Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

cj_coolcat

Members
  • Posts

    270
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About cj_coolcat

  • Birthday 11/28/1983

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    Vancouver

cj_coolcat's Achievements

Abbotsford Prospect

Abbotsford Prospect (2/14)

40

Reputation

  1. Finally bit the bullet and went to see Les Miserables. I was avoiding it because I was worried I was going to hate it. Well, I didn't hate it. But I didn't love it either. I really don't know what they were thinking casting Russell Crowe as Javert. The guy can't sing. To his credit you can tell he really tried, but it struck me he was concentrating so much on his singing that he forgot about acting. He was just so....blank. It's too bad because I bet if he didn't have to sing he'd make an awesome Javert. On the other end of the spectrum it felt like Hugh Jackman was concentrating so much on acting he forgot about singing. I mean, he was okay, but there's several points where you really want him to belt it out from his gut and he just doesn't get there. I'm thinking the biggest hindrance to the singing and my biggest problem with the movie overall was all the awkward close-ups. Why did every single ballad have to be filmed with the camera up the actor's nose?? It reminded me of Blair Witch Project, but with singing. I think it made a lot of the actors (Hugh Jackman in particular) sing from the throat like the audience was right in their face rather than sing from the gut like they're trying to project to a concert hall, which I guess is maybe what they were going for but I didn't like it. On the plus side, I'm pretty sure I'm in love with Eddie Redmayne now and I was pleasantly surprised by Anne Hathaway and Amanda Sigfried. Hathaway's "I dreamed a dream" achieved a good balance between beautiful and uncomfortable to watch (which Hooper then tried to replicate with every other song in the movie to its detriment). Also in the rare moment when the camera isn't up somebody's nose the cinematography is quite beautiful. Finally of course Colm Wilkinson as the bishop = pure awesomeness. It's too bad he's too old to play Valjean again. Overall, 6/10.
  2. I can definitely see that. You can tell there's certain aspects and scenes in the movie that were added in after the fact because they are really out of joint with the overall tone. It's not cohesive. And then the ending is like "oh crap, this movie is too long already we better wrap it up quickly." There really needed to be more discussion and back-story about the kid and the mob boss in the future to make that ending more believable and less convenient.
  3. I think I have to raise my rating for Life of Pi since despite my issues with it it's still far and away the best movie I've seen all year and giving it a 7.5 is going to screw over all my other ratings! So I'm going to upgrade it to an 8.5 (hope that's okay with you movie experts!) Anna Karenina: This is one of my favourite books so I was kind of scared going into this movie but I was actually pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed it. It's certainly not a masterpiece and definitely not a faithful reproduction of the book by any means but it gets to the spirit of it very well. To be honest I'm glad they didn't try to reproduce the book because there's obviously no way you could fit it into a 2 hour movie. I liked the concept of the stage production, it allowed for some cool and creative scene changes. Also, if not for Life of Pi, it might be considered one of the most visually stunning movies of 2012. It should definitely win for best costumes imho. That being said, it was definitely a bit too melodramatic and overacted for my taste, but I kind of expected that so it didn't bother me too much. I give it a solid 7/10. Looper: I really wanted to like it. Really. It gets points for a cool and unique concept but the execution wasn't there. It kind of felt like they couldn't decide what kind of movie they wanted to make. And yes I get that they were trying to not follow a formula but it ended up feeling like they made two movies and then tried to merge them unsuccessfully. What I mean is instead of making an action movie that also confronts a moral dilemma and is deep and thoughtful throughout they ended up making a movie that starts as an action movie, then decides to be deep and thoughtful through the middle portion of the movie while he's hanging out on the farm then says "screw it, this is boring" and brings out Bruce Willis with the dual machine guns at the end. Not to mention they throw in a completely unbelievable and disjointed romance angle because...why? There has to be sex scene? Just cause? I also found the ending to be disappointingly convenient and predictable. It just wraps up way too easily. That being said, the acting is top-knotch and the action sequences are pretty entertaining (who doesn't love Bruce Willis with a machine gun?) so it was still enjoyable. 6/10. I've read it. I haven't seen the movie but I have seen the stage production of Les Miserables. If you like the story you should like the book. The musical obviously leaves stuff out (it has to, it's a long book!) but overall it's quite true to the general storyline. The only thing I would say is the book is a lot grittier and less romantic. Still, you might like the musical better after reading the book because it really does a masterful job of translating some pretty tough subject matter (because really, who in their right mind would read that and think "gee this would make a great musical!") On the other hand, if you don't like musicals, then you don't like musicals and will probably never like them regardless. Not that I'm questioning your objectivity, I'm just saying most people either love musicals or they hate them and you usually can't do much to sway their opinion either way.
  4. Yes, I did pay attention at the end and I get what you're saying about the divergence of options, it just didn't quite resonate with me as much as I expected it to. BTW, I don't think your reply to me is pretentious at all because I absolutely agree I probably missed something. I'm curious though, have you read the book? I've heard from a couple of my friends that you really need to have read the book to fully appreciate the movie. I'm thinking that might be my problem.
  5. I think I'm going to need someone to explain Life of Pi to me. I mean it's certainly gorgeous (and for once the 3D actually adds something to the movie) but it seems like you spend huge chunks of the movie just staring at pretty scenes with pretty music playing in the background. What I mean is it feels like the movie relies on being pretty. Don't get me wrong, I love a beautiful movie as much as the next person, but all I heard going into it was how amazing and deep and meaningful it all was and I think I missed the "deep and meaningful" part. Maybe you need to read the book to "get it", or maybe my expectations were too high going in and as such I was underwhelmed. I might need to watch it again on the small screen so I'm less distracted by the visuals and I can concentrate on what little story there is. I still give it a solid 7.5/10. *edit* I've got to raise this to an 8.5 otherwise it's going to screw over all my future ratings. It's still probably my favourite movie of 2012 so it deserves higher.
  6. Sooo, what's the deal with the Canada Line? I don't take it, but I keep getting transit alerts about Canada Line service disruptions. Isn't it a little new to be having technical issues already?
  7. Well that would really suck for all the people who live on 10th.
  8. Unrelated to the game, but I don't suppose anyone knows if the security official who got tackled and hit his head on a bleacher while trying to break up a fight is okay? I know an ambulance was called for him and they told us to leave the area and that's all I know. It was a really crappy ending to what was otherwise a fun night. People who become violent when they drink should just not drink at all imho.
  9. Is this going to be for i-phones only like their schedule app is though? I don't really get why they don't have a blackberry app also. Heck, I'd pay for the GPS app if they charged a nominal fee (say a dollar or something.)
  10. This would be sooo awesome. I hate the 116 bus with a fiery passion. That being said, good luck convincing people to take transit to the Fraser Foreshore business park. There's copious amounts of free parking and it's so easy to drive there (really not many traffic issues). Not to mention that there's almost nothing within walking distance in terms of restaurants, stores, etc. So if you want to go out for lunch, you pretty much have to have a car.
  11. Can someone explain to me how turnstiles are supposed to make skytrain stations safer? It may just be because I don't think the stations themselves are that unsafe to begin with (it's usually outside the station that's the problem) but I'm not sure I understand how stopping fare evaders equates to safer stations.... I mean, if there's skytrain cops posted at every station as a result of the turnstiles, then okay yes, it makes the stations more secure. Otherwise??
  12. Sha Lin Noodle house is back in business! Nice to see they've recovered from that fire last December. Those who live in the vicinity of Cambie/ W. Broadway know what I'm talking about.

  13. This was supposed to be my first Whitecaps game. (Well, first one since they became an MLS team.) I don't remember any of my soccer games being canceled because of rain!! (Yah, yah, I know, they're professionals, they could get injured.)
  14. How can you possibly never leave campus?? Okay so I admit that I've only been to UBC campus a couple of times, but is it it's own city or something? Don't you need to leave campus to get groceries at least? Is there enough housing on campus or within walking distance of campus to house the entire UBC student population? I'm guessing not. Even less so if you go to SFU. Why not instead of abolishing the U-PASS just raise the price of it and make it optional so students have to opt in? And obviously take steps to reduce or eliminate U-PASS fraud (like I said, should be pretty simple if they follow the Victoria model of having the student ID and U-PASS be one card.)
  15. 100 bucks a month is not going to make people move closer to campus when they can live with their parents rent free (I'm assuming nobody chooses to rent in Langley and go to UBC.) I doubt that 3 zone commuters make up a large proportion of U-PASS users. Most live probably live within one zone. But even a one zone pass is 80 bucks a month. Doesn't sound like a lot but that would have been a huge drain on me when I was student. And you make it sound so easy to find accommodation within walking distance? Maybe Vancouver is different, but I tried for 4 years in Victoria to live close enough to campus so that I could walk and was completely unsuccessful. Those places go so fast they're nearly impossible to get in to. The U-PASS was a godsend for me. As for U-PASS fraud, why don't they just make people scan their U-Passes rather than merely showing them to the driver? I'm pretty sure we didn't have this problem (or at least not on the same scale) in Victoria as your U-PASS was also your student card and it had a magnetic stripe on it that you swiped whenever you got on the bus. So if you're not a student anymore, it's de-activated and it won't work on the bus. And you can't really go sell your student card while you're a student since you need it for things other than the bus! I guess the only issue here is that our ticketing machines are sooo slow that everyone scanning their U-Passes when they got on the bus would take forever.
×
×
  • Create New...