|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Miracle
|
|
|
John Carpenter
Film Handler
Posts: 96
From: Fort Walton Beach, FL, USA
Registered: Nov 2002
|
posted 01-31-2004 09:49 PM
In the sneak here in Gainesville, it sold out hours before showtime. That says a lot, because even though we normally have very large grosses, sneak previews don't normally do all that well.
The audience all seemed to love it - laughs and applause throughout the film - especially at the end. For some reason, the customers felt the need to tell me as they were leaving, how much they enjoyed it.
For me, I really liked it. I think most people will, unless they really don't like those "feel good" movies. Kurt Russell's fake accent was quite a bit annoying, and the plot dragged on at the beginning a bit. Overall well done by both the writers and technical crews. Particularly interesting was how they set up what was going on in current events leading up to the 1980 Olympics - set the mood of the country for the viewer.
4.5 out of 5
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Norwood
Film God
Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 02-07-2004 09:22 PM
Liked it, although "Hoosiers" is still my favorite "sports movie that conforms to every cliche in the book, but is well done enough to make it worth watching."
The opening title was great (yeah, I'm a sucker for stock footage used to set the mood for a film). Score was good as well.
I'm in complete agreement with Brad on the gratuitous use of zooms, although I was more annoyed by the sheer number of shots which were just plain out of focus. These weren't just action shots, either. There's no excuse for out-of-focus shots and I'm surprised that the director didn't fire the first AC and re-shoot those scenes. On the other hand, the game photography is pretty good. Hockey is a tough sport to shoot (I made some attempts in high school, on both video and 16mm), and they did a nice job in this film.
I was unimpressed with the way that most shots were framed, too; most are way too tight for a scope (well, super 35) film intended to be shown on a large screen. I'm sure that it will look fine for the Academy frame TV version when they use more of the super 35 image area than was seen in the scope prints. This is annoying...movies should be made to look best on the big screen, not on TV. ![[puke]](graemlins/puke.gif)
Oh, well, that's a minor complaint. It's still a good film and one of the better titles in current release.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
David Stambaugh
Film God
Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002
|
posted 02-08-2004 06:23 PM
08 Feb 2004, Regal Cinema World 8, Eugene OR, 12 noon, house #4, SR-D. Attendance around 60. When the trailers ended (finally ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif) ) and the feature started, there was an abrupt improvement in sharpness and detail in the screen image. Yay. Presentation was very good though there were a couple of lab splices and a fogged section of film that caused a digital dropout and the analog level dropped very low. But no major complaints. I noticed 1 instance of CRAP code. I did notice some shots were out of focus. Most of the scenes were razor sharp, so the o-o-f shots really stand out. I suppose it's possible that was intentional, given the almost documentary look and feel of the action sequences sometimes. Who knows?
I loved this movie. Kurt Russell was great -- I felt I was watching Herb Brooks, not an actor playing him. I liked that they used all unknowns for the hockey team. Very inspirational - the best feel-good movie in quite a while.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave Bird
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 777
From: Perth, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Jun 2000
|
posted 02-14-2004 11:13 PM
Just saw it. I agree with Brad and Scott, the zooming was the most annoying part. I think they did it because it is so difficult to recreate a hockey scene. I've heard a couple people up here in "hockey country" say that the film was a little embellished. But those folks are simply too young or were not paying attention. My father was a hockey coach who around the same period was winning provincial championships, we were VERY into the game at the time. We also are not far from Lake Placid and vacationed there before and after the Games. Russell does a fabulous job, and the story stands. Team USA, a bunch of kids playing the mighty USSR professionals, and all the political turmoil of the time, this really WAS impossible, a miracle. There are many proud Canadians who hold this victory by the US as a far, far greater moment than when our Canadian team of pros beat a bunch of other vacationing pros to win in Salt Lake. It just doesn't compare. I watched it with my family at home. We screamed at the cheap-shotting Ruskies, were awed by Craig's supernatural goaltending, and embraced when they won. My parents are gone now, I was very emotional watching this movie, especially the scenes where the players celebrated goals vs. the USSR, absolutely bang-on. Anyone who thinks this was Hollywood embellishment, simply did not see it the first time, what a story, just when the world needed it...
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mitchell Cope
Master Film Handler
Posts: 256
From: Overland Park, KS, United States
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 04-18-2004 04:50 AM
Just saw this movie at a dollar theater. Maybe it was the hazy image or incomplete aperture filing, but I didn't notice the zooming that much. I agree, in principle, that zooming is normally obvious and amateurish. It was OK for me, though, to use the effect to show a visual speed over the ice. Whatever.
I'm a big fan of "Hoosiers" and if I had to compare the two, "Hoosiers" would still win out. Maybe I ended up not liking Brooks that much, though I do respect what he was able to accomplish. It seems like he could always go too far. Maybe he did.
I liked the way they summed up how the big game was played. Essentially, each goal and when it came was shown. Then, just holding out the last 10 minutes of the game. I did feel like cheering in the audience whenever the U.S.A. scored. ![[uhoh]](graemlins/uhoh.gif)
I thought Brooks character was a little bit too one dimensional. He had a little bit of interaction with his wife, but to me that was just to get some female element into the film.
The skating was impressive. I had heard it was easier for Disney to teach hockey players how to act rather than teaching actors how to skate. I assume they did the same with "Hoosiers" because few of those players ever acted again according to IMDB.
Overall, it held my interest, but I wouldn't call it a great movie.
| 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
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic