Miscellaneous Movie Musings the Sequel

[Not Afraid]

Originally Posted by MouseWife

Forgive me, but, I haven't seen Milo & Otis in many years. My older kids watched it quite a few times {on VHS}.

I can't remember...why was it painful?

Spoiler:

Because they were lost?They did make it home, right??? I can't remember!!

Did Thurston and Kimchi watch it, too?

Do dogs snack while watching t.v?

The list of horrors that happened to BOTH Milo and Otis was HUGE! Pugs don't swim very well, yet Otis was thrown into the ocean and a river, was supposed to fend for himself for a year, hand a run-in with a bear who grabbed him and was stuck in the snow for a LONG time. Otis was left to travel downstream in a little box, went over a falls, had run-ins with birds of prey, a bear and a fox, and he was obviously not a well taken care of cat in the films because his ears were FILTHY and looked infected.

Thurston watched almost the entire film with a lot of interest. He seemed as horrified as I was at the things happening to the poor pug and kitty.

[wendybeth]

I love Milo and Otis. Yes, it is fraught with peril, and the poor things look pretty disheveled for most of the film, but it's the ultimate animal buddy flick. Tori and I used to watch it all the time when she was little.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

The Razzie nominations are out for this year. Transformers and Land of the Lost are up for top honors.

It looks like Sandra Bullock could be up for a Worst Actress Razzie and Best Actress Oscar this year (different movies). I wonder if that's ever happened before. Not that she stands a chance of winning both. It's sure to be Mega Fox's year at the Razzies.

Well damn. I'm glad I'm not a betting man. Congrats on your double win Sandra.

[BarTopDancer]

Note to self. NEVER watch Milo and Otis. EVER.

Please tell me it has a happy ending.

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by BarTopDancer

Note to self. NEVER watch Milo and Otis. EVER.

Please tell me it has a happy ending.

It was his sled.

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

BTW, the 3-D in Alice in Wonderland is lame. I found out today the movie was filmed in 2-D and converted to 3-D, and it looks it. Everything has that flat, cut-out, old multi-plane camera look. And the handful of 3-D "tricks" they did were straight out of 1950's 3-D movie schtick. Embarassing.

So, if you're gonna see it, see the 2-D version.

Originally Posted by lashbear

...and we loved Alice - especially the 3D. They didn't resort to the usual cheap tricks and any "protrusions" out of the fourth wall were justified. It made it a lot easier to get immersed in the ambiance and settings. We'd recommend it to anyone. We wouldn't recommend it to small children as a lot of characters seem to have a penchant for poking others in the eye with things.

I am more with Bear on this one. I didn't love it - just liked, but it was entertaining.

After talking with several people this weekend about Alive, the responses seem to be divided thusly: people who pay more attention to the fine details of the story; how it does (or doesn't) follow the original story; how well the story and plot line were developed; etc., then those people didn't like it. For those of who enjoy an entertaining movie, can be amused by good visuals and a story that isn't full of ugly holes, we liked it.

This is NOT meant as a slam against those who like the details I mention in the first group; it is simply an observation on two groups of movie goers. I personally don't see that many movies (I don't think I had been in a movie theater for about a year), so maybe my simpler mind is just more easily amused.

Originally Posted by Moonliner

Congrats on your double win Sandra.

Loved her acceptance speech at the Razzies. I like Sandra Bullock - she doesn't take herself too seriously.

[innerSpaceman]

If they didn't go in nearly strict order from place-to-place following the (Disney version of) Alice in Wonderland, I wouldn't have minded so much that they imposed a completely different and stupidly vapid story upon it. Want original story? Then don't copy the layout of the original tale so slavishly.

Of course, that the story chosen was so cut-and-dried, and no one but the Red Queen even for a moment tried to mess with Alice's head, left the proceedings feeling NOTHING like any presentation that should dare to call itself "Alice in Wonderland."

The characters and settings don't make the tale what it is, especially if half those characters are nothing like their literary counterparts. (The settings were well done, and half the characters were indeed like their literary counterparts. Forgot to mention that the Caterpillar fvcked with Alice's head quite properly. Good on him.)

[flippyshark]

I'm glad I read enough here that I went into Alice with adjusted expectations. I had a pretty good time while watching it, but now, just a couple of hours later, I can only remember things about it that I didn't like.

It really did feel more like a Narnia story with a Lewis Carroll visual overlay. (And could the Dormouse character have been any more of a distaff Reepicheep?)

How did anyone think that the Mad Hatter's little dance was a good idea? (Especially unfortunate for its musical accompaniment. Yuck.)

I'm giving it a pass here, because they made the Red Queen's giant head part of the story, but I do not want to see any more digitally inflated head characters at the movies ever again. (Same goes for digitally embiggened eyes.)

But, I didn't hate it.

[bewitched]

We saw it in IMAX 3D and I have to say that I really liked it; but I wasn't expecting it to be a true "Alice in Wonderland". I knew it was based more on Carroll's poem "Jabberwocky".

That said, I too found the Mad Hatter's dance entirely out of place.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Sigh. I may never get to watch another "gritty" movie again. Because apparently these days "gritty" is synonymous with "shaky".

Got 24 minutes into Hurt Locker before having to stop. Took some dramamine and we're going to try again in an hour. Perhaps I'll be able to at least watch enough chunks to get through it eventually.