Across The Universe
 

Official Site

I just went to see this film this evening here with a few friends. It hasn't officially opened here in Visalia, but thanks to the miracle of shady theater workers, a dime bag and emergency exits a few of us were able to enjoy an evening of a visually beautiful musical made with nothing but awesome Beatles tunes. Sadly, it leaves a lot to be desired in the story department... The flimsy plot is really just a construct in which to Beatles songs get played in context with the story. But let's face it: I didn't pay a dime bag to get an award-winning plot; I payed it so I could see a Beatles musical that wasn't "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" and it's exactly what I got.

And you know what?

I loved EVERY. SINGLE. SECOND of it. All the musical numbers are downright awesome remakes and it's visually one of the most wonderful films that's ever seen the screen. The two leads played by Jim Sturgess and Evan Rachel Wood (<3) really have a pretty decent chemistry on screen; we're not talking Ewan McGregor and Nicole Kidman in Moulin Rouge here, but it's believable enough considering how weak the rest of the story is. There's also a pretty good cast of cameos here: Eddie Izzard as Mr. Kite, Salma Hayek as Bang Bang Shoot Shoot Nurses and Joe Cocker. However, the film's centerpiece are its visuals. Director Julie Taymor (who previously directed Frida and, one of my personal favorite films, Titus) took a lot of flamboyant and colorful liberties with the film's cinematography but one thing is certain: It's an awesome arrest of the senses.

However, If you're looking for a strong plot and standout performances, I'm sorry to say that I recommend you look elsewhere. But if you want to sit through 2 and a half hours of arresting visuals and Beatles tunes, you better find the nearest theater that's playing this already. You won't be disappointed.

I remember seeing a trailer of this. I also want to see it, but just for the sake of listening to Beatles covers in a visual setting. I remember in the theater when the trailer finished playing, some kid in front of me said, "I'm not going to see that." I was thinking, what is wrong with this kid? Haha, probably too young to discover Beatles yet. But anyway, the reviews were pretty bad (I think) because of the crappy plot, but are people going to watch this movie for the plot?

I was blown away by the preview I saw in the theater. My parents just saw it and really enjoyed it. I can't wait.

If I wanted a trippy Beatles musical, I'd just watch Yellow Submarine. That film is still visually stunning, funny, and contains original Beatles songs instead of shitty cover versions. I honestly don't see the appeal of Across The Universe at all. If I want to look at pretty things for two hours I'll go to an art gallery or a garden.

That doesn't make sense, why would a theater be any worse a place to see art than an art gallery or a garden? Plus, (I haven't seen this yet, but heard several reviews), the covers are interpretive. It is different takes on the Beatles music.

Nothing you said at all gives any indication into the quality of the movie, just what you think it is not. All I can tell from what you say is that the only movie you'd ever watch is Yellow Submarine, because nothing else are the things you listed.

Anyway, I plan on seeing this at some point, hopefully while it's still in the theater, if I can find myself not too busy.

Yeah... I would too. But interpretations never really hurt anyone emotionally and I really don't think I fall in that crowd.

Yeah... I would too.

It's all subjective, man. Some of us like the Beatles in any form and some of us don't. Doesn't mean we like it at ALL times (like in SAUS) but nobody ever died from "Hey Jude" in small doses. :p

Neither do I; I think it's just another way to separate fans of some particular music or era or whatever from their money, but hey whatever floats your yellow submarine...

A way to entertain people who like that sort of thing??!?! BLASPHEMOUS

I guess I came across as too aggressive in my first post. There's nothing wrong with going to a theatre to see art, I love film, but a good film has more elements than lots of bright swirling colors. That can be good in a film, but when a movie has almost no plot and is just bright swirling colors, what's the point? I guess it's fine, but there's so much unused potential.

I haven't seen this film. I might rent it when the DVD comes out, but from all I've seen, it just seems like an exploitative thing to me. As in, The Beatles are really popular, let's profit from that! It may or may not actually be that, but it gives off that vibe to me.

There are literally hundreds of cover albums already devoted solely to The Beatles catalogue, so different interpretations are pretty well played out. Getting actors to sing Beatles songs with help from Bono just screams cash grab to me.

My best mate keeps nagging me to see this with her. I was a bit dubious about the plot from the beginning; dragging up events of the 20th century Hair-esque is all I can see, although with a different soundtrack. Not that it matters, I'm just hoping for an empty theatre in case we start singing along, which we undoubtedly will. Should be a laugh.

The version you saw has little to do with Taymor, since the studio seized the picture from her and completely re-edited it. There was a fairly big huff in Hollywood over it (since Taymor is a well-respected theater director - though notorious for being hard to work with at times).

After director Julie Taymor's cut of Across the Universe, featuring music of the Beatles, was greeted with derision by preview audiences, it was recut by Revolution Studios chief Joe Roth and shown last week to a receptive audience in Phoenix, AZ that gave it a score of 86 percent, L.A. Weekly columnist Nikki Finke reported Tuesday, citing unnamed sources. But when Taymor learned of the screening, insiders told Finke, she had an angry "meltdown." One studio insider told Finke: "We were dealing with a woman who has absolutely no sense of commercial potential. At one point, [Sony Pictures Co-chairman] Amy Pascal took her to dinner and diplomatically told her 'how good it could be' if only she'd cut the movie. But Julie still refused. Indeed, that's the refrain of everyone: there's a great movie in there, somewhere. But, as [Taymor's cut] stands now, it's so complicated it's just a bad movie."

Movie & TV News @ IMDb.com - Studio Briefing - 21 March 2007