CINEMA

MockingJay Part 1: no spoilers in OP

POSTED BY: MAL4PREZ
UPDATED: Wednesday, December 3, 2014 06:03
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3842
PAGE 1 of 1

Saturday, November 22, 2014 9:38 PM

MAL4PREZ


I just saw MJ1 on the Saturday afternoon of its opening. What's more, I saw it as this new AMC "Prime" thing, which costs a few bucks more than the already wicked high price of showings at the large, comfy, nice theaters in Times Square.

I've said before that it takes more than one viewing for me to cement my opinion of a movie. In the case of Guardians, my first take wasn't so good, and I later discovered more. So who knows. But on first viewing of MJ1...

I really liked this movie. Very much. More than I expected to.

I read the book and didn't think much of it, which in fact helps. The storyline is grim and slow at times. I didn't like that in the book, but the movie, with only a few (very justifiable) adjustments in plot, was much more engrossing than the book. I was thoroughly engaged the whole time. Perhaps someone who hasn't read the book wouldn't be so engrossed. I'm curious to know.

As for the "AMC Prime" thing, from their web site:

"Introducing AMC Prime, the movie experience that delivers the "wow" of sight, sound and sense like you wouldn't believe. Feel the action with super-comfy recliners that actually reverberate with every explosion and every laser blast. Live inside the sound with audio that submerges you in a world of sensation. And capture every moment in the finest detail with the unbelievably crisp and luminous picture. With AMC Prime, you see, hear and feel every wow."

So, AMC has armed a few choice theaters with awesomely nice reclining seats with much space between them. I'm totally 100% into paying a little extra to have space and electronically reclined seating. For once I didn't leave the theater with sore knees. However, they also pipe the soundtrack into the seats and vibrate them when the bass is booming. Really. Vibrating seats. The crowd giggled at it.

I'm not a fan of the vibrations. It's cheesy and silly and distracting. But, for me, its worth overlooking the silliness because of how damned comfortable I was.

Also, the seats are reserved. How huge is this? You can buy your seat in the theater and then be A-OK to show up 20 mins late and avoid all the annoying unending previews and still have your good seat.

Theater gods be praised!

As for their claims of a "crisp and luminous" picture: there was an obvious red-green grid behind the skin tones and white frames on the screen. It was distracting. For a theater experience charging me $20 to be "Prime", someone ought to fix this bug.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 22, 2014 10:12 PM

ECGORDON

There's no place I can be since I found Serenity.


$20!!!!

I don't think I'd pay that even if Kubrick rose from the dead and finally filmed his Napoleon like he'd planned for decades.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 22, 2014 11:13 PM

WISHIMAY


I've heard that this one is pretty violent, with people eating corpses and the like, and the ending kinda screetches to a halt.

I won't be seeing it until the next one comes out on video, I HATE waiting till next year and breaking up a story (don't remember the plot too well). Believe it or not, we waited until ALL the Harry Potters were out on video to see what all the fuss was about. I hear they might be making three more. Probably have to wait a decade to see all of those

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 23, 2014 5:51 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


The Prime Thing: I don't mind paying extra for a better experience and comfy seats, but please! vibrating chairs - not even if they came with dancing girls and servants feeding me grapes (I may consider it if they throw in Hula girls).

I did visit a theater in the Bronx, Co-Op City to be exact, and they had the extra wide reclining chairs with electronic control when I went to see Gone Girl and paid $15 during a matinee. No vibrations, but extra leg room that made for a pleasant trip to the movies.

Shiny.

Took my grown nieces to see it tonight (Saturday) and they both liked it, but both felt it was a bit long. I tend to agree, at least it felt long. What I liked was that it balanced the love interest part with the political drama and choices that Katniss had to make. I liked it better than Catching Fire, but only slightly so. I guess the jury is still out for me. Jennifer Lawrence was solid as was Woody Harrelson, but I was impressed by Elizabeth Banks yet again (as Effie Trinket), she got my attention more so in Catching Fire.

This one was much darker that the other two, if that's possible, but, as part of the second act, that's usually the case. Well, it's actually a bridge between the second and third acts. Still though I was riveted in my seat, so there's something to be said for it's relentless ratcheting up of dramatic storytelling. The pace was slow at times, but overall, because of the grim storyline, it wasn't a total disaster (but I'm a patient moviegoer, I give it time to deliver the payoff). There were a few scenes that ended with an awkward wimper, but those were minor. Perhaps that's what "slowed down" the movie in the general sense.

In the AMC theater where I saw it - it was a packed house. We got there a half hour early and people were already in the waiting line inside the movieplex (in Queens). And at the end about half the theater applauded, and even more when, at the end credits, they flashed a memoriam across the screen for Philip Seymour Hoffman.


SGG


Quote:

Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
I just saw MJ1 on the Saturday afternoon of its opening. What's more, I saw it as this new AMC "Prime" thing, which costs a few bucks more than the already wicked high price of showings at the large, comfy, nice theaters in Times Square.

I've said before that it takes more than one viewing for me to cement my opinion of a movie. In the case of Guardians, my first take wasn't so good, and I later discovered more. So who knows. But on first viewing of MJ1...

I really liked this movie. Very much. More than I expected to.

I read the book and didn't think much of it, which in fact helps. The storyline is grim and slow at times. I didn't like that in the book, but the movie, with only a few (very justifiable) adjustments in plot, was much more engrossing than the book. I was thoroughly engaged the whole time. Perhaps someone who hasn't read the book wouldn't be so engrossed. I'm curious to know.

As for the "AMC Prime" thing, from their web site:

"Introducing AMC Prime, the movie experience that delivers the "wow" of sight, sound and sense like you wouldn't believe. Feel the action with super-comfy recliners that actually reverberate with every explosion and every laser blast. Live inside the sound with audio that submerges you in a world of sensation. And capture every moment in the finest detail with the unbelievably crisp and luminous picture. With AMC Prime, you see, hear and feel every wow."

So, AMC has armed a few choice theaters with awesomely nice reclining seats with much space between them. I'm totally 100% into paying a little extra to have space and electronically reclined seating. For once I didn't leave the theater with sore knees. However, they also pipe the soundtrack into the seats and vibrate them when the bass is booming. Really. Vibrating seats. The crowd giggled at it.

I'm not a fan of the vibrations. It's cheesy and silly and distracting. But, for me, its worth overlooking the silliness because of how damned comfortable I was.

Also, the seats are reserved. How huge is this? You can buy your seat in the theater and then be A-OK to show up 20 mins late and avoid all the annoying unending previews and still have your good seat.

Theater gods be praised!

As for their claims of a "crisp and luminous" picture: there was an obvious red-green grid behind the skin tones and white frames on the screen. It was distracting. For a theater experience charging me $20 to be "Prime", someone ought to fix this bug.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 23, 2014 5:58 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


I'd buy that for a dollar!


SGG


Quote:

Originally posted by ecgordon:
$20!!!!

I don't think I'd pay that even if Kubrick rose from the dead and finally filmed his Napoleon like he'd planned for decades.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 23, 2014 12:51 PM

ECGORDON

There's no place I can be since I found Serenity.


I nearly always go to matinees even though I can get the senior discount in the evening. Unless someone else invites me to go along I never go on Friday or Saturday night because I don't like big crowds. I like to sit as close to the center of the theater as possible, but I don't want to be crowded or have to listen to everyone else munching their popcorn or slurping their drinks. One perk that I might pay extra for is headphones so I can listen to the movie without hearing others talking about it or talking about something else entirely.

I'll see Mockingjay, as well as Birdman (which I'm sure I'll like more), sometime this coming week.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 23, 2014 7:17 PM

MAL4PREZ


After some reflection, I have ideas as to why the book annoyed me so and the movie didn't. I will not spoil re plot details, but I may give away some general ideas of characterization for those who didn't read the books. So read on or not at your danger.













