|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: SOmeone called the new Solaris the worst stinker of the past 20 years... posted by Victor Khomenko on December 04, 2002 at 17:17:17:
I thought it was an excellent movie. Soderbergh's photography was stunning, just like in Traffic. The score was very sparing and I loved that. I also thought Soderbergh did a good job of distilling the story down to its core. Both the book and the original movie did not hold my attention (and for that matter, the original movie was much too long).Clooney was excellent. McElhone is gorgeous, and while she had a much smaller amount of screen time, turned in a very good performance. At no time did I think it was slow or boring.
I thought it was a good study of who we are and what we think of (and about) others.
I have no idea why you guys WANT to bash this flick. Maybe it's just Soderbergh you find an easy target. Or some notion of what "Hollywood" movies are. I don't know why you guys bother to watch movies at all.
Follow Ups:
***I don't know why you guys bother to watch movies at all.I don't know whom you mean by "you guys". I am sure AuPh knows why he watches. I do too. clark does. So do many others. If you mean the guy who called it the worse stinker in 20 years, then you should probably ask him.
To answer you other question - Solaris to many of us represents the finest in movie making. As such we - some of us, anyway - treat it with special respect. Like many other fine movies of that caliber.
So when the news hit about the director many of us consider very lame (can't think on a single movie he made that I liked) taking his shot, plus with the actor some of us consider very lame too, that naturally created negative expectation. It would be different if a good director decided to do so.
I am glad you liked it.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: