"The Illusionist"
Russell Watson
Slayah
> Finally saw, really liked.
Yeah, it stays with you for a while too, right? Didn't you think Ed Norton
and Jessica Biel were great chemistry together?
Russell Watson
wrote:
It was really good performances all the way around. Happy to see foxy
Jess in a role that she doesn't get through with skin-tight clothes or
a bikini (and I LOVE her in skin tight clothes or a bikini). I was
happy to see Norton with the beard, since his chinless visage doesn't
lend itself to the compelling sort of personality required by this
role. Rufus Sewell played a good villain (again) and Giamatti is one
of those guys who'll always be a supporting player, but is always a
damn good one. The cinematography was great, I loved the silent
film-style scene fades, etc. If the movie had been shot in atmospheric
b&w it could easily have been something from the '30s that had been
"in the can" for all thsee years, and for a guy who loves all the old
shit they show on TCM I find nothing wrong with that at all. Nice to
see it done so well.
I guess next weekend I'll be in neo-noirville, as I will probably try
to catch both "Hollywoodland" and "The Black Dahlia" sometime over the
weekend. If either is half as good within their genre as "The
Illusionist" is in its they should be fairly decent. Having read James
Ellroy's novel on which the latter is based (and don't buy into that
"based on real events" hooey: it's a straight up work of fiction that
has as much to do with the real BD case as "Saving Private Ryan" has
to do with WW2) I actually find myself hoping that DePalma has
streamlined the story somewhat. I learned my lesson about desiring
slavish attention to the literary source material with "The DaVinci
Code".
Slayah
> It was really good performances all the way around. Happy to see foxy
> Jess in a role that she doesn't get through with skin-tight clothes or
> a bikini (and I LOVE her in skin tight clothes or a bikini).
That was my first time seeing her in anything. I was impressed.
I was
> happy to see Norton with the beard, since his chinless visage doesn't
> lend itself to the compelling sort of personality required by this
> role. Rufus Sewell played a good villain (again)
What else has he been in? I think that's the first time I've ever seen him
too.
and Giamatti is one
> of those guys who'll always be a supporting player, but is always a
> damn good one.
I didn't realize until after the movie that he was the guy who did that wine
movie! Wasn't he the lead in that?
The cinematography was great, I loved the silent
> film-style scene fades, etc. If the movie had been shot in atmospheric
> b&w it could easily have been something from the '30s that had been
> "in the can" for all thsee years, and for a guy who loves all the old
> shit they show on TCM I find nothing wrong with that at all. Nice to
> see it done so well.
It was beautiful. Shot in Prague, right?
My uncle and his g/f just took a European trip and she tells me they visited
that theatre! It's real. I think she says it's an Opera House.
> I guess next weekend I'll be in neo-noirville, as I will probably try
> to catch both "Hollywoodland" and "The Black Dahlia" sometime over the
> weekend.
I'll wait for your word on both.
If either is half as good within their genre as "The
> Illusionist" is in its they should be fairly decent. Having read James
> Ellroy's novel on which the latter is based (and don't buy into that
> "based on real events" hooey: it's a straight up work of fiction that
> has as much to do with the real BD case as "Saving Private Ryan" has
> to do with WW2) I actually find myself hoping that DePalma has
> streamlined the story somewhat. I learned my lesson about desiring
> slavish attention to the literary source material with "The DaVinci
> Code".
Tried reading the book. Couldn't. Never saw the film
Russell Watson
wrote:
>Russell Watson wrote:
>
>
>> It was really good performances all the way around. Happy to see foxy
>> Jess in a role that she doesn't get through with skin-tight clothes or
>> a bikini (and I LOVE her in skin tight clothes or a bikini).
>
>That was my first time seeing her in anything. I was impressed.
>
> I was
>> happy to see Norton with the beard, since his chinless visage doesn't
>> lend itself to the compelling sort of personality required by this
>> role. Rufus Sewell played a good villain (again)
>
>What else has he been in? I think that's the first time I've ever seen him
>too.
He was the knight bested by Heath ledger in the climax of "A Knight's
Tale" and wa the villain in "The Legend of Zorro". He has been a few
other things as well, but I haven't seen them.
>
>and Giamatti is one
>> of those guys who'll always be a supporting player, but is always a
>> damn good one.
>
>I didn't realize until after the movie that he was the guy who did that wine
>movie! Wasn't he the lead in that?
Ah, "Sideways". Yes, I suppsose so. I was thinking in terms of more
mainstream movies than indy pics.
>
>The cinematography was great, I loved the silent
>> film-style scene fades, etc. If the movie had been shot in atmospheric
>> b&w it could easily have been something from the '30s that had been
>> "in the can" for all thsee years, and for a guy who loves all the old
>> shit they show on TCM I find nothing wrong with that at all. Nice to
>> see it done so well.
>
>It was beautiful. Shot in Prague, right?
>My uncle and his g/f just took a European trip and she tells me they visited
>that theatre! It's real. I think she says it's an Opera House.
That's what I understand. There's a certain charm to that part of
Europe that is appealing, but I've never really wanted to go there.
The only part of Europe I have any interest in seeing are Ireland and
Scotland. I was scheduled to go to Italy if my step-son had stayed in
the Navy, but he got out at the last moment (he had re-upped on paper
but his CO had never sent it in and he changed his mind and got it
back. He tore it up and a week later he was home).
>
>> I guess next weekend I'll be in neo-noirville, as I will probably try
>> to catch both "Hollywoodland" and "The Black Dahlia" sometime over the
>> weekend.
>
>I'll wait for your word on both.
I'll let you know what I think.
>
>If either is half as good within their genre as "The
>> Illusionist" is in its they should be fairly decent. Having read James
>> Ellroy's novel on which the latter is based (and don't buy into that
>> "based on real events" hooey: it's a straight up work of fiction that
>> has as much to do with the real BD case as "Saving Private Ryan" has
>> to do with WW2) I actually find myself hoping that DePalma has
>> streamlined the story somewhat. I learned my lesson about desiring
>> slavish attention to the literary source material with "The DaVinci
>> Code".
>
>Tried reading the book. Couldn't. Never saw the film
>
What put you off the book? Pacing, style, subject? It's pretty good if
you like that sort of thing, though I think I actually liked _Angels
and Demons_ better. His _Deception Point_ is pretty good, too.
Completely different genre than the Langdon novels, reads more like
something Crichton might write.
On the subj of books and authors I checked out Dean Koontz's website
looking for news on the 3rd entry in the Frankenstein trilogy which
was due out "Summer '06" according to the blurb in the back of _City
of Night_ and there's no mention of it. They still have the stuff
about that book up as though it were a new release.
KT3000
"Russell Watson" <russell...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:o3tdg29jguifm7ctf...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 14:41:43 GMT, "Slayah" <Sla...@hellmouth.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >It was beautiful. Shot in Prague, right?
> >My uncle and his g/f just took a European trip and she tells me
they visited
> >that theatre! It's real. I think she says it's an Opera House.
>
> That's what I understand. There's a certain charm to that part of
> Europe that is appealing, but I've never really wanted to go there
Giamatti was on _Conan_ a couple of weeks ago. He described Prague
as nice city (IIRC) but still one where you couldn't put the thought
of waking up in a bathtub full of ice missing a kidney totally out
of your mind.
Russell Watson
wrote:
Central Europe is a scary kind of place. Be my luck if I ever went
there I'd end up living a scene from "Hostel".
Slayah
Rufus Sewell played a good villain (again)
>>
>> What else has he been in? I think that's the first time I've ever
>> seen him too.
>
> He was the knight bested by Heath ledger in the climax of "A Knight's
> Tale" and wa the villain in "The Legend of Zorro". He has been a few
> other things as well, but I haven't seen them.
I saw "The Illusionist" again last night. It was just as good the second
time around! I saw it with someone who hadn't seen it yet (my James Bond
friend) and he really liked it too.
Seeing it a second time and knowing what I know,
SPOILERS
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
I actually felt a bit sorry for the Crown Prince. If he hadn't slapped
Duchess Jessica Biel, I would have felt even more sorry for him.
Anyway, the cinematography was just beautiful, the acting all-around superb.
I appreciated it even more this time.
> The only part of Europe I have any interest in seeing are Ireland and
> Scotland.
I've heard it's gorgeous there (both places).
I was scheduled to go to Italy if my step-son had stayed in
> the Navy, but he got out at the last moment (he had re-upped on paper
> but his CO had never sent it in and he changed his mind and got it
> back. He tore it up and a week later he was home).
Lucky!
>>> I guess next weekend I'll be in neo-noirville, as I will probably
>>> try to catch both "Hollywoodland" and "The Black Dahlia" sometime
>>> over the weekend.
My friend saw Hollywoodland and says it's not as good (in its genre) as The
Illusionist. Oh, there was a trailer for a new movie coming, looked like a
total rip-off of The Illusionist! A period piece about a magician. It looked
pretty good, though.
I learned my
>>> lesson about desiring slavish attention to the literary source
>>> material with "The DaVinci Code".
>>
>> Tried reading the book. Couldn't. Never saw the film
>>
>
> What put you off the book? Pacing, style, subject?
Too wordy, like a history book. I gave up at about page 90. I need forward
motion, intrigue, a thrill, and I need it right away!
> On the subj of books and authors I checked out Dean Koontz's website
> looking for news on the 3rd entry in the Frankenstein trilogy which
> was due out "Summer '06" according to the blurb in the back of _City
> of Night_ and there's no mention of it. They still have the stuff
> about that book up as though it were a new release.
I was just wondering about that! I guess it hasn't been released yet.
Russell Watson
wrote:
Nothing symathetic about that guy. Despot to the core and an example
of all that is wrong with rule by right of succession. Eisenheim
didn't just save Sophie, he saved the Empire from someone who was
already absolutrely corrupted by absolute power without even having
acsended to the throne yet. You DID hear the part where they said he
killed a girl by throwing her out a window to cover the marks of the
beating he'd given her, right?
>
>Anyway, the cinematography was just beautiful, the acting all-around superb.
>I appreciated it even more this time.
>
>> The only part of Europe I have any interest in seeing are Ireland and
>> Scotland.
>
>I've heard it's gorgeous there (both places).
I'm tentatively working on a plan to go to Australia next year. I'll
just have to see if it gels or goes splat.
>
>I was scheduled to go to Italy if my step-son had stayed in
>> the Navy, but he got out at the last moment (he had re-upped on paper
>> but his CO had never sent it in and he changed his mind and got it
>> back. He tore it up and a week later he was home).
>
>Lucky!
>
>>>> I guess next weekend I'll be in neo-noirville, as I will probably
>>>> try to catch both "Hollywoodland" and "The Black Dahlia" sometime
>>>> over the weekend.
>
>My friend saw Hollywoodland and says it's not as good (in its genre) as The
>Illusionist.
I'm hearing that too. I might end up waiting for that one to go to the
$1 theater or even DVD before taking up time with it. Apparently if
they had stuck with the George Reeves story it would have been good,
but the addition of the fictional detective investigating his death
just muddies it up.
>Oh, there was a trailer for a new movie coming, looked like a
>total rip-off of The Illusionist! A period piece about a magician. It looked
>pretty good, though.
Not a rip-off. Really a completely different film called "The
Prestige" about 2 illusionists who were once friends but become rivals
over a woman. They constantly attempt to upstage each other until the
illusions of one excede the realm of probability to a degree that he
becomes suspected of being an actual sorcerer. Stars Christian "Batman
Begins" Bale and Hugh "X-Men" Jackman, with a turn by David Bowie as
real life electrical wizard Nicola Tesla in a film by "Batman Begins"
director Christopher Nolan. It is predicted by many to be "The Sixth
Sense" to "The Illusionist's" "Stir of Echoes". In other words, the
buzz is that after "The Prestige" comes out people will be saying
"What was a that other movie about a magician from a while back?"
>
>
> I learned my
>>>> lesson about desiring slavish attention to the literary source
>>>> material with "The DaVinci Code".
>>>
>>> Tried reading the book. Couldn't. Never saw the film
>>>
>>
>> What put you off the book? Pacing, style, subject?
>
>Too wordy, like a history book. I gave up at about page 90. I need forward
>motion, intrigue, a thrill, and I need it right away!
Thanks for the warning. If we ever hook I'll know to skip the petting,
make short work of the foreplay, and get right down to business.
Hello!
Hi!
Let's fuck like bunnies in heat!
OK!!!!
Slayah
> I'm tentatively working on a plan to go to Australia next year. I'll
> just have to see if it gels or goes splat.
Australia! I'd like to go there someday. And Alaska. Alaska more.
>> My friend saw Hollywoodland and says it's not as good (in its genre)
>> as The Illusionist.
>
> I'm hearing that too. I might end up waiting for that one to go to the
> $1 theater or even DVD before taking up time with it. Apparently if
> they had stuck with the George Reeves story it would have been good,
> but the addition of the fictional detective investigating his death
> just muddies it up.
I might not ever see it. Maybe once it's on HBO.
>> Oh, there was a trailer for a new movie coming, looked like a
>> total rip-off of The Illusionist! A period piece about a magician.
>> It looked pretty good, though.
>
> Not a rip-off. Really a completely different film called "The
> Prestige" about 2 illusionists who were once friends but become rivals
> over a woman. They constantly attempt to upstage each other until the
> illusions of one excede the realm of probability to a degree that he
> becomes suspected of being an actual sorcerer. Stars Christian "Batman
> Begins" Bale and Hugh "X-Men" Jackman, with a turn by David Bowie as
> real life electrical wizard Nicola Tesla in a film by "Batman Begins"
> director Christopher Nolan. It is predicted by many to be "The Sixth
> Sense" to "The Illusionist's" "Stir of Echoes". In other words, the
> buzz is that after "The Prestige" comes out people will be saying
> "What was a that other movie about a magician from a while back?"
Cool!! Well then, I can't wait for this one.
>>> What put you off the book? Pacing, style, subject?
>>
>> Too wordy, like a history book. I gave up at about page 90. I need
>> forward motion, intrigue, a thrill, and I need it right away!
>
> Thanks for the warning. If we ever hook I'll know to skip the petting,
> make short work of the foreplay, and get right down to business.
But don't forget the chaps!
> Hello!
> Hi!
> Let's fuck like bunnies in heat!
> OK!!!!
Not even a couple of pages of Intro?