I quit reading the book at some point maybe 3/4 though MJ1 because it lost any believability for me. As someone who teaches teens, I suddenly saw how obviously the book was trying to sell itself to the teen mentality. Teenagers are focused on themselves. This is not a bad thing; it's a reality of the age. They are all about learning who they are and improving who they are (let's hope!) so they can eventually become functioning adult human beings. But they are not yet independent creatures. They still have to color within the lines.

Remembering back to those times in my life, I sometimes find it shocking that I didn't have the freedom to say: hey, this weekend is boring I'm going to drive over to that ---insert fun event--- happening in ---insert nearby town--- see you Monday. It's ridiculous to me now to think of not having that freedom, but when I was a teen I didn't question the limitation.

So, point 1: the teen is the center of everything.
Point 2: the teen is powerless and dependent on those around her.

Katniss is Point 1 times 100. Or 1000. She is SOOOO important. The fate of every being in her nation depends on her. Not just on her fighting skills, but on her personality and dress and grooming. Every facet of her being. She is fully the spotlight of everything.

Point 2: Katniss can't say: I don't like what's happening so I'm going to choose to do something else and I don't need to get permission for it. She is powerless to choose her own path without clearing it with others. This also, conveniently, makes her not responsible for consequences. After all, the adults are driving the boat. They are pushing her into everything she does.

Those who've seen the movie and not read the book might disagree with my take here. Which just proves my point.

When I read the book, the obvious contrivances become unbearable and I had to quit it for some time. I finished it out eventually, but I lost any sense of this fictional world being believable. It was written to appeal to the teen mentality, without any actual realistic logic about how real adults act.

The movie, however, backed off point 2. The adult rebels are far less contrived and shallow and non-believable in the movie than they were in the book.



*-------------------------------------------------*
What trolls reveal about themselves when they troll:
http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=57532
*-------------------------------------------------*



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 23, 2014 10:00 PM

MAL4PREZ


Quote:

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
The Prime Thing: I don't mind paying extra for a better experience and comfy seats, but please! vibrating chairs - not even if they came with dancing girls and servants feeding me grapes (I may consider it if they throw in Hula girls).

I did visit a theater in the Bronx, Co-Op City to be exact, and they had the extra wide reclining chairs with electronic control when I went to see Gone Girl and paid $15 during a matinee. No vibrations, but extra leg room that made for a pleasant trip to the movies.



Ok, so I'm with you there. The "leather" recliner - not sure if it was real leather but it felt similar - was so comfy that it was worth the $5 extra. And let's not down play the significance of the reserved spot. I f***ing hate the never ending previews. It is all good to me to be able to avoid that wasted time.

I am like ECG that I hate a crowded theater. I usually wait a few weeks or more after a movie comes out because I hate feeling physically crowded. At the same time, I do enjoy observing an interested audience's reaction to a movie. If I can experience the lively crowd without feeling crowded,i f I have a full sized recliner all to myself, I am not distracted by any stranger's elbows poking at me, and I am willing to pay for that.

So that's 3 reasons I'll pay the $5 extra.

The vibrations though. Gah! Straight out of Brave New World's "feelies." Creepy and weird. There needs to be a MUTE button on each seat. I'm serious - it really wouldn't be that hard to do.

Quote:

The pace was slow at times, but overall, because of the grim storyline, it wasn't a total disaster (but I'm a patient moviegoer, I give it time to deliver the payoff). There were a few scenes that ended with an awkward wimper, but those were minor. Perhaps that's what "slowed down" the movie in the general sense.

Did you read the book? I ask because I think it was so much worse than the movie. It helped me, ironically, because I expected the slow moments and they were much less ponderous than in the book. I was more than happy at how quick the movie moved on.

As for MJ2 (no spoilers!), I found that all the action to come in 2015 was poorly visualized in the book. The filmmakers have won my confidence, and I think they'll make something more of it.

I do not argue with those who refuse to watch MJ1 until there is an MJ2. The lack of action in 1 will be made up in 2, and between these two films there will be a well balanced adventure to be had.

Oh, and yes, Effie was the shit. That is one correction from the book that I fully expected and it was fully well done! BOOK SPOILER:










In the book Effie disappears, never to be heard from again, and her barely known stylists appear. After being captured and cruelly imprisoned by the rebels. So stupid. I expected the movie to correct this, and I wasn't disappointed.


