Xtra News Community 2
December 14, 2017, 07:46:19 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to Xtra News Community 2 — please also join our XNC2-BACKUP-GROUP.
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links BITEBACK! XNC2-BACKUP-GROUP Staff List Login Register  

at the movies


Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: at the movies  (Read 780 times)
Crusader
Guest
« Reply #25 on: August 06, 2013, 04:31:02 pm »

Watched a primo film last night - 'Assault on Wall Street.' All about a blue collar guy who seeks revenge on bankers after they rip him off.


Do you rip-off the film company by STEALING the movie?   


I didn't steal the movie at all. I used my internet account of which I pay Vodafone a monthly fee to access material from the internet to download it. A big difference.
Report Spam   Logged
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 28122


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #26 on: August 06, 2013, 05:13:47 pm »


Vodafone don't own the movie.

You are merely using Vodafone's services to steal the movie from the owner.

If everybody acquired movies the way you do (without paying), there would be no money to be made from making movies, so no movies would be made.

Have you ever considered that basic fact as you freeload off people who do pay to view movies?

Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Crusader
Guest
« Reply #27 on: August 07, 2013, 11:36:14 am »


Vodafone don't own the movie.

You are merely using Vodafone's services to steal the movie from the owner.

If everybody acquired movies the way you do (without paying), there would be no money to be made from making movies, so no movies would be made.

Have you ever considered that basic fact as you freeload off people who do pay to view movies?



I haven't stolen a thing. They still have access to it.
Report Spam   Logged
Im2Sexy4MyPants
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 7090



WWW
« Reply #28 on: August 08, 2013, 09:42:33 am »

http://xbmc.org/

XBMC you can watch movies for free not downloading just streaming

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XBMC

To watch free movies you need NAVX

« Last Edit: August 08, 2013, 09:48:40 am by Im2Sexy4MyPants » Report Spam   Logged

Are you sick of the bullshit from the sewer stream media spewed out from the usual Ken and Barby dickless talking point look a likes.

If you want to know what's going on in the real world...
And the many things that will personally effect you.
Go to
http://www.infowars.com/

AND WAKE THE F_ _K UP
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 28122


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #29 on: August 25, 2013, 12:11:50 am »


From the Los Angeles Times....

‘The Expendables’: Should there be an age limit on action stars?

By DAVID HORSEY | 7:27AM - Wednesday, August 21, 2013

Stallone and Schwarzenegger are back in action, but should there be an age limit for action heroes? — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times.
Stallone and Schwarzenegger are back in action, but should there be an age limit for action heroes? — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times.

THE NEWS that Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger will be starring in a third “Expendables” movie raises a question: Should there be an age limit for action heroes?

Obviously, plenty of actors have had long, distinguished careers. Paul Newman, the young stud in “Hud” and “Cat On a Hot Tin Roof”, stayed at it long enough to win a Golden Globe at 80 years old for his work in HBO’s “Empire Falls”. The legendary Sir Laurence Olivier had a six-decade career on stage and screen. In 1947, he was the youngest British actor ever to be knighted. Forty-one years later, he played his last film role, a year before his death at 82.

Newman and Olivier were able to stay in the game because they were brilliant actors who could gracefully take on more age-appropriate roles as the years went by. But what if you are an actor of more limited range who has learned to do one thing well — play an action hero? Do you have the same options?

The option Schwarzenegger famously took was to go into politics. But, now that his run as governor of California is over, he is back doing the action thing. Stallone, who proved he could act pretty well back in his “Rocky” days, steered onto the action-picture track and has not veered out of it. Now, they are together in Bulgaria filming “The Expendables 3”.

The big appeal of the “Expendables” movies is that they bring together an ensemble cast of action all-stars. Bruce Willis and Chuck Norris had key roles in the earlier films in the series. Mel Gibson and Harrison Ford have joined the crew for the third movie. Others who have been, or will be, on the “Expendables” team include Jean-Claude Van Damme, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren, Wesley Snipes, Antonio Banderas and Mickey Rourke.

A couple of these guys are in their action prime; a few others are doing the movie as a change of pace in their varied careers. The rest, like Stallone, age 67, and Schwarzenegger, 66, are simply veterans of the genre out to prove that 60 is the new 40. Their performances may or may not convince the 17-year-old guys in the audience, but there are plenty of male Baby Boomers with sagging guts and bifocals who will be staring at the screen and cheering them on.


http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-horsey-on-hollywood-the-expendables-20130821,0,214120.story
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 28122


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #30 on: September 28, 2013, 03:25:50 pm »


Film review: Planes

By GRAEME TUCKETT - The Dominion Post | 5:00AM - Saturday, 28 September 2013

PLANE CRASH: Planes is a tacky and misjudged cash-in that slid swiftly into thoughtlessness and venality.
PLANE CRASH: Planes is a tacky and misjudged cash-in that slid swiftly into thoughtlessness and venality.

WHAT: PLANES (PG) — 92 minutes.

DIRECTED BY: Klay Hall.

STARRING: Dane Cook, Stacey Keach and Priyanka Chopra.


AGGRAVATED. There is no other word for my mood.

I know that the school holidays are about to start, because a couple of animations have just hoved into view at the multiplex. One of them is about a snail who wants to go racing (Turbo), and the other is about a small crop-dusting airplane who wants to do the same. I figure, with a couple of good film festival returnees also opening, I'll pick one of the cartoons to review this week, and let the other take care of itself. I chose Planes. Bad move.

Planes is what happens when a hugely successful franchise is tapped to pour another few hundred million into the coffers of a Hollywood studio. The franchise was Cars, and the studio is Disney. Cars was made by Pixar, and I've utterly lost track of who's sharing whose bunk in the relationship between those two companies, but somehow, probably via producer and Cars creator John Lassiter, Disney has finished up owning the Planes spin-off franchise.

The original Cars at least had a few moments of wit and big-heartedness to commend it. The film also featured the last ever performance from Paul Newman, and that is reason enough to remember it with some affection. Cars 2, not so much. That film was a tacky and misjudged cash-in that slid swiftly into thoughtlessness and venality. Planes is very much in the spirit of Cars 2.

Our hero is an unhappy crop duster. He dreams of entering, (and winning of course, for what is the point of competing, if you are not to win?) a pan-global air race. And so, with only his self-belief to aid him (and a couple of friends, including the obligatory grizzled old-timer) young Dusty takes on and defeats the world's finest air racers.

How? Who cares, it's only a movie. Right?

What I do care about is the hugely derivative and lazy writing, and the unthinking bigotry that drives this screenplay.

That Dusty will win the race is a given. It's been longer than I can remember since a Disney animation illustrated any lesson other than "winning is everything". But Planes can't even make that dubious point without denigrating its own supporting characters. There are two female planes in the race. Both are written to be no more than objects of the male's desire, to be seduced and "won" before the race is over. Then there is the Mexican plane. He is a bit dim, but full of passion, and he plays the guitar. And there is an African/American plane. He is also dim, and content to work in the fields all his life, despite his folksy wisdom. I cringed at first, but by Planes' end, I was actually angry.

If you're aged about nine, or have recently taken a couple of sharp blows to the frontal lobe, then maybe you could let this kinetic candy coloured kack wash over you, and think nothing more of it. But if you were hoping for something other than cynical, exploitative, reactionary drivel, I'd avoid Planes like a bad mussel. Maybe the one about the racing snail might be a better bet.


http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/culture/film-reviews/9218169/Film-review-Planes
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 28122


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #31 on: October 21, 2013, 12:20:42 am »


Meet the musicians behind the movies

Music and sound make a movie.

By AMY JACKMAN - The Dominion Post | 3:31PM - Sunday, 20 October 2013

DRAMATIC DRUMMER: NZSO principal timpanist Larry Reese enjoys recording movie scores.
DRAMATIC DRUMMER: NZSO principal timpanist Larry Reese enjoys recording movie scores.

TRY TO imagine how scary Jaws would have been without the buh-dum buh-dum noise following the shark around.

Would you still have cried at Mufasa's death in the Lion King without Hans Zimmer's score?

Behind every great composer is a group of great musicians and a rising star on the scene is the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra.

In the past year it has been involved in recording film scores for movies such as the second Hobbit movie, Mr Pip, and the Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone blockbuster Escape Plan.

New Zealand Symphony Orchestra principal timpanist Larry Reese said the orchestra was becoming more sought after for films.

"Composer and conductor Alex Heffes did a film with us last year, Emperor, which was filmed here as well," he said.

"He so liked what he got with us that on his next project, which happened to be the Hollywood blockbuster Escape Plan, he convinced the studios to delay their post-production until we were free."

"He said, ‘You won't regret the time delay, because this orchestra is so good’."

Mr Reese said that with modern technology, an orchestra's location was no longer a barrier.

"It's extraordinary. We can have a link from the Michael Fowler Centre to Park Road Post in Miramar and they have a giant link in almost real-time to Hollywood and they will be listening to what's happening."

"That technology allows a lot of people to collaborate on the post-production process."

"The conductor could be communicating with people in London or Los Angeles or Prague and make instant changes to the music."

The film director was normally at the recording and music producers followed the score in a control room, Reese said.

Movie scores can take from two days till 10 or more to finish.

"We can do the whole score in three days if there's no money for a longer time period, but usually for a two-hour film that has 70 to 80 minutes of music, we will take 10 days," he said.

"When we do a CD recording of classical music, we average between 12 and 15 minutes of useable material in a three-hour session."

"For a film, because it's more collaborative, we might play a piece really well, but the movie director will say, ‘That's nice, but I want more of a scary bit here or more of a magical mystery bit here’."

"The conductor has to translate that into musical direction. It can completely change the feel of the piece."

"Sometimes we can do a three-minute piece of music six or eight times just to give the movie people options for what they will actually mix with the film."

"It has a few challenges, because it has to be perfect every single time."

The music is played directly to the moving images.

"What the composer writes is supposed to line up exactly with what is happening on screen," he said.

"We are the end of a long post-production process, so most of the movie has been finalised when we play the score."

"We don't see the pictures, but the conductor has a giant TV screen in front of him. It has the pictures from the movie and lots of time code information."

"There are streamers that travel across it, which give him visual clues as to when the music should change."

"We play along to a click track, so we know exactly how long and at what speed to play."

Reese said some members of the orchestra would bring books or another activity to the recording because they would not be needed as often.

"It can be tedious if you don't play much, but you still have to be like a sprinter on the blocks, ready to go as soon as the gun goes off," he said.

"For me it's the music that adds impact to the visual imagery."

"When I'm sitting on the scoring stage, no matter what I'm asked to play, knowing I'm contributing to the last little bit of frisson for the audience is really exciting."

But, Reese said, the best part was "watching the films and being able to go, ‘That's me’."

"Like in Fellowship of the Ring, where Gandalf says, ‘You shall not pass’. There's a huge orchestral moment with lots of timpani in it — that's me."

The NZSO has recorded 17 film scores, including parts or all of:

The Hobbit: Desolation of Smaug, 2013.

Mr Pip, 2013.

Emperor, 2012.

Escape Plan, 2013.

