Discussion
fido said:
As per other LalaLa thread it didn't do anything for me. To compare it with Pulp Fiction which I love - IF it took bits form other classic films I just didn't give a to$$. Swimming pool party - Greenberg was miles better. Pretentious bits about jazz - Miles Ahead was, erm, miles better. Musical - would rather see Mamma Mia.
I think it was a film for people who aren't really into films and get all cooey and excited because they can relate to people who aren't really into films. And because Mark Kermode says he likes it for extra kudos. Also with Valentines around the corner, the more cYOUntstruck items have no choice but to like it - probably the same blokes who would sell their home, car and business to keep her happy.
Can you not perhaps even make a token effort to try criticising the film in a remotely grown up way rather than spouting such toxic nonsense about people who just happen to have different taste to your own ? I think it was a film for people who aren't really into films and get all cooey and excited because they can relate to people who aren't really into films. And because Mark Kermode says he likes it for extra kudos. Also with Valentines around the corner, the more cYOUntstruck items have no choice but to like it - probably the same blokes who would sell their home, car and business to keep her happy.
Edited by fido on Tuesday 14th February 12:27
Eric Mc said:
jbudgie said:
rubystone said:
jbudgie said:
No problem,
I liked Pulp Fiction, MIB 1, Independence Day, Arrival, King Creole
, and a few others !
Then why go and see a musical? Or did someone tell you ET was playing the main character?I liked Pulp Fiction, MIB 1, Independence Day, Arrival, King Creole
, and a few others !Nice to see this thread has turned into a 'spirited' discussion.
coppice said:
fido said:
As per other LalaLa thread it didn't do anything for me. To compare it with Pulp Fiction which I love - IF it took bits form other classic films I just didn't give a to$$. Swimming pool party - Greenberg was miles better. Pretentious bits about jazz - Miles Ahead was, erm, miles better. Musical - would rather see Mamma Mia.
I think it was a film for people who aren't really into films and get all cooey and excited because they can relate to people who aren't really into films. And because Mark Kermode says he likes it for extra kudos. Also with Valentines around the corner, the more cYOUntstruck items have no choice but to like it - probably the same blokes who would sell their home, car and business to keep her happy.
Can you not perhaps even make a token effort to try criticising the film in a remotely grown up way rather than spouting such toxic nonsense about people who just happen to have different taste to your own ? I think it was a film for people who aren't really into films and get all cooey and excited because they can relate to people who aren't really into films. And because Mark Kermode says he likes it for extra kudos. Also with Valentines around the corner, the more cYOUntstruck items have no choice but to like it - probably the same blokes who would sell their home, car and business to keep her happy.
Edited by fido on Tuesday 14th February 12:27
Just watched this tonight and thoroughly enjoyed it. Beautiful vibrant cinematography and an infectious feel-good vibe that was evident in the whole production. I liked single takes and the early faltering dance steps of the early initial courtship. Yes the plot is straightforward, the nuances are in the song and choreography.
It's a genre that is so alien to young moviegoers I can see how it can divide opinion.
I thought Emma stone was electric and completely outshone gosling.
It's a thumbs up from me. In the eyes of some of the PH members that probably marks me out as a limp-wristed libtard socialist then so be it!!
It's a genre that is so alien to young moviegoers I can see how it can divide opinion.
I thought Emma stone was electric and completely outshone gosling.
It's a thumbs up from me. In the eyes of some of the PH members that probably marks me out as a limp-wristed libtard socialist then so be it!!
Finally got to see this at the cinema. A bit of backstory...never enjoyed a musical in my life and I intensely dislike jazz music.
Loved it.
Even if people don't like it (and I understand why), I don't think it's difficult to appreciate the craft that's gone into it. It's fantastically well shot and clearly all 'real' as well. It made me realise how rare it is to see scenes shot relatively naturally in all of those times of day (particularly sunset). Also lots of scenes that were clearly very long single takes that were done so well.
Do those things make it a a better film? Not necessarily, but I appreciate good craft and the director is clearly incredibly talented.
Loved it.
