Familiarity
It's funny how much Entertainment Weekly has become like an old friend to me. Ok, that really isn't as pathetic as it sounds. After reading it on a regular basis since at least my freshman year of high school, and reading it cover to cover every week for several years now, it's become a warm and familiar weekly tradition.
Like any good old friends, its got its good qualities and bad qualities - some of the opinions drive me nuts, and they are uneccessarily harsh on some things, and sickeningly nice to others (*cough*Entourage*cough*), but there are also some things that I've come to count on, like the fact that if they say that a movie is good, I can be pretty damned sure that they're right. The opposite, of course, is not always true - I'm a much less harsh judge of most films, and I think that some of their critics are rather tragically out of touch. But that's not uncommon in the film community (or any academic community) where the experts are aging, and usually obsessed with something they consider to be "the golden age" - something that's different for every generation, of course.
I know this magazine so well, in fact, that when I went to see Across the Universe this afternoon, I was able to pick out the exact scene that they would make fun of in their review (for the record, it was the scene where some soldiers carry the statue of liberty while singing "She's so Heavy"). I knew the review would probably bad, and bordering on condescending, and I knew I'd disagree with it, because I just plain enjoyed the film, and sometimes that's enough for me.
For the record, I would recommend "Across the Universe", but only if you have a past history of liking musicals, strange films, The Beatles, the 60s, or a combination of all these. If you thought the preview looked stupid, then you probably won't like the film. It's only semi-narrative, and some of it is really, really trippy. But I really enjoyed it, though I thought it lacked some connective tissue. I know that the studio made the director cut the film down a bit - not unusual - but I'll be there'll be a director's cut eventually, and I'd like to see that.
I'll also be interested to see if it becomes a hit like Moulin Rouge, which is probably the film it's most similar to. But I think that the story in this film is better. And the music is better. I mean, come on, it's the fucking Beatles.
Oh, that's the other thing. I was surprised that EW made fun of the music. I thought that the re-interpretations were pretty fucking stellar, and showed that the Beatles music will always, always be relevant, and amazing, and it just has this ability to morph, but still be good . . . yeah. So you can also get the soundtrack on iTunes, and you should do that too. Even if you don't see the film. If you like the Beatles, of course.
Ok, I'm done.
Like any good old friends, its got its good qualities and bad qualities - some of the opinions drive me nuts, and they are uneccessarily harsh on some things, and sickeningly nice to others (*cough*Entourage*cough*), but there are also some things that I've come to count on, like the fact that if they say that a movie is good, I can be pretty damned sure that they're right. The opposite, of course, is not always true - I'm a much less harsh judge of most films, and I think that some of their critics are rather tragically out of touch. But that's not uncommon in the film community (or any academic community) where the experts are aging, and usually obsessed with something they consider to be "the golden age" - something that's different for every generation, of course.
I know this magazine so well, in fact, that when I went to see Across the Universe this afternoon, I was able to pick out the exact scene that they would make fun of in their review (for the record, it was the scene where some soldiers carry the statue of liberty while singing "She's so Heavy"). I knew the review would probably bad, and bordering on condescending, and I knew I'd disagree with it, because I just plain enjoyed the film, and sometimes that's enough for me.
For the record, I would recommend "Across the Universe", but only if you have a past history of liking musicals, strange films, The Beatles, the 60s, or a combination of all these. If you thought the preview looked stupid, then you probably won't like the film. It's only semi-narrative, and some of it is really, really trippy. But I really enjoyed it, though I thought it lacked some connective tissue. I know that the studio made the director cut the film down a bit - not unusual - but I'll be there'll be a director's cut eventually, and I'd like to see that.
I'll also be interested to see if it becomes a hit like Moulin Rouge, which is probably the film it's most similar to. But I think that the story in this film is better. And the music is better. I mean, come on, it's the fucking Beatles.
Oh, that's the other thing. I was surprised that EW made fun of the music. I thought that the re-interpretations were pretty fucking stellar, and showed that the Beatles music will always, always be relevant, and amazing, and it just has this ability to morph, but still be good . . . yeah. So you can also get the soundtrack on iTunes, and you should do that too. Even if you don't see the film. If you like the Beatles, of course.
Ok, I'm done.