santosmatildedzulsblog

Out of Sight (1998)

Posted on the March 9th, 2010 under Uncategorized by santosmatildedzulsblog

Tagline:


Opposites attract.


Box Office:


Budget $48 million.

Opening weekend $12.02 million on 2107 screens.

Domestic gross $37.339 million.


MPAA:


Rated R for language and some strong violence.

Academy Awards:


Nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay; Best Film Editing.

Spanish Dolby Atmosphere

French Dolby Surround

English, Spanish

Runtime:

123 min.


Price:

$34.98


Release Date:

1/5/1999

Bonus:


• Audio Commentary by director Steven Soderbergh and writer Scott Frank

• "Inside

Out of Sight

" Documentary

• Deleted scenes

• Production photographs

• Music highlights section

• Theatrical trailer

• Production notes

Out of Sight (1998)

Poor George Clooney. He so desperately tried to become a movie star, but his first steps in this direction were either box office duds or relative disappointments. Flicks like

One Fine Day

simply tanked. In the latter category,



Batman and Robin



earned more than $100 million, but that was a bare minimum for that franchise; anything you slapped the Batman name onto should make at least that amount.

Batman and Robin

was deemed a failure because it

only

made $107 million, and Clooney seemed doomed to be the man who killed Batman - or at least who endangered the series.

Clooney finally made a terrific movie in 1998, one that appeared destined to grant George some leading man cachet at last:

Out of Sight

. This one had everything going for it: strong acting, sharp directing, and a terrific script. Universal released

Out of Sight

at an unusual time: the middle of June, a point at which teen-oriented action films dominate the schedule. Clearly they attempted counter-programming of the sort that boosted films like



Forrest Gump



and



Saving Private Ryan



over the top. Release an ?adult? film when everything else is for kids, and the grownups flock to it because they have nowhere else to go.

I guess the adults must have found somewhere else to go, because very few of them headed to see

Out of Sight

. After a fairly brief run in theaters, the film wound up with a total US gross of about $37 million. When you consider that many summer flicks top $37 million in their opening weekends, the numbers become even more disappointing.

Admittedly, no one thought

Out of Sight

would do



Armageddon



-type business, so it's not like $37 million is a complete failure. However, considering the strength of the film, it should have done better. In addition to being witty, clever, and extremely well realized,

Out of Sight

has two things going for it that are almost impossible to find in movies: subtlety and real sex appeal.

Whether a director is a critic's darling like Barry Levinson or a so-called pandermeister like Michael Bay, most directors have one thing in common: they tend to really hammer home their ideas and points. You're not leaving that theater until they've repeatedly pummeled you with their themes.

That was not the case with the work Steven Soderbergh did in

Out of Sight

. He painted with a much defter stroke than the usual splatters on the canvas. For example, throughout the film we witness how difficult it can be for a woman to make it in a man's world, as demonstrated by the experiences of Karen Sisco (Jennifer Lopez). While many films would shout this idea at you and make it the focus of the film, it's not that way here; it actually takes repeated viewings for the concept to really seep through and make an impact.

One positive aspect of the film that is also subtle but

won?t

require additional viewings to be noticed is the strong chemistry between the leads. Clooney and Lopez really work well together; it didn't take plot devices for the audience to find their relationship believable. Again, all of that was handled subtly; even their one sex scene is presented fairly modestly and seems almost old-fashioned.

So why didn't this movie make it at the box office? I think one strong reason appears on this ?Collector's Edition? DVD of

Out of Sight

: pathetic marketing. Universal seemed uncertain of how to sell the film - thriller? comedy? action? romance? - so the terrible US trailer succeeded only in making the movie look like a half-assed action flick with comedic overtones, like something Stallone might do.

Audiences didn't know what to make of it, and I guess positive word of mouth and good reviews couldn't overcome that. Thank God for home video, the format that offers renewed life for films that got lost in the box office shuffle. Hopefully,

Out of Sight

will find its audience at home. Universal's strong Collector's Edition DVD certainly seems poised to charm its way into the hearts of the home theater crowd.

The DVD Grades: Represent B-/ Audio B+/ Bonus B+

Out of Sight

appears in an aspect ratio of approximately

1.85:1

on this single-sided, double-layered DVD; the image has been enhanced for

16X9

televisions. Although the picture looked excellent at times, it featured enough problems to result in a moderately problematic presence at times.

For the most part, sharpness seemed good. Most of the movie appeared acceptably crisp and distinct. However, some scenes looked somewhat soft. I don?t include those that were intentionally out of focus; instead, a few shots were fuzzy for no apparent reason. Jagged edges caused no concerns, but I saw a few instances of shimmering as well as mild edge enhancement at times. In regard to print flaws, the image showed a little grain at times as well as some other concerns. I noticed periodic grit and speckles as well as a few hairs and nicks. While not rife with defects, the movie seemed dirtier than I expected.

