ANYBODY SEE LA LA LAND??

I'll come back with a longer response tater this morning.

But short form:
Easily my favorite movie of 2016. I listen to the soundtrack a couple times each week.

I hope you do > (YOU ARE DA MOVIE GUY) I want to understand and possibly see it (I will become such massive EMO dude in my wife's eyes by voluntarily taking her to see it)
BUT, (and a big butt) I MUST NOT FALL ASLEEP THEREIN.
Otherwise I will urge her to take a train, go visit her sisters and they ll go see it with a bunch of friends in SCranton.

Listen to the soundtrack



(at the very least skip forward to Herman's Habit - it's good stuff)

We Canadians are just so talented.

ps...haven't seen it yet

Be warned. It's not a zany musical comedy. It's funny at times but not ROTFL funny.

It's more of a romance between the Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling character. Any side characters are really incidental. The chemistry between the two leads is stellar. Thankfully, it's not a tacky Nicholas Sparks The Notebook/Lifetime Network made-for-tv level romance either.

Neither actor is a natural singer but their singing style is still accessible. It adds a certain romantic charm to the songs.

It's a stunning movie to look at. Choreography: energetic but not insanely over the top. The score is quite catchy and hummable and the songs are very lovely and memorable.

I have no idea what a Green Mansions is but La La Land ain't no Ishtar. For one thing, Ishtar only one two Razzies and gathered no major award nominations. Ishtar is supposed to be an ode to the old epic Hollywood buddy/road movies.

La La Land is a simple and personal romance between a struggling actor and a struggling jazz musician. Pretty simple and traditional musical in that regards.

See it already or risk losing your Canadian citizenship.

Oh I will. I'm just waiting until Celine Dion has a free evening. She's booked so solid that it's incredible. No one has even seen anything like it. Amazing. You wouldn't believe how booked she is.

Green Mansions is a film that destroyed W H Hudson's novel.
https://www.amazon.com/Green-Mansions-W-H-Hudson/dp/1585679488
The timeless classic beautifully restored to its original 1920s format.

Lavishly illustrated with 60 drawings by Keith Henderson, W.H. Hudson’s most famous novel, Green Mansions is the book that sparked the nature conservation movement. The inspiration for the movie starring Audrey Hepburn, Green Mansions stunningly recreates the untouched forests of South America with amazing detail.

After a failed revolution, Abel is forced to seek refuge in the virgin forests of southwestern Venezuela. There, in his “green mansion”, Abel meets the wood-nymph Rima, the last of a reclusive aboriginal race. The bird-girl’s ethereal presence captivates him completely, but the love that blossoms is soon darkened by cruelty and sorrow. Exploring a love somewhere between reality and imagination, Green Mansions is a poignant meditation on the loss of wilderness, the dream of a return to nature and the bitter reality of the encounter between savage and civilized man.

A master of natural history writing, W.H. Hudson forms a link between nineteenth-century Romanticism and the twentieth-century ecological movement. First published in 1904, Green Mansions owes much of its success to the mystic, near-religious feelings that pervade the story. Hudson’s halting, poetic expressions combined with his descriptions of untouched, natural beauty makes Green Mansions as powerful call back to nature today as it was one hundred years ago.

thank you. I too have always liked the book and especially the C Henderson art work.

The movie was such a suckass one tht I immediately broke up with my then girlfriend and went out to Pittsburgh to work in the film industry. Imagine my surprise when someone told me that fatty arbuckle died like 50 years erlier. SO, insted I came home and worked as an explosives expert, But thqt another tale.

I watched Green Mansions, the movie, sort of. I wandered in and out of consciousness til it was over.

Thank you, I see words in there like "Romance", interpreted as "RomCom" and "choreography" (As a wee kid, my mom would take me to Fred Astaire movies in Allentown P where the theater would give away Free china to everyone in attendance> I therefore counted as 3/5 of a person and would receive the obligatory "Gravy bowl and saucer" , mostly cause I was this cute kid. I remember one movie I got huge pqncake batter pitcher (Which e still have). It had stamped on the side along the top, in blue and yellow "Made in Bellefonte Pa. Penitentiary Ceramics Complex"
Betcha thqt baby is worth some bucks today.

Reminds me of a story of a guy who hqd "Shorty" tattooed along the side of his penis.

Haven't seen it yet in China! Actually, my friends and I can't wait to see it probably due to the different and charming trailer!

I thought it was an average movie. It was really pretty. But that's the only thing that made it standout. The soundtrack is unmemorable. Ryan Gosling is an okay singer. Emma Stone is, I'd say, a weak singer. A musical movie relies on its singing and dancing to carry it because they're such a large part of the viewing experience. Having this grand backdrop but actors whose voices didn't nearly match it didn't make sense to me. I suppose some would argue that's what made it appealing but I would never listen to the soundtrack on its own. I can't even remember most of the songs. The only ones I remember are City of Stars, through sheer repetition, and Fools who Dream, which is definitely the strongest of the songs with vocals except for maybe the opener which I cannot remember but am not compelled to listen to again. The dancing felt contrived at moments which isn't the goal and also laborious. I don't think it added to the songs which it ideally should have, and remember feeling mildly impressed that the main actors could kind of dance rather than feeling as if they were progressing the story and conveying the current emotion. The only parts of the movie I really enjoyed were the beginning and ending, which i thought was a really great way of capturing a feeling. The beginning was the only scene of the movie that i felt was vibrant and over the top in the way i think musical movies should be. Whats the point of bursting into song if it's not fun and larger than life. For the most part, I don't think this movie achieved that. Also, Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling have zero chemistry.

I will say that a major reason why I couldn't enjoy this movie very much and probably contributed to my opinion was the way it was shot; all those slow moving/rotating frozen shots. They made me nauseous and I wish they would've stopped.

I can't think of a faster turnoff than freeze frames and slow or fast images. More like a headache than nausea, though.

It's not shot with a shaky-cam or edited like a hyperADHD 90's music video, so don't worry about motion sickness when watching this movie.

This is not filling me with a lot of "Gotta see this one"

I'm not going to force anyone to see any given movie or TV series. If it doesn't look like your cup of tea? Don't go on the basis that it's basically a homework assignment to chore through. If you get around to seeing it at a later date? That's fine.

Music (and thusly musicals) are far more a question of taste than movies.

There are movies out there that aren't getting their rightful attention. Seek them out too.

you should be in sales. You let me down gently

If you want taters, this is the film for you.



Or this, bit risqué mind you.