Freeway is not a high school/teen film, really... I mean, it's the obvious best but it's not really in the same... genre?Lazario wrote:What about Freeway?
And Jawbreaker?
And I love Jawbreaker, I do... but Cruel Intentions is better.
What Movie Did You Just Watch? - Shh! It's Starting!
-
PeterPanfan
- Diamond Edition
- Posts: 4553
- Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:43 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
-
Lazario
-
blackcauldron85
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 16689
- Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 7:54 am
- Gender: Female
- Contact:
-
SmartAleck25
- Special Edition
- Posts: 671
- Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 6:02 pm
- Location: The U.S.
-
blackcauldron85
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 16689
- Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 7:54 am
- Gender: Female
- Contact:
). Amazingly funny. Run to the theater when it comes out. I'll definitely be buying the DVD when it comes out.-
TheValentineBros
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1119
- Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 8:26 am
- Contact:
Gladiator
last movie I watched was gladiator. what a story and incredible acting. the reason I watched it, I've been studying a lot about masculinity lately and in gladiator's characters go out far into extremes depicting messed up father and son relationship between marcus aurelius and his son commodus, as well as on the other side maximux being a real man in all sense of that word and a little guy (forget his name) who looked up to maximus, because he never had a father around.
fantastic emotionally filled movie.
fantastic emotionally filled movie.
A few movies:
St Trinians 2: The Legend of Fritton's Gold
Now, I love the first of the 21st Century St Trinians films. Yes, it is, if analysed nothing but rubbish. But it is infectious; it has an energy and vibe that conveys nothing but fun and respect. We can tell, just by watching it that it appears everyone had a blast making it (especially Everret and Firth) and while portraying the notorious school in modern times, it has clear affection for the original strips and films.
But sadly, while not a disaster the sequel is missing something. It's taken me a couple of viewings, but I think I know what. It's not the cast changes as I first thought (although several cast members have been dropped - and I do feel the lack of Russell Brand as Flash Harry hurts the film enormously). Its that the backbone of the story has been ill-judged.
The fact that the girls are fighting "a secret society of woman haters" crucially changes the thrust of the narration. Previous films, including 2007's St Trinians are about anarchy. It's the school railing against society's rules and conventions. This is a film about the school fighting something that's worse than the school. It makes the girls not a force of anarchy, but of order. That's why it fails.
But its still an entertaining film for all its faults. (7/10)
The Wolfman (2010)
The Wolfman is a strange film from the outset. It really doesn't know what it is. Is it a respectful homage to the original? Or is it a new horror film for this decade's audience? The answer is that it appears to have it's foot in both camps, and therefore both approaches fail.
Being somewhat enamoured by Universal's Classic Monster films (but not so keen on the Wolfman it must be said) I had major concerns about this film from the start. But I have to say, I was pleasantly surprised by the majority of the film. I feel a lot of the choices made were the right ones; the period setting, the make-up resulting in a more man than wolf werewolf, the elements from the original which made it into the film... even the sequences set in London worked well (I was most concerned about these once I learned of them, but I feel they worked in a Curse of the Werewolf type of homage even though that wasn't set in London).
However, it all falls to peices (literally) at the end. Who the heck are the numbskulls executives who work at Universal?
[Spoilers]
You'd think that after Van Helsing's "failure" the last thing Universal would want to do in another big-budget horror movie built upon their Classic Monsters would be to repeat Van Helsing's biggest mistake. That film ended with a CGI fight-fest between a bulked-out batlike Dracula and a bulked-out werewolf Van Helsing (even just thinking about this makes me facepalm). What does The Wolfman give us as its "climax"? A Wolfman battling another Wolfman (His father of all things!)
Which repeats the main issue with Van Helsing. We, the audience, just don't care. It's like watching a videogame being played.
If you scratch beneath the surface, I guess that it doesn't quite come out of the blue; the fact we're all just animals inside, unleash the beast, and I guess even Sins of the Fathers are all lightly suggested or hinted at at the film. But that's probably worse than the ending coming from nowhere. Because these issues are only hinted at - fundamentally this Wolfman isn't about anything. It could have been a film about sexual repression (pretty common in the period, making statements about the beast within more meaningful). It could have been more about the Sins of the Father visited upon the family. Talbot's curse could have been more about his guilt of his attraction to his dead brother's fiancee. The film dances around all this; almost as if its worried if it actually does become a metaphor for something more meaningful it will be rejected by the audience.
So we end up with a period film, with a somewhat visually dated Wolfman realisation trying to appeal to followers of the original, showing flashes of gore to try and satisfy the modern, younger audience while ending with a big nonsensical fight simply because... well, I guess fights are expected these days and the modern audience would feel cheated without one.
Until the ending, the film is enjoyable if somewhat simple viewing. 5/10
Alice in Wonderland (2010)
Talking of nonsensical fights, what the heck was the ending of Alice all about? As far as I could see another fight simply because all modern films must have a big fight at the end. In fact, what was most of the film actually about? It's pretty clear that Middle-Earth and Narnia influenced the story as much as Carroll. The Mad Hatter as some sort of underground freedom fighter?
It's a shame that something as unconventional as Wonderland was ultimately placed in such a conventional narrative. Long time visitors to this site may know I'm no fan of the original work, nor the Disney animation. But while the original has little appeal to me, I can also see that making Wonderland more "mainstream" seems to throw away most of the stuff that's unique (and I would guess well-loved) from the original. And what's the point of Burton pushing himself and technology to visualise a Wonderland, if the story within it is to be so conventional? It seems like such a wasted opportunity.
Oh, and considering one of the reasons I dislike Disney's Alice In Wonderland so much is the portrayal of Alice in the movie, I would never have expected anyone to be able to portray a more mind-numbingly bland Alice. Well, congratulations Burton, you managed to do so.
Also while Bonham Carter's Red Queen may be receiving acclaim in many reviews, she's not really doing anything new. It's a slightly less (yes, less) deranged version of "Queenie" from Black Adder II. Being as she's a British actress, I'm pretty sure this is what her performance is taken from (everybody in Britain knows Queenie!)
I watched this mainly because I wanted to see/hear how many British actors and comedians in their roles as various Wonderland characters. I must admit, one the whole I was impressed. With the voicing, and with the motion capture or pure CGI animation (depending on the character). Not only was this the first film in which I feel motion capture could be justified, but its clear when watching it that the film will be a ground-breaking milestone in motion picture effects.
But this, Avatar and Transformers depress me slightly. It seems people are happy going to the cinema as long as they get their effects. I guess for most people, the bits in the middle between each jaw-dropping effects sequence are just fillers, rather then being, you know, story.
For the story: 4/10. For the film as a whole, including it's effects and predicted importance: 8/10
St Trinians 2: The Legend of Fritton's Gold
Now, I love the first of the 21st Century St Trinians films. Yes, it is, if analysed nothing but rubbish. But it is infectious; it has an energy and vibe that conveys nothing but fun and respect. We can tell, just by watching it that it appears everyone had a blast making it (especially Everret and Firth) and while portraying the notorious school in modern times, it has clear affection for the original strips and films.
But sadly, while not a disaster the sequel is missing something. It's taken me a couple of viewings, but I think I know what. It's not the cast changes as I first thought (although several cast members have been dropped - and I do feel the lack of Russell Brand as Flash Harry hurts the film enormously). Its that the backbone of the story has been ill-judged.
The fact that the girls are fighting "a secret society of woman haters" crucially changes the thrust of the narration. Previous films, including 2007's St Trinians are about anarchy. It's the school railing against society's rules and conventions. This is a film about the school fighting something that's worse than the school. It makes the girls not a force of anarchy, but of order. That's why it fails.
But its still an entertaining film for all its faults. (7/10)
The Wolfman (2010)
The Wolfman is a strange film from the outset. It really doesn't know what it is. Is it a respectful homage to the original? Or is it a new horror film for this decade's audience? The answer is that it appears to have it's foot in both camps, and therefore both approaches fail.
Being somewhat enamoured by Universal's Classic Monster films (but not so keen on the Wolfman it must be said) I had major concerns about this film from the start. But I have to say, I was pleasantly surprised by the majority of the film. I feel a lot of the choices made were the right ones; the period setting, the make-up resulting in a more man than wolf werewolf, the elements from the original which made it into the film... even the sequences set in London worked well (I was most concerned about these once I learned of them, but I feel they worked in a Curse of the Werewolf type of homage even though that wasn't set in London).