Steven Soderbergh often favors overblown colors, and that came across during

Out of Sight

. Most of the time the hues kept from becoming too saturated, but on occasion, they seemed a bit too heavy. The DVD did handle colored lighting well, however; for example, the red tones seen during the trunk scene appeared tight. Black levels were nicely deep and rich, while shadow detail appeared appropriately heavy but not excessively opaque. Frankly, much of

Out of Sight

presented a stellar image, but the mix of small issues meant that I felt comfortable with a grade no higher than a ?B-?.

Though not a killer piece of work, the

Dolby Digital 5.1

soundtrack of

Out of Sight

offered a consistently solid auditory environment. Most of the time it featured a fairly strong forward bias. The front channels showed good stereo presence for the music and also added a nice sense of atmosphere. Elements blended together cleanly and also panned convincingly. Most of the time the audio remained ambient, but it created a good sense of place.

Surround usage seemed modest but effective as well. More active scenes - mainly those that involved gunfire - came to life well, as the blasts flew all around the spectrum. In addition, quieter sequences such as the one in the trunk also demonstrated a fine sense of atmosphere. The soundfield won?t dazzle you, but it worked well as a whole.

Audio quality was positive. Speech sounded natural and distinct, with no problems related to intelligibility or edginess. Music showed clean highs and reasonably good bass, though I felt the latter could have been a bit deeper. Effects were also clear and bright, and they lacked noticeable distortion or other flaws. Again, the audio for

Out of Sight

didn?t stand out, but it accomplished its goals.

While not one of Universal?s best ?Collector?s Edition? DVDs,

Out of Sight

does include some good extras. Best of the bunch is the terrific

audio commentary

from director Soderbergh and screenwriter Scott Frank. The two were recorded together for this running, screen-specific track. It's quite easy-going and relaxed, with an atmosphere of two buddies getting together to watch and discuss their film. It also provides an informative and relatively detailed over-view of the creative processes behind the flick. We learn about changes between script and book, various technical processes, and quite a number of other elements. Overall, this is a very entertaining and useful commentary.

Next we discover

Inside

Out of Sight


, an original 25-minute documentary about the film. It combines the standard mix of movie clips, shots from the set, and interviews with principals. We hear from Soderbergh, Frank, novelist Elmore Leonard, and actors George Clooney, Jennifer Lopez, Ving Rhames, Don Cheadle, Albert Brooks, and Steve Zahn. Though ?Inside? lacks the depth of the better Universal CE documentaries, it still packs some good info into its relatively brief running time. In addition to some goofing from the cast, we learn about a variety of issues, with a particular focus on the trunk scene, color schemes, and character development. Some of the material repeats from the audio commentary, but it remains a good little program.

On a positive note, ?Inside? boasts English subtitles. Unfortunately, none of the other extras include such text.

Of the remaining supplements, the

deleted scenes

are the most compelling. The eleven segments run as a continuous piece that lasts 22 minutes and 10 seconds; the scenes themselves go from 52 seconds to six minutes, 11 seconds. In an odd move, no chapter stops appear here, which makes it hard to access favorite scenes.

Referring to these as "deleted scenes" seems somewhat misleading, as most of them offer extensions of scenes that appear in the final film. In addition, we have an alternate take of the trunk scene that receives mention in the audio commentary. All in all, the extended scenes are interesting to watch and they include some good character information as well as some entertaining bits.

In what seemed to be a brief trend for Universal - they also did it for



Fast Times at Ridgemont High



and



American Pie



, among others - we get an option called

Music Highlights

. This lets you skip straight to any of 14 songs featured in the film. It does little for me, but it?s still a thoughtful addition.

Next we discover a few text pieces. The

Production Notes

provides some solid information about the project, while

Cast and Filmmakers

adds comments about the participants. We find fairly perfunctory entries for actors George Clooney, Jennifer Lopez, Ving Rhames, Don Cheadle, Dennis Farina, and Albert Brooks as well as director Stephen Soderbergh. An unusual extra,

Technical Information

tells us about the picture and sound transfers.

Swelltone

discusses that program and also offers their video logo.

Also included is the hapless

trailer

that I mentioned earlier. The fact that the DVD contains only this one trailer is a disappointment. During the audio commentary, Soderbergh mentions that he didn't care for it the US promo but that the foreign trailer worked much better; he even says that he hopes the ad in question will pop up on the DVD. Well, it doesn't, and while it may sound petty, I regard that as a negative omission. An additional trailer appears within the ?Cast and Filmmakers? domain. Inside Soderbergh?s filmography, you?ll discover a promo for

The Underneath

.

While not Steven Soderbergh?s most celebrated movie,

Out of Sight

may well be his best. The movie offers strong characters whose interaction makes the flick a consistent delight, and it paints them in such a way to make them more complex and intriguing than usual. The DVD provides decent but moderately flawed picture along with good sound and a nice selection of extras.

Out of Sight

is a great choice for a purchase, as the movie holds up well to repeated viewings.

Old Yeller review

Posted on the March 7th, 2010 under Uncategorized by santosmatildedzulsblog

A committed Walt Disney story of a in need 1860’s Texas family and the wonderful dog who befriends them. At first, green Travis wants nothing to do with the go off on. But Long-standing Yeller quick proves himself a loyal friend and the two become inseparable pals, sharing joyous experiences and learning valuable lessons.

