|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Time Machine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Stambaugh
Film God
Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002
|
posted 03-09-2002 05:59 PM
03/09/2002, Regal Cinema World 8, Eugene OR, 12:30PM, #4, scope. About 40 people in attendance. Excellent presentation, and in particular the sound was fantastic. On the way out I talked to the manager, asked what format it's playing in. Turns out to be SDDS. She says they've been using SDDS as their preferred format at this location for all big "effects" movies for the last few months, starting with Lord of the Rings. She also said they are in line for upgrade to SDDS-8 in the 2 largest auditoriums, and when that happens they will start specifically advertising 8-channel sound in their newspaper ads. This is going to be a counterattack against Cinemark 17, who has stolen much of Regal's business. So it appears SDDS-8 will be used as a marketing tool against their only real competitor. The mgr. says they are trying hard to consistently beat Cinemark in the presentation department, and my recent experiences here bear out that things have indeed improved.The main problem I had with the film was Guy Pearce. What were they thinking? That issue aside, I kind of liked the movie, but it's definitely flawed. It's like the screenplay needed another draft, or they didn't have the necessary footage during editing to make everything work. Most of the special effects were good. The time machine as a movie prop was pretty cool. With someone like Ewan McGregor (sp?) in the lead role, the holes might not have seemed so gaping. But it didn't suck, and I wasn't looking at my watch, so on some level it kind of worked.
------------------
- dave
Look at this! His chin strap has been cut!
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evans A Criswell
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1579
From: Huntsville, AL, USA
Registered: Mar 2000
|
posted 03-10-2002 09:43 PM
Attendance: 2002/03/13 19:00, Carmike Century Cinema 8, Decatur, AL, Auditorium 1, ScopeI have mixed feelings about this remake. I agree with some of the comments already made and have some assorted comments to add. The first thing I noticed is much of the mathematics put on the board seemed to be gibberish. He seemed to write various symbols used in mathematical formulas and equations in random order that made no sense. I say this as a computer scientist with degree in mathematics also! This newfangled time machine, while appropriate in this day of science fiction movies and computer generated everything, lacks the wonderful charm of the original time machine used in the 1960 version. I'd love to have a small replica of the 1960 one for a conversation piece. The morlocks were much scarier in this version. They were much uglier and were much stronger and more physically capable than their 1960 counterparts. They were much more aggressive, coming up and attacking and hunting rather than luring them into their part of the world. The underworld in this version was much uglier and more grotesque than in the 1960 version. In the 1960 version, we just get a quick glimpse to get the point of the cannabalism thing, while in this version, we get dumped into their equivalent of sewage, with bones floating in it. By the way, do bones actually float? I can't remember. I guess it made sense to replace the nuclear war of the 1960s that never happened with something later and much more bizarre. The computer software that ran the "librarian" was an interesting concept, although I doubt that any manmade computer technology or data storage technology could last 800000 years. Then there is the issue of how the system survived the moon disaster and the evolution of two species, and ... oh well... That's Hollywood. I enjoyed it, but I think I liked the 1960 version better. ------------------
Evans A Criswell
Huntsville-Decatur Movie Theatre Information Site
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic