La La Land--the return of the musical

I was seated in a middle row, not too close to the screen...or so I thought. Soft focus usually doesn't bother me, but there were a few of Stone that were questionable. I also found some of the camera pans to be blurring images to the point of unpleasantness. I was captivated by the Stone-Gosling relationship, but found the imagery less satisfying.

 

Just got back from seeing it.
I thought it was a really brave, uneven movie. Some absolutely wonderful moments alongside some contemporary flatness. The stuff I loved, I was transported by. I kind of felt at arms length from their relationship though. They felt more like pals to me so I wasn't taken by the romance. Some really magic moments though with some beautiful direction.

 

This was exactly my impression of the ending, articulately said.

 

Saw it last night with another couple and we all enjoyed it.

I was really impressed with all the one camera shots, especially the opening. Wow. I read there were only three edits in the whole sequence. This is one of the few releases better enjoyed in a theater.

I'm not looking for meaning of life at the movies anymore. I just want to be entertained and we were entertained.

 

I'm much easier to please and gave myself to this film.

 

'La La Land' Breaks Golden Globes Record for Most Wins by a Film

'La La Land' Breaks Golden Globes Record for Most Wins by a Film »

 

After Whiplash and Chazelle's twisted vision on jazz education, I won't go to see to see La La Land.

 

With its strongest competitors being in the drama category, I'm not surprised about this. Still happy to see it, though.

 

Wow, I finally had time to see the film tonight and I really loved it from start to finish. The cinematography just made me weep. That's the most beautiful goddamned movie I've seen in a long, long time. It's emotional, moving, funny, poignant, sad, and very true... pretty much everything you'd ever want to see in a movie. DP Linus Sandgren and colorist Natasha Leonnett at eFilm did a superb job on the look.

By god, that's the first 2.55 anamorphic CinemaScope film I've ever seen without any lens distortion. Just stunning, amazing, masterful work from the top down, excellent on every level, easily the best musical I've seen in at least 20 years. STUNNING.

And I also liked the story and characters and all that other stuff. The editing is also very thoughtful: the super-wide 2.55 frame presents a lot of compositional problems, and I noticed that they didn't use any really tight close-ups until (slight giveaway) the relationship starts to break up a bit. There's a lot of really, really interesting, subtle stuff in the film that I thought was amazing.

 

I absolutely loved this movie. It was so great to see a movie musical on the big screen again and so beautifully filmed. And the chemistry between Ryan and Emma is magical -- I look forward to them working together again!

 

The wife whispered to me before the second number started 'The girls are all going to be in different primary colors.' I was like 'yea, so?' I knew it would be like that and I was glad it was that way. It was a rare movie where what you expected was good and that was exactly what they gave you.

 

Very well put.

 

Actually, the sneaky truth is that there were dozen of seamless match-frame edits and VFX that helped hide all the cuts in what appeared to be long 3-minute or 4-minute shots. I spotted a few, which they generally blended in with whip-pans or very sneaky composites. It was extremely well done, a good example of "invisible effects" throughout the film.

The opening sequence with the people dancing around the stopped cars is a jaw-dropping number. The word is that a bunch of studios rejected that right out because it'd cost a couple of million bucks just to get a couple of hundred cars, hire that many people to dance, and block an entire freeway ramp for two days of production. But they managed to do it. Most of what you see is real in this sequence, but there's some clever cheats here and there.

I was really, really impressed by the DP's bravery in doing live spotlights and dimmer changes on set as transitions, which is the sort of thing you really have to commit to. I also think the "alternate reality" number kind of pulled the rug out from some viewers ("what? You mean they're now back together?"), but I always got that this was merely the road not taken, and we'd be stuck with the original ending. Still brilliant and still highly original, and I think they took a lot of risks telling a very complicated story where the two attractive people ultimately don't stay together for good reasons.

 

That's one of the best parts of the movie.

 

Yeah, I really enjoyed the ending quite a bit, but I think there was a little "WTF" reaction from the audience.

 

I have no strong feeling one way or the other on the ending, but I do think it was designed with the primary intent of eliciting that 'WTF' reaction. It felt more like, 'Hey, let's do something weird and disorienting at the end' rather than 'Hey, we're telling a story, and the story we're telling has to end this way.'

I prefer what we got to a they-lived-happily-ever-after (with each other) ending. They waited until the end to reveal that the whole story had been about *a* relationship rather than a 'the' relationship if you'll pardon my articles, but it did feel like a committee decision to have an ending that would generate internet chat.

 

Boy, I wish people would still use spoiler tags. The film hasn't even opened in my country and I already know about the WTF twist at the ending.

Yes yes, I know, I shouldn't read the thread then. But what if I'm just interested in peoples' general opinions, before watching it?

Spoiler

See, it' really simple.

 

All the reviews that came out five months ago said "this movie is about two struggling entertainment people working in Hollywood who eventually find success, but only at the cost of their personal relationships." I think it's clear going in there's gonna be a load of compromisin', on the road to their horizon.

The writer/director has said that the whole point of the movie was that this is an upbeat film with a downbeat ending. The two main characters get almost everything they want in their careers, but not necessarily happiness. "You can't always get what you want."

I don't have a problem with that at all. Not every movie has to have a happy ending. Two major, huge, important award-winning movies with downbeat endings I can think of are Midnight Cowboy and Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid, both cases where one or more of the lead characters dies. Does it hurt the film? No. Does it tell the story? Sure. Were these films successful? Incredibly so. Knowing that doesn't hurt the movie for anybody going in.

 

I agree. But, if it helps, I purposely learned the ending of Arrival beforehand, just so I wouldn't feel so confused in the theatre, and I don't think it hurt the experience at all. And the same would be true here, I think -- this ain't The Sixth Sense.

 

Saw this last night. LOVED it. 2 hours of pure joy. A few minor quibbles but nothing to take away from a great achievement.

 

Just to add to my previous comments: With the info you have going in, I could see your experience being intensified when you know those final moments are coming -- especially if you're the weepy type, as I am.

 

Damned computers messing with my movie wonder.

 

And wishful thinking.

 

Yeah, those paradiddles were brutal.

 

I'm not going to lie, I thought it would have a happy ending, but I was okay with the way it ultimately ended. I really liked the brief fantasy sequence that showed how it COULD have played out which was definitely bittersweet...