!" Perfsonally, I have no use for critics. Such audicity! Talentless idiots who critique others work? Well, this film is halarious--full of intelligent humor that does not rely on excessive profanity and gross-out crap! Maybe thats why the critics gave it a thumbs down? Because it is intelligent humor that is above their intellectual level! If you want good, clean fun, then this is a flic to see. There was not a person in the theater that was not bustin up laughin!
I'm actually surprised myself that I waited so long to see this movie. I really enjoyed it. For a Wednesday night, attendance was good and everyone seemed to enjoy the movie.
A nitpick: The movie screen used during the final part of the movie was not of an appropriate aspect ratio for any movie shot these days. It looked 1.33:1 .
I suspect that in the scene when they get on the elevator, the left elevator was used for the "lower floor" shot and the right elevator (next to it) was used for the "8th floor shot". I say this because the floor indicator for the elevator they were in front of on the lower floor had the top right LED out in the 7-segment display. When they got to the 8th floor and got out, all of the LEDs were on in the 8 (all segments lit). I noticed when they went up the hall and the elevator to the left was visible, its floor indicator had the top right LED out in its display. It's just too coincidental.
This was actually a very enjoyable comedy, and it passes my quality test since I liked it so much that I plan to buy it on DVD when it comes out. This movie had some great one-liners in it that I wish I could remember. If anyone can remember some of the good ones, list them.
The presentation quality was very good (98), with nothing keeping me from enjoying the film.
This movie was shot with an anamorphic lens.
If you haven't seen this, by all means catch it.
A funny note: four seats to my right, a young teenage girl was sitting. When the "roller coaster" Regal policy trailer came on, she held up her arms and moved around when the thing went around curves. Her performance exceeds any I've seen concerning accuracy of acting like being on a roller coaster. I looked around and she was the only one doing it. She REALLY got into it. After it was over, I heard her tell her friends "I could have ridden a real roller coaster and it would have been 5 bucks cheaper." I'm not making this up. Oh, and she had dark hair (not blonde).
------------------
Evans A Criswell
Huntsville-Decatur Movie Theatre Information Site
There was a Pepsi product placement (a Pepsi machine) that was so obvious it hurt. Though Hyatt got mentioned in the script, they also had a nice plaque spelling out "HYATT" in one of the shots.
I disagree with Evans on the screen in the hotel. It looked like a 1.85:1 aspect ratio to me.
Best line (or cutting remark), Billy Crystal tells his assistant, the one he's mentoring, that he doesn't know a thing about movies. This is in response to him not recognizing the film title "Breakfast At Tiffany's" or thinking that the Hepburn in that movie was Katharine Hepburn.
quote:
There are, though, uncomfortable stretches that seem painful. I'm a big fan of Julia Roberts, but scripts like "My Best Friend's Wedding" and "Runnaway Bride" are real downers. This had that feel in places. Overall, it made the film feel uneven and longer than it was.
I agree with this, since there seemed to be a long stretch before the scene where the movie was played at the hotel. I felt that the movie playing at the hotel scene really got the movie's energy going again. I was a bit surprised at how much my perception of the movie as a whole improved once that scene got going. Judging from everyone else's reactions in the auditoriums, many others felt the same way. A rather long segment... and then... WOW.
quote:
I disagree with Evans on the screen in the hotel. It looked like a 1.85:1 aspect ratio to me.
Are we talking about the same screen? The first screen was in a theatre auditorium early on (when only the titles were shown). It seemed wide. The one used to show the completed film at the end definitely looked like a big TV-shaped screen. Does anyone else think so? I'd say it was 1.5:1 at the widest. Whenever I see a screen used for a movie in a movie, the aspect ratio is usually the first thing I notice. 
Some of my friends jokingly refer to me as "the aspect ratio police".
------------------
Evans A Criswell
Huntsville-Decatur Movie Theatre Information Site
It's funny we should talk about aspect ratios of screens within the movie. "Cider House Rules" has a drive-in movie screen that looked like to me its aspect ratio was 1.85:1. I thought that was sort of weird (actually a goof) since the movie was supposed to be during World War II and the 1940s.
