So… Singham Returns looks pretty promising.
But then you all know I have a soft spot for Bebo being awesome.
You'll have to excuse me this morning, my cat woke me up at 3am for some reason, possibly the storm, possibly my roommate was up and rustling around because he's getting over jet lag.
While I was dozing, though, I was thinking about the review I wrote yesterday and how funny it is that I almost never write about visuals, even though film is substantively a visual medium. I'm sure I've written this before but I'm not a very visual person and never have been. What matters to me are characters, emotion, and music… and performance. I love a contextualized performance number. Story flow and pacing matter more to me than "logic" and I'll always appreciate a good pratfall or preposterous comedy accent.
And I have very little patience for filmmakers who think "art" means navel-gazing self-portraits or condescending poverty porn. And an equally small amount of patience for filmmakers who coat "entertainment" in layers and layers of irony.
I like films that entertain and engage the audience, films that are talking to us, rather than at us.
Visuals are important, sure, but unless they're really good or really bad, it's usually something I pick up on in a second or third viewing of a film… if I make it that far. One exception, however, is the way some modern films seem to be filmed for the TV screen rather than the movie screen. There is something very particular about all those lush Swiss landscapes that just doesn't translate to television… we almost ever see them anymore.
I do prefer to go to the theater when I can, for that reason and because any distractions are forcibly taken away, leaving just us and the film.