Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Secondhand Lions

This is topic Secondhand Lions in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000645

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-18-2003, 05:17 AM:

Geez, how do I put this into words...

50% of this movie was really great. 50% of this movie was really lame.

The great stuff:
*Watching Robert Duvall and Michael Caine sit on their porch waiting to blast their shotguns at door to door salesmen. (I could watch this all day.)
*Watching Robert Duvall and Michael Caine fish via shotgun.
*Watching Robert Duvall beat the crap out of some teenagers while Michael Caine sits by knowing he doesn't even need to bother to lift a finger to assist.
*Listening to Robert Duvall and Michael Caine's take on things in general. Case in point, the movie gets it's title because they buy an old lion and have it delivered in a crate. The idea here is to open the crate with both of them armed with their shotguns so they can hang it's head over their fireplace. What an interesting way to hunt.

The really lame stuff:
*The frequent godawful loss of direction. Whoever this director was, this must've been his first film, or has previously directed crap. With this script in the hands of a competent director, this movie could've been a whole lot more.
*Haley Joel Osment's bad, bad acting. This kid has the ability to act well, but I suppose when in front of a bad director, the worst shines through. Just watch as he tries to cry. Is he upset? Is he crying? No wait, he's smiling! No, I think that's a tear? Nah, he's about to burst out laughing. Why is he delivering that corny dialogue during this scene? Yeah, pretty sure that is supposed to be crying there. No wait, yeah, awwww who knows what his emotion is, I just know it's not working.
*The obviously overdone for campiness effect flashbacks to Robert Duvall and Michael Caine's past. The stories here are just plain damned stupid and the visuals they provide are even worse. Pretty much every time they start talking about their past, it's a perfect time to take a bathroom break (or for you people waiting for video, hit the scan button!)
*The cluttered script that can't decide what it what kind of movie it wants to make.
*The vertical motion sickness from the pathetic printing job via Deluxe Hollywood lab. Do these guys just TRY and make shaky prints? If that's their goal, then they are doing an awful good job of it.
*The ridiculous CAP code. Whoever is responsible for overdoing the CAP code marks this year on all of these prints needs to be beaten.

If you miss this in the theaters, don't lose any sleep over it. I think it will play just as well on video. On the other hand, if you're bored it's not as bad as most of the crap out there this year. It's at least worth a viewing on video though. At least the picture will be steady and there won't be any of that obnoxious CAP code. (Jack Valenti, you suck!)

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 09-18-2003, 06:37 PM:

The director is also the writer. His name is Tim McCanlies. His previous work as a director is "Dancer, Texas Pop.81".

His previous work as a writer includes The Iron Giant (screenplay adaptation), Dennis the Menace strikes again, and the yet to be release remake of Around The world in 80 Days.

Yes, he is a maroon. The only good thing he did was adapt "The Iron Man" into "the iron giant", the only good film of Vin Diesels career.

Dave

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 09-20-2003, 04:13 PM:

The print I saw Thursday at Century Roseville had red dots all over the 4th reel, but I didn't see any during the rest. I would've asked for a replacement reel.
Whoever built the film up cued the lights to come up during the "opening-credits-at-the-end" segment, and the cue tape showed up onscreen on top of that!

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 10-25-2003, 09:07 PM:

Yup. Red dots on the 4th reel here, too. Is that the CAP code or the CRAP code? I thought CRAP was bigger blotchy dots. These were smaller groups and in just a small (and varying) area of the picture. Similar to the coding in School Of Rock -- I only noticed that in one reel, too.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 10-27-2003, 01:21 PM:

This thread has a photo of the original CAP Code Kodak developed for the MPAA in 1982:

http://www.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=001018#000000

As you can see, the code dots in the picture area are really tiny.

Note that some of the speculation about the coding method discussed in the thread is incorrect. The man-readable edgeprint at the in the perf area is optional.

Today, a variety of coding methods may be used, even multiple codes on the same print.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-27-2003, 01:25 PM:

Too much tech talk here. Please start a NEW thread in FHF linking to this.