Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

The Lovely Elaine on Cameron Diaz's THINGS YOU KNOW JUST BY LOOKING AT HER

So when? by Calmante	Aug 29th, 2000 05:39:45 PM
When is this 'masterpiece' airing, anyway?
Cameron Diaz is hot and I am first! by Skywalker,Anakin	Aug 29th, 2000 05:40:51 PM

Oops - Looks like Cameron Diaz is hot, and I was second! by Skywalker,Anakin	Aug 29th, 2000 05:42:43 PM
By the way, this movie will be released in Mexico also. I've seen many posters and ads, and in a recent visit to Mexico, Cameron Diaz said that she will attend the premiere here.
Garcia is the son of Gabriel Garcia Marquez... by Stephen Dedalus	Aug 29th, 2000 07:38:24 PM
Gee, you have family lineage like THAT and you still don't get any respect in Hollywood. Damn. I just spent the summer reading ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SOLITUDE and LOVE IN THE TIME OF CHOLERA. If anyone ever deserved the Nobel Prize for Literature, its Marquez (he won back in the 70's). Why can't his son get the kind of respect that Coppola's daughter gets????????
Am I on the right board? by cds	Aug 29th, 2000 08:03:13 PM
Did I just read an intelligent film review with all the words spelled correctly, using proper grammar, even proper punctuation, that actually referred to the use of color temperature to complement the narrative?
Showtime or HBO by All Thumbs	Aug 29th, 2000 08:34:44 PM
Dammit, I'm getting my cable hooked up and if I order one movie channel I get free installation. I figure I'll order it for a month and that's cheaper than installation anyways. But my problem is I can't decide between HBO and Showtime. HBO has cool series and some good original movies; Showtime has some of the better original movies and theatrical releases. Anyways, I might just get Showtime if only to see this movie. Sounds interesting.
Travesty! by Lazarus Long	Aug 29th, 2000 08:43:55 PM
It's sad that none of these actresses will be eligible for the academy awards because of this wussy move by MGM. It's okay to unleash another Bond turd on us, but god forbid we get to hear from a male writer/director and his film about a bunch of different women. Of course, it would be detrimental to American society to see some three-dimensional women on the screen, right? Definitely NOT for everybody. Well I guess Flockhart will have to settle for an Emmy or Golden Globe if her performance is that good. Or because it wasn't made for cable, it won't be eligible for those either. Is there someone we can lynch or shoot for this? Hyporcites and bastards.
I must be high... by Tezuka	Aug 30th, 2000 04:12:29 AM
...because I could have sworn that I just read a lucid, informative review laden with intelligent and insightful comments. This can't be AICN, surely?
This film is good by spinza	Aug 30th, 2000 08:00:51 AM
I saw this film in Cannes at the festival, where it deservedly was very well received among both audience and journalists. It's a shame (and pretty damn strange) that it won't be shown in cinemas in the US. Engaging and nicely told stories and fine, fine acting by everyone in the ensemble - I was especially impressed by Flockhart and Baker. BTW: Diaz's sister in the film is not Roma Maffia but Amy Brenneman ["Heat" etc].
Magnolia St. by Bosola	Aug 30th, 2000 08:53:58 PM
I realise that this isn't exactly on the subject but I thought that Magnolia was called Magnolia because that's the name of the road running through the centre of L.A. that they all live on or around and that you can see on the opening titles when the map is overlaid on the opening flower (Hey shoot me down if I'm wrong)
TV or Film? by J.Utah	Aug 31st, 2000 04:44:05 AM
I saw this in Cannes too. I agree with much of the review, it's well crafted at every level - but it is 'serious' and I can understand a certain reluctance to play it theatrical. It has some great acting (Hunter), some characters you don't see much of on the big screen anymore (real women), is told in a non-operatic visual style, has sensitive treatment of theme etc. In short, basically, it's a high quality tv film. But it's wilfully discreet and subtle, dare I say it a little arty, but not offthewall arty enough to distinguish it like, say, Sex Lies&Video was and thus give it a profile that might help its change of limited theatrical (in fact, now I think, whilst not being quite so enigmatic, it reminded me of Altman's Three Women, and not just in terms of subject matter). It doesn't play to the audience, you have to Pay Attention and be patient because it's an Adult Film (remember those?). So I can't see it drawing crowds, and if you're running a studio I guess what you want/need is a crowdpuller. It's reality. But the issue of this films release raises some really interesting and pertinent questions of what 'plays' theatrical and what doesn't these days. I was at a seminar in Cannes once where a highly respected and long established director said the problem today was that movie audiences have been 'brainwashed' into only being able to absorb a film told in a certain kind of way. And the fate of this movie going straight to tv is prime example of this. I was also disturbed when on hearing the complaints about Mission Impossible (the first one) being incomprehensible, couldn't follow the plot etc. I thought it was pretty straightforward - it's just audiences don't know how to play attention unless the conflict is told in simply black and white terms, plot points spelt out like skywriting and thrown in their face with a sledgehammer. Which is why we might forever more be doomed to easily digestable pap as the only thing we can see in a moviehouse anymore, and why 'Things' goes straight to tv. The only consolation is that it will at least be seen - unlike some films that vanish into oblivion.

Talkbacks

The Lovely Elaine on Cameron Diaz's THINGS YOU KNOW JUST BY LOOKING AT HER

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks