If you are as excited as I am about the 3rd X-Men movie, then you’ll want to watch this 7 minute sneak peak. I have been “preparing” myself for the movie by reading the phoenix saga ark of the comics which John generously provided me with.
Strangest movie I’ve seen in recent history. The movie completely abandons standard elements of movie-making such as plot, dialogue, pacing… instead there are just a series of images and music that tell the story of John Smith and Pocahontas falling in love (lots of long shots of faces, shots of running through fields, and so on). The music very much mirrored the imagery, with the main theme being a single measure that was repeated over and over again at different volumes and with different instruments. I will admit that it was extremely beautiful, but its beauty was so static and unchanging that it could not hold my attention for the entire 2 1/2 hours.
Overall a pleasantly enjoyable adaptation of the book. A lot of material had to be cut in order to make the movie a tolerable length (most of the Rita Skeeter plot disappeared, and Percy Weasley is completely absent). But, my first reaction was just a sort of amusement at how people imagine things differently. For instance, the “pensieve” (the container that holds Dumbledore’s thoughts) that I imagine is more of a space than a physical object. And somehow Dumbledore should be a bit softer around the edges.
The movie Primer was the Grand Jury selection at Sundance in 2004. It is a science-fiction film about a couple guys that invent a time machine. Unlike most current sci-fi, though, this movie is not about special effects. Instead, it focuses on the breakdown in the relationship between two friends as the power which the machine grants them requires increasing trust in each other. The movie is quite sucessful at entertaining the viewer, although I find it hard to imagine getting through the film the first time without being confused. The film is unlike most time travel stories because the characters are not traveling to the distant past or future, but to earlier the same day. Consequently, as we watch the story unfold from the perspective of one of the characters we also see events which occur simultaneously, or later, depending on your point of view. The puzzle almost requires two viewings to piece together, and I still haven’t decided on the precise sequence of events shown in the film.
What is particularly impressive about this movie, from my point of view, was that it was made on a budget of $7000 (that’s less than Alan and I spent on Gutter Falls!). That it was Mr. Carruth’s first film is evident in some places, such as spotty audio in various sections of dialogue. But, the camera work was as successful as anything I have achieved. I definitely recommend this one.
Phyllis and I went to a Q&A with Sofia Coppola today at the law school. To be honest, the novelty wore off a bit quickly because despite several people asking interesting questions, it seemed that Miss Coppola was entirely unwilling to enter into any particularly meaningful dialogue. Don’t get me wrong, I really enjoyed Lost in Translation, especially because I think it demonstrates that quirky, off-beat films can make money. But, she seemed to have no reflection on her own style other than that she works in a rather impromptu way, waiting for whatever inspiration strikes her and the actors while rehearsing on the set. She has nothing really to say about how her movies are influenced by her father’s work, or about what it is like being a female director in a Hollywood dominated by men in that role. I guess the most interesting thing was to find that she speaks with the same subdued, calm voice when addressing an auditorium of people that she used for the director’s commentary for Lost in Translation.