You, too, can learn something via text message

[trinityvixen]

I watched Across the Universe yesterday. It was decent. The story was a non-issue; it was merely a vehicle to excuse people singing Beatles tunes. I found myself bored when they weren't singing, but the singing was pretty good. I still think they cheated by getting Bono to do a couple of songs, but the actors/actresses were otherwise pleasant to listen to. A tad studied, perhaps, but all crystal in their own way.

The entire movie had about as much coherence as an acid trip. Or so I thought until there actually was an acid trip sequence and then I discovered how creepy that could get. (Thanks, Eddie Izzard, I may never sleep again.) I was telling feiran and darkling1 that it was a shame the writers had the entire Beatles catalogue at their disposal and they couldn't come up with a coherent story. I immediately retracted the statement when I recalled that a movie that felt like one long drug high is probably exactly what the Fab Four's music was meant to narrate.

I texted my sister after watching since I remembered she'd loved it, shared the same feelings with her, to which she replied that she has it on good authority (aka her pot-head roommate) that the movie does improve when one is watching it high. Something to consider, I suppose, for those of you so inclined. (Me, not so much.)

Funnily enough, I dreamt about using pot last night. True to form, I then immediately spent the rest of the dream freaking out about how drug tests at jobs that I might want six months down the road could detect that I'd used. Also, all my friends were totally shocked that I was such a pothead. Especially a smoker, since I make the most terrible fuss whenever I'm around smokers. I'm sure the Partnership for a Drug-Free America would be pleased to know that I've completely internalized the paranoia about using drugs and how they'll mess me up to the point that my dreams read like a pamphlet of prevention.

Comments

[droidguy1119.livejournal.com]

I felt pretty much the same. Dazzling, but dramatically inert. Also Jim Sturgess seems to be half the star he's meant to be. He seems a reasonably fine actor and he's certainly handsome but he registers as charisma-free whenever I see him in a movie.

Speaking of which, avoid 21 at all costs. It doesn't look like much, and it's actually even less.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

Oh, was that him in it, too? Well, no that didn't look remotely interesting (which is a shame since the real story is terribly interesting).

"Dramatically inert" is about perfect. The director's Broadway background is showing--she can stage really impact-filled scenes, but they have almost no need to go any deeper than the icons she uses. She hits all the buzzwords/images of the 1960-70s, and makes them visually popping and that's it. When the cast aren't singing mournfully at one another, they're just set pieces.

[viridian.livejournal.com]

I thought 21 was decent! Kevin Spacey is always awesome, and Jim Sturgess is okay. I thought the story was interesting, even though they simplified it a lot for the movie.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

Aww, well, now see I don't know what to think!

[viridian.livejournal.com]

I saw it in the theater and didn't feel like it was a waste of my time. Ben seemed to like it okay, too. I'm picky about what I'll watch but not overly critical once I'm watching, so I dunno.

But my opinion of Across the Universe was roughly the same as yours - pretty music, nice visuals, NO STORY WHATSOEVER.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

Yeah, there were "things" not story. Things like the protestors, the artists, the druggies, and the vets. Big honking deal.