#1551
Posted: 12/9/21 at 8:42am
Great to see that Natalie Wood’s daughter Natasha was present to represent her at the L.A. premiere.
Steven Spielberg's WEST SIDE STORY - News & Discussion Thread — Page 63
#1552
Posted: 12/9/21 at 10:16am
I saw this last night and it was incredible. Spielberg has put his entire being into this. Everyone in it is excellent, with Zegler, Alvarez, Faist, DeBose, and Menas the highlights of what are already highlights. My friend won a contest and I got to be her guest. (Unfortunately we were a little too close for my liking [not at the nausea line, but close], so I'll be happy to see it from further back. I didn't get to appreciate the dancing as much as I'd hoped I would.)
"This thread reads like a series of White House memos." — Mister Matt
#1553
Posted: 12/9/21 at 10:21am
What I love about this version is that you feel the pulse of New York City life which you don’t get from the original 1961 film.
Updated On: 12/9/21 at 10:21 AM
#1554
Posted: 12/9/21 at 11:57am
LizzieCurry said: "I saw this last night and it was incredible. Spielberg has put his entire being into this. Everyone in it is excellent, with Zegler, Alvarez, Faist, DeBose, and Menas the highlights of what are already highlights. My friend won a contest and I got to be her guest. (Unfortunately we were a little too close for my liking [not at the nausea line, but close], so I'll be happy to see it from further back. I didn't get to appreciate the dancing as much as I'd hoped I would.)"
How was the CGI work on the film Lizzie? I noticed a few shots (especially America dance number) where the tall buildings in the background look very fake CGI and unfortunately kinda put me off for such a big production. And that was on Youtube with mediocre resolution. How is it in the cinema?
#1555
Posted: 12/9/21 at 12:24pm
Nothing looked off to me as far as CGI, but it was also on an IMAX screen and my friend and I got in later than we wanted to. We were sitting much closer than we would've liked, so there may have been distortions I just didn't pick up on. (Or just chalked up to not being able to forget the curve of the screen.)
"This thread reads like a series of White House memos." — Mister Matt
#1556
Posted: 12/9/21 at 12:43pm
It's a perfect film, enjoy the movie this weekend, all! 
#1557
Posted: 12/9/21 at 1:11pm
LizzieCurry said: "Nothing looked off to me as far as CGI, but it was also on an IMAX screen and my friend and I got in later than we wanted to. We were sitting much closer than we would've liked, so there may have been distortions I just didn't pick up on. (Or just chalked up to not being able to forget the curve of the screen.)"
I have booked for IMAX on Monday (BFI - Waterloo, London) as well. Apparently although the film was shot on 35mm with AR 2:39.1 and NOT IMAX format (70mm) the projection on an IMAX screen is still much larger compared to a standard cinema screen. Did you feel that way?
Can't wait!!!
Updated On: 12/9/21 at 01:11 PM
#1558
Posted: 12/9/21 at 1:29pm
I think it’s safe to assume that Lizzie’s IMAX experience was an unfortunate one due to her sitting too close for comfort. I think it’s wise to ask others whose IMAX experience will be a better one to provide comment.
#1559
Posted: 12/9/21 at 1:43pm
Yeah, I'm also not versed in IMAX/non-IMAX technology anyway. I generally see like three movies a year in the theater, and that was even before covid.
"This thread reads like a series of White House memos." — Mister Matt
#1560
Posted: 12/9/21 at 1:47pm
I saw it again last night, this time in much smaller (capacity wise) theater in Dolby Cinema. On Monday I saw it in the IMAX format. It's definitely a film once has to see more than once to catch everything because there is so much going on, not only the musical sequences but bits of dialogue that often reflected back on later in the film. There is so much to take in with "The Dance at the Gym" sequence and so much to love about it.
It's the same story but in this retelling the stakes are higher for every character. They each have a dream at the beginning of this film and by the end each of their dreams are torn down along with their neighborhood.
It definitely cut deeper for me.
#1561
Posted: 12/9/21 at 2:15pm
I saw the movie last week and really cannot wait to see it again To-niiight. As many times as I can with a sizable audience (masked and post-booster!). I don't expect this to open very well, and expect some doom-saying when it probably comes in somewhere in the teens, but hope it's leggy through the holidays and awards chatter--would love to see Spielberg do another. So, so nice to have a well-shot musical again, with no awkwardness about what it is.
Updated On: 12/9/21 at 02:15 PM
#1562
Posted: 12/9/21 at 3:15pm
"masked and post-booster" for you, or the rest of the audience? I don't know about you, but I finally went to the theatre to see BELFAST last week. And among the 20 or so people, most were unmasked whether they were eating or not. Very unnerving even though i was double masked. And the film was only 1h 38m. I cant imagine sitting for almost three hours in a NYC theatre for WSS at the moment. Folks are sloppy, as is the staff that checks them in. I may have to wait til the crowd peters down for this one. Ugh.
#1563
Posted: 12/9/21 at 3:17pm
For me. But it's worth noting that every theater I've been to in the city, including major chains, has been stringent about checking vax cards. I feel safe in that environment being vaccinated, but I am relatively young and in good health and definitely understand where other people still have concerns.
#1564
Posted: 12/9/21 at 3:25pm
Glad to hear they’re checking vax. This is the first time I’m going to a cinema in months as my last attempt was very uncomfortable. Going tonight at Lincoln Center.
"I know now that theatre saved my life." - Susan Stroman
#1565
Posted: 12/9/21 at 3:27pm
Scarywarhol said: "For me. But it's worth noting that every theater I've been to in the city, including major chains, has been stringent about checking vax cards. I feel safe in that environment being vaccinated, but I am relatively young and in good health and definitely understand where other people still have concerns."
Same here. I've been boosted since the beginning of November. And although they didn't check until we were on the floor where the screens were, the staff at the AMC 13 Lincoln Square checked all our vax cards and IDs carefully. From what I could tell, people were pretty good about keeping masks on whether they were eating or not.
Previously in the covid era, I'd only seen movies at not-full-capacity Alamo Drafthouse (Brooklyn and downtown Manhattan) and the Museum of the Moving Image. Alamo always checked vax cards; MOMI didn't, but seats were super spaced-out and that was in June, before NYC got stricter about checking for that kind of thing.
"This thread reads like a series of White House memos." — Mister Matt
#1566
Posted: 12/9/21 at 3:50pm
They have been very good with checking ids and vaccine cards! Went to a early screening of the movie tho last night and it was a mess. They gave out too many tickets and there was multiple people sitting on the steps watching the movie. That was the first time I did that!
#1567
Posted: 12/9/21 at 3:51pm
Scarywarhol said: "For me. But it's worth noting that every theater I've been to in the city, including major chains, has been stringent about checking vax cards. I feel safe in that environment being vaccinated, but I am relatively young and in good health and definitely understand where other people still have concerns."
Thanks for replying. We can only control so much. I'm boosted and healthy as well, but it's disconcerting nonetheless. I watched The Power of the Dog on HBO max, and certainly would've preferred it on the big screen as with WSS. I'll probably keep an eye on the seats for next week at AMC Lincoln Square--and pop in after previews. 
#1568
Posted: 12/9/21 at 4:32pm
I’ve gone to see a handful of movies at Nitehawk - not only were they checking vaccinations and IDs, but they had ushers frequently (but not distractingly so) making trips down the sides of the theatres and making sure people were masking up if they weren’t actively eating, which I love.
I am big. It’s the REVIVALS that got small.
#1569
Posted: 12/9/21 at 4:48pm
I'm going to see it again tonight with a bunch of co-workers. tonight at the AMC Lincoln Square. It's going to be funny seeing it there. That theater stands on the corner of 68th and Broadway. The big "America" dance number climaxes at that very corner.
Updated On: 12/9/21 at 04:48 PM
#1570
Posted: 12/9/21 at 8:36pm
Well, that was spectacular. Spielberg's best film since 1993, and my personal favorite since The Color Purple in 1985. It's magical, and there isn't a single thing about it I would change.
#1571
Posted: 12/9/21 at 8:40pm
TaffyDavenport said: "Well, that was spectacular. Spielberg's best film since 1993, and my personal favorite since The Color Purple in 1985. It's magical, and there isn't a single thing about it I would change."
The fact that Jurassic Park AND Schindler’s List came out in 1993. What a talent.
#1572
Posted: 12/9/21 at 9:13pm
TaffyDavenport said: "Well, that was spectacular. Spielberg's best film since 1993, and my personal favorite since The Color Purple in 1985. It's magical, and there isn't a single thing about it I would change."
