Across the Universe

I'm tempted to spill my credentials when it comes to Beatles music, but it's not exactly material in reviewing this movie purely on its own merits, so I'll resist. There's good and there's bad, but if my score is any indication, the bad greatly outweighs the good. The good: Some decent song renditions, and a misplaced Joe Cocker. If this movie wasn't attempting to have a consistent plot, it'd be a fun collection of mediocre music videos, and I'd be less strict about judging it, but alas... The bad: ...there is an attempt to portray a story. It's vapid to say the least, and inexistent if you're truly critical. As a result, the characters are two-dimensional and uninteresting. The movie flows along at an astoundingly disjointed pace, creating any and every excuse to have a musical segment possible - usually falling flat on its face in the process - with the most literal interpretations of the songs possible and some truly poor imagery and symbolism. As if the audience didn't have enough of being slapped in the face with giant Uncle Sam poster singing "I want you," the movie depicts just about every 60's cliché you can imagine. There's a clone for Janis and a clone for Jimi, a naked, scant Vietnam War subplot, Timothy Leary and Ken Kesey (Bono is just a giant turd after all) references, Greenwich Village; it's as if they just stuck as many 60's events as they could into a bowl, randomly arranged them in a line, and decided to order the movie as such. The whole affair is a mess, but in the end the events just resolve themselves with no real actions taken by the characters. The worst part about this movie is that there will be people that absolutely love it. They'll call it "sweet," or "pretty," or "fun." It's safe to say that, if they do, you can go ahead and null their opinion on movies from here on out, because this overlong, self-righteous, 60's-for-the-cell-phone-generation trash heap is none of the above.

There has been no greater disservice to the music and spirit of the Beatles than 'Across the Universe': an over-emotive, glitz-laden, ham fisted vehicle for a talentless group of unknown 'actors' which should only be viewed by film students as cautionary tale of what can happen when ego thinks it can adapt and improve things that that are already perfect. I wonder what on earth was going through the head of Ms. Taymor - a normally talented director of stage and screen and the mastermind behind the overlooked film adaptation of Shakespeare's 'Titus Andronicus' starring Anthony Hopkins and Jessica Lange. 'Across the Universe' fails on so many levels as a film that in all honesty it's impossible to list every single that's wrong whether it be a frat-boy singalong of 'A Little Help from My Friends'; an out-of-place cheerleader's lament summed up by 'I Wanna Hold Your Hand' (and as an aside, the time/place faction for this young lady's scene made zero sense); a moronic narrative involving every plot cliché yanked from network television mini-series including some father/son silliness and some seemingly-solid-yet-ideologically-different relationship silliness; cheesy character names that serve as excuses to break into songs containing said names; all this topped off by performances so ludicrous, that in comparison, they make Tor Johnson's role in 'Plan 9 from Outer Space' appear Oscar-worthy. As for the songs, I used to think that it would be close to impossible for anyone to miss the irony, wit, or humor of any song by the Beatles. I also was of the feeling that it would be quite a stretch for any performer to make a Beatles sound bad. Heck, I didn't think the 'I am Sam' soundtrack was that bad, and I kind of dig the Fiona Apple version of 'ATU'. I don't even mind 'Hello/Goodbye' featured on the Target commercials. But the renditions of the songs in this film were so terrible, I wanted to call Sir Paul and Ringo to apologize profusely for my girlfriend and I spending money to watch as people who should know better slowly killed their songs. I never thought I'd write this, but, if you're thinking about going to see 'Across the Universe', don't. Just go out and rent 'Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Heart's Club Band'. As bad as that picture is, it's ten times the movie 'Across the Universe'. Ugh.

I have never wanted 2+ hours of my life back more than I did when I saw this movie. Everyone I know saw it before me and, after all the hype, I couldn't wait. I'm a huge Beatles fan and thought the idea of a Beatles musical would be awesome. I mean, hey, Cirque did it with Love, and they succeeded. The movie had to be good, right? Wrong. I wanted so badly to give it a chance, but within the first half hour I could tell that the plot was severely lacking. Characters like Prudence were horribly underdeveloped; you could've taken her out altogether, and the only thing that would have REALLY changed would that you couldn't include "I Want to Hold Your Hand" or "Dear Prudence," and speaking of the former, that number was just one of the many examples where in the movie, you'd think they were trying to lead up to something, and then they'd drop it altogether. They included random and stupid things just so they could use a few more songs, and why do people buy into this crap? Because they're too distracted by the music to care. The "cutting edge graphics" as Ebert called them were among some of the worst I've seen in years. They were quite obviously fake and cheesy, and you could argue that it's meant to be as such because it's a hallucination or whatever BS you want to throw at me, but if it really was a hallucination, it should at least be believable! After a while all of the garish colors and pompous, "pseudo-artsy" camera angles made me nauseous. That's not even half of it, and I haven't even gotten to the music yet. I know nothing compares to the Beatles, but they didn't even TRY - the music was so halfhearted, and some of the "spins" they put on them? Just back off! "Helter Skelter" was ridiculous, and I wanted to slap that actor for ruining "Revolution." There isn't a single song I enjoyed. In all, I wish I had never gone to see it. Don't waste your time or your money on this pretentious bull.

Good God.... I'm a teacher and some of my students ( knowing that I'm a huge Beatles fan ) told me I HAD TO SEE THIS MOVIE .... I resisted, until my parents ( who usually have decent taste in films ) said IT WAS ONE OF THE BEST MOVIES THAT THEY EVER SAW IN THEIR LIVES!!!!! "Visually, the most creative movie I have ever seen," said my dad. So I went ... Ten minutes into the movie I knew I was a goner. As soon as I saw them singing and dancing like goofy Gene Kellys around the good ol college campus like Fame rejects, I began to groan. Loudly. "Where was the amazing creativity?" I asked myself. "Maybe it'll kick in later...." It never did. ( You want amazing creativity? See "Yellow Submarine"). This movie, instead, was flat out horrendous. I cringed every time they blasphemed another Beatle song with Taymore's insipidly sophomoric MTV vision of the sixties. Strawberry Fields and Happiness is a Warm Gun were two segments, particularly, that made me wanna barf in my popcorn bag... It was awful. Just awful. Some clapped at the end. I booed....

As someone who was literally a child of the mid - late 60's & and a student of the time period, I first want to thank everyone who had anything to do with the making of this film! Your timing could not of been better! You helped me to remember the fervor, passion and idealism that made up the mid-late 60's. It's been many years since I have burst out sobbing in a movie theater! Thanks for helping to lift the fog a bit! As an activist, you have collectively given me some badly needed renewed vigor! I also feel so very, very sorry for all the critics of this movie who don't have a clue about what it all this means, or whose hearts have grown so hard with such bitterness, cynicism or despair; or have just simply sold-out; or plain no longer care! All your ranting and raving and nay saying won't do a thing to take away one moment of the adventure, creativity, experimentation, excitement or passion that made this time in history so great! I also what to thank the brilliant filmmakers for paying homage to so many great cultural icons, organizations and events of the period: Walter Cronkite, the greatest broadcaster of the 20th century. Baba Olatunji, the Nigerian Drummer and social activist, his double looked like he came right off the Drums of Passion album cover! I can now see him smiling from heaven! The tremendous scene with Bread and Puppets, a living, breathing, direct link to 1960's radicalism, warmed my heart! You even went up to their stronghold in Glover, Vermont, to film part of the scene! Bravo! The SDS (Students for a Democratic Society), which did not advocate violence, and the much smaller splinter-group that morphed into an organization advocating extreme measures, called the Weather Underground. The brave Martin Luther King, Jr. and his intervention in a labor dispute, which cost him his life. The historic occupation of the Ivy League, Columbia University by its students protesting both the Vietnam war and the intense poverty that surrounded the school. Ken Kesey and his legendary bus. The Jimi Hendrix & Janice Jopplin characters who show such dignity, and a passion for music. And, of course, the Beatles! Their music reaches deep into my soul. You gave me insights into the meaning of their tunes that after all these years never crossed my mind! I also enjoyed being bathed in all the very colorful special affects. The 60's and early 70's were a time of outrageously bold colors and design. Something brilliantly portrayed in Across the Universe! The only film I intend to purchase on DVD that has been released this year!

I was lucky enough to see a screening of this film and it is very enjoyable, very thought provoking. I only gave it an 8/10 because I felt that it went on a little long. I looked around and saw people looking at their watches. Im also not a huge Evan Rachel Wood fan. She was fine in the movie, Im just not crazy about her acting. The gentleman who played Jude was excellent. I found him to be adorable and funny. He also had an excellent voice. I also felt it to be kind of...out there. If you watch the preview, you already have a taste of what I mean. Some of the moments in the songs were kind of abstract (personally I enjoy that in small doses but she did use it quite a lot throughout the film.) Over all, this move was good, and I think that everyone should see it.

Pure emotion. No one can mix theater with film like Julie Taymor. From beginning to end the film takes you on a psychedelic beatle ride that grips you by the ears, the heart and the soul and never lets go. Even now. Hours after the projector was shut off. Every song adaptation interpretation and setting is spot on, fans of the Beatles will recognize that every detail in Taymor's images recall an instance, a photograph, a line or a quote from the band. Even the girl that comes in through the bathroom window. Nothing is left to chance, everything is on purpose. Amazing. Easily the best film of the year. And in regards to people saying it's a two hour music video.. well... yeah, what the heck were you expecting???

... and it's nanny was Julie Taymor ... This probably sounds like I hated the film, but I actually loved it. It has the time line and self-consciously-culture-smart soundtrack of Hair, yet the campy fun and karaoke stylings of Moulin Rouge. Julie Taymor takes this combination and makes it fun, instead of extra cheesy, and it is visually fascinating instead of the obnoxious MTV-video nightmare it could have been. I cared about the characters - and the cast of 'unknowns' have great star power and voices. Even though I knew exactly what would happen, the journey there was great. The cameos were fun. The lead was sufficiently hot. The soundtrack is stuck in my head as I write this (the new versions, not even the original songs) All corny jokes and references, and lapses in plot are forgiven, because Ms. Taymor manages to take a movie chock full of things that have been done a million times before and makes it as fresh and exciting as if it were all done for the first time. You may know exactly what's going to happen but you never know how. This is the director's movie! Definitely a movie journey worth taking.

Oh, have you seen "Across the Universe"? (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0445922/) Are we the only ones to find it bad, bad, REALLY bad? I think there's an odd syndrome--I've seen it before, can't remember where--of 60s-and-Beatles-infatuation among people who were born post-60s-and-Beatles, and they seem to take ownership of the 60s and Beatles music in a way that is often extremely distasteful to me. Besides the codification of the 60s into convenient chewy clusters (one character drafted, another one black, a girl "too" involved in the anti-war protest movement , another in the club scene trying to sing like Janis Joplin...), in this movie, it appears they tried to build an entire plot around the 60s and most of the dialog out of (sung) Beatles songs. To me, as soon as you start naming characters "Jude," "Max(well)," "Prudence," "Sadie," "Lucy," you're already losin' me, kid. When half of those characters are ONLY there to support an occurrence of one person or another breaking into song (i.e. "Prudence's" whole raisin-bran d'etre in the ENTIRE movie was to have a scene where she's shut herself in a closet pouting and everyone outside the closet sings "Dear Prudence," now THAT's just stupid. They shoehorned songs into the plot, and plot lines into song-ops. The one English guy always sings with a smile on his face and everyone has these pure, clear (let's call it "plear") voices fresh out of "Fame" (they were born after THAT, too, I think). WAY too many telegraphed references to well-known Beatles and 60s trivia, like the use of apples and strawberries and the comment to Max about killing grandma with a hammer. There are a few cool animation bits (well, one, really), but ALL of that might not be too bad, but they ALSO had to bring my man Jimi into it! Now they're making me mad. The characters are zero-dimensional. The acting is out of Junior High, rising only occasionally to Sophomore level. The writing is just execrable. I had to watch it through because these are my heroes from, and this is the soundtrack of, my youth, and frankly I couldn't tear myself away, just like that reporter and the Hindenberg--"Oh the humanity!"

I saw a sold-out opening night screening of "Across the Universe" last night with a group of my friends who had really been looking forward to it. Many of them were extremely disappointed, while in the critical world, Roger Ebert and the New York Times loved it. Because the film was so highly anticipated, and a number of people have asked me how I liked it, I'm writing this review in an attempt to express why the movie is so divisive. I'm not going to talk about plot, or describe any of the numbers. If you're interested in seeing the movie, they'll be more enjoyable if they're unexpected. It's a bizarre and beautiful movie musical, almost a music video at times, that uses thirty- three of The Beatles' songs and director Julie Taymor's unique visual style to illustrate both a personal love story and the overall conflict in the sixties. The movie is incredibly original and ambitious, and therefore its failings are as dramatic as its successes. Both stem from the same source: Julie Taymor's self-indulgence. That's nothing new to her movies, "Frida" and "Titus" have the same problem, but in a movie stripped of traditional narrative, it's glaringly obvious. Some songs are impeccably chosen and staged with great creativity, but others are too obvious, or thematically forced so Taymor can cram in another song and stunning visual sequence. For the first half of the movie, I was frequently divided. One innovative sequence would really pull me into the style, then a forced number or awkward staging would distance me again. When an obvious, recognizable number began, I was torn between a cynical impulse to roll my eyes and an almost exhilarated impulse to laugh and applaud. "Across the Universe" is a mess. There's no denying that. It is poorly paced and badly structured, and at times its feather-light plot and contrived or obligatory numbers become tedious. But at one point, about halfway through, I decided just to go along for the ride. I delighted in every brash, bold choice, whether it worked or not. I let the poignant moments move me, whether or not I intellectually felt that they were contrived. The Beatles' music had a huge effect on me; from the fateful day that my friend accidentally copied the first three tracks of "Revolver" onto my computer, a love affair was born. Their songs are inexorably tied to memories beautiful and horrible scattered all over my life, and as I grow older, I'm constantly discovering new, deeper resonances in their familiar refrains. Even when the context was vague or stretched, the film's reinterpreting and revealing new facets of these songs seemed to serve as a tribute to their breadth and greatness. Taymor's damning depiction of the horrors of war, and lyrical portrait of young, idealistic love are both painfully expressive and unique, and simply took my breath away. By the film's shamelessly corny close, I realized that I had just had a genuine cinematic experience. For all the movies that I watch, that's incredibly rare. In his review in the New York Times, Stephen Holden writes, "I realized that falling in love with a movie is like falling in love with another person. Imperfections, however glaring, become endearing quirks once you've tumbled." I could laughingly list this movie's flaws from now till next week, but I sort of fell in love with its sheer audacity. You might not. It's extremely naïve, and thematically simple, and you could find that endearing or irritating. You may love it, or you may hate it, but you're going to feel something. This movie will not change your life; don't expect it to. But if you let your criticism fade to the background, and abandon yourself to Taymor's passionate fervor, you may have a pretty amazing experience.