Even if people don't like it (and I understand why), I don't think it's difficult to appreciate the craft that's gone into it. It's fantastically well shot and clearly all 'real' as well. It made me realise how rare it is to see scenes shot relatively naturally in all of those times of day (particularly sunset). Also lots of scenes that were clearly very long single takes that were done so well.
Do those things make it a a better film? Not necessarily, but I appreciate good craft and the director is clearly incredibly talented.
ukaskew said:
Finally got to see this at the cinema. A bit of backstory...never enjoyed a musical in my life and I intensely dislike jazz music.
Loved it.
Even if people don't like it (and I understand why), I don't think it's difficult to appreciate the craft that's gone into it. It's fantastically well shot and clearly all 'real' as well. It made me realise how rare it is to see scenes shot relatively naturally in all of those times of day (particularly sunset). Also lots of scenes that were clearly very long single takes that were done so well.
Do those things make it a a better film? Not necessarily, but I appreciate good craft and the director is clearly incredibly talented.
Sorry, couldn't resist:Loved it.
Even if people don't like it (and I understand why), I don't think it's difficult to appreciate the craft that's gone into it. It's fantastically well shot and clearly all 'real' as well. It made me realise how rare it is to see scenes shot relatively naturally in all of those times of day (particularly sunset). Also lots of scenes that were clearly very long single takes that were done so well.
Do those things make it a a better film? Not necessarily, but I appreciate good craft and the director is clearly incredibly talented.
Special Effects by
Jeremy Hays .... special effects coordinator
Steve Shines .... special effects foreman
Chris L. Ward .... special effects
Visual Effects by
Fiifi Aggrey .... digital compositor
Joshua Bailor .... digital compositor: Crafty Apes
Tanner Bartlett .... compositor
Les Bernstien .... matte camera
Kathy Chasen-Hay .... visual effects executive
Patrick Clancey .... digital opticals
Steve Dinozzi .... digital compositor
Brianna Domont .... visual effects consultant
Gus Duron .... digital opticals editor
Chad Fetzer .... digital compositor: crafty apes
Brian Fortune .... sr. compositor: Crafty Apes
Rocco Gioffre .... traditional matte painting by
Blake Goedde .... digital compositor
Bryan Haines .... digital compositor
Nina Harlan .... compositor
Chris Ingersoll .... digital compositor
Ian Kelly .... digital artist
Chris LeDoux .... visual effects supervisor
Mark LeDoux .... compositing supervisor
Tim LeDoux .... visual effects supervisor
Adam Pere .... visual effects coordinator
Sean Pollack .... cg supervisor
Ryan D. Romero .... digital artist (IMAX Version)
Jason Sanford .... visual effects producer
Sara Emily Tremblay .... digital compositor
John L. Weckworth .... visual effects supervisor
Ryan Wieber .... digital compositor
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3783958/combined
It is quite interesting that musicals are technically possible again and that modern younger directors are willing to have a go at them.
One of the limitations of classic musicals was that, because of the special requirements to sing, dance and record complicated related scenes in very controlled environments, their shooting was restricted to large sound stages and (maybe) closely controlled studio back lots.
One of the reasons they disappeared in the 1960s was because audiences began to expect a more "realistic" look to how films were shot and obvious back lot and sound stage scenes began to look "artificial". In fact, a lot of the new directors also wanted to move away from studio settings because -
a) equipment was getting better and more portable
b) a lot of them were coming out of film school where "camera verité" was all the rage
c) popular music was moving away from musicals anyway
d) TV was having an impact on film studios who began to suffer reducing income which encouraged them to sell off large back lots - especially as land values were rising in California.
With modern digital techniques, some of the restrictions of shooting outdoor and away from controlled studio environments can be overcome.
As ever, technology is often a driver.
One of the limitations of classic musicals was that, because of the special requirements to sing, dance and record complicated related scenes in very controlled environments, their shooting was restricted to large sound stages and (maybe) closely controlled studio back lots.
One of the reasons they disappeared in the 1960s was because audiences began to expect a more "realistic" look to how films were shot and obvious back lot and sound stage scenes began to look "artificial". In fact, a lot of the new directors also wanted to move away from studio settings because -
a) equipment was getting better and more portable
b) a lot of them were coming out of film school where "camera verité" was all the rage
c) popular music was moving away from musicals anyway
d) TV was having an impact on film studios who began to suffer reducing income which encouraged them to sell off large back lots - especially as land values were rising in California.
