Louis at the airport and a fan's report [8.15.22]
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from New Zealand
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from China

seen from Malaysia
seen from China
seen from China

seen from Russia
seen from Latvia

seen from Malaysia
seen from Italy
seen from Hong Kong SAR China

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from Russia
Louis at the airport and a fan's report [8.15.22]
rollie pollie is my friend (again).
I'm writing this right out the shower so no knee pic today :)
today I'm upset about the state of movies. not in the way that we've shifted our perspective on film to be tied to IP-- that's somewhat reasonable from a business perspective. If you're making an IP movie like Star Wars, you know you'll make your money back, because there's a built-in audience.
but I am upset that films are built to be more than two hours long. i think I've identifed some contributing factors here. TV has been getting huge budgets, which is awesome. this means that serialized stories have a place in the filmic space. but movies are getting longer, maybe somewhat in response to this.
Baz Luhrmann's 'Elvis' was originally four hours in a rough cut. Nope's rough cut ran three hours and forty five minutes.
Hollywood seems to be completely open to having a very wide berth of material that ends up on the cutting room floor, which is mind-blowing because this will inevitably inflate the budget. it also absolutely means the final product suffers.
While 'Nope' was incredible, 'Elvis' was constantly bloated with material, and also missed many years of Elvis' life by virtue of producing a reasonably paced final cut. Still, its incredibly challanging to create something cohesive when you're cutting material down so dramatically from its original incarnation.
while 'Nope' is incredible, its absolutely missing some connective tissue that was likely left out of the final cut. this means that the Gordy's Home subplot left many unanswered questions, for example: "What does this mean?" and "Why was this necessary?" I have my answers, but for a blockbuster that otherwise feels so accessable, having to make such an important aspect opaque means it limits the audience's initial engagement.
i hope to see this reversed in the future. a tighter script with more focus is better all around. It would mean less wasted cast moments like Barbie Ferreira being cut from the majority of 'Nope.' I can't imagine this level of ambition being very easy to produce initially, and when very little of it makes it to screen, it seems like such a dramatic waste of time and energy.
Every time I catch myself wishing I was more muscular I remember the days I was too self conscious to step foot in the gym (& in public) and I'm proud of myself again
8/15/22
8 + 1 - 5 = 2 + 2
Also:
8 - 1 - 5 = 2 = 2