It's rumored that forms of communication exist by which your questions might be answered and yet no one would be in danger of viewing spoilers. Information theory specialists still speculate as to what those forms might be though, so for now I'll have to risk reading future spoilers.
I haven't seen the movie yet - it looks both thin and dull. I couldn't believe they could wrench a full-length movie out of such a concise short story. Read that, if you can. It's very satisfying (but again - a full length movie? How?). Incidentally, it was in a recent issue of All-Story (by Zoetrope - F.F. Coppola's outfit), a surprisingly great short story magazine.
Oh, and Jessica Biel actually turns out to be a dude.
Has anyone (besides Wolfson, for whom I know the answer to part a)) seen The Illusionist, Half Nelson, This Film Is Not Yet Rated, or ? If you've seen one of them, did you like it? If you've seen more than one, how would you compare them? Without subsequent information, which might include being told that my filmgoing companion has already seen one or more of these, I'm going to see Half Nelson.
That last movie, after This Film Is Not Yet Rated, sounds intriguing. I have seen none of those but can tell you that Becks and a friend saw Half Nelson. There was a post about it.
I have seen The Illusionist. I'm a big fan of Steven Millhauser, but I hadn't read the short story.
I have no problems with following the plot of the movie. I think it's fair to complain that some of the illusions couldn't possibly have been done with the technology of the time, but that's no biggie. I have some minor quibbles with the timetable of the blowoff. But by and large I thought the film was well-directed and -acted, and the cinematography excellent. I frankly didn't pay much attention to Biel's lips.
I'm looking forward to The Prestige, and I have read the Christopher Priest novel.
It does seem that you can't do a film about magic without involving Ricky Jay.
Of those three moives I've only seen The Illusionist. Liked it a lot. When I left the theater I was thinking, okay, that was diverting enough. But it has been one of those that I like better the more I think about it. And it is very pretty — the colors, the focus — though there were a couple of gratuitously arty shots.
But Ben, did you really not get it? Other than the doctor/guy at the train identity, I think I had figured most of it out before the end.
18: I missed the doctor/guy at the train too, but that's hardly surprising. I'd put most of it together fairly early, and was certain when the prince and inspector were talking, so I thought it was fairly obvious. I know the person I was with was surprised though...
Agree it had pretty moments. It was ok, as you say, a reasonable diversion. Some of the CGI etc. in the illusions was jarring though --- I would have preferred more realistically fake, if that makes sense.
But Ben, did you really not get it? Other than the doctor/guy at the train identity, I think I had figured most of it out before the end.
What I didn't get was the precise mechanics—what was going to happen I had figured out, but exactly how it happened remained a bit opaque. This has since been cleared up.
It's rumored that forms of communication exist by which your questions might be answered and yet no one would be in danger of viewing spoilers. Information theory specialists still speculate as to what those forms might be though, so for now I'll have to risk reading future spoilers.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 12:05 AM
Are you trying to tell us you think your mom is a lesbian, or that she's sexist? Or both?
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 12:07 AM
I'm just sayin' what I'm sayin'.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 12:09 AM
I haven't seen the movie yet - it looks both thin and dull. I couldn't believe they could wrench a full-length movie out of such a concise short story. Read that, if you can. It's very satisfying (but again - a full length movie? How?). Incidentally, it was in a recent issue of All-Story (by Zoetrope - F.F. Coppola's outfit), a surprisingly great short story magazine.
Oh, and Jessica Biel actually turns out to be a dude.
Posted by moira | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 12:10 AM
Named Rosebud.
Posted by moira | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 12:11 AM
The horror.
Posted by Stanley | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 12:12 AM
Speaking of ass.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 12:13 AM
2: I think you're reading too much into it.
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 12:14 AM
And yet, I add joy to the world.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 12:15 AM
You're no Kantian.
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 12:49 AM
It would be great if Ben's mum were bi, then even more of us could sleep with her. Of course, if she's sexist, I'm not going anywhere near her.
Posted by asilon | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 1:25 AM
I freely admit that I don't get 10.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 6:50 AM
Has anyone (besides Wolfson, for whom I know the answer to part a)) seen The Illusionist, Half Nelson, This Film Is Not Yet Rated, or ? If you've seen one of them, did you like it? If you've seen more than one, how would you compare them? Without subsequent information, which might include being told that my filmgoing companion has already seen one or more of these, I'm going to see Half Nelson.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 8:21 AM
That last movie, after This Film Is Not Yet Rated, sounds intriguing. I have seen none of those but can tell you that Becks and a friend saw Half Nelson. There was a post about it.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 8:50 AM
my mom commented on Biel's ass
Yes, but what did she say? Did she approve?
This will help us decide if she is sexist, gay, a person of sound judgment, etc.
Posted by rob helpy-chalk | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 8:52 AM
I have seen The Illusionist. I'm a big fan of Steven Millhauser, but I hadn't read the short story.
I have no problems with following the plot of the movie. I think it's fair to complain that some of the illusions couldn't possibly have been done with the technology of the time, but that's no biggie. I have some minor quibbles with the timetable of the blowoff. But by and large I thought the film was well-directed and -acted, and the cinematography excellent. I frankly didn't pay much attention to Biel's lips.
I'm looking forward to The Prestige, and I have read the Christopher Priest novel.
It does seem that you can't do a film about magic without involving Ricky Jay.
Posted by theophylact | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 8:57 AM
I assume I did something wrong with my italics tags, the last one was meant to be Mutual Appreciation.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 8:58 AM
Hey, I thought of Brooks Hansen, too.
Of those three moives I've only seen The Illusionist. Liked it a lot. When I left the theater I was thinking, okay, that was diverting enough. But it has been one of those that I like better the more I think about it. And it is very pretty — the colors, the focus — though there were a couple of gratuitously arty shots.
But Ben, did you really not get it? Other than the doctor/guy at the train identity, I think I had figured most of it out before the end.
Posted by Blume | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 8:58 AM
I think it's fair to complain that some of the illusions couldn't possibly have been done with the technology of the time
This doesn't seem like it would be a sensical complaint about the story.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 9:00 AM
18: I missed the doctor/guy at the train too, but that's hardly surprising. I'd put most of it together fairly early, and was certain when the prince and inspector were talking, so I thought it was fairly obvious. I know the person I was with was surprised though...
Agree it had pretty moments. It was ok, as you say, a reasonable diversion. Some of the CGI etc. in the illusions was jarring though --- I would have preferred more realistically fake, if that makes sense.
Posted by soub | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 9:11 AM
But Ben, did you really not get it? Other than the doctor/guy at the train identity, I think I had figured most of it out before the end.
What I didn't get was the precise mechanics—what was going to happen I had figured out, but exactly how it happened remained a bit opaque. This has since been cleared up.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 10:02 AM
To a certain extent. I'm not a canny audience.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 10:12 AM
The reviewers at The Onion were not enthusiatic about the ratings documentary.
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 10:42 AM
Half Nelson is a good film for people who don't mind inaction. Nothing much happens.
Posted by Willy Voet | Link to this comment | 09-12-06 11:25 AM
She's his sister and his daughter.
Posted by Raven | Link to this comment | 09-16-06 3:22 AM