Wow, that is a very bold statement, if you take into account that his filmography since 1993 includes: SPR, A.I., Minority Report, Munich and Lincoln. Personally I consider SPR, A.I. and Munich masterpieces, the rest can be argued from very good to good.
That aside, was it really that good eh? Without giving much spoilers, did you find some of the criticism that circulates valid? For e.g. Ansel Elgort is emotionally flat and doesn't have chemistry with Rachel. The film although technically perfect fails to trigger the emotions in the third act and feels flat.
Did you feel and saw any of that?
Thank you for your feedback in advance. Monday can't come soon enough for me!!
#1573
Posted: 12/9/21 at 9:27pm
Musicnut82 said: "TaffyDavenport said: "Well, that was spectacular. Spielberg's best film since 1993, and my personal favorite since The Color Purple in 1985. It's magical, and there isn't a single thing about it I would change."
Wow, that is a very bold statement, if you take into account that his filmography since 1993 includes: SPR, A.I., Minority Report, Munich and Lincoln. Personally I consider SPR, A.I. and Munich masterpieces, the rest can be argued from very good to good.
That aside, was it really that good eh? Without giving much spoilers, did you find some of the criticism that circulates valid? For e.g. Ansel Elgort is emotionally flat and doesn't have chemistry with Rachel. The film although technically perfect fails to trigger the emotions in the third act and feels flat.
Did you feel and saw any of that?
Thank you for your feedback in advance. Monday can't come soon enough for me!!
"
I thought my post was pretty clear. If there was nothing about it I would change, then, yes, I think it's really that good, and, no, I don't agree with the criticisms that are circulating. You're welcome to feel differently, but I thought it was better than anything he made after 1993, which includes the films you mentioned. They're great movies, but there's just something incredibly special about this one. Just my opinion.
Updated On: 12/9/21 at 09:27 PM
#1574
Posted: 12/9/21 at 9:44pm
TaffyDavenport said: "Musicnut82 said: "TaffyDavenport said: "Well, that was spectacular. Spielberg's best film since 1993, and my personal favorite since The Color Purple in 1985. It's magical, and there isn't a single thing about it I would change."
Wow, that is a very bold statement, if you take into account that his filmography since 1993 includes: SPR, A.I., Minority Report, Munich and Lincoln. Personally I consider SPR, A.I. and Munich masterpieces, the rest can be argued from very good to good.
That aside, was it really that good eh? Without giving much spoilers, did you find some of the criticism that circulates valid? For e.g. Ansel Elgort is emotionally flat and doesn't have chemistry with Rachel. The film although technically perfect fails to trigger the emotions in the third act and feels flat.
Did you feel and saw any of that?
Thank you for your feedback in advance. Monday can't come soon enough for me!!
"
I thought my post was pretty clear. If there was nothing about it I would change, then, yes, I think it's really that good, and, no, I don't agree with the criticisms that are circulating. You're welcome to feel differently, but I thought it was better than anything he made after 1993, which includes the films you mentioned. They're great movies, but there's just something incredibly special about this one. Just my opinion.
Respect, different strokes for different folks I guess. Thanks for the feedback, I am now more excited than ever.
"
#1575
Posted: 12/10/21 at 12:04am
Musicnut82 said: "TaffyDavenport said: "Well, that was spectacular. Spielberg's best film since 1993, and my personal favorite since The Color Purple in 1985. It's magical, and there isn't a single thing about it I would change."
Wow, that is a very bold statement, if you take into account that his filmography since 1993 includes: SPR, A.I., Minority Report, Munich and Lincoln. Personally I consider SPR, A.I. and Munich masterpieces, the rest can be argued from very good to good.
That aside, was it really that good eh? Without giving much spoilers, did you find some of the criticism that circulates valid? For e.g. Ansel Elgort is emotionally flat and doesn't have chemistry with Rachel. The film although technically perfect fails to trigger the emotions in the third act and feels flat.
Did you feel and saw any of that?
Thank you for your feedback in advance. Monday can't come soon enough for me!!
"
After seeing this tonight, my new top three for Spielberg films:
1. Saving Private Ryan
2. West Side Story
3. Schindler’s List
Upon additional viewings, I can easily see this one moving to the number one spot. Munich fell out of this list.
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95