Reviews written by registered user
|
| 696 reviews in total |
10 out of 21 people found the following review useful:
Wow, "Shadowhunters" in tight and shiny spandex, latex, and leather
outfits; shades of "Barbarella"! Best eye-candy on television, at least
until "Lab Rats" decides to lure viewers by prominently featuring Kelly
Berglund parading around in her original spandex uniform with the
knee-high black boots. And way better than Victoria Justice's
short-lived and misnamed "Eye'Candy" MTV series. After watching the
"Beyond the Shadows: The Making of Shadowhunter" I did not expect to
like the actual episodes but so far they have exceeded my expectations.
I see a lot of Joss Weedon influences, especially in the creative ways
the production designer gets a lot of mileage out of a modest budget.
"Shadowhunters" is most like his "Dollhouse" (2009-10) series, or at
least if "Angel" had been working out of that location.
Katherine McNamara has always been incredibly videogenic, but extremely
sterile. She's a little older now and her Clary Fay costumes and action
sequences give her actual sizzle.
Emeraude Toubia's "Isabelle Lightwood" character simply scorches your
eyeballs in both close-ups and wide-shots. And she delightfully teases
this role with a nice tongue-in-cheek parody quality that works to make
Isabelle more accessible to viewers.
I'll leave it to others to comment on the three main brooding male cast
members.
Like all the "Hunger Games" films, the series can be painful and
insulting to viewers who have read the books.
The acting is weak, McNamara has a squeaky voice, and the story lines
could be more engaging. But pretty much everything in the production is
on a level far above such mainstream garbage as "Supergirl"; and given
"Shadowhunters" elevation above that sort of dreck it is hard to
understand the one star comments. Ratings should on a relative scale.
Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child. Comment
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
"Call Me Dodie" is my personal favorite of the many "Gunsmoke"
episodes. The story has considerable charm and a remarkable portrayal
of the title character. And it introduces a nice bit of symbolism,
bookending the 60 minute September 1962 episode with a kite. In fact,
it goes out on a shot (panning up) of the kite and its string tangled
in the Pleasant Valley Orphanage sign; symbolic of the controlled
freedom of Dodie's expected future. An absolutely brilliant ending.
Dodie was one of the first parts 30-year-old Kathleen Nolan played
after leaving "The Real McCoys", at the conclusion of the series' fifth
season. It was a remarkable performance as Dodie was a wide-eyed
seventeen year-old orphan out to aggressively experience the world,
starting with Dodge City. That Nolan is completely convincing in this
part, both from an acting and a physical perspective, is simply
amazing. You recognize her voice but there is complete physical
transformation, wiping years off her Kate McCoy character.
The episode simply transplants the storyline of "Sparrows" (United
Artists' 1926 silent feature) to Dodge City with Nolan playing Mary
Pickford's Molly character. Molly was also the oldest child at an
orphanage. The orphans in both stories are treated like slaves.
Pickford was 34 when she played the 17 year-old Molly. I suspect that
the casting of Nolan was inspired by Pickford's believability in this
similar age disparity situation. In both the character takes on a
dimensionality from the stretch required of both actresses, who sell
their young characters so effectively that little suspension of
disbelief is required of viewers.
Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Like many adaptations, this one leaves you amazed at Lionsgate's
staggering contempt for the movie viewing public, a contempt similar to
the "Capital's" contempt for the populations of the "Districts"; so
perhaps their attitude is appropriate.
Susan Collins' source novel (she is complicit in this insult as she had
a least some part in the adaptation), the first of a trilogy, is the
story of an existential heroine (Katniss Everdeen) who performs a
single heroic act, volunteering to take the place of her younger sister
in the post-apocalyptic games from which the grim trilogy gets its
name.
But Katniss immediately knows that there was nothing heroic about her
action, that her lightening fast decision required no contemplation but
was something she was compelled to do. For the rest of the first book
(upon which the 2012 film is based) Katniss is buffeted along by mix of
free will and destiny, second-guessing each of her decisions and
feeling far more guilt than satisfaction over the consequences and
(more fundamentally) over her decision to essentially prostitute
herself to the Capital in the service of survival.
And the reader gets full access to the inner working of her mind
because the story is told entirely (100%) from her point of view. This
storytelling device shrinks the scale of the story, as a reader never
goes out beyond the reach of the first person storyteller. This fosters
the sort of reader identification Edgar Rice Burroughs brought to his
"John Carter of Mars" series.
