dehro
2012-02-26, 06:10 AM
yeah..so I watched this yesterday with my father, who insisted on coming along. I was kinda worried it's not exactly his kind of movie, but he was really impressed with it once we walked towards the car. also, it was his first 3D experience in 30 years, so thumbs up for that too.
anyhoo.. I can see why it's getting all those nominations for academy awards.. does it deserve that many? I'm not sure.
I'm glad to see they're all for technical merits rather than for acting, because I'm guessing that's what this movie was all about, being a movie about movies, and all.
you could almost feel the intent of making a technical masterpiece at some stages overpowering the story. have they succeeded? I find myself conflicted as I say that I think they have.
the one award that maybe I don't think it deserves is that for the best adapted screenplay, because I think the story is a bit too easy.. a bit too formulaic and just overal too predictable and feelgood to deserve such a high accolade as the Oscar.
other than that however, the movie does a great job in the technical department and the acting itself isn't bad either.
Sasha Baron Cohen shows he can actually act in roles other than those that just make you want to slap him climb a ladder and slap him.
Christopher Lee's cameo made me go awww, as did Ben Kingsley's performance... but all that said, I don't know that this will become a classic movie to be watched and appreciated by generations, like many movies that rake in nominations and awards usually do. I left the theatre satified, more so than usual with 3D "real" movies, but that's just the thing. The movie was too formulaic for me to really appreciate the story, so what I appreciated most in it are its technical merits.
On that score, I checked the people who are behind the movie and are up for award. Small wonder the movie is such a gem.. they're all veterans who have previously collected about 20 Oscars already (I stopped counting past 15 awards, and didn't bother counting the previous nominations they got, as that number would be somewhere close to the 3 digits and I can't count that far without taking my shoes off)
so, will the awards reflect the technical merits, splash out on awards and leave it at that, a movie destined for theatre and film-making classes, or will the general public suddenly fall in love with it despite its rather simple plot?
also, what is it with the awards, movies about movies and the 1930's this year? between Hugo and The Artist (which I haven't seen), they're stealing the show.
P.S. the one minor technical flaw, inevitable with 3D, was the outburst of flames, which just looked extremely fake.. but I've yet to see a convincing 3D flame.
on the plus side seeing Méliès' work come to life in 3D was fun to watch.
anyhoo.. I can see why it's getting all those nominations for academy awards.. does it deserve that many? I'm not sure.
I'm glad to see they're all for technical merits rather than for acting, because I'm guessing that's what this movie was all about, being a movie about movies, and all.
you could almost feel the intent of making a technical masterpiece at some stages overpowering the story. have they succeeded? I find myself conflicted as I say that I think they have.
the one award that maybe I don't think it deserves is that for the best adapted screenplay, because I think the story is a bit too easy.. a bit too formulaic and just overal too predictable and feelgood to deserve such a high accolade as the Oscar.
other than that however, the movie does a great job in the technical department and the acting itself isn't bad either.
Sasha Baron Cohen shows he can actually act in roles other than those that just make you want to slap him climb a ladder and slap him.
Christopher Lee's cameo made me go awww, as did Ben Kingsley's performance... but all that said, I don't know that this will become a classic movie to be watched and appreciated by generations, like many movies that rake in nominations and awards usually do. I left the theatre satified, more so than usual with 3D "real" movies, but that's just the thing. The movie was too formulaic for me to really appreciate the story, so what I appreciated most in it are its technical merits.
On that score, I checked the people who are behind the movie and are up for award. Small wonder the movie is such a gem.. they're all veterans who have previously collected about 20 Oscars already (I stopped counting past 15 awards, and didn't bother counting the previous nominations they got, as that number would be somewhere close to the 3 digits and I can't count that far without taking my shoes off)
so, will the awards reflect the technical merits, splash out on awards and leave it at that, a movie destined for theatre and film-making classes, or will the general public suddenly fall in love with it despite its rather simple plot?
also, what is it with the awards, movies about movies and the 1930's this year? between Hugo and The Artist (which I haven't seen), they're stealing the show.
P.S. the one minor technical flaw, inevitable with 3D, was the outburst of flames, which just looked extremely fake.. but I've yet to see a convincing 3D flame.
on the plus side seeing Méliès' work come to life in 3D was fun to watch.