How was U23D received at Cannes?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
david said:
The Rattle and Hum backlash came because they were a young band that were starting to seem pretentious and it seemed like they were trying to elevate themselves to the likes of the rock legends that they were trying to pay homage to back in 87.

20 years later they are rock legends and all this movie is is a fun concert filmed in 3D and nothing more.

Rattle and Hum was a Hollywood production and played in cinema, but Rattle and Hum was about U2 discovering American music and was making the big picture clearer with the album. The biggest band - which they were at the time - was paying hommage to the greats, not saying they were their equal. I think that's humble.

In contrast, this is a fancy techy movie about ... a U2 show. I'm guessing expensive to make since it's cutting edge 3-D techology, and for a movie with no big movie director and no real actors, I think it's brave they went to open it at the world's biggest movie festival. You think there was no ego in that ?

Anyway I posed that question above because there were some post(er)s worried they'd get flamed for this. Perhaps the Cannes review/s can be a sneak preview of the critical opinion of this movie.
 
am i the only one thinking that 55 minutes is more than a little disappointing? first we heard 90 minutes, which would have been bad enough, but 55? wtf, bitches? i don't want to spend more time waiting in line for popcorn than i spend on watching the movie.
 
U2Man said:
am i the only one thinking that 55 minutes is more than a little disappointing? first we heard 90 minutes, which would have been bad enough, but 55? wtf, bitches? i don't want to spend more time waiting in line for popcorn than i spend on watching the movie.


Cannes version is 55 minutes, but it is said that the movie will be 90 minutes, so nothing to worry about.
 
U2Man said:
am i the only one thinking that 55 minutes is more than a little disappointing? first we heard 90 minutes, which would have been bad enough, but 55? wtf, bitches? i don't want to spend more time waiting in line for popcorn than i spend on watching the movie.
seriously whats with the foul language?
 
KUEFC09U2 said:
seriously whats with the foul language?

female pooches.

anyway, i've called like any single interferencer a bitch now, but you don't react before i call the members of u2 the same :hmm:

corianderstem said:
I also heard the theatrical release will be longer. So there.

nothing but loose, unfounded rumours.
 
U2Man said:
am i the only one thinking that 55 minutes is more than a little disappointing? first we heard 90 minutes, which would have been bad enough, but 55? wtf, bitches? i don't want to spend more time waiting in line for popcorn than i spend on watching the movie.

It's not uncommon for film to be shown in shortened/incomplete form at major film fests like Cannes. it may do with them still working on Editing or just getting audience feedback to see if the new film technology is working in the way that's intended.

u2fp
 
55 minutes is more than enough for the critics to judge the 3D aspect. After all, there is no plot to the film and songs can be cut out without affecting the overall impression.
 
Ok, whatever.. I thought this article was, I want to say, a fun read.
But I'm not speculating on what some feel is fun.
Here it is none the less:

http://film.guardian.co.uk/cannes2007/story/0,,2084478,00.html

Peter Bradshaw
Monday May 21, 2007
The Guardian

Cannes always prides itself on the theatrical flair of its red-carpet events. But on Saturday night, it outdid itself: nothing less than a free open-air concert by U2 on the steps of the Palais, as a rock'n'roll curtain-raiser to U2 3D, an hour-long concert movie by Catherine Owens and Mark Pellington.
This was an event that transformed the tuxed and permatanned festivalgoers into a screeching mass of fans.
We crammed up against the barriers, as the scary crowd- and riot-control police waited for the band to arrive.

Official cars ferried them up to the foot of the steps, perhaps to minimise the assassination risk.
A vast whoop was finally expelled from the crowd, goosed en masse by the swaggering emergence of the band from their car; they bounded up the steps and took up positions where their sound system had been assembled 30 minutes before, under security conditions comparable to the Yellow Alert deployment of an inter-continental ballistic missile.
"Cannes!" hollered Bono, "Cannes, howareya?" And the band shatteringly opened up. The crowd were kept well back.
An American producer next to me fantasised about improvising a mosh-pit of dinner-jacketed fans in front of the band, or just having his recumbent body being passed overhead, hand over hand, up to where The Edge was playing.
If he had tried it, he might have come close - but only in the sense of being passed from cop to cop, to be beaten up by each of them on his way to the police van.

After 15 minutes, the band knocked it on the head and the crowd were admitted to the Palais, where we were each given a pair of those silly 3D glasses.
Bono was far too cool to wear his, though I saw The Edge fit his big specs around his woolly hat, rendering his face all but invisible.

As for the film itself: perfectly good stuff. But we had all had the real U2 3D experience just five minutes before.

:wink:
 
Back
Top Bottom