However, it all falls to peices (literally) at the end. Who the heck are the numbskulls executives who work at Universal?
[Spoilers]
You'd think that after Van Helsing's "failure" the last thing Universal would want to do in another big-budget horror movie built upon their Classic Monsters would be to repeat Van Helsing's biggest mistake. That film ended with a CGI fight-fest between a bulked-out batlike Dracula and a bulked-out werewolf Van Helsing (even just thinking about this makes me facepalm). What does The Wolfman give us as its "climax"? A Wolfman battling another Wolfman (His father of all things!)
Which repeats the main issue with Van Helsing. We, the audience, just don't care. It's like watching a videogame being played.
If you scratch beneath the surface, I guess that it doesn't quite come out of the blue; the fact we're all just animals inside, unleash the beast, and I guess even Sins of the Fathers are all lightly suggested or hinted at at the film. But that's probably worse than the ending coming from nowhere. Because these issues are only hinted at - fundamentally this Wolfman isn't about anything. It could have been a film about sexual repression (pretty common in the period, making statements about the beast within more meaningful). It could have been more about the Sins of the Father visited upon the family. Talbot's curse could have been more about his guilt of his attraction to his dead brother's fiancee. The film dances around all this; almost as if its worried if it actually does become a metaphor for something more meaningful it will be rejected by the audience.
So we end up with a period film, with a somewhat visually dated Wolfman realisation trying to appeal to followers of the original, showing flashes of gore to try and satisfy the modern, younger audience while ending with a big nonsensical fight simply because... well, I guess fights are expected these days and the modern audience would feel cheated without one.
Until the ending, the film is enjoyable if somewhat simple viewing. 5/10
Alice in Wonderland (2010)
Talking of nonsensical fights, what the heck was the ending of Alice all about? As far as I could see another fight simply because all modern films must have a big fight at the end. In fact, what was most of the film actually about? It's pretty clear that Middle-Earth and Narnia influenced the story as much as Carroll. The Mad Hatter as some sort of underground freedom fighter?
It's a shame that something as unconventional as Wonderland was ultimately placed in such a conventional narrative. Long time visitors to this site may know I'm no fan of the original work, nor the Disney animation. But while the original has little appeal to me, I can also see that making Wonderland more "mainstream" seems to throw away most of the stuff that's unique (and I would guess well-loved) from the original. And what's the point of Burton pushing himself and technology to visualise a Wonderland, if the story within it is to be so conventional? It seems like such a wasted opportunity.
Oh, and considering one of the reasons I dislike Disney's Alice In Wonderland so much is the portrayal of Alice in the movie, I would never have expected anyone to be able to portray a more mind-numbingly bland Alice. Well, congratulations Burton, you managed to do so.
Also while Bonham Carter's Red Queen may be receiving acclaim in many reviews, she's not really doing anything new. It's a slightly less (yes, less) deranged version of "Queenie" from Black Adder II. Being as she's a British actress, I'm pretty sure this is what her performance is taken from (everybody in Britain knows Queenie!)
I watched this mainly because I wanted to see/hear how many British actors and comedians in their roles as various Wonderland characters. I must admit, one the whole I was impressed. With the voicing, and with the motion capture or pure CGI animation (depending on the character). Not only was this the first film in which I feel motion capture could be justified, but its clear when watching it that the film will be a ground-breaking milestone in motion picture effects.
But this, Avatar and Transformers depress me slightly. It seems people are happy going to the cinema as long as they get their effects. I guess for most people, the bits in the middle between each jaw-dropping effects sequence are just fillers, rather then being, you know, story.
For the story: 4/10. For the film as a whole, including it's effects and predicted importance: 8/10
Most of my Blu-ray collection some of my UK discs aren't on their database
-
Lazario
If 1951's Alice was bland, name me a traditional Disney animated heroine / protagonist who wasn't.2099net wrote:Alice in Wonderland (2010)
Oh, and considering one of the reasons I dislike Disney's Alice In Wonderland so much is the portrayal of Alice in the movie, I would never have expected anyone to be able to portray a more mind-numbingly bland Alice.
Well, you're probably right - Snow White et al were hardly poster girls for feminism. 101 Dalmatians is probably the first Disney animated film with a strong female role - it just happens to be a dog!Lazario wrote:If 1951's Alice was bland, name me a traditional Disney animated heroine / protagonist who wasn't.2099net wrote:Alice in Wonderland (2010)
Oh, and considering one of the reasons I dislike Disney's Alice In Wonderland so much is the portrayal of Alice in the movie, I would never have expected anyone to be able to portray a more mind-numbingly bland Alice.
But something about Alice in Alice in Wonderland has always bothered me, more so than Snow White, Aroura et al. Alice in Alice in Wonderland is a lead with little emotion in a film with little emotion. At least Disney's other films wanted us to feel something both for the film and the characters.
The new live-action Alice is even worse. I personally think its a terrible performance, but I shouldn't blame the actress, the script was mostly to blame. It's probably a result in both cases of the character knowing/believing themselves to be in a dream. If the character doesn't believe the situations and environment they find themselves in, why should we?
Most of my Blu-ray collection some of my UK discs aren't on their database
-
Lazario
Well, then at least we can't say the film isn't consistent.2099net wrote:Well, you're probably right - Snow White et al were hardly poster girls for feminism. 101 Dalmatians is probably the first Disney animated film with a strong female role - it just happens to be a dog!Lazario wrote: If 1951's Alice was bland, name me a traditional Disney animated heroine / protagonist who wasn't.
But something about Alice in Alice in Wonderland has always bothered me, more so than Snow White, Aroura et al. Alice in Alice in Wonderland is a lead with little emotion in a film with little emotion. At least Disney's other films wanted us to feel something both for the film and the characters.
I think Alice is a blast. Just look at her reaction shots during the trial scene. And how angry she gets when the Hatter and Hare treat her like she's gone crazy. And when she's trying to control her croquet dodo-bird. She's grumpy at times. She has a purpose. In her world, she's the strange one. In theirs... I don't think that's bland. Just rigid. But a very entertaining kind of rigid.
-
PeterPanfan
- Diamond Edition
- Posts: 4553
- Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:43 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
The Crazies (2010) - ... Not good. I've heard it's one of the better remakes as of recent, but it really wasn't. It was kind of boring, there were no scary moments (sans one, which wasn't even really that scary), and the acting wasn't even that great.
I Want to Marry Ryan Banks - This ABC Family movie was actually good, lol. It had a lot of familiar faces in terms of popular TV actors of the time (Jason Priestly, Bradley Cooper, and Emma Caulfield). Thankfully, all of them were able to leave their former characters (Brandon Walsh, Will Tippin, and Anya Jenkins) to take over their new ones. The plot was ridiculous. Jason Priestly played Ryan Banks, a famous movie star, while Bradley Cooper played his best friend and agent. A reality show is devised to save Banks' career, and Emma Caulfield is one of the contestants that both the actor and the agent fall in love with.
Despicable Me - I really liked it. It was hilarious, sad, and heart-warming. Recommended.
I Want to Marry Ryan Banks - This ABC Family movie was actually good, lol. It had a lot of familiar faces in terms of popular TV actors of the time (Jason Priestly, Bradley Cooper, and Emma Caulfield). Thankfully, all of them were able to leave their former characters (Brandon Walsh, Will Tippin, and Anya Jenkins) to take over their new ones. The plot was ridiculous. Jason Priestly played Ryan Banks, a famous movie star, while Bradley Cooper played his best friend and agent. A reality show is devised to save Banks' career, and Emma Caulfield is one of the contestants that both the actor and the agent fall in love with.
Despicable Me - I really liked it. It was hilarious, sad, and heart-warming. Recommended.
-
littlefuzzy
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1700
- Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2004 6:36 pm
I haven't watched a movie in a while. I've been watching a lot of TV seasons (M*A*S*H, the Dick Van Dike Show), and I feel like I need to take a break for some movies shortly. I'm planning to start on my Mel Brooks Collection, probably in chronological order.
The Producers (not in the collection, I have the DVD) - I think I saw the remake once, I probably won't watch it again.