Lovely Bones, 2009.

Under The Mountain, 2009.

Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring, 2003.


http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/culture/9293104/Meet-the-musicians-behind-the-movies
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 28122


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #32 on: October 26, 2013, 02:26:15 pm »


From the Los Angeles Times....

Fifty Shades of Grey’ seeks ‘breathtaking’ actor

By DAVID HORSEY | 7:12AM - Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Now that Charlie Hunnam has dropped out, the race is on to find a male lead for “Fifty Shades of Grey”. — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times.
Now that Charlie Hunnam has dropped out, the race is on to find a male lead for “Fifty Shades of Grey”. — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times.

WHICH ACTOR can possibly live up to the mental image readers have of Christian Trevelyan Grey, the billionaire bondage aficionado in “Fifty Shades of Grey”, the hugely successful erotic novel that is soon to become a movie?

In the book by British author E.L. James, Grey is described as “not merely good looking — he is the epitome of male beauty, breathtaking.” There are probably male models who could come close to that standard, but what about men who can actually act? Is there anyone gorgeous enough?

Charlie Hunnam had been slated for the role, a choice that provoked protest from “Grey” fans. Best known as the young stud from FX’s biker gang series “Sons of Anarchy”. Hunnam is a reasonably handsome guy, but not exactly “breathtaking.” His blond hair and close-set eyes give him the look of a surfer dude at San Onofre, or maybe a hunky Amish farmer. A mysterious billionaire with a dark soul and a perfect face? Not so much.

Hunnam dropped out of the project last month citing “family stuff” as a reason. Besides that stuff, maybe the actor decided he did not need the grief of trying to live up to impossible expectations.

Now every time the movie’s producer, Michael De Luca, shows up in public he is being peppered with questions about who will replace Hunnam. De Luca’s public statements suggest he is looking for someone with a face even less well-known than Hunnam’s modestly familiar mug. He told the Times’ Amy Kaufman, “It’s like casting Superman or James Bond. A fresh face is appropriate.”

With production in limbo and a release date pegged for next August, he needs to find that fresh face fast — a guy eager for a role that could make his career or humiliate him for life. Who will that brave — and breathtaking — man be?


http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-horsey-on-hollywood-fifty-shades-of-grey-20131023,0,1058883.story
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Crusader
Guest
« Reply #33 on: October 30, 2013, 10:35:09 pm »

Could make for an interesting movie  Grin

Report Spam   Logged
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 28122


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #34 on: January 03, 2014, 10:19:27 am »


From the Los Angeles Times....

America wolfs down ‘Wolf of Wall Street’ excess

By DAVID HORSEY | 7:00AM PST - Thursday, January 02, 2013

Director Martin Scorsese's “Wolf of Wall Street” presents filthy greed and wretched excess in a way that seems to excite moviegoers. — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times.
Director Martin Scorsese's “Wolf of Wall Street” presents filthy greed and wretched excess in a way that seems to excite moviegoers.
 — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times.


MARTIN SCORSESE and Leonardo DiCaprio are being accused of glamorizing a criminal in their new movie, “The Wolf of Wall Street” — a charge to which generations of actors and filmmakers could plead guilty.

The criticisms began with an open letter to the film’s director and leading man from Christina McDowell, the daughter of Tom Prousalis, an accomplice to Jordan Belfort, the con-man portrayed by DiCaprio in the movie. Belfort bilked millions of dollars from investors before getting caught, spending a short stint in prison and hitting it big with the memoir on which “The Wolf of Wall Street” is based.

“You people are dangerous,” McDowell wrote to DiCaprio and Scorsese. “Your film is a reckless attempt at continuing to pretend that these sorts of schemes are entertaining, even as the country is reeling from yet another round of Wall Street scandals.… Did you think about the cultural message you'd be sending when you decided to make this film? You have successfully aligned yourself with an accomplished criminal, a guy who still hasn't made full restitution to his victims, exacerbating our national obsession with wealth and status and glorifying greed and psychopathic behavior.”

Others chimed in online. Hillary Crosley on the website Jezebel said she regretted seeing the movie “and increasing the bank account of a known criminal and huckster.”

At the Huffington Post, Ernest Owens urged working-class families to avoid the film. “The man that many moviegoers might accidentally root for in theaters this holiday season was the same man that defrauded a lot of working-class people out of tons of money,” he said.

Hollywood has never shied away from the public’s fascination with bad guys. From Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway in “Bonnie and Clyde” to Robert Redford and Paul Newman in “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid” to Johnny Depp in “Public Enemies”, accomplished and attractive actors have been hired to play real-life criminals in sympathetic ways on the big screen.

In the era governed by the Motion Picture Production Code, hoodlums portrayed by stars such as James Cagney and Edward G. Robinson always paid for their bad deeds in the end. Bad guys were required to look bad. Today, in successful television series such as “Boardwalk Empire” or “Breaking Bad”, the criminals are presented with such psychological depth — and the lawmen are caricatured as so crooked themselves — that it is hard not to root for them.

Has Scorsese taken this phenomenon too far? Is DiCaprio’s version of Belfort too charming, too glib, too likeable? Are Belfort’s crimes made to look too benign and his lavish lifestyle too appealing? Does it make a difference that Belfort, the real-life bad guy, has gained substantial benefit from the making of the movie?

Scorsese is a great director who has illuminated the lives of criminal figures in several fine films, including “Goodfellas”, “The Departed” and “Gangs of New York”. At a time when Wall Street crooks have repeatedly ravaged the U.S. economy, does his illumination of economic crime make it look like too much over-the-top fun?

In his own defense, Scorsese has said, "This is something that's not going to go away if you don't talk about it.”

