DVDizzy.com

Home | Reviews | Schedule | Cover Art | Search The Site
DVDizzy.com Top Stories:

It is currently Fri Jul 20, 2018 11:51 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1885 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 1:57 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:02 pm
Posts: 12447
Location: Somewhere in Time and Space
Disney Duster wrote:
And I don't even think Cinderella (2015) is that good to watch that often. It's kinda bland, and boring

To be honest, I've found myself watching Cinderella (2015) far more often than the 1950 film. Based on my yearly viewing logs, I've seen the 2015 film nine times since its theatrical release (4x in 2015, 2x in 2016, 2x in 2017, and once already this year). I've only watched 1950's Cinderella four times in that same timeframe (2x each in 2015 and 2017). But I've already had plenty of 1950 Cinderella viewings in my childhood, so the 2015 film has to catch up.

By comparison, I saw Beauty and the Beast thrice in theatres, but still haven't watched it on home media yet (though I've watched the bonus features). Not for lack of trying, just that there are plenty of 2017 movies I still need to see before the Oscars (fourteen that are Oscar-relevant, and several 2017 films I just want to catch up on). Plus, I've always had a companion watching the film in theatres, and it'll be weird to watch it alone for once.

Albert

_________________
WIST #60:
AwallaceUNC: Would you prefer Substi-Blu-tiary Locomotion? :p


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 3:05 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 8:02 am
Posts: 8901
Location: America
Yeah, but you have the money to see all the films you want to and write intelligent reviews about them, and then the magical ability to watch films of varying quality over and over and over again. I hardly see a film more than once unless it's very, very good, it's a top favorite, or it's some version of Cinderella. To be honest all versions of Cinderella can be a little boring. But I love them. I love the 1950 too much to watch too often, and would watch the 2015 one more, as I love it, too.

I've actually seen the 2017 remake of Beauty and the Beast a good number of times. I saw it twice in theaters with friends, and saw it on home video by myself once, and then I brought it to my friend's house to show them, and somehow, to show other people at their house, I and my friends ended up seeing it a bunch more times there, and lastly I began watching it at my house with a friend and finished it after he had to leave. Needless to say I like the film. I plan on watching it again and then all the bonus features but I have to find time. I'm glad you like Cinderella enough to watch it that much.

Escapay, you really should see the 2014 Beauty and the Beast, too!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 4:19 am 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2013 7:29 pm
Posts: 1340
I've been watching the Cinderella 2015 film more than the animated one since it came out, but that's mainly because I have the former on digital and not the latter. I was never interested in getting the digital copy for the 1950 Cinderella because of the shoddy restoration. Hopefully the Signature Collection will be able to fix this finally. I do, however, love both of them equally.

I've only seen BATB once after watching it in theaters. Funny, because I was blown away opening night, and wanted to watch it multiple more times, but over time, the flaws of the film became more apparent to me. There are certain scenes I do like, but that's mainly just the opening and ending and only because of Audra McDonald's singing. If I try to watch the rest of the scenes, I end up comparing them to the animated version and then I just want to rewatch that. And most of the new scenes don't really do it for me, although I did love Luke Evans and Josh Gad, but I can get the former in the current TNT show The Alienist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 1:51 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 8:02 am
Posts: 8901
Location: America
I just didn't want the digital copy when Cinderella (1950) had it, but now I do want digital copies and wish I had bought that beautiful gold cover with the digital copy.

Yeah, Beauty and the Beast (2017) was quite an experience for me the first times I watched in the theatres. Now I'm like...oh man...but I still like it a fair amount.

You know, I think The Shape of Water, which I bet will win Best Picture, is like a version of Beauty and the Beast!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 06, 2018 2:27 am 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2013 7:29 pm
Posts: 1340
Disney Duster wrote:
I just didn't want the digital copy when Cinderella (1950) had it, but now I do want digital copies and wish I had bought that beautiful gold cover with the digital copy.

Yeah, Beauty and the Beast (2017) was quite an experience for me the first times I watched in the theatres. Now I'm like...oh man...but I still like it a fair amount.

You know, I think The Shape of Water, which I bet will win Best Picture, is like a version of Beauty and the Beast!

The Signature Edition will hopefully be here soon (maybe next year at the soonest?) and hopefully with a proper restoration this time. So we can both get digital copies then.

Yeah, it was an amazing cinematic experience to see the film brought to life. It's easy to get blown away by a movie the first time you see it (especially in theaters) and then realize how faulty it was afterwards. I felt similarly with Frozen.

I haven't seen The Shape of Water yet, but I really want to. It's the Oscar film I'm most interested in seeing and I'm rooting for it to win Best Picture. People think it could win, if Three Billboards doesn't.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 5:01 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 8:02 am
Posts: 8901
Location: America
Yeah, I agree with everything except I think The Shape of Water is the more worthy film and will win because of that. I haven't seen Billboards, but I have seen Water. Loved it.

You know what gets me about the enchanted book scene is not the book, it's that the scene adds nothing to the plot or characters. It gives the reason Belle moved to the village, but that could have been handled by her father doing what any normal loving father would have done and told her. The Beast says he's sorry he called Maurice a thief but again, it could have been solved easier. He would say that to Belle because he loved her.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 5:32 am 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2013 7:29 pm
Posts: 1340
Disney Duster wrote:
Yeah, I agree with everything except I think The Shape of Water is the more worthy film and will win because of that. I haven't seen Billboards, but I have seen Water. Loved it.

You know what gets me about the enchanted book scene is not the book, it's that the scene adds nothing to the plot or characters. It gives the reason Belle moved to the village, but that could have been handled by her father doing what any normal loving father would have done and told her. The Beast says he's sorry he called Maurice a thief but again, it could have been solved easier. He would say that to Belle because he loved her.

I hope that's the case because Billboards won at the Golden Globes and SAG awards. For both Best Actress and Best Film, and I would love for Sally Hawkins to win as well. She's a great actress and this is a one-in-a-lifetime role.

The book scene bothered me mainly because I didn't care for the Belle's mother plotline. It seemed completely unnecessary and only to pander to people who complained about Disney's treatment of mothers. Even the original song written for it was not very good imo. Celine Deon can make it memorable but not Emma Watson. And as you pointed out, it adds nothing else to the plot too. The only thing I like is the shot of Paris and mainly because seeing Notre Dame gave me chills and hopes for a certain future film...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 12:45 pm 
Offline
Collector's Edition

Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 8:18 pm
Posts: 763
JeanGreyForever wrote:
The book scene bothered me mainly because I didn't care for the Belle's mother plotline. It seemed completely unnecessary and only to pander to people who complained about Disney's treatment of mothers. Even the original song written for it was not very good imo. Celine Deon can make it memorable but not Emma Watson. And as you pointed out, it adds nothing else to the plot too. The only thing I like is the shot of Paris and mainly because seeing Notre Dame gave me chills and hopes for a certain future film...


To me, most of these live action films seem to be made with the purpose (outside of making tons of money) as a way of pandering to people who had certain issues with the original films. I don't really care about Maleficent's backstory. Sure, maybe her enacting revenge over not being invited to a birthday party is pretty petty but this is a movie that has three fairies trying to conjure up a dress using magic as well as Maleficent turning into a fire-breathing dragon. Also, the movie takes place during the 14th century where people got murderously upset over the most ridiculous things. With Beauty and the Beast, I don't need to be explained why the villagers don't know about the castle. Doesn't it kind of ruin the magic and mystery of the telling? That's the problem with most movies these days. They just feel the need to explain every single thing thus sacrificing the idea of leaving it all up to the imagination. Disney, stop using internet comments and fanfics as influences and focus on making good movies.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 11:29 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 8:02 am
Posts: 8901
Location: America
I just heard Billboards wasn't good at all from a review site I pay heed to.

I also didn't care for the Belle's mother backstory. And actually I only slightly was more ok with the one for the prince's father. What a dumb, lazy explanation for the prince being beastly. It was originally his CHOICE, writers. That's what it should be instead of blaming someone else. God, it's called CHARACTER.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 12:30 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:02 pm
Posts: 12447
Location: Somewhere in Time and Space
Three Billboards outside Ebbing, Missouri is brilliant. The performances, the commentary/criticism about the powers of the local police, and the outright darkness of it all. I put it in my Top 10 for 2017, thought it did come at the expense of pushing Get Out from that bracket. I think the Best Picture award will likely go to Get Out or The Shape of Water, though my personal pick would be either Lady Bird or Call Me By Your Name.

Albert

_________________
WIST #60:
AwallaceUNC: Would you prefer Substi-Blu-tiary Locomotion? :p


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 1:58 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:26 pm
Posts: 9735
Location: North Carolina Gender: Male
Honestly, this is one of those years where I'll be fine with any of Three Billboards..., Lady Bird, Shape of Water, Get Out, or CMbYN winning. I think all of them are deserving.

Disney Duster wrote:
I just heard Billboards wasn't good at all from a review site I pay heed to.

I also didn't care for the Belle's mother backstory. And actually I only slightly was more ok with the one for the prince's father. What a dumb, lazy explanation for the prince being beastly. It was originally his CHOICE, writers. That's what it should be instead of blaming someone else. God, it's called CHARACTER.
Funny, I thought it still was his CHOICE? The only person calling it an excuse is, well, you. Must be entertaining to create your own issues out of nothing at all.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 1:47 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 8:02 am
Posts: 8901
Location: America
The film said his father made him that way. You know, he made him be that way? Nobody thinks that was a good idea.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 1:00 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:26 pm
Posts: 9735
Location: North Carolina Gender: Male
Unless the Narrator said the Beast’s father was responsible for the Beast’s own sins, I'd rank that claim as false. And you don't know everyone.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 2:34 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 8:02 am
Posts: 8901
Location: America
All I need is Mrs. Potts to say the Beast's father made him the way he is, which she did, it's clear the film is saying that's what happened.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 2:49 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:26 pm
Posts: 9735
Location: North Carolina Gender: Male
You wouldn’t even need actual dialogue to make any ridiculous claim under the sun. But for myself, I’ll say Mrs. Potts is not an unbiased, objective voice within the narrative and what she says doesn’t constitute "what the film is saying."

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 03, 2018 8:22 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 8:02 am
Posts: 8901
Location: America
Tristy wrote:
To me, most of these live action films seem to be made with the purpose (outside of making tons of money) as a way of pandering to people who had certain issues with the original films. I don't really care about Maleficent's backstory. Sure, maybe her enacting revenge over not being invited to a birthday party is pretty petty but this is a movie that has three fairies trying to conjure up a dress using magic as well as Maleficent turning into a fire-breathing dragon. Also, the movie takes place during the 14th century where people got murderously upset over the most ridiculous things. With Beauty and the Beast, I don't need to be explained why the villagers don't know about the castle. Doesn't it kind of ruin the magic and mystery of the telling? That's the problem with most movies these days. They just feel the need to explain every single thing thus sacrificing the idea of leaving it all up to the imagination. Disney, stop using internet comments and fanfics as influences and focus on making good movies.

Where did you get the information I bolded?

And just because there is magic in a film doesn't mean human emotions shouldn't ring true.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 03, 2018 8:58 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2013 7:29 pm
Posts: 1340
Disney Duster wrote:
Tristy wrote:
To me, most of these live action films seem to be made with the purpose (outside of making tons of money) as a way of pandering to people who had certain issues with the original films. I don't really care about Maleficent's backstory. Sure, maybe her enacting revenge over not being invited to a birthday party is pretty petty but this is a movie that has three fairies trying to conjure up a dress using magic as well as Maleficent turning into a fire-breathing dragon. Also, the movie takes place during the 14th century where people got murderously upset over the most ridiculous things. With Beauty and the Beast, I don't need to be explained why the villagers don't know about the castle. Doesn't it kind of ruin the magic and mystery of the telling? That's the problem with most movies these days. They just feel the need to explain every single thing thus sacrificing the idea of leaving it all up to the imagination. Disney, stop using internet comments and fanfics as influences and focus on making good movies.

Where did you get the information I bolded?

And just because there is magic in a film doesn't mean human emotions shouldn't ring true.

In Sleeping Beauty, Prince Phillip remarks that it's the 14th century to his father when he tells him he is going to marry a peasant girl instead of the Princess Aurora.
"Now, father, you're living in the past. This is the 14th century!"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 04, 2018 7:34 am 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 3:58 am
Posts: 1101
Location: Timisoara, Romania
Tristy wrote:

To me, most of these live action films seem to be made with the purpose (outside of making tons of money) as a way of pandering to people who had certain issues with the original films. I don't really care about Maleficent's backstory. Sure, maybe her enacting revenge over not being invited to a birthday party is pretty petty but this is a movie that has three fairies trying to conjure up a dress using magic as well as Maleficent turning into a fire-breathing dragon. Also, the movie takes place during the 14th century where people got murderously upset over the most ridiculous things. With Beauty and the Beast, I don't need to be explained why the villagers don't know about the castle. Doesn't it kind of ruin the magic and mystery of the telling? That's the problem with most movies these days. They just feel the need to explain every single thing thus sacrificing the idea of leaving it all up to the imagination. Disney, stop using internet comments and fanfics as influences and focus on making good movies.


This! I agree, 100%. I noticed this, too. Why do people always need to explained everything that happens in a movie? I'll take Beauty and the Beast as an example. In the animated movie, the narrator says, "And as punishment, she transformed him into a hideous beast, and she placed a powerful spell on the castle and all who lived there." There you clearly have it, the castle is under a spell, so that is why the villagers didn't remember it.

I have no idea why people analyze movies. Why can't they just enjoy them?

_________________
Image

If you're a fan of Disney animation, like my Facebook fanpage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 04, 2018 9:34 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2013 7:29 pm
Posts: 1340
BATB didn't win the Oscar for Best Costume Design for anyone interested. I won't pretend that I'm not a little pleased by that. It also didn't win for Best Production Design, which I did feel a bit bad about, but I'm glad The Shape of Water won instead.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 04, 2018 10:16 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:06 am
Posts: 11139
Beauty and the Beast deserved the Oscar for Best Production Design much more than The Shape of Water, in my opinion. Those set designs were simply stunning! Can't comment on costume design and Phantom Thread as I haven't watched it.

_________________
ImageImageImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1885 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group