Sunday, 5 June 2011

Stars in my eyes

Something a little different this evening... Summit's decision to release Source Code as VOD, a couple of weeks sooner than its US DVD and Blu-ray release on 26 July, is a test. Its aim is to determine whether audiences will part with (presumably) a smaller amount of cash early before (presumably) liking what they see enough to buy the disc a fortnight later. The hope is that a VOD release for bigger budgeted and popular films will whet the appetite for the disc. And all this within four months of the film's theatrical release.


While there is a risk that this practice will only encourage audiences not to bother with the cinema experience - after all, there is so little time to wait before you could order up the movie in your own living room while you eat your dinner to it - there is another risk, as discussed on CNN today: 'Are our small screens making big stars little?'


Which raises a whole new topic of what makes a movie star something different than any other star? What makes them extra shiny? It is true, I think, that movie stars are something above and beyond the stars of the small screen. We see TV stars regularly, some of them week after week in the same role, and it can be the roles that audiences come to follow rather than the actor. But one of the main things that makes a movie star stand out - and I think something of the same is true for stage actors - is the scale of the performance. Before you, on a big screen or on a grand stage, you see something that transports you out of your real life, with its distractions forgotten.


I remember watching Charlton Heston on stage in London in Man For All Seasons. I was completely starstruck. I can't imagine feeling anything like that for an actor that I know so well from the TV. Even if they make the transition from TV to fim, it's still not the same as coming face to face with a movie star that you see on the big screen in maybe only one movie a year, sometimes less often than that. When I saw Nicole Kidman in a restaurant in Beverly Hills a few years ago, you realise that movie stars should be different, they aren't like us. No one disturbed her, everyone was in awe and this was Beverly Hills where stars move among others and even... dareIsay... mingle. A movie is still an event.


I am a movie fan (I know, I hide it well) but I've watched Jake Gyllenhaal evolve as a movie star over the last few years, followed the movies as they are born, grown and delivered amongst the glory of red carpets, premieres and appearances and this is what cannot be beaten. I like to think that there will always be people who love the entire movie-going experience, that magic of those two hours, and as long as they do, there will be movie stars. The world would be a little greyer without them.


However much VOD there is, however short the gap between the movie release and the DVD, we will always have movie stars - and we know just where to find them.


Includes pictures from IHJ.

Here's my review of Senna at MovieBrit.

35 comments:

Carol said...

I totally agree with you Kate. There is something I've always found magical about the movies and movie stars. Ever since I was a little girl, transfixed by the Saturday matinee on tv, with Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers gliding across the dance floor.

We need our movies and movie stars now more than ever in these difficult times for every one.

Wet Dark and Wild said...

Hi Carol! I love the movies and I love movie stars. I'm lucky, I get to see them more often than most, and yet I never lose the thrill of seeing them. I never want the glamour of the movies to fade. So for me, these days, I see more movies at the cinema and fewer DVDs.

But the cost is a factor. I wish they cost less to see. And also films need to be shown in more countries at the same time. Having said that, though, VOD wouldn't benefit these places either. And so I would love studios and theatre chains to work to give everyone a movie experience above all else. I'm so glad we have DVDs etc but nothing replaces the movies. That's where I want to see the stars.

mermon said...

Wow! What a post, Kate. That's all true. Maybe that's right, this is one of the reasons, that creates movie stars, despite great performance, that we don't see them on daily basis. So despite the fact we want so much to see Jake in many movies, maybe it's worth to wait for our special star. So I will try to be more patient, in the meantime enjoying his previous movies :)
Your choice of today's Jake' pictures is excellent.

Wet Dark and Wild said...

Thanks so much, Mermon! I think you're right. We want to see regular Jake movies but part of what makes a movie star special is the anticipation. I love watching the run up to a film and then its release. It makes it an event. It's not easy to wait. But we do because Jake's worth it. I'm so glad you liked the pictures :)

Anonymous said...

I think the line between movie star and tv movie star has been blurring to the point of no line at all especially in the United States. There have been great actors who did movies on the big screen first only to do a great televsion movie when the role was too delicious to pass over.

I think both TV and the big screen are in trouble to point of extinction here in America due to the internet and our portable devices. Who needs to sit in front of a tv at a certain time or spend loads of money at a theatre when you can watch what you want where you want at your own discretion. Its the price that will be paid by "movie stars" on the big and small screen due to the soaring technology advances.

I like to think great actors are just that actors not movie stars. I would like to think that Jake would not pass up a great role just because its on the small screen, anyway all movies end up on a small screen (tv or laptop) anyway.

But all of that does have a upside, the theatre where it all started could benefit greatly.

Susan said...

Anon 23:04, I have to agree with a lot of what you said, but it makes me very sad to think that you may be right about the trend away from theater attendance and a preference for "instant gratification" of movies and other entertainment on a portable device. I may be atypical, but I still think the best way to see a great movie is in a theater on a big screen. The experience of getting out of the house and sharing a larger-than-life experience with other moviegoers is a special thing to me.

You are so right, Kate, about most things in general, but especially when you describe the movie star/movie viewing phenomenon. We need them both. And it wouldn't hurt for the experience to be less costly; that's the best way to increase theater attendance.

lillyrosesNjake said...

Yes, I too agree with most of what all of you have been saying. My best theater experiences were on the really big screens. Movies were an wonderful experience. When the multi-plexes came to the U.S. they were exciting at that time-novel experiences because of the uniquness of the possibility of seeing more than one movie in a week-but they took away the really bigger than life screens. But now a days, if you don't go and see a movie right away, it's soon gone and in a couple months you can have it on your on demand tv, movie channels, dvd's, hand helds and computers.

For younger kids, the movie experience is viewed differently than for some of us of a different generation. A family can now see a whole movie with the dvd experience at home or VOD or the cost of the monthly HBO experience for less than it would cost to go to the movies.(I hope that makes sense) :) A dvd costs less than one or two tickets.

But the experience will never be the same. I have spoken with others over the last few years..who is to be blamed for what is going on with the theaters-the studios, the theater owners or the movie lovers? I know I certainly see more movies with dvd, on demand and movie channels for purchase..and certainly enjoy them..but my first experiences with movies in a cold dark theater with the huge screens flanked with curtains will always be my favorites! Popcorn and a coke please! :)

sass said...

Hi WDW!! Of course I forgot to explain why I was so excited about the SC VOD 7/8/2011 early release date when I popped over last week. TY:) I'd read about this test situation but had no idea what movie would be tested first. The DVD industry is falling off a cliff and if Jake's SC VOD can bring some of it back I'll order it for the greater good :):)

The amazing thing about SC is the number of people in the theater with me Friday night. The theater is mid-sized and was 3/4/full. It's still playing 3 times a day when most if not all of the movies that opened 4/1/11 are long gone.
sass

mermon said...

For me - watching movies in the theatre is a kind of magic, worth to leave my home and spending some money. I reserve it for special movies. Movies I wait for, like Jake's movies for example. Or movies that should be watched on huge screen. Like Avatar. That's also a good way of spending time with friends - going out. Maybe for a family is too expensive, but the most money making movies are kids/family movies - so despite the cost for a family is also adventure they want to have out of the house.
That magic is create by the darkness, in the crowd of people wanting to see the same thing at the same time.
In old times a magic was bigger. There were not so many cinemas in one city, so the theatres really gathered huge audience. Now in Multiplexes' era, with many screens under on roof, in big cities the audience is mediocre. I guess in small cities with one or two cinemas it may be still the same old feeling.

lillyrosesNjake said...

"That magic is create by the darkness, in the crowd of people wanting to see the same thing at the same time." mermon-that sentence is spot on for me. I remember seeing pictures like Jaws and the Star Wars series, E.T. and sreaming, gasping, clapping and laughing with groups of unknown strangers and we were bonded during that couple of hours of watching these treasures on a big screen in a dark theather-talking and mumuring with others after a picture, on the walk out-how wonderful, funny, scary, inspiring-just how good the pic was. I truly miss some of those experiences. :(

JuliaEnnis said...

I couldn't agree more.

As you said, the movie is a an experience that starts before the movie has been released. For those who love movies, and I most certainly do, it all starts way back. And to see films on TV can be an OK experience if you have nothing better to do (I prefer reading a good book myself) or if you have already spent your weekly allowance for fun :-) but nothing compares to the big screen.

Needless to say, nothing compares to JAKE on the big screen. I've seen his movies an embarrassing number of times on DVD but only after I saw them a likewise embarrassing number of times at theaters :-)

Awesome pics, thanks!

Jules

MrsJakobGyllenhaal said...

Wonderful topic.

I still remember my very first visit to a theater when I was a kid: a special viewing of "Disney's 101 dalmations" I must have been six or seven.
I can still smell the popcorn, the coke (which we never got at home), the thrill when the lights went out, how my cousin and I held hands when Cruella appeared...