The Twelve Chairs
Blazing Saddles
Young Frankenstein
Silent Movie
High Anxiety
History of the World: Part 1
To Be or Not To Be - I just watched the Jack Benny version
Spaceballs (not in the collection, I have the DVD)
Life Stinks (not in the collection, I have the DVD)
Robin Hood: Men in Tights
Dracula: Dead & Loving It - I need to track this one down..
I may try to find the Spaceballs animated series, as well.
The Producers (not in the collection, I have the DVD) - I think I saw the remake once, I probably won't watch it again.
The Twelve Chairs
Blazing Saddles
Young Frankenstein
Silent Movie
High Anxiety
History of the World: Part 1
To Be or Not To Be - I just watched the Jack Benny version
Spaceballs (not in the collection, I have the DVD)
Life Stinks (not in the collection, I have the DVD)
Robin Hood: Men in Tights
Dracula: Dead & Loving It - I need to track this one down..
I may try to find the Spaceballs animated series, as well.
-
Margos
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1931
- Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 3:12 pm
- Location: A small suburban/rural town in PA
Let's see... I've already reviewed just about every Disney movie on here. So I'm not going to repeat myself. However, I've been watching a lot of TCM lately, so I have seen a bunch of stuff recently.
Gidget - Cute surfer flick. I felt the end was a little predictable. I liked Gidget's character, but found her voice a little annoying. My only real problem was that, while it started off as what could have been a really interesting movie about a tomboy proving herself as a surfer, it lost some of my respect when Gidget fell in love with Moondoggie and became a bit of a typical, mildly annoying girly-girl just using surfing to get a man.
Beach Blanket Bingo - Wow, this was kind of a crap-fest. It was entertaining, but it was such a crazy, crazy movie! I think it wasn't even sure what kind of a movie it was supposed to be! I did appreciate the "Perils of Pauline" tribute, and the plotline with the mermaid was of some interest. Still, just really off-the-wall and a bit distracting. Not a very good film, but it had some funny moments.
Bikini Beach - Of the same series as the aforementioned Beach Blanket Bingo. Same exactly formula, too. Annette and Frankie are in love, they fight, they get back together.... Don Rickles does some stuff, and some dude named Erik von Zipper causes trouble. This one had a much more solid plot, and I thought the "Potato Bug" was hilarious! But, for some reason, it wasn't really as enjoyable all-around as Beach Blanket Bingo. I think it was the superior film, but the other one was more interesting.
Sweet November - What a horrifically sad movie! I thought the premise was very bizarre.... If I were a guy, I would be really, really suspicious of Sarah's motives, I think. I don't know if I would accept having a girlfriend for only a month and then being kicked out. And even when you find out why she is doing it... It still seems odd to me, but it's a lot more understandable, and really, really sad!
Abraham Lincoln - D. W. Griffith directed this one. I thought it was kind of boring, honestly. And I couldn't understand most of what they said, the audio quality was hideous. But what do you expect from 1930? It was sort of interesting in its way, I guess, and I do give Griffith credit for not going the route that I thought he would when I heard he made a Lincoln bio-pic. I thought he was going to demonize Lincoln, I really did.
Superstition - Talk about terrible movies. This was a pretty predictable B-movie slasher pic. The worst part was the score. Oh my god! Whenever something scary happened, they played this upbeat tune that sounded like a party from the Dukes of Hazard! And there was a witch character who spoke using this terrible voice mod... It was just hilariously bad. My favorite method of death? Some kid was decapitated, and his head (quite obviously a mannequin... it looked so fake) was blown up in the microwave! Yeah, that ridiculous! Oh, but even that wasn't as bad as the priest who got his chest sawed through by a posessed saw blade! That was kind of hilarious, it was so unrealistic!
The Blood on Satan's Claw - Kind of forgettable. Made me think of The Crucible on crack. Basically, a bunch of kids get possessed by the devil in an old New England town, and some crazy shit happens. It had some interesting moments, though. I have a lot of respect for TCM, and this film is an example of why. When they say that they always show their films uncut, they mean it. Not only do they never show commercials (except their own, and even then, not too terribly often), but they will show R-rated films completely uncensored. There was a bit of full-frontal nudity in this one. And no pixellation whatsoever! That takes guts, and I'm so glad the FCC leaves this station alone. Sure, this movie wasn't great, but it proves that TCM can do something that other movie networks do not dare to do.
