I live about an hour away from the nearest movie theatre, and it only plays one movie at a time. I've been thinking about making the trip, though. If it's as good as you say it is- and I suspect it will be.
You're so vain, you probably think this post is about you.
It will be well worth the trip. Trust me. It's a movie you have to see on the big screen. DVD won't do it justice. Talk a friend that drives into taking you!
I never get to see these things. We never have these venues in the UK! I want to see Love & Across the Universe, but that means i have to travel to the US. sorry, i'm i moaning!
HAPPY 40TH BIRTHDAY TO THE WHITE ALBUM! you say its your birthday!
Yeah but Across the Universe is a movie. Isn't it already playing in the UK? LOVE is another thing altogether. I mean, even people in the US have trouble getting to Vegas sometimes. Maybe they'll do a LOVE tour eventually. They really should because it was f-ing amazing. As was Across the Universe. I can't believe quality Beatles related stuff is being put out lately. Maybe it's time for a new biopic. Or maybe we'd be pushing our luck.
I read this review. Not everybody seems to be happy with this film:
Quoted Text
Out of all the legendary bands you can choose from to design a soundtrack for a movie, director Julie Taymor sided with The Beatles. Therein lies a problem. Only half of the members of The Beatles are still alive today. How do you score a movie when half of the band can't even play?
In Julie Taymor's eyes, the answer was simple. Her latest film, "Across the Universe," tells a love story much like a musical does, but to the tunes of The Beatles. The combination seems fascinatingly original, but the content may be too simple and tiresome.
Everyone, meet Jude, your main character. Now, say "Hey Jude". Congratulations, you've just had your first lesson in one of the many references to The Beatles lore in "Across the Universe." Sounds a little easy doesn't it? Well, the most fun you will get out of "Across the Universe" is exactly that.
The story, hidden underneath all of the psychedelic musical scenes, is disappointingly cliched and simple. Jude falls in love with Lucy as the nationwide happenings of the 60s tears them apart. Along the way, as if to heighten the dullness of the story, Taymor laces the scenes with lyrics that play mistakenly as coincidence to the story. Needless to say, it's easy to lose interest without the music.
For an aesthetic art form, this film is experimentally brilliant. It is doubtful, though, these images will replace or even be remembered when hearing a Beatles' song replayed on the radio. The bottom line is, "Across the Universe," brings nothing new to the table other than a unique visual interpretation of an original soundtrack from some of the greatest songwriters of all time. If The Beatles catch your fancy, this film a sure fire enjoyment. If nothing else, just "Let it Be".
of coursethe film doesn't come out anywhere but London here, otherwise I would have seen it! I downloaded the soundtrack though, it's quite good! I've just seen a face is great!
I read this review. Not everybody seems to be happy with this film:
That reviewer has a very negative way of looking at it. It was all in good fun the little jokes and references. Meant to be obvious. The actors did a great job. They were all charismatic and fun to watch. The images ring true to what was going on back then, and of course to sum up the sixties in a 2+ hour movie isn't going to be easy but I'd say Taymor did a pretty good job. It's better than most of the stuff I've seen lately. And I'm not easily impressed with anything involving Beatles. I thought for sure I'd hate it, but I didn't. But then everyone's different.
I thought for sure I'd hate it, but I didn't. But then everyone's different.
I thought for sure I'd like it, but I ended up hating it. The ONLY thing that made the movie worthwhile for me was the nice eye candy (Jim Sturgess), and even that got old 20 minutes into it. I read one review when the movie came out that mentioned that you would have to have experienced the 60s to really appreciate the movie, so maybe that's why I couldn't really get it into it. But I will say that the imagery was fascinating at times. The "Because" scene sticks out in my memory.
I took my friend with me in hopes that it would turn her on to the Beatles, and while she did love the songs, she is only interested in the soundtrack versions... so that completely backfired. She has no Beatles albums but regularly jams out to Evan Rachel Wood. Go figure. I wonder how many other people in the younger generation went and bought the soundtrack without bothering to explore further.
Try not to worry too much, nothing_is_real. You never know when the seed will blossom. I don't know when my interest blossomed into mania, but it certainly lay fallow a while.
All you've got to do is choose love. That's how I live it now. I learned a long time ago, I can feed the birds in my garden. I can't feed them all. -- Ringo Starr, Rolling Stone magazine, May 2007
For all I know, Ringo might be a yogi disguised as a drummer! - George Harrison
I thought for sure I'd like it, but I ended up hating it. The ONLY thing that made the movie worthwhile for me was the nice eye candy (Jim Sturgess), and even that got old 20 minutes into it. I read one review when the movie came out that mentioned that you would have to have experienced the 60s to really appreciate the movie, so maybe that's why I couldn't really get it into it. .
'
Uh, I didn't experience the sixties just so you know. I enjoyed it because it was pretty well done. They didn't completely ruin the songs and I thought the storyline was interesting. Maybe the fact that I had really low expectations helped too. Anyway, I don't think you would have to have experienced the sixties to enjoy this. I mean, the events they portray are pretty much common knowledge to most people.
Uh, I didn't experience the sixties just so you know. I enjoyed it because it was pretty well done. They didn't completely ruin the songs and I thought the storyline was interesting. Maybe the fact that I had really low expectations helped too. Anyway, I don't think you would have to have experienced the sixties to enjoy this. I mean, the events they portray are pretty much common knowledge to most people.
I didn't mean to imply that you were older than you are. And I realize that you don't have to be of that generation to understand the movie, just maybe to fully embrace it. For some people.
I happen to think the storyline was nothing but a giant cliche - which would have been okay if the musical performances had been decent. But most of them, particularly anything that was sung by Evan Rachel Wood, just made me cringe. That's just me though.
Most movies based on the sixties are cliche. I wasn't looking for this movie to be art of any kind. Anyway, I think it helped that I thought it would suck and that I'd be tortured throughout. I was surprised that I was actually entertained. I liked Sturgess and the other guy. I loved Bono's Kesey character and the Joe Cocker part completey surprised me. I had no idea he was in it. I thought he was awesome. So that was enough for me to be entertained. The worst part was Evan Rachel Wood. She's kind of dull. Most movies are crap anymore anyway but at least this one had decent songs.
I was THERE in the sixties, so naturally I revere my tangible and substantial memories of that era. I'm extremely proud of growing up in that period. I depise all these recent superficial attempts to "cash in" on the Fab . I find "Love" and "Across The Universe" prime examples of this.
I was THERE in the sixties, so naturally I revere my tangible and substantial memories of that era. I'm extremely proud of growing up in that period. I depise all these recent superficial attempts to "cash in" on the Fab . I find "Love" and "Across The Universe" prime examples of this.
We've had the conversation before. I really can't see either of your examples as being "superficial attempts to 'cash in'", One is just a movie containing a soundtrack of Beatles covers. So what. Like someone else said, one thing that might come out of that is new, younger Beatles fans. I know you didn't like the movie, but that shouldn't make a difference. And unless you want to accuse The Beatles of cashing in on themselves you can't really refer to Love in that way either. It was, after all, George Harrison's idea. And there doesn't seem to be anything superficial about it.
And Btw, I was also there in the 60's, but I don't see what difference that makes.
I just want you to reassure him - talk to him, make him see the error of his ways. Then I'll hit him.
Home
Calendar
Search
Register
Login
Mairi
Female
Bobber
Male
Logged
I didn't mean to imply that you were older than you are. And I realize that you don't have to be of that generation to 