*-------------------------------------------------*
What trolls reveal about themselves when they troll:
http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=57532
*-------------------------------------------------*



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 25, 2014 1:18 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Did you read the book? I ask because I think it was so much worse than the movie. It helped me, ironically, because I expected the slow moments and they were much less ponderous than in the book. I was more than happy at how quick the movie moved on.

As for MJ2 (no spoilers!), I found that all the action to come in 2015 was poorly visualized in the book. The filmmakers have won my confidence, and I think they'll make something more of it.

I do not argue with those who refuse to watch MJ1 until there is an MJ2. The lack of action in 1 will be made up in 2, and between these two films there will be a well balanced adventure to be had.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I stopped reading the books after Book 1 (well, I actually read the first couple of chapters of Book 2). One reason why I did so was because after reading Hunger Games, I found myself comparing the book to the movie while I was watching the film - not good. I couldn't really enjoy it. So I stopped, I kept finding that they left out certain sections and scenes from the book and questioning why instead of enjoying the movie.

For A Clockwork Orange I saw the movie then read the book. Both were brilliant in their own right, even though Kubrick masterfully followed the book picking out the essence of Anthony Burgess' future vision, Burgess was not happy about Kubrick's choices.

To me a masterpiece flows, without being self-concious or timid or unsure (see Cloud Atlas). It tells the story without apology, hesitation or confusion. MJ1 had great moments mixed in with some curious choices. Tell me M4P, was Cressida in the book? Don't get me wrong, Dormer was solid, but I felt that it may have been tacked on. Still though, I felt the movie's intensity and commitment to tell the story of this teen as though it were a modern tale of a not-long-ago real person, a rebel with a cause. Well, as I think of it, Lawrence was, once again, powerful in portraying Katniss as a put upon teen not quite ready to accept the responsibility of being an adult.

I dare say that Effie is taking the place of Cinna as inspiration to Katniss. I'm glad that they included her character, it just makes more sense especially since Cinna is gone. I thought it was a nice touch that she places the mockingjay pin on Katniss.


SGG


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 28, 2014 11:49 AM

MAL4PREZ


Quote:

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
I stopped reading the books after Book 1 (well, I actually read the first couple of chapters of Book 2). One reason why I did so was because after reading Hunger Games, I found myself comparing the book to the movie while I was watching the film - not good. I couldn't really enjoy it. So I stopped, I kept finding that they left out certain sections and scenes from the book and questioning why instead of enjoying the movie.

I read the books after seeing the first two movies. I think it worked better this way, because the visuals of the movie fill many gaps in the books, IMHO. I enjoyed the books more with the images in my head, and liked getting more detail filled in.

Quote:

Tell me M4P, was Cressida in the book? Don't get me wrong, Dormer was solid, but I felt that it may have been tacked on.
She was in the book, as were the two photographers. But none of them were fleshed out much. Really, few characters - few *adult* characters - were given much life in the books. Effie was barely present, but in the movies, especially MJ1, she's brilliant. In the third book she just disappeared without a chirp. If I remember right, we just kind of assume she's dead and a few barely developed "stylists" are kidnapped out to 13 to handle wardrobe and makeup.

One adult who was well done in both book and movie was Cinna. Lenny Kravitz is exactly as described. It's a small part, but perfectly done.

Quote:

Still though, I felt the movie's intensity and commitment to tell the story of this teen as though it were a modern tale of a not-long-ago real person, a rebel with a cause. Well, as I think of it, Lawrence was, once again, powerful in portraying Katniss as a put upon teen not quite ready to accept the responsibility of being an adult.


I agree.

I read a review that compared the plot of MJ1 to having Obama represented by Justin Bieber and Romney by Miley Cyrus or someone like that. Which is silly. Katniss is more like Malala Yousafzai. She's not fluff. She's been through something and there's substance behind her as a symbol and leader.

I do look forward to part 2. That part of the book was rather dreadful, I think. But it is a solid framework that I think the movie-makers will flesh out. I even guess that, once I see the substance added in the movie, I'll be able to read the book again and enjoy it more.