Chinese Box (1997)

Posted on the March 6th, 2010 under Uncategorized by santosmatildedzulsblog

---

Lions Gate was in olden days a limited company that distributed a countless of straight-to-video titles. On the other hand, I assume that it acquired several smaller companies and consolidated numerous resources in an strain to behoove a key especially bettor in the film cataloguing business. Under that it´s getting big in a larger way, Lions Opening has seen fit to re-package some of its products as members of the Signature Series DVD line in order to impart primacy on the chosen films. Themselves, I think that it´s a profound move because it gives consumers a bet to notice films that they may have missed in the past. Also, the design art for the Signature Series DVDs makes them look like the dearest editions that they are. Wayne Wang´s intelligent, provocative "Chinese Box" was advantageous sufficiently to be selected for inclusion in Lions Gate´s boutique collection.

During the spring of 1997, I had sundry discussions with partner momentous school students of Chinese descent about the July handover of Hong Kong from Britain to China. Most of them were Cantonese with parents who grew up in Honk Kong, so they were raised in families common to ideas such as "democracy" and "liberty". No question that the British introduced representative government to Hong Kong during the latter stages of their rule mostly to grant trouble to the Chinese authorities who would be inheriting the mantles of government–they all seemed to hope for some miracle that would keep Hong Kong in British hands. My friends from China were oddly indifferent about the problem, and my friends who considered themselves to be Taiwanese and not Chinese in any perception worried themselves about China becoming impertinent and invading Taiwan. (I´m from Taiwan, but I consider myself to be Chinese and not Taiwanese.)

I understood their feelings about the business, but I seemed to be the only one who felt pride in canny that centuries of British subjection in China would be terminated soon. It´s wish what Gandhi said in "Gandhi" when the British wondered if he really wanted to continue in a country leg it by people with no wisdom in operating a administration–it´s better to be ruled seriously by your own people than to be ruled in any way by outsiders. I drink nothing adverse against the British, but I am unequivocally against any sort of foreign meddling in Chinese affairs. When I watched the handover ceremonies that took place between 30 June and 1 July of 1997, I felt a crucial suspect of gladness. Finally, the bastards who brought opium to China had to leave.

The events in "Chinese Box" draw post during the Hong Kong handover. John (Jeremy Irons, looking dependably tired) is a British newswoman who uses a video camera to document the life of Jean (Maggie Cheung, heartbreakingly okay as always), a avenue urchin who sells the total from fake Rolexes to cans of "pre-handover air". Jean has a scarred cheek that was a result of disheartenment past boyfriend in her past. John likes to lynch out in a bar manufacture by Vivian (Gong Li, not as memorable here as in her movies with director Zhang Yimou), hoping that she´ll weld him and follow him to Britain. There´s also Chang (played by Hong Kong actor Michael Hui, who mostly appears in obnoxious, hilarious comedies), Vivian´s boyfriend, who dangles the prospect of confederation in front of Vivian without really substance it because of her shady past.

Life is passing John in numberless ways. He´s suffering from a terminal indisposition, and his status as a British national means that he´ll no longer be a privileged person in Hong Kong. He knows that his involvement with Vivian won´t awaken him far, but he sticks around to be foreordained anyway.

The characters are mostly types that paint resident consciousnesses sort of than realistic people. For specimen, John is the declining power of Britain on the international status, and Vivian is the waves of Chinese who have always poured into Hong Kong from the mainland. Jean is Chinese but speaks perfect English because of her lettered upbringing, thereby making her what Hong Kong is–a fusion of Chinese and English sensibilities. I´d also parallel to to suggest that Jean´s scarred tete-e-tete represents the damage that the British cause done to the Chinese psyche. The film doesn´t be to go as widely as I do, but the subtext is there for all to socialize with.

Book of Blood full video dvd

"Chinese Box" relies on character sketches that observe a few simple people living out the last days of British rule. You won´t find a strict "Point A to Point Z" well-meaning of narrative arc, though you do get a wide feel for the kind of tumult that took place as Britain ceased to be a colonial power and the Chinese people began on the path of restoring Chinese dominion once more Chinese lands (Macau, at one go controlled by the Portuguese, reverted to Chinese rule in 1999). There´s a lot of rap session to be digested, and admittedly, my kinsmen and I didn´t understand what to make of the cinema after we first saw it. However, the more that I think about the unfriendly attention that Wayne Wang lavished on general people caught up in the tides of history, the more that I appreciate the complex moral quandary that faces the people of Hong Kong to this day in 2003. It´s estimable (and brave) that a film is enthusiastic to be as air-ended as its touchy subject.

I don´t agree with the understanding of curious nostalgia exhibited by "Chinese Box", but what can you do? The main character is British, after all, and I guess that the people of Hong Kong were horrified that the Communists would slacken up on their monetary power. Calm, I enjoyed the critical nature of and discussions provoked by the film, and there are matchless performances by Jeremy Irons and Maggie Cheung.