Apparently Lionsgate felt that viewers were not up to the mental
challenge of Collins' storytelling technique and they converted to a
third person POV, going so far as to completely dispense with a
voice-over narration by the main character. A puzzling decision since
film offers wonderful opportunities for the juxtaposition of objects of
contrasting scale.
Lionsgate also felt the need to draw in characters and events from the
second book in the series (endless scenes of President Snow and signs
of the beginning of dissent in the Districts). These immediately
destroy the scale unique to the first book and the concept of a
faceless enemy, so that the progression of the trilogy from small to
vast is compromised. Overt dissent in the Districts appears far too
soon in the adaptation, effectively spoiling both the intimacy of the
first book and the expansion of the struggle in later books.
The film's ham-handed treatment of the story is reflected in Haymitch's
explanation for the high score Katness receives after shooting the
apple out of the pig's month. He says it is because they liked her
guts; but his explanation in the book is that they liked her temper,
that this exhibition of her fierceness has made her a player who they
believe will bring some heat to the games. Guts are not going to
attract sponsors or win the games, nor are they going to incite anyone
to revolt. It is a critical change of phrase because throughout the
trilogy it is not her courage but her mix of fierceness and humanity
that is the difference maker for Katniss, and it is this mix that gives
the character the dimensionality necessary for reader identification.
Most remarkable, however, is Lionsgate's inexplicable failure to
feature the most powerful and most memorable moment in the entire
trilogy; the moment Katniss receives the bread from District 11.
Arguably the most intense segment ever written. This is really the
first book's climatic scene, as Katniss slowly grasps that the bread
was originally intended for Rue, with those in her district making a
great sacrifice in order to support her. And that after Rue's death
they elected to redirect the gift to a participant from another
district, the first time in the 70+ year history of the games that such
a gesture was made. And the first hint of a unification of the twelve
intentionally isolated districts.
This is the turning point of the entire story, much like the moment in
"The Magnificent Seven" when the Villagers tell Chris they collected
everything of value in their village to hire him and he accepts this
small sum, saying: "I have been offered a lot for my work, but never
everything".
Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.
I can't in good conscience give "Screwball Hotel" more than four stars
but it is still a must see. Buried throughout what is otherwise a
moronic exercise in low-budget torture are short vignettes between the
hotel manager and his secretary Miss Walsh (Laurah Guillen). These
inspired scenes feature their active costume and fantasy sex life,
these assorted scenes are inventive and hilarious enough to belong in a
much better film. Despite their almost nonstop silly coupling, the two
characters never call each other by their first names; maintaining the
executive - secretary formality as they do erotic takeoffs on "The
Wizard of Oz", "Star Trek", "Raider of the Lost Ark", "Snow White", and
"Jaws". At one point a bellboy dresses up in a frog costume hoping to
make it with Miss Walsh.
Miss Walsh is arguably the most erotic character in movie history
(Guillen being an irresistible combination of cute face, killer body,
and self-knowing whimsy). She surprisingly upstages Penthouse
Pet-Of-The-Year Corinne Alphen (whose scenes are the only other ones
worth watching) in the sizzle department.
Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.
"The Ambushers" (1967) is the third film in Dean Martin's four-film
"Matt Helm" franchise. It is significantly weaker than the other three
and the only one which does not feature a song by the Steubenville
Thrush, I don't think that omission impacted the film's relative
quality. Martin was not in Sinatra's class as a singer or an actor but
he was effortlessly likable and had some comedic talent. "The
Ambushers" gets two stars instead of one because Janice Rule gives a
solid performance in the face of what must have been a professionally
embarrassing production for her. She looks extremely uncomfortable when
she is not looking bored - I imagine her mind alternated between these
two states. I can't imagine that the typical Irwin Allen production
design motivated any of the cast.
That said the film works quite well as a window into the pre-Woodstock
era cultural vacuum. It throws a bevy of pretty young starlets onto the
screen, none having the slightest dimensionality or being involved in
anything remotely erotic. Sizzle-wise it's all form over substance.
Rule (whose character physically looks a lot like Mrs. Peel) does
provide a bit of erotic voltage in much the same classy detached way
Diana Rigg did in a standard episode of "The Avengers". Working against
all the females in the cast are some of the worst costume choices you
can imagine. Apparently for a few days in 1967 dull finish boots that
look to be made from shag carpet were trendy, unfortunately those days
appear to have been the days when the wardrobe choices were made.
The film had a villainess or at least the Francesca Madeiros character
was intended to serve such a purpose. Francesca is played by a foreign
actress named Senta Berger. She has orange skin, no waist, and wears
large Christmas tree ornaments for earrings. It is rumored that
Francesca's look served as the inspiration for the Oompa, Loompa
characters in "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory".