*-------------------------------------------------*
What trolls reveal about themselves when they troll:
http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=57532
*-------------------------------------------------*



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 3, 2014 6:03 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Hey there M4P, hope you had a great Thanksgiving! I took a break for a while to attend to family stuff including the Big Day.........it was nice and calm for once...........lol.

Anyway, I'm glad we're able to "talk" about movies without getting all weird, thanks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I read the books after seeing the first two movies. I think it worked better this way, because the visuals of the movie fill many gaps in the books, IMHO. I enjoyed the books more with the images in my head, and liked getting more detail filled in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I found that was true when I read a Clockwork Orange (one of the few books turned into movies that I read). It just makes reading that more interesting when you can add visuals, I enjoyed the book immensely.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
She was in the book, as were the two photographers. But none of them were fleshed out much. Really, few characters - few *adult* characters - were given much life in the books. Effie was barely present, but in the movies, especially MJ1, she's brilliant. In the third book she just disappeared without a chirp. If I remember right, we just kind of assume she's dead and a few barely developed "stylists" are kidnapped out to 13 to handle wardrobe and makeup. One adult who was well done in both book and movie was Cinna. Lenny Kravitz is exactly as described. It's a small part, but perfectly done.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I could tell that the character wasn't "fleshed out much" and to me it didn't add to the story much - just in the sense that the exiled president and her staff were using Katniss. It reminded me of "the revolution will not be televised." From the late 70s early 80s. I really loved the way they enhanced Effie and tweaked her character's development, plus Banks was so good. So I agree with you 100%. And Kravitz as Cinna was perfect casting, but it was because Kravitz was also very good (who knew), and breathed life into Cinna. So, that's 2 for 2.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I read a review that compared the plot of MJ1 to having Obama represented by Justin Bieber and Romney by Miley Cyrus or someone like that. Which is silly. Katniss is more like Malala Yousafzai. She's not fluff. She's been through something and there's substance behind her as a symbol and leader.

I do look forward to part 2. That part of the book was rather dreadful, I think. But it is a solid framework that I think the movie-makers will flesh out. I even guess that, once I see the substance added in the movie, I'll be able to read the book again and enjoy it more.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah that Bieber/Cyrus thing is silly indeed. I like your comparison, Katniss/Malala. Malala has a determined fierceness, as does Katniss, there is an inner strength that they both control. Lawrence has intrigued me ever since I saw her in Winter's Bone, and as Katniss she strikes the perfect pitch as a young girl/woman pressed into service. A lesser actress would have probably botched it with too much drama, and she's the key to the success of the franchise (Woody Harrelson is no slouch either). Kudos to the casting director.

I look forward to Part 2 as well, hopefully the script will do the actors justice.



SGG




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Horror movies and Scary Tv making a comeback?
Thu, November 21, 2024 11:36 - 41 posts
Beatlejuice Beatlejuice blows everything else out of the water this weekend.
Thu, November 21, 2024 07:54 - 45 posts
Hollywood's Abysmal 2024 in Numbers
Thu, November 21, 2024 07:37 - 151 posts
Good Low Budget and Independent Flicks
Wed, November 20, 2024 05:31 - 151 posts
Reagan
Mon, November 18, 2024 12:25 - 8 posts
'Napoleon' liked, disliked ...or ...has Ridley Scott Lost the Ability to Make Great Movies?
Mon, November 18, 2024 07:26 - 22 posts
What Films Are You Looking Forward To In Cinema 2024?
Mon, November 18, 2024 07:22 - 88 posts
Hollywood Fatigue...people flee California and is Hollyweird finished?
Sat, November 16, 2024 19:49 - 18 posts
The Snow White Failure Thread
Sat, November 16, 2024 16:20 - 17 posts
The Joker 2: The Musical Doo Deux failure thread
Sun, November 10, 2024 12:35 - 84 posts
Joker
Wed, November 6, 2024 23:13 - 196 posts
Disney's Latest Woke Turd
Wed, November 6, 2024 06:48 - 11 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL