movies

yeah! i saw superman returns yesterday and loved it. as soon as i heard that original john williams theme and saw the opening credits, i was a kid again. to be honest, i was skeptical of the film until pretty much the day it opened at which point the skepticism rolled over to unbridled anticipation. i think a lot of this had to do with the fact that most of my friends saw the film opening day and i refused to talk to them until i saw it. it took me till sunday because i promised jen and my family i would wait to see it on 3d imax which they were all looking forward to. and jen explained to me it wouldn’t be fair if i already saw it before them. i don’t know how it wouldn’t have been fair, but i understand what she meant. i would have felt cheated if i wasn’t seeing it with others for the first time too- not experincing the mystery, excitement or whatever on an equal level.

as silly as it sounds, i really felt like i was on a separate planet for a few days. unable to communicate with anyone until i saw the film for fear that they’d give something away or spoil my enjoyment in some annoying critical manner. that wasn’t the case of course, as all my friends felt the same as i did after making my phone call rounds after seeing it. i think the fact that i waited as long as i did, letting anticipation build up and up, and still walking out of the theater with a big smile on my face says a lot about the film. the directing was great, the story well thought out, casting was perfect (yes, i believed kate bosworth as lois lane), the cinematography was gorgeous, the kid didn’t annoy me and the music- the music was awesome. i think everyone that was a part of this film was filling some pretty big shoes, but they all played enough homage to their original counterparts to satisfy nostalgia while still entertaining you with their original takes.

i don’t want to spoil anything for anyone though. the only thing i’d like to deter people from is seeing it in 3d. the imax was cool. very cool. i think the larger screen just increased the scope of everything. but the 3d scenes were few and very poorly done. not only did it distract from the movie with blinking glasses at the bottom of the screen and a rush to put them on, but the double imaging caused me to be a bit lost during some of the action scenes. in fact, i was actually starting to get dissapointed everytime i had to put the glasses on. still, i walked out loving this film.

i can’t wait to see it again on wednesday. :)

cow & buffalo is up. actually it’s been up for about eight hours now, but i keep forgetting to mention it since i started writing updates on this blog.

jen and i saw the da vinci code last night. i kept trying to make time to read the book before i saw it but just never found it. we did see it with someone who did though and he said it stuck pretty close to the book, which i guess just added to some of my frustrations with the movie. i mean it was a decent movie, not great, but entertaining enough and with a terrific cast (i just love audrey tautou). and i love treasure hunt tales and searches for the holy grail and stories of that nature. but the way so much of the story is routed in supposed truths just made a lot of what was said difficult to swallow. and yes, you’d think this would be because of me being a christian, and i’m sure part of it is, but it really had more to do with what i’ve studied in art history and particularly of the last supper. i mean, seriously, right off the bat here- why on earth would da vinci paint only eleven disciples? i mean, if he was commisioned to depict the last supper, don’t you think he’d include john instead of mary? was this the master artist i studied for his keen grasp on persepective or somebody more intent on leaving secret messages in his paintings? and if he wanted to conceil a hidden meaning to be preserved throughout time, why would he experiment with tempera? i don’t know. i didn’t know him. neither did dan brown, but he sure seems to assume a lot of what he did and what da vinci believed in. and that’s kind of the problem. it’s clear mr. brown does believe these accounts and theories presented in the film and he roots the basis of his storytelling in these “facts”. if i felt like i was only watching a fictional thrilling mystery with all these facinating puzzles to solve, that would have been great! i would have loved that. and i would have no problem with some of the religious theories that dan brown has. but don’t present them as based on fact. don’t presume i’m going to accept what you say is true because of your “research”. the fact is that the story depends on the reality of these pesumptions to feel credible. and not buying in to most of them really took away from some of my enjoyment.

ack! i’m rambling. i really did enjoy the movie. i enjoyed how the story unfolded, the inclusion of past events, the history, the conspiracies and the mysteries therein. but i enjoyed them as pure fiction. unfortunately, i don’t think dan brown sees things that way. hopefully, audiences are a little wiser.