When I was in the US for a year I was too young to go to pubs, so I went to the movies a lot, like every other day, sometimes twice a day. But the magic never faided.
It touches all your senses. Especially the acustics in theaters is very important to me. The scrunching of steps on gravel or the sound a scared woman's high heels make on the street while she is trying to get away... NOTHING can replace that.
I don't get to go to the movies as often anymore, not only for money reasons, but also because I need a babysitter now.
But DVDs or VOD, no matter how big your TV and how good a sound system you have, can never ever replace theaters.
And people need to be more patient again. Not everyone of your desires needs to be fullfilled right away. The waiting part can and should be part of the experience.

JuliaEnnis said...

@MrsJacobGyllenhaal

That's so true about the waiting. New generations have grown with the "I want it and I want it NOW" philosophy, which is wrong on many levels.

I still love the waiting. It makes finally obtaining what you long for so much more awesome.

Wet Dark and Wild said...

Good morning everyone. Back at work - ugh. Thanks to everyone for their comments, this is such a fascinating conversation.

As a movie fan, nothing can beat the cinema experience. In a good cinema that lets the movie overwhelm you (as opposed to a bad cinema where it just kicks you out of the film), then there's nothing like it. I go as often as I can afford, and sometimes more than that, but it's always a treat and I always look forward to it.

Certain films just cry out for a big screen experience - thinking recently about Thor and X-Men for example - but I'm never going to forget some experiences - seeing SC and any of Jake's films for the first time on the big screen. I was overwhelmed by the scale of PoP! I loved that at the cinema. And then there are other films like Close Encounters from my childhood - I'll never forget that - and more recently seeing True Grit in my favourite cinema with every seat taken. An incredible atmosphere.

The cost is always going to make DVD (and VOD in some places) the only option for some films. We can't see everything even if we could afford it. But I do believe that the cinema and the appeal of the movie star is safe.

I think cinemas need to watch their pricing though...

Thanks to everyone for the comments and keep them coming! fascinating stuff! I'm thinking of other memorable movie experiences now... watching BBM for the first time, Star Wars, TDAT and The Dark Knight. Or walking 6 miles through a blizzard to see The King's Speech!

Have a lovely day :)

MrsJakobGyllenhaal said...

Kate, remember how I almost jumped out of my seat when Colter got run over by the train when we saw "Source Code" in Berlin?
And all the excitement leading to that viewing?

THAT's what movie stars are made for!

BTW - tomorrow is Jake's "career birthday" - "City Slickers" opened in the US on June 7th, 1991.
20 years and still going strong!

TD said...

Hi WDW,
I want to agree however I'm afraid I do think the power of the small screen is underestimated. I came to this opinion when Buffy was the ruling star. Joss Whedon's work was very revolutionary at the time, not least for using the same actors over and over even for small bit parts etc, thus creating even more intimacy between audience and players.
I also do not associate the same 'starriness' with stage actors, I think I just missed the whole stage impact, though I did once get that-hairs-on-the-back-of-the-neck feeling watching an open air rural play in darkest Devon! (Known covens in the area!)
However, nothing beats the true A-listers or Old Hollywood either, especially as you get a sense of the history of it - I'm thinking of Paul Merton's current series, and of the news of the Burton-Taylor film. That photo of Jake and Anne next to the light, behind the scenes at Vanity Fair shoot the other day, captures that classic Hollywood feel beautifully, I think.
Anyway, I'm all for starriness, and I don't mean reality TV that's fer sure! ;D
TD

TD said...

PS. I do adore the whole cinema experience however. Did not mean to overlook that, though. Not ever!
TD

sheba said...

What a fantabulous post. Thank you. Jake has renewed my love of the moviegoing experience. You're so right WDW from incepton/conception to birth its been a real treat to enjoy the process. The end result then has allowed me to meet up and share the experience with family and friends.

With regards to movie stars and the 'A' list that holds no mystique for me. The mystique is being turned on by a great performance that has pulled me out of myself and touched me. People like William H Macey, Keith Hamilton Cobb, Simon Baker and Alan Rickman are my A list if we must categorise them. I've not hidden my disappointment at the 'tripe' that's churned out snd the movie stars that participate in them only injure their own mystique. The internet has created their own movie stars and that's not a bad thing because if you're good you will be able to have 2nd 3rd 4th etc chances of really good movies and your work will speak for itself just like Donnie Darko.

Congratulations to Jake on a glorious 20 years making movies. I'm excited for all of us that some of his best work is in front of him.

paulh said...

This was one of your all-time best posts, WDW. I have a TV, but I don't even use it. The trips to the theater are what keep me going.

But please don't dump on "Hangover 2" quite so much. It's far better than some of the other movies I've seen this year. I got a kick out of the scene where the dentist tries to have a stag party in a pancake house. When the other diners object to the language being used, Bradford Cooper says, "It's all right. It's a stag party!"

"Kung Fu Panda 2" is excellent, but it doesn't make sense to try comparing it with "Hangover 2" or any other movie.

There are no new movies I want to see this week. I'm going to go crazy! What am I going to do? :-(

LadyEkster said...

Hear hear! Wonderfully written Kate, I couldn't agree more. :)

Before you, on a big screen or on a grand stage, you see something that transports you out of your real life, with its distractions forgotten.
That's exactly why I love going to the movies so much. There's no better place to get soaked into a whole different world and forget about reality for a couple of hours. That magical feeling of excitement when the lights go out, the chatter stops and the film begins... I always enjoy it.
Sometimes you can almost touch the vibe in the room when you're in an audience that is looking forward to a movie just a much as you. I remember the premiere of Pirates 4, with over a 1000 people in the room, all avid PotC fans like myself. It was nothing less than magical.
No matter how big or advanced your tv screen at home may be, it will never live up to that wonderful cinema expectation.

LadyEkster said...

I meant *experience, obviously. ;-)

Leslie said...

I agree with what everyone is saying but I wanted to add my own perspective, and it's not necessarily about an actor - but about the movie itself.

I remember going to see Poltergeist (yes, I'm that old!) in the theatre and it not only scared the s@$!t out of me, but it blew me away with the effects of the time. Years later I saw it on television and it was . . meh. I was so excited to be able to see it again and seeing it on the screen without the surround sound and all of that made it look so weak. Yes, I was no longer seeing it for the first time but even when it came to the parts where I knew I jumped out of my seat or hid my face, it almost made me laugh instead. *shrug* I think seeing things on a huge screen with all of that sound around you really gives you that movie "kick" you can't get at home. But I guess now with the larger HD TVs and surround sound systems we have - it's getting closer to the movie experience.

But after all of that and in the end . . . my popcorn just doesn't taste the same. ;)

Anonymous said...

I agree about the "specialness" of film stars as distinct from the weekly sitcom TV we are fed.

WD, there is an actual difference in how we experience a film by seeing a film in a movie house on a big screen, and then watching it on TV at home.

Personally, I will be watching SC on VOD and I will be buying it as well, and if they re-released it for the large screen, I'll go see it again.

Very excellent post, BTW. I do believe the way we watch films is changing, and the film industry needs to do better about keeping up with the changes.

Huge, 3D, event type movies aren't the only ones that benefit from the big screen.

Wet Dark and Wild said...

I've been out this evening - at the movies - and it's wonderful to come back to your comments - thanks to you all. And seeing Senna at the pictures shows the power of cinema. Here is a documentary and yet, partly because it was presented on the big screen in front of an audience in the dark, it took on something of a great tragedy. It would never have had that power on the TV.

I do remember that, Mrs JG! It was quite a moment - seeing Jake in such peril on the big screen - always makes me catch my breath :) That's amazing about City Slickers - thanks for letting me know about that.

Hey TD! I love that Paul Merton series - I've been recording it to savour. And it was one of the things that inspired this post. I feel so ignorant about the history of film - this documentary is doing something to fill in some gaps.

I'm not so sure about the small screen. That's possibly because I rarely watch it and so many of these classic series are unknown to me. The exceptions are West Wing and Firefly which I adored.

Many movies and stars aren't worth the time of day. Maybe it's a generation thing but some younger actors hold no appeal for me, but I've yet to see anything on the TV that gives me anything of the feeling of watching a movie in a darkened theatre. Not that there's anything 'bad' with TV, just that it's a different experience.

Hi Sheba! And those great performances are never forgotten. I was watching Tom Hanks on the news just now, at his premiere. I met Tom Hanks in DC when I was 15 years old and he inspired every pore of my body. He was so kind to me and let me watch the making of a movie, if only for a few hours.

Thanks so much Paul! My comments about hangover 2 and KFPanda 2 though weren't so much to do with the quality of the movies but because KFP2 was more relevant to Jake's kung fu training. So it was just a conceit :)

I totally agree, Lady Ekster! And seeing the crowds out to see Johnny Depp at the POTC 4 premiere just showed the power of movies and stars. And sharing a premiere experience is amazing! One of my best examples of that lately was at the gala screening of Rio. The whole theatre was jumping up and down!!

I saw Poltergeist at the cinema too, Leslie! And it scared me to pieces, it really did. But sometimes seeing these films is never quite the same on DVD. Although it's nowhere near as good, I saw Sanctum 3D at the movies and it was enthralling in that medium, I saw it on blu-ray at home this weekend, and I fastforwarded through much of it. All right it had lost the 3D but even so...

Thanks so much 21:06! I do agree that movie watching is changing and that cinemas have to realise that we will want to stream movies. They shouldn't fight it but realise that many of us will want the best of both worlds and watch both versions. Interesting days... As long as there are enough good films to see...

Many thanks to you all for the comments! Do keep them coming :)

Wet Dark and Wild said...

Mega comment - oops!

Wet Dark and Wild said...

After all this talk of movies and cinemas, here's my review of Senna at MovieBrit

Eileen said...

I saw the first LOTR on DVD, and the next two in the theater. No comparison. The story was entertaining on DVD, but it was awesome on the big screen, in the dark.

And there's no way the second Star Wars can be fully appreciated on a TV. It's about scale. The spectacle of that giant space ship slowly crossing the screen...

But I also think the film business lacks imagination in a way. They believe in order to get us all into theaters, they need to do giant, expensive, 3D, special effects extravaganzas, with little plot and disposable characters.

They spend hundreds of millions of dollars and consider a movie a failure if it doesn't earn billions.

But there's a place for less expensive, well made movies, with a plot, and great acting, and great writing. Years ago, the Weinstein brothers and James Schamus at Focus knew this and still believe it.

I am glad Duncan cares about good stories, plots, characters, and writing. Yes he had a budget that restricted him with Moon & SC.

But I believe even if he had a bigger budget he'd still prefer to get involved with his characters and their dilemma, and their choices, rather than put all the emphasis on FX and pyrotechnics at the expense of his story.


I love going to the theater to see movies. Leaving your familiar surroundings behind to enter another world is what movies are all about, whether it's The King's Speech or Star Wars II.

Eileen said...

I saw the first LOTR on DVD, and the next two in the theater. No comparison. The story was entertaining on DVD, but it was awesome on the big screen, in the dark.

And there's no way the second Star Wars can be fully appreciated on a TV. It's about scale. The spectacle of that giant space ship slowly crossing the screen...

But I also think the film business lacks imagination in a way. They believe in order to get us all into theaters, they need to do giant, expensive, 3D, special effects extravaganzas, with little plot and disposable characters.

They spend hundreds of millions of dollars and consider a movie a failure if it doesn't earn billions.

But there's a place for less expensive, well made movies, with a plot, and great acting, and great writing. Years ago, the Weinstein brothers and James Schamus at Focus knew this and still believe it.

I am glad Duncan cares about good stories, plots, characters, and writing. Yes he had a budget that restricted him with Moon & SC.

But I believe even if he had a bigger budget he'd still prefer to get involved with his characters and their dilemma, and their choices, rather than put all the emphasis on FX and pyrotechnics at the expense of his story.


I love going to the theater to see movies. Leaving your familiar surroundings behind to enter another world is what movies are all about, whether it's The King's Speech or Star Wars II.

BBMISwear said...

What a great read this is, WDW - it's all so very interesting. Thanks for writing about it and keeping the conversation going in the comments!

I agree there is no place to watch a movie better than a movie theater but, like you said, it can't always happen for everyone for a variety of reasons so thankfully there are other ways to watch.

Some movies I feel I *have* to see in the theater - some I don't feel it makes too much of a difference to me personally so I wait until I can watch it at home.

And then there are Jake's movies. This VOD test that Summit is doing (that just so happens to luckily be for SC!!!) is making me very happy because now I've been able to see it in the theater 6 times, will watch it on Blu-ray again and again starting on July 26th AND now can watch it on July 8th cutting down the wait by weeks! Now, would I do this for any other actor's movie? Ummmm...no. So would I care that the movie was in the theater and then VOD and then Blu-ray and then Netflix, Red Box, etc.? Ummmm...no. But this is a Jake movie and with Jake movies my motto is the MORE the better!!

The questionable thing here is not every consumer is going to feel this way of course! That is why I mentioned in an earlier comment that huge fans of the movie, lead actor or director are going to probably spend more with this early VOD thing (meaning they spent money at the theater and will again on the DVD or Blu-ray and will again for VOD) because they are huge fans of it in one way or another - but the average movie fan won't. Just like I won't with many other movies. So it will be interesting to see how this all goes. But for me - THIS IS FREAKING GREAT! LOL!

Well thanks again for all the updates, WDW, especially while I'm super busy and not keeping up with much other than major work stuff and major family stuff at the moment (all good stuff...just crazy busy)! And I'm so glad you got to spend time with Uli - yay - and great pictures!

Shout out to Paul - thanks for thinking of me during the tornadoes - bad thunder and lightning here but nothing worse thankfully. Deadly tornadoes in Mass are not common at all - scary stuff!

See you next time! P.S. Go Bruins! (this will mean nothing to most of you - LOL - but has HUGE meaning to Bostonians)!! :-)

mermon said...

I saw Source Code for the third time yesterday. I liked it even more. I didn't have to concentrate on who the bomber is, so I could focus on other things like Jake's performance, which was so convincing, real and good. On Jake's look. Particularly I like his look in that imaginary chamber, with so many close-ups, he was so handsome, sweet and cute, adorable and lost that I would love to comfort him. No wonder that Goodwin took a risk of loosing her job for him, not even really seeing him, reading his lines only. That's how impressive he was! :)
I appreciated very much dialogues, music. I started to like passengers, they became quite familiar to me. Hahaha. I felt almost sorry for a bomber when he dropped a tear, finding out that his plan failed.
And all this in a dark room of the cinema, almost alone (4 people). We had premiere May 6, it's still played in 5 cinema on 11 seances per day. I would rather prefer it to be in one theatre on 1 or 2 seances full of people.
I experienced it watching Avatar. We have only one IMAX cinema - so everyone of 7 times I was happy to watch it - was packed with fans of the movie and it was during few months. Unforgettable feeling to be among crowded audience, loving the same movie, knowing for sure that all of them see the movie not for the first time.
One more thing. Why I prefer theatre then DVD at home. I have to focus well, to do not miss anything, cause I can't rewind :), I can't stop to do anything else in between, so the movie has a kind of bigger value, I can watch a reaction of different people, laugh, sigh, or fear together. And then I may buy a DVD and enjoy it at home.
Sorry for such a long post.

Wet Dark and Wild said...

Morning everyone! And how great to see the conversation continuing. And I did indeed have a wonderful night at the movies last night :)

I totally agree, Eileen - whatever the scale of the movie, seeing it in a cinema adds a whole new level to it.

Morning BBMISwear :-) Absolutely! When it comes to Jake's films I'll take whatever version I can and as often as I can! I can't imagine doing that for anyone else and so I do agree. I can't see many people seeing a film at the cinema, watching it on VOD and then buying the DVD. Sorry to hear about those bad storms.... Good to see you!

Morning Mermon! This post is designed for long comments - thanks for taking the time :) I get so distracted when I see one of Jake's films for the first time that I definitely get more from the second and third viewings. I don't have an IMAX near me and so it's not something I've experienced in England. I saw Star Trek at the IMAX in Boston and that was a wonderful experience. Avatar was a truly immersive experience for me too. And even watching Senna yesterday - a documentary - I was completely lost in it.

I hope you all have a good day and thanks again for taking the time to write such wonderful and long comments :)

Karen said...

Hi WDW, just wanted to let you know that I enjoy watching soaps I am afraid(!) and on Eastenders last night someone mentioned Jake Gyllenhaal! One of the young female characters rated a male 9 and a half out of ten and another girl siad thats more than Jake Gyllenhaal - it made me laugh anyway and I thought it was interesting that the writers picked Jake - obviously because he is so handsome of course! x

Karen said...

Should have typed "said" not "siad"! Sorry!

Anonymous said...

Hi Kate,
Congrats to this post. I totally agree with you and the others: It's a great experience watching films on the big screen at the theatre. It's a special feeling when I am at this place with other people. It's fascinating for me. DVD's are ok but FIRST I want to watch films at the theatre.
I wish I could be there more often...
Next week I hope to "jump across the border" and watch SC in original version (not dubbed) in the Netherlands. I can't get enough of this movie (and of course of Jake) :-)
BTW: I like the pics you choose.
Have a nice evening everyone.
Christina

Wet Dark and Wild said...

Hi there Karen! Good to see you - hope things are good with you :) That is so great Jake got a mention - thanks for letting me know!

Thanks Christina! I love the idea of crossing border to watch SC undubbed. Good luck!

Thanks again to everyone for all their comments on this post. It's been so much fun. We must have more discussions on WDW...