Found it. Easy to miss the link catching up at this point. Reposting link in case anyone else missed it. [link]

That's twice as confusing if you don't post it, Typo.

Fixed.

I just finished watching Red Lights. It is a movie with Sigourney Weaver, De Niro, and the Scarecrow (Murphy) from Batman Begins.

It is one of the strangest movies I have seen in a long time. I don't mean it is a new version of the French New Wave, I mean that the movie takes an abrupt tonal, genre shift in the middle of the film and I do not understand what the film's writer/director was thinking.

It is rare that I finish watching a movie and think: "why the fuck did they construct the story this way?" The film has a lot of promise and I think actually could have been *good* - I mean the acting talent in the film is top notch and compelling. From the first few minutes Beau and I both agreed it was interesting and engaging and then...

WTF.

So, the movie is ostensibly about Weaver and Murphy as phd researchers and faculty who investigate telekinetic phenomena. They seem to be skeptic researchers who disprove phenomena and have rigid research protocols to determine whether a person has various powers or not. Weaver is pretty fantastic.

However, about midway through the film, the movie goes from a drama/mystery to a straight out thriller/horror movie and there was absolutely no reason for that. I actually groaned at the end because while where the movie ended up is fine (and I think you could pretty much see it coming; it was telegraphed IMO) but you didn't need a horror story to get us there.

It's like, if you had a story about Old Yeller, you could tell it the way the classic story was told OR you could turn Old Yeller into Turner & Hooch first, then Cujo and then kill the dog. This is an exaggeration of what I experienced in watching "Red Lights", but you get the idea.

I think if you have Netflix streaming and need a diversion, this is a good movie for that purpose. It is interesting, I'd actually watch it again, but it isn't "good." Despite Weaver being in the movie, I should have known it was going to be a trainwreck because DeNiro was in it. I mean his last good movie was Ronin.

I mean his last good movie was Ronin.

I actually enjoyed Stardust quite a bit, though I realize he wasn't the lead in that.

So, we saw Les Miz today. I am *really* impressed with Hugh Jackman. And I did not yell "Wolverine!"

Until the credits.

Also, oh Russell Crowe NO.

And I need to get my CDs out NOW.

I thought DeNiro ruined Stardust. That role would have been perfect for Stephen Fry.

I thought DeNiro ruined Stardust. That role would have been perfect for Stephen Fry.

I don't know. I'm not familiar with the book at all. I just remember enjoying the hell out of the movie.

I thought DeNiro ruined Stardust. That role would have been perfect for Stephen Fry.

I was deeply disappointed in the movie of Stardust, and felt the whole section with DeNiro's character was unnecessary. t /Stardust book purist

Also, I kind of wish I hadn't read Film Crit Hulk's review of Les Miz, because the whole time I kept thinking "SO MANY CLOSE-UPS! HULK WANT WIDE ANGLE. MARIUS, STOP LOOKING INTO THE CAMERA."