And, when crime is talked about in the language of movies — compelling images, handsome actors and smart dialogue — it seems inevitable that crooks are going to look far more glamorous and engaging than they are in real life.


http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-horsey-on-hollywood-wolf-of-wall-street-20131231,0,4432336.story
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 28122


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #35 on: January 18, 2014, 04:54:43 pm »


From the Los Angeles Times....

Golden Globes 2014: Seen at the party scene

By DAVID HORSEY | 9:26AM PST - Tuesday, January 14, 2014



JACQUELINE BISSET's rather drifty acceptance speech at the Golden Globes on Sunday garnered lots of snide comments from the critics, but I figure she was just short of breath. The distance from her seat in the ballroom of the Beverly Hilton to the stage was considerable, plus she had to hack her way through a tangle of dinner tables, chairs and a scrum of her fellow thespians.

It is no wonder Bisset had to pause before she could breathe deeply, bring her “Scottish background to the front” and deliver her scrambled thoughts.

"I was in a daze," Bisset said backstage after receiving the award for supporting actress in a TV movie or miniseries. "I was certainly surprised, and I was completely out of it, thinking, ‘Where is my dinner?’ I still hadn't gotten the dinner I was expecting."




Well, yeah, there’s that too. Was it so hard to get meals delivered to the back section where the TV actors and longshot nominees were seated?

I sympathize with Bisset, not only because I’ve had a crush on her since I first saw her back in the ‘70s at the height of her youthful sexiness in “Le Magnifique” with Jean-Paul Belmondo, but also because navigating a path through the Golden Globes evening was tough for many people.

For those of us who were attending the HBO party after the ceremony, there was a gantlet to be run. First, among several lonely parking garages a mile away from the hotel, find the one lonely parking garage with a lineup of shuttle buses. Then, take the slow ride on the shuttle stuck in the monumental jam of limousines trying to reach the hotel entrance. Once off the bus, stand in an unmoving line for no apparent reason — which was still a better option than getting out of a vehicle too soon, as some did.




Those who bailed out of their limos and walked a block or two discovered the security folks would not allow them to enter the hotel on foot. They were forced to wade into traffic, commandeer a taxi, go to the back of the line of cars and buses and start all over.

Once at the hotel entrance, there was a security check and two or three more ticket checkpoints inside the hotel. There were enough security people on hand that, traveling together, President Obama, Queen Elizabeth and Vladimir Putin would all have felt well protected.

Such is the glamour of Tinseltown in this age of terrorism and lunatics with guns.




Nevertheless, once inside the party, there was plenty of fun to be had and numerous star sightings. My favorite pairing of the evening: Tom Hanks and Mike Tyson. Posing for photographs together, Tom looked like the king of Hollywood, which is pretty much what he is. Tyson looked out of his element, a bit of a lost little boy — although I mean that in the nicest possible way (Mike Tyson is the last guy I would want to anger).

The party really kicked into high gear with the arrival of “Modern Family” star Sofia Vergara and her entourage. She coaxed the DJ into playing some Latin dance tunes and, as she started to shake her thing, the dance floor was flooded with video cameras and fans taking shots on their iPhones. Among the mob that joined in the dancing was none other than Jacqueline Bisset, apparently recovered from the shock of winning. She looked wistful and gorgeous.

I confess, I just stared.


http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-golden-globes-horsey-hollywood-20140113,0,3869508.story
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 28122


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #36 on: January 19, 2014, 11:25:12 am »


From the Los Angeles Times....

Paramount stops releasing major movies on film

It becomes the first big Hollywood studio to embrace digital-only U.S. releases.
Others are expected to quickly follow suit.


By RICHARD VERRIER | 5:30AM PST - Saturday, January 18, 2014

Harkins Movie Theater Operations in Denver, Colorado. — Photo: Matthew Staver/Bloomberg.
Harkins Movie Theater Operations in Denver, Colorado. — Photo: Matthew Staver/Bloomberg.

ROLL CREDITS.

For more than a century, Hollywood has relied on 35-millimeter film to capture its fleeting images and deliver them to the silver screen. Now, in a historic move, Paramount Pictures has become the first big studio to stop releasing its major movies on film in the United States.

The studio's Oscar-nominated film "The Wolf of Wall Street" is the studio's first movie in wide release to be distributed entirely in digital format, according to theater industry executives briefed on the plans who were not authorized to speak publicly.

Paramount recently notified theater owners that its Will Ferrell comedy "Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues", which opened in December, was the last movie released on 35-mm film, these people said. Previously, only small movies such as documentaries were released solely in digital format.

The decision is likely to encourage other studios to follow suit, accelerating a complete phase-out of film that could come by the end of the year.

"It's of huge significance because Paramount is the first studio to make this policy known," said Jan-Christopher Horak, director of the UCLA Film & Television Archive. "For 120 years, film and 35 mm has been the format of choice for theatrical presentations. Now we're seeing the end of that. I'm not shocked that it's happened, but how quickly it has happened."

Paramount has kept its decision under wraps, at least in Hollywood, and a spokeswoman for the studio did not return calls for comment.

Its reticence reflects the fact that no studio wants to be seen as the first to abandon film, which retains a cachet among purists. Some studios may also be reluctant to give up box-office revenue by bypassing theaters that can show only film.

About 8% of U.S. theater screens have not gone digital and can show movies only in the old-fashioned film format. Internationally, Paramount is still expected to ship film prints to Latin America and other foreign markets where most theaters still show movies on film.

Studios prefer digital distribution because it is much cheaper. Film prints cost as much as $2,000; a digital copy on disc usually costs less than $100. Eventually, these movies could be beamed into cinemas by satellite, saving even more on production and shipping costs.

Digital technology also enables theaters to screen higher-priced 3-D films and makes it easier for them to book and program entertainment.

Other studios were expected to jump on the digital bandwagon first. 20th Century Fox sent a letter to exhibitors in 2011 saying it would stop distributing film "within the next year or two." Disney issued a similar warning to theater operators. And last year, many industry watchers expected Lions Gate to make history with an all-digital November release of "The Hunger Games: Catching Fire".

Paramount's move comes nearly a decade after studios began working with exhibitors to help finance the replacement of film projectors with digital systems.

As a result, large chains have moved quickly to embrace digital technology: Ninety-two percent of the 40,045 screens in the U.S. have already converted to digital, according to the National Association of Theatre Owners.

The slackening demand for film has been felt across the industry. Last month, Technicolor, the French-owned film processing and post-production company, closed a film lab in Glendale. That lab had replaced a much larger facility at Universal Studios that employed 360 workers until it closed in 2011. Last year, Technicolor closed its Pinewood film lab in Britain.

"The Wolf of Wall Street" would seem an unlikely choice for the industry's first all-digital wide release. The movie was partially shot on film, and its director, Martin Scorsese, is a passionate advocate for film preservation. His last feature film, the 2011 3-D extravaganza "Hugo", was a loving homage to film's early days.

A spokesman for Scorsese said the director was traveling and not available for comment.

The march to digital puts further pressure on some small-town community theaters that have been struggling to finance the purchase of $70,000 digital projectors.

Those theaters are at risk of going out of business if they can no longer obtain film prints of movies. More than 1,000 theaters, about half of them independently owned, have not converted to digital. Some are turning to their communities to raise funds for digital equipment.

Others have opted to close because of the high costs.

Jeff Logan, who operates a small chain of theaters in South Dakota, has invested more than $700,000 to equip his three theaters with new digital equipment.

But Logan said that last year, he had to close a nearby drive-in theater that dated back to 1949 because he couldn't afford to install a digital projector there.

"We looked at some of the financing," Logan said. "But there was no way we would have been able to service the debt."


http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-paramount-end-to-film-20140118,0,5666826,full.story
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 28122


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #37 on: February 13, 2014, 04:34:40 pm »


From the Los Angeles Times....

After ‘The Lego Movie’ why not ‘The Play-Doh Movie’?

By DAVID HORSEY | 9:54AM PST - Wednesday, February 12, 2014

“The Lego Movie” is a smash hit. Can a film based on Play-Doh be far behind? — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times.
The Lego Movie” is a smash hit. Can a film based on Play-Doh be far behind? — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times.

THE Toys R Us store on La Cienega and Santa Monica Boulevard is likely to be swarmed by screenwriters and producers this week, given the $69-million opening of “The Lego Movie” over the weekend. If Legos can kill at the box office, they will be asking themselves, which toy on these shelves is the next hot property?

I only wish I had anticipated this trend. If I had simply written an action-packed script, hired a small film crew and reassembled the tens of thousands of Lego pieces my son long ago left packed away in the basement, I could be a millionaire by now. But who knew chunky little plastic people would be the new stars of Hollywood?

As Daniel Miller reported in the Los Angeles Times on Tuesday, not all toy- and game-based movies have been winners. But there have been enough good performers, such as the films inspired by the G.I. Joe action figure and the Transformers car/robots, that few in the motion picture business seem discouraged. Up next, Miller reports, are productions featuring Hot Wheels cars and the Ouija board, plus a Lego sequel.

Anyone who wants to take the low-budget route could follow the lead of my cartoon and do a stop-action movie with a few balls of Play-Doh. Suggestion: Don’t sweat the production values. Let Play-Doh be Play-Doh with lots of easy-to-create snakes and lumpy creatures whose legs and arms break off every minute or so. That is comedy in its purest juvenile form.

Here’s one other concept offered free of charge: Barbie has already been featured in dozens of cute animated movies geared to little girls. Maybe it’s time to give the gal with the impossibly proportioned body the kind of serious role such a big star deserves. It doesn’t have to go as far as “50 Shades of Grey”, but an adult theme for a Barbie movie would break new creative ground. Imagine the climactic bedroom scene where Barbie disrobes Ken and discovers there’s nothing down there.

That’s a shocker raw enough for HBO.


http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-horsey-on-hollywood-lego-movie-20140211,0,1107757.story
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 28122


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #38 on: February 28, 2014, 07:45:54 pm »


From the Los Angeles Times....

Errant thoughts on Oscar's best picture nominees

By DAVID HORSEY | 10:58AM PST - Wednesday, February 26, 2014



THIS year’s nine Academy Award nominees for best picture are exceptional films that envelope audiences with great acting, unusual story lines and distinctive cinematography. But who among us can say they have been so captivated by a great movie that no errant thought has strayed into their mind?

I have seen all nine (which may be more than most members of the academy can claim) and do not have a favorite. Each in this group of movies has such an individual look and voice that weighing one against another is like comparing the proverbial apples and oranges.

The stunning extraterrestrial canvas of “Gravity” is utterly different from the black-and-white, small-town portraits of “Nebraska”. The epic pageant of excess that is “The Wolf of Wall Street” is far from the quieter tales told by “Her” and “Philomena”. And which is more compelling, the brutal history lesson of “12 Years A Slave”, the wrenching realism of “Captain Phillips”, the quirky con men and women in “American Hustle” or the odd couple on the edge of oblivion in “Dallas Buyers Club”?

This year’s awards have offered up a fine crop of films and, though a single lucky one will be proclaimed the best, I don’t think any one of the nine stands out as the obvious choice for the honor.

Still, as good as they are, odd little thoughts crept into my head as I watched them. I couldn’t help worrying that Matthew McConaughey and Jared Leto may have done permanent damage to their bodies by starving themselves for their roles in “Dallas Buyers Club”.

I couldn’t keep from wondering if astronauts really wear shorts and tank tops under their spacesuits as I observed a weightless Sandra Bullock floating in her skivvies inside the capsule in “Gravity”. And I cannot have been the only one to be distracted by all the drugs Leonardo DiCaprio’s character ingested in “The Wolf of Wall Street”. Could anyone function, let alone survive, after taking that many pills on top of all that booze?

Yes, even as a movie pulls us into its artful fiction, a little piece of our brains cannot let go of the fact that Judy Dench and Jonah Hill and Bruce Dern and all of the rest are real human beings playing make-believe. When the camera gets so close to Joaquin Phoenix’s mustache that it is about five feet wide on the screen, it’s hard not to think of grooming habits.

All of this has inspired me to do a series of cartoons that can be seen in the gallery below. It’s a satirical rumination on what is really on our minds as we watch movies. Give it a look. Perhaps it will remind you of viewing “American Hustle” and the reaction you had when you first caught sight of Christian Bale’s belly.




















http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-horsey-on-hollywood-best-picture-oscar-nominees-20140226,0,1221694.story
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 28122


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #39 on: March 01, 2014, 02:44:13 pm »


From the Los Angeles Times....

Academy Awards acceptance speeches should be more than thank-yous

By DAVID HORSEY | 5:00AM PST - Friday, February 28, 2014



SUNDAY NIGHT, a happy cohort of entertainment folks will have their careers sprinkled with fairy dust at the 86th Academy Awards. And, as happens every year, too many of them will clutch their Oscars and bore an audience of many millions with totally lame acceptance speeches.

You would think that such a distinguished group of creative people could do better, but many of them will spend their precious moment in the spotlight simply checking off a baffling list of names. If it were merely a matter of thanking their parents and their high school drama teachers, that might be OK, especially if they share some poignant bit of personal history in the process. But few will stop with that.

They will thank the studio and their publicist and their agent and their personal assistant and the caterer and the key grip and, as the music from the pit orchestra kicks in, they will rush to name a dozen more. Why is this the default speech at awards ceremonies? Where would we be if politicians did the same?

What if Franklin D. Roosevelt had merely thanked his campaign advisors, his doctors and his barber instead of telling the country “we have nothing to fear but fear itself?

What if John F. Kennedy had not said “the torch has been passed to a new generation” or encouraged Americans to “ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country?” What if he had, instead, filled his inaugural address with thanks to his brother for running his campaign and his dad for bankrolling his political career and Ted Sorensen for writing his speeches?

What if Abraham Lincoln had not told us the “honored dead” at Gettysburg had “not died in vain,” but had given the country “a new birth of freedom” so that “government of the people, by the people and for the people shall not perish from the Earth"? What if he had just thanked all his buddies back in Illinois and the boys in the White House telegraph office?

We would all be poorer for it if speeches were just valentines. So come on, Oscar winners. We know you’re surprised and nervous, but you are on stage — exactly where you always wanted to be. Give us some wit, some insight, some pathos. You can tell your agent you think he’s swell on Monday.


http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-academy-awards-speeches-20140227,0,5126710.story
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Alicat
Guest
« Reply #40 on: March 02, 2014, 10:06:09 am »

I saw PHILOMENA a few weeks ago - it is fantastic. Dame Judi Dench is magnificent.

I saw SAVING MR BANKS last week - what a wonderful movie. Tom Hanks and Emma Thompson are great in their roles - Emma Thompson is a STAR!
Report Spam   Logged
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 28122


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #41 on: March 06, 2014, 11:55:02 am »


From the Los Angeles Times....

The Oscar show is too long? Too bad!

By DAVID HORSEY | 10:39AM PST - Wednesday, March 05, 2014

Oscar critics always grouse about the show being too long. Who cares? — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times.
Oscar critics always grouse about the show being too long. Who cares? — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times.

WHEN the 87th Academy Awards rolls around next year, I hope someone calls a moratorium on grousing about the length of the ceremony. Does anyone care about how long it takes, except the poor critics who are stuck scrutinizing every minute of the show?

The Oscars extravaganza is not normal entertainment. Like the Super Bowl, it is event TV. No one expects the super Bowl to be confined to a tight schedule, even if the game is tedious. It takes as long as it takes. The same goes for the Academy Awards.

Yes, this year’s iteration went 3½ hours, but it was probably worth taking the extra time, if only to avoid having so many speeches rudely cut short by an impatient producer cueing music from the orchestra to usher a rattled winner off the stage just when he or she is getting around to thanking the kids at home.

And, sure, some of the stunts Ellen DeGeneres pulled, like handing out pizza and shooting a selfie, may have gone on too long. On the other hand, those were moments in which we could see the larger-than-life stars act like normal people. Who wanted pizza? Who helped pass out the sloppy pieces? Who was most excited to get in on the photo that crashed Twitter?

The thing is, most people are not glued to the screen for every second of the show. For many, it’s a social occasion. People are jumping up to refresh a drink or pull something out of the oven. They are bantering back and forth during the boring bits and debating whose dress is the sexiest and which actor is aging least gracefully.

Folks in the Oscar audience are not sitting there like they are at the symphony. They are multitasking — talking, drinking, eating, laughing, complaining, whooping it up when their favorite film wins and moaning when the one they hate grabs an award. The Oscars ceremony is not just another TV show, it’s an excuse for a party and, like any party, who cares how long it takes as long as it’s fun?


http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-horsey-on-hollywood-long-oscar-show-20140305,0,4618811.story
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Alicat
Guest
« Reply #42 on: March 12, 2014, 04:58:06 pm »

A friend and I went to see 12 YEARS A SLAVE yesterday. It's graphic and violent but it is an amazing movie.
Report Spam   Logged
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 28122


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #43 on: March 28, 2014, 02:23:00 pm »


From the Los Angeles Times....

A flood of reaction to ‘Noah

By DAVID HORSEY | 10:13AM PST - Thursday, March 27, 2014

With the Biblical epic “Noah” ready to flood movie theaters, its distributor is trying to remind purists that it's only a movie. — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times.
With the Biblical epic “Noah” ready to flood movie theaters, its distributor is trying to remind purists that it's only a movie.
 — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times.


UNTIL film director Darren Aronofsky got his hands on it, the old tale of Noah’s Ark had devolved into a cute children’s fable of giraffes and elephants and bears and bunnies crowding onto a big boat.

Aronofsky has re-envisioned it as what it really has always been: an apocalyptic, end-of-the-world disaster story. Biblical literalists, though, are not entirely happy about this new telling of one of the most ancient stories in the Judeo-Christian tradition.

Aronofsky’s “Noahopens on Friday in theaters across the country and the big question for Paramount, the studio that paid more than $130 million to produce the film, is whether the large Christian audience that showed up for Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ” and the more recent “Son of God” will pay to see what Aronofsky has called “the least biblical film ever made.”

If Glenn Beck has his way, no right thinking person will go see the movie. The eccentric conservative TV and radio commentator has told his followers, “I hope that ‘Noah’ is a massive failure.” Without actually viewing the film, Beck has dismissed it as two hours of “dangerous disinformation” that portrays Noah as a drunk with an environmentalist agenda.

Other religious conservatives, however, have expressed a distinctly different opinion of the film. Among them is Jim Daly, president of Focus on the Family, who previewed “Noah” and gave credit to Aronofsky for telling a compelling story. “It is a creative interpretation of the scriptural account that allows us to imagine the deep struggles Noah may have wrestled with as he answered God's call on his life," Daly said.

On Wednesday night I went to a screening at Paramount Studios in Hollywood to see “Noah” for myself. I followed it up by re-reading the story of Noah and the flood in Genesis. The contrasts between the two versions are stark.

The story in the Bible is brief — not much longer than a pitch for a disaster movie — and Noah doesn’t have a word of dialogue until after the waters have receded and his sons find him drunk and naked in his hut. Aronofsky bulks up the sketchy tale, turning it into a cross between “Game of Thrones” and “Waiting for Godot”, with some antediluvian “Transformers” thrown in as ark builders.

Arguably, God comes off better in the film than in the book. In the Bible, just 10 generations into his creation, the Big Guy is not happy with the sinful ways of human beings. He wants a redo, so he drowns everybody but Noah and his family. Then, sounding a little regretful — “Oops! My bad,” sayeth the Lord — God promises Noah he won’t do it again, even though he knows Humanity 2.0 will be just as awful as the first version.

Aronofsky’s movie keeps God off in the clouds and lays the heavy choices on Noah while graphically portraying the wickedness and violence of those early humans. You can see why they kind of had it coming. Besides their murderous ways, they were a bunch of polluters who didn’t recycle and ate way too much red meat.

The richest part of the film version, though, is the way Aronofsky gives depth and dimension to Noah and his family and the existential issues they face. Yes, he takes great liberties with the details, but, for any Christians interested in something more intellectually rigorous than old fables, Aronofsky’s “Noah” would be a great starting point for a Bible class discussion about justice, mercy, faith and obedience.

Paramount may have less trouble than expected attracting a Christian audience already intrigued by the second story in the Bible. The tougher sell might be to a general audience unaccustomed to having their disaster flicks served up with such a grim and challenging vision.


http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-horsey-on-hollywood-noah-20140324,0,4553870.story
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
ssweetpea
Moderator
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 7426



WWW
« Reply #44 on: March 28, 2014, 03:58:34 pm »

An elderly lay preacher friend of mine said last week that she was interested in seeing Noah purely because she wanted to see how they managed to stretch out a story that can be told in under 3 minutes in order to make a full length movie.

I wonder if the ark has 7 sheep on it.
Report Spam   Logged

The way politicians run this country a small white cat should have no problem http://sally4mp.blogspot.com/
Alicat
Guest
« Reply #45 on: March 28, 2014, 04:14:37 pm »

Cuban Fury is FANTASTIC!!!!!!
Report Spam   Logged
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 28122


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #46 on: March 28, 2014, 04:19:43 pm »


Review: Energetic ‘Noah’ goes overboard — to riveting effect

          (Los Angeles Times — March 27th, 2014)
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Alicat
Guest
« Reply #47 on: March 29, 2014, 10:21:23 am »

I've seen the shorts to NOAH a few times now. If the shorts are anything to go by - definitely not a movie I have any interest in seeing.
Report Spam   Logged
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 28122


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #48 on: April 04, 2014, 12:35:10 am »


From the Los Angeles Times....

Hollywood action movies: Could they be any worse?

By DAVID HORSEY | 9:17AM PST - Wednesday, April 02, 2014

Hollywood action movies — could they be any worse? — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times.
Hollywood action movies — could they be any worse? — Cartoon: David Horsey/Los Angeles Times.

A FEW NIGHTS AGO, I finally caught up with watching the most recent Tweedledee and Tweedledum of action movies — “White House Down” and “Olympus Has Fallen”.

White House Down”, with Channing Tatum in the lead role, was one of the flubs that drove a big revenue decline at Sony Pictures Entertainment in 2013 — losses that contributed to last month’s layoff of 216 employees at the studio’s Culver City headquarters. “Olympus Has Fallen”, starring Gerard Butler, was made for less money and did pretty well selling tickets. The contrast in box office performance, though, is one of the few things that sets the two movies apart.

During production, it was common knowledge that two cinematic versions of an attack on the White House were in the works and, since their release, many people have noted the remarkable similarities between them. If a viewer did not know they were made at the same time, it would be easy to think one was a remake of the other.

Tatum plays a cop who is rejected as a candidate for Secret Service agent’s position in the White House. Butler plays a Secret Service agent who has been banished from the White House and relegated to a desk job. In both movies, when bands of terrorists start blowing up D.C. and take the president hostage, these Secret Service outsiders are the only ones left inside the White House to save the day. Both movies feature kids in peril. Both have admirable, resolute presidents (a rarity in the era of “House of Cards” and “Scandal”). Both make the Speaker of the House a central character. The similarities run deep.

If these were books or news articles, one might suspect plagiarism at work. However, the reality of Hollywood action movies is different. There are certain formulas that everyone uses. In the case of “White House Down” and “Olympus Has Fallen”, it is the venerated “Die Hard” formula that has worked so well for the Bruce Willis franchise. If two screenwriters apply the same formula to an attack on the White House the resulting films are bound to be clones of each other.

In their third acts — that final 45 minutes when everything starts blowing up and the hero and chief villain come face to face for a final confrontation — just about all action movies are the same. These predictable climaxes are seldom very interesting. One of 2013’s better action movies, “Man of Steel”, was a very original reinvention of the Superman story, but the climactic battle was just the usual overload of noise and mayhem.

Man of Steel” ended with an epic fist fight — the most unshakeable convention in action movies. By some strange logic, the top good guy and top bad guy, no matter the potency of their weapons or level of their powers, must always end it all in a brawl, as if they were two cowboys in a saloon.

It would be nice, for once, to be surprised. Remember the moment in “Raiders of the Lost Ark” when Harrison Ford was confronted by a hulking Arab assassin brandishing a huge scimitar? For just a beat, Ford, as Indiana Jones, contemplates hand-to-hand combat. Then he realizes what a ridiculous idea that is, pulls out his pistol and shoots the bad guy. It was unexpected and it was funny. It spoofed convention.

That’s what we should wish for in future action movies: fewer explosions and a lot more surprises.


http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-horsey-on-hollywood-action-movies-20140402,0,4963937.story
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
nitpicker1
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 11881


Nothing sexceeds like sexcess


« Reply #49 on: April 08, 2014, 10:26:02 am »



Making a movie in 48 hours hard on crew   
 
JO MCKENZIE-MCLEAN   

Last updated 12:06 07/04/2014 
             
Temporary insanity is one way to describe the feeling of making a film in 48 hours with only just over two hours sleep.

Cromwell filmmaker Raymond Lum, of Sword Productions Ltd, is recovering today from a weekend of sleep deprivation after co- writing, directing, filming and editing a film for the Rialto Channel 48Hours Furious Film- Making Challenge.

Lum and a group of Cromwell actors, assistants and a musician leapt to action on Friday night when a text with the team's genre came through: The Revenge Movie.

The team's task - complete a revenge movie centred around a main character - a liar called Morgan Foster, using the line - "Not with that you're not" and a using a ball as a prop. They also had to include an extreme close-up shot.

Lum said the genre, one of a possible 12, was much easier than last year's when he landed a robot/android genre.

"There is more drama this year . . . we have a group of kids who know someone and there is a relationship breakdown and there is a bit of a twist at the end."

He would not reveal any other details of the film, which would be screened at The Nose restaurant in upcoming weeks, he said.

"The biggest challenge has been the lack of sleep. I've only had about two and a half hours . . . but I love doing film work. It's my passion."

The competition, in its 12th year, attracted more than 800 teams from around New Zealand this year.

Assistant director Odette Pride said it was her second year working alongside Lunn and this year, while filming seemed more polished, it was not without its "chaotic" moments.

"This year we decided to take a light-hearted approach and use a lot of outdoor locations but it poured with rain all Saturday morning so we had to change locations pretty quickly but the filming went well," Pride said.

After an entire day filming, one actor pulled the pin during the last scene and the child actors had to be thrown a few chocolate energy bars to keep them going, she said.

"Everyone who has done it has said, 'call me, I'm doing it next year'. There is a wrap party [on Sunday night] but I will be home in bed."

Organiser Tim Groendaal said there were about 700 people from Otago and Southland competing in the challenge and numbers were growing each year.

"Per head of population, it is the biggest short film competition in the world. I think normally, when it comes to filmmaking it's a long protracted process for people and you don't get the quick fix gratification this provides . . . and it works because it is a cool social activity for people. That is the big thing for us.

"It isn't about winning the awards - that's the cream on top if you get that far - it's that social experience. Having Peter Jackson as a patron and guy who selects wildcard winners from the shorts is not a bad thing either."

The films had to be finished by 7pm last night, and would go through a regional final process.

The grand final is held on May 30 with Oscar-nominated scriptwriter Josh Olson heading the judging panel.

 http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/news/9911166/Making-a-movie-in-48-hours-hard-on-crew
 
Report Spam   Logged

"Life might not be the party you were expecting, but you're here now, so you may as well get up and dance"

Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Open XNC2 Smileys
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum

Buy traffic for your forum/website
traffic-masters
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.203 seconds with 14 queries.