Gidget - Cute surfer flick. I felt the end was a little predictable. I liked Gidget's character, but found her voice a little annoying. My only real problem was that, while it started off as what could have been a really interesting movie about a tomboy proving herself as a surfer, it lost some of my respect when Gidget fell in love with Moondoggie and became a bit of a typical, mildly annoying girly-girl just using surfing to get a man.
Beach Blanket Bingo - Wow, this was kind of a crap-fest. It was entertaining, but it was such a crazy, crazy movie! I think it wasn't even sure what kind of a movie it was supposed to be! I did appreciate the "Perils of Pauline" tribute, and the plotline with the mermaid was of some interest. Still, just really off-the-wall and a bit distracting. Not a very good film, but it had some funny moments.
Bikini Beach - Of the same series as the aforementioned Beach Blanket Bingo. Same exactly formula, too. Annette and Frankie are in love, they fight, they get back together.... Don Rickles does some stuff, and some dude named Erik von Zipper causes trouble. This one had a much more solid plot, and I thought the "Potato Bug" was hilarious! But, for some reason, it wasn't really as enjoyable all-around as Beach Blanket Bingo. I think it was the superior film, but the other one was more interesting.
Sweet November - What a horrifically sad movie! I thought the premise was very bizarre.... If I were a guy, I would be really, really suspicious of Sarah's motives, I think. I don't know if I would accept having a girlfriend for only a month and then being kicked out. And even when you find out why she is doing it... It still seems odd to me, but it's a lot more understandable, and really, really sad!
Abraham Lincoln - D. W. Griffith directed this one. I thought it was kind of boring, honestly. And I couldn't understand most of what they said, the audio quality was hideous. But what do you expect from 1930? It was sort of interesting in its way, I guess, and I do give Griffith credit for not going the route that I thought he would when I heard he made a Lincoln bio-pic. I thought he was going to demonize Lincoln, I really did.
Superstition - Talk about terrible movies. This was a pretty predictable B-movie slasher pic. The worst part was the score. Oh my god! Whenever something scary happened, they played this upbeat tune that sounded like a party from the Dukes of Hazard! And there was a witch character who spoke using this terrible voice mod... It was just hilariously bad. My favorite method of death? Some kid was decapitated, and his head (quite obviously a mannequin... it looked so fake) was blown up in the microwave! Yeah, that ridiculous! Oh, but even that wasn't as bad as the priest who got his chest sawed through by a posessed saw blade! That was kind of hilarious, it was so unrealistic!
The Blood on Satan's Claw - Kind of forgettable. Made me think of The Crucible on crack. Basically, a bunch of kids get possessed by the devil in an old New England town, and some crazy shit happens. It had some interesting moments, though. I have a lot of respect for TCM, and this film is an example of why. When they say that they always show their films uncut, they mean it. Not only do they never show commercials (except their own, and even then, not too terribly often), but they will show R-rated films completely uncensored. There was a bit of full-frontal nudity in this one. And no pixellation whatsoever! That takes guts, and I'm so glad the FCC leaves this station alone. Sure, this movie wasn't great, but it proves that TCM can do something that other movie networks do not dare to do.
http://dragonsbane.webs.com
http://childrenofnight.webs.com
^My websites promoting my two WIP novels! Check them out for exclusive content!
http://childrenofnight.webs.com
^My websites promoting my two WIP novels! Check them out for exclusive content!
-
UmbrellaFish
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 5717
- Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 3:09 pm
- Gender: Male (He/Him)
-
TheSequelOfDisney
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 5263
- Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 3:30 pm
- Location: Ohio, United States of America
I've watched a lot of movies lately and I'm not exactly sure what I last put on here, so here goes:
Singin' in the Rain - I've never seen this before and the only part that I've actually heard of is the title song. It was pretty good. It took me awhile to get into it because it seemed that there was a lot more dancing than singing, but both of those aspects were pretty good. Gene Kelly, Debbie Reynolds and Donald O'Connor were wonderful. Overall, it's a nice little comedy-musical that I might watch again sometime.
West Side Story - Now I had a really hard time getting into this one. When we had TCM, this was on and I couldn't get passed the initial snapping and dancing gangs. It seemed really ridiculous and it didn't make much sense to me (last time I checked, gangs don't go around the NYC and snap and dance). But anyway, I made it passed that this time and overall it was purty good. It did bug me, however, that all of the actors sang the songs but then were dubbed later by others. Though I know that that stuff happened all the time (especially back in the day), it just seems weird for such an iconic musical (well, supposedly since I've never actually seen the play and this was the first time that I've seen the film). It does kind of surprise me that it was Best Film Oscar. Maybe I just don't like dancing gangs?
Evita - Well, continuing my movie-musicals, I thought that it was decent. Madonna definitely struggled with the singing since her vocal range is like 2 octaves (well, I have no idea about that, I'm just guessing). Antonio Banderas was sufficient as Che but every time that he was singing he looked like he was about to murder me and his weird eyebrow movements was just kind of awkward. It's not my favorite of Andrew Lloyd Webber's (that'd be Phantom!), but the songs that make it a classic (Buenos Aires, Don't Cry For Me Argentina, Another Suitcase In Another Hall) were done well enough. Madonna wouldn't have been my first choice but seeing as the needed a big name, she got the job done (but just barely).
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button - Holy crap. It felt like it was the longest movie in the world. All of the characters were nice and everything, but I needed to take like three breaks from it because it seemed to drag on and on and on and on and on and on and on. Sure, the special effects were good, and the story was nice and interesting, but it could've been shortened because I lost interest after awhile.
Dreamgirls - This was my favorite out of this list. Jennifer Hudson was freakin' fantastic; no wonder she was Best Supporting Actress. And I Am Telling You I'm Not Going was beastly. She was the star of the whole film and surpassed everyone else (yes, even Beyonce Z). Hudson's And I Am Telling You makes Amber Riley's (from Glee) rendition of it look like a pussycat. Aniki Noni Rose also brought great strength to her unfairly smaller role. Beyonce was great, and Listen was pretty good, but she definitely doesn't have the powerful voice that Hudson has. I really liked this film and I expect to purchase it in the near future.
Singin' in the Rain - I've never seen this before and the only part that I've actually heard of is the title song. It was pretty good. It took me awhile to get into it because it seemed that there was a lot more dancing than singing, but both of those aspects were pretty good. Gene Kelly, Debbie Reynolds and Donald O'Connor were wonderful. Overall, it's a nice little comedy-musical that I might watch again sometime.
West Side Story - Now I had a really hard time getting into this one. When we had TCM, this was on and I couldn't get passed the initial snapping and dancing gangs. It seemed really ridiculous and it didn't make much sense to me (last time I checked, gangs don't go around the NYC and snap and dance). But anyway, I made it passed that this time and overall it was purty good. It did bug me, however, that all of the actors sang the songs but then were dubbed later by others. Though I know that that stuff happened all the time (especially back in the day), it just seems weird for such an iconic musical (well, supposedly since I've never actually seen the play and this was the first time that I've seen the film). It does kind of surprise me that it was Best Film Oscar. Maybe I just don't like dancing gangs?
Evita - Well, continuing my movie-musicals, I thought that it was decent. Madonna definitely struggled with the singing since her vocal range is like 2 octaves (well, I have no idea about that, I'm just guessing). Antonio Banderas was sufficient as Che but every time that he was singing he looked like he was about to murder me and his weird eyebrow movements was just kind of awkward. It's not my favorite of Andrew Lloyd Webber's (that'd be Phantom!), but the songs that make it a classic (Buenos Aires, Don't Cry For Me Argentina, Another Suitcase In Another Hall) were done well enough. Madonna wouldn't have been my first choice but seeing as the needed a big name, she got the job done (but just barely).
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button - Holy crap. It felt like it was the longest movie in the world. All of the characters were nice and everything, but I needed to take like three breaks from it because it seemed to drag on and on and on and on and on and on and on. Sure, the special effects were good, and the story was nice and interesting, but it could've been shortened because I lost interest after awhile.