With modern digital techniques, some of the restrictions of shooting outdoor and away from controlled studio environments can be overcome.
As ever, technology is often a driver.
hyphen said:
Sorry, couldn't resist:
I think you know what I meant. Clearly there are scenes that required effects of some kind (and on a basic level, even though the flyover scene at the start was real, I'm sure there were barriers etc in the background that had to be removed), but generally speaking it's natural light, real sunsets, single take etc.4Q said:
As I said earlier, I loved it. Not because someone told me i should, nor because of any publicity. I loved because I did! I've seen it three times, twice on TV and once at the cinema and would happily watch it again. I love the honesty of the story - that they both wanted to pursue their career more than their relationship, that one of them was willing to give up his dream in order to earn money, that there was no break-up 2/3rds in with a reunion/make up at the end, that they were happy in their new lives and happy for each other, etc - all things which Hollywood HAS to do now with any film where there's a romance. It was nice to see the formula broken for a change. I also like that Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling aren't professional singers or dancers, it adds to it's charm.
BTW it's a couple of weeks since I saw it and I've still got the tune in my head
She wasn't happy at the end. She looked like she had realised,too late, that she had made a bad decision. BTW it's a couple of weeks since I saw it and I've still got the tune in my head
It's advertised as a Feel Good Movie and I did have a smile on my face during the beginning whilst they eventually get together but we left feeling quite down
croyde said:
4Q said:
As I said earlier, I loved it. Not because someone told me i should, nor because of any publicity. I loved because I did! I've seen it three times, twice on TV and once at the cinema and would happily watch it again. I love the honesty of the story - that they both wanted to pursue their career more than their relationship, that one of them was willing to give up his dream in order to earn money, that there was no break-up 2/3rds in with a reunion/make up at the end, that they were happy in their new lives and happy for each other, etc - all things which Hollywood HAS to do now with any film where there's a romance. It was nice to see the formula broken for a change. I also like that Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling aren't professional singers or dancers, it adds to it's charm.
BTW it's a couple of weeks since I saw it and I've still got the tune in my head
She wasn't happy at the end. She looked like she had realised,too late, that she had made a bad decision.BTW it's a couple of weeks since I saw it and I've still got the tune in my head
It's advertised as a Feel Good Movie and I did have a smile on my face during the beginning whilst they eventually get together but we left feeling quite down
Sorry, I'm still struggling with this !
I recall that rather catchy tune, and I liked the jazz (probably the best part of the film) but there really was little else in it, and nothing for the first hour !.
Is it really fair to call it a musical - honestly ?. When I think of the musicals of previous years I'm sure they had far more musical content.......didn't they ?
I recall that rather catchy tune, and I liked the jazz (probably the best part of the film) but there really was little else in it, and nothing for the first hour !.
Is it really fair to call it a musical - honestly ?. When I think of the musicals of previous years I'm sure they had far more musical content.......didn't they ?
Robertj21a said:
Sorry, I'm still struggling with this !
I recall that rather catchy tune, and I liked the jazz (probably the best part of the film) but there really was little else in it, and nothing for the first hour !.
Is it really fair to call it a musical - honestly ?. When I think of the musicals of previous years I'm sure they had far more musical content.......didn't they ?
A musical is where the songs dont interrupt the narative and they dont 'really' happen from the character's point of view are they not?I recall that rather catchy tune, and I liked the jazz (probably the best part of the film) but there really was little else in it, and nothing for the first hour !.
Is it really fair to call it a musical - honestly ?. When I think of the musicals of previous years I'm sure they had far more musical content.......didn't they ?
If so, La La Land definitely qualifies.
Challo said:
CalNaughtonJnr said:
Challo said:
Watched it last night with the missus. Really enjoyed and it's such a feel good movie. As many have said it's beautifully filmed.
I didn't realise that Gosling learned the piano from scratch to play the role.
He didn't!!I didn't realise that Gosling learned the piano from scratch to play the role.
Anyway he only had to learn about three tunes! Most of the time he was playing variations of the same theme
Code of Conduct Breach! 
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff