :green:
2. :green:
3. I didn't even reflect on that; guess it's not really important.
4. That was one of the best bits in the book.
5. Yes, his hat is :green:
6. A beetle, actually, but yes. And near the end, Hermione captures her after figuring out her disguise. More un-explained unregistered Animagi stuff.

Maybe Peter Jackson will make a 4-hr extended-edition DVD

_________________
It's such a fine line between stupid and clever.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 26 Nov 2005, 04:26 
Offline
Queen of FilmWise
Queen of FilmWise
User avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2001, 16:00
Posts: 27597
Location: Sweden
I was discussing all these significant book changes with coworkers yesterday, and we came to the conclusion that all four movies so far have been sort of individual bits, and they're gonna have a hell of a hard time tying it all together.

For example, as movie viewers, we know (almost) nothing about Harry's parents, about that fateful night, about the Marauders, about Snape's character (loyalty/spy stuff). Basically, we know only what is important to each particular movie, but precious little about the overall plot.

They're gonna have such a hard time setting up some of the characters next time, and it's not like it's not a massive book to begin with. If they want this series to turn out coherent in the end, they're gonna have to work really hard setting up important characters such as Snape, Tom Riddle, Wormtail, the Marauders, and many more. Not to mention Harry's relationship with Sirius. If we don't see how close they are, the end of the next film will just make no sense whatsoever.

I guess I'm just a little disappointed because while I enjoy each year's individual hardships, what I really like about the series as a whole are the bits that tie them all together -- like the past, the future, what Harry has to do, about Snape's loyalty, and all that stuff that's been left out completely in the movies.

I just hope they don't butcher these any more; the movies will make no sense as a whole if they don't spend some serious time working out these issues.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 26 Nov 2005, 04:49 
Offline
Hollywood Hopeful
Hollywood Hopeful
User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2005, 04:31
Posts: 1
Location: Colorado
I agree with everyone disliking how Gambon portrays Dumbledore. Like a lot of you, when he accosted Harry for his name appearing out of the cup I let out an audible "What the hell is that?" And it makes me more angry that he refuses to read the novels. So assuming he is a member of the sixth movie's cast he's just gonna be like "Oooooh...>.>" One can hope he WON'T be back.

I also agree with the total lack of Severus. Snape is hands down my favorite character in all the books, and Alan Rickman is one of my favorite actors. His role in the future books is so integral and for people that don't read, just watch the movies, they're going to be like "Why the hell is Snape doing all this!?"

Overall though I really enjoyed it. Cedric's death was much more brutally quick than I had imagined in the book, I really enjoy how they portray the Avada Kedavra...very scary. Fiennes was also very stellar, really hope he returns.

_________________
Her name was Pauline she lived in a tree.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 26 Nov 2005, 05:50 
Offline
Queen of FilmWise
Queen of FilmWise
User avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2001, 16:00
Posts: 27597
Location: Sweden
Welcome to FilmWise, Josh. Excellent first post (and avatar) -- I think I love you. Hope to see you around.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 26 Nov 2005, 07:22 
Offline
Academy Award Winner
Academy Award Winner
User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2005, 19:44
Posts: 1167
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Oh, and I have another compaint, also screen related. Was it shot in 2.35:1, or 1.85:1? Because the rest of them were 2.35 (and I love my 2.35, the wider the better) but in this theater, it was most definitely not that wide. More of a theater complaint, but I was disappointed with the incredibly small picture.

_________________
Image Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 26 Nov 2005, 11:39 
Offline
FilmWise Beach Bum
FilmWise Beach Bum
User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2003, 02:45
Posts: 18902
Location: hiding under my desk...
Nunis wrote:
Welcome to FilmWise, Josh. Excellent first post (and avatar) -- I think I love you. Hope to see you around.


and that's high praise indeed, Josh (unless you're English and middle aged+)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 85 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group