Dreamgirls - This was my favorite out of this list. Jennifer Hudson was freakin' fantastic; no wonder she was Best Supporting Actress. And I Am Telling You I'm Not Going was beastly. She was the star of the whole film and surpassed everyone else (yes, even Beyonce Z). Hudson's And I Am Telling You makes Amber Riley's (from Glee) rendition of it look like a pussycat. Aniki Noni Rose also brought great strength to her unfairly smaller role. Beyonce was great, and Listen was pretty good, but she definitely doesn't have the powerful voice that Hudson has. I really liked this film and I expect to purchase it in the near future.
The Divulgations of One Desmond Leica: http://desmondleica.wordpress.com/
-
UmbrellaFish
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 5717
- Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 3:09 pm
- Gender: Male (He/Him)
Ahh! I've been dying to see this film (and since you mentioned it, The Phantom of the Opera as well)! Actually, I haven't seen/heard enough Webber in general.TheSequelOfDisney wrote: Evita - Well, continuing my movie-musicals, I thought that it was decent. Madonna definitely struggled with the singing since her vocal range is like 2 octaves (well, I have no idea about that, I'm just guessing). Antonio Banderas was sufficient as Che but every time that he was singing he looked like he was about to murder me and his weird eyebrow movements was just kind of awkward. It's not my favorite of Andrew Lloyd Webber's (that'd be Phantom!), but the songs that make it a classic (Buenos Aires, Don't Cry For Me Argentina, Another Suitcase In Another Hall) were done well enough. Madonna wouldn't have been my first choice but seeing as the needed a big name, she got the job done (but just barely).
-
TheSequelOfDisney
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 5263
- Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 3:30 pm
- Location: Ohio, United States of America
One should never be lacking in knowledge of Sir Webber! Phantom is my all time favorite (In fact, I'm seeing it on Broadway this Thursday and I can't hardly wait!). I hope you see Phantom and Evita! Webber is awesome!UmbrellaFish wrote:Ahh! I've been dying to see this film (and since you mentioned it, The Phantom of the Opera as well)! Actually, I haven't seen/heard enough Webber in general.
The Divulgations of One Desmond Leica: http://desmondleica.wordpress.com/
-
UmbrellaFish
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 5717
- Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 3:09 pm
- Gender: Male (He/Him)
Well, I expect to be educated very soon because I just found both movies on YouTube!TheSequelOfDisney wrote:One should never be lacking in knowledge of Sir Webber! Phantom is my all time favorite (In fact, I'm seeing it on Broadway this Thursday and I can't hardly wait!). I hope you see Phantom and Evita! Webber is awesome!UmbrellaFish wrote:Ahh! I've been dying to see this film (and since you mentioned it, The Phantom of the Opera as well)! Actually, I haven't seen/heard enough Webber in general.
Thank God for the internet.
Léon (1994)
Amazing, wonderful film. I caught it on tv a lot of years ago and I it struck me as few films have before. I've been searching for it on dvd for years, and I finally found it a few weeks ago. I watched it again, and it was even better than I remembered it.
It tells the story of the little girl Mathilda (played extremely powerful and convincing by a 13 year old Natalie Portman) whose family gets murdered by a corrupt DIA agent (a mental Gary Oldman). She gets taken in by hitman Léon (a sympathetic Jean Reno), who teaches her the traits of the business. Over time, they develop a bond.
The ending was so depressing, yet so beautiful and so fitting at the same time. I recommend this film to everyone. No matter what genres you like, what kind of stories you like to see: this one will strike a chord with you.
Amazing, wonderful film. I caught it on tv a lot of years ago and I it struck me as few films have before. I've been searching for it on dvd for years, and I finally found it a few weeks ago. I watched it again, and it was even better than I remembered it.
It tells the story of the little girl Mathilda (played extremely powerful and convincing by a 13 year old Natalie Portman) whose family gets murdered by a corrupt DIA agent (a mental Gary Oldman). She gets taken in by hitman Léon (a sympathetic Jean Reno), who teaches her the traits of the business. Over time, they develop a bond.
The ending was so depressing, yet so beautiful and so fitting at the same time. I recommend this film to everyone. No matter what genres you like, what kind of stories you like to see: this one will strike a chord with you.