The film features a flying saucer and I wonder if the original script
called for Francesca to be from Venus, perhaps they forgot to
communicate the changes to the wardrobe people. That might explain the
incredible leaps of logic and obvious gaps in the development of her
character. Berger's character is so garishly moronic that it elevates
Rule's character or at least helps you appreciate the degree to which
Rule was able to transcend this hopeless mess.
Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.
Now almost forgotten, C.O.D. (1981) (German title "Snap") was a staple
of the old "usa-up-all-night's" programming. The humor was a bit more
sophisticated and satirical than most of their exploitation film
selections; perhaps reflecting the German influence in the writing and
the production. And unlike most it had a quality cast, many of whom
have gone on to assemble impressive acting resumes.
Chris Lemmon plays Albert Zack, a relatively dim young advertising
executive whose client is the financially failing Beaver Bra Company.
The company chairman believes the enterprise can be saved if Albert can
get their bra line endorsed by famous busty woman. He has selected five
celebrity women and the film consists of five separate segments with
the blundering Albert and his female secretary /
good-girl-love-interest (played by Olivia Pascal) devising ways to meet
them and pitch the endorsement idea. Getting past the escorts and
security people involves an assortment of costumes and subterfuge.
Working against them is a board member who wants the company to fail,
with the biggest laughs coming from his female associate's (played by
Jennifer Richards) attempts to stop Albert.
Corinne Alphen and Carole Davis play two of the celebrity women. They
were arguably the two most erotic actresses of their decade and are
both nicely showcased in their segments. Both had an instinctive acting
for-the-camera ability. Former Penthouse Pet-Of-The-Year Alphen was the
Nancy Kovack of the 80's, with a remarkably low upper arm to bust
ratio. Even in this early role Davis radiates an intelligence and
self-knowing whimsy that nicely complements her obvious physical
assets.
The front-end-loaded pun refers to the ordering of the segments, as
Alphen and Davis are featured early and the other three actresses are
simply not up to their standard. Although "The Toy's" Teresa Ganzel
does her standard airhead blonde quite competently. This peaking early
is the film's only weakness, with little to hold your interest after
Davis' hilarious film-stealing appearance as the mega-erotic Contessa
Bazzini.
Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.
F. Scott Fitzgerald's time in Hollywood inspired him to write "The Last
Tycoon", his final novel. Fitzgerald had a tendency to model his heroes
on men he admired and then infuse them with a lot of himself. In this
case he choose Irving Thalberg, who for a brief period in the late 20's
and 30's was the "boy genius" production chief at M-G-M, until his
death at the age of 37 in 1936. Thalberg was second to none in his
instinctive feel for what would make a successful film but he only
provided the bones for Fitzgerald's protagonist, the author fleshed the
character out with little or no attempt to incorporate Thalberg's
personality or private life. Instead Fitzgerald opted for Abraham
Lincoln as the model for much of what was Monroe Stahr - including his
novel's title, as Lincoln was frequently referred to by contemporary
media as "The Tycoon" and like Stahr was fighting a war on many fronts.
As a film, the "The Last Tycoon" (1976) is far less than the sum of its
generally excellent parts, which could also be said of its unfinished
source novel. It is full of structural discord that many viewers will
find quite frustrating. A relatively large budget, excellent production
design, fine performances by a cast nicely matched to the characters
they play, clever editing, and first-class cinematography. Then throw
in a screenplay that is true to its unfinished source novel. Yet
instead of box office and critical success you get one of the more
expensive flops in movie history. But you also get a very ambitious
film that is about as interesting as any you will find, with a cutting
edge story that is no less powerful for its extremely small target
audience; all nicely matched by the ambitious, paternalistically cast,
and expensive film-within-a-film that the title character is pushing
though despite it being an obvious money-loser for the studio.
The adaptation's trouble lies almost solely with the film's love
interest, Kathleen Moore, played by Ingrid Boulting. Kathleen is all
Fitzgerald, an Irish will-of-the-wisp given to irresponsible
self-indulgences and beguiling frankness. Woman such as Kathleen were
central to Fitzgerald's world view, he believed that they inspired and
tortured any man cerebral and imaginative enough to appreciate them.
While such a relationship can be translated to the screen (often easier
than in a book because film is a visual medium), it will only connect
with a small segment of viewers, most others will find it puzzling.
The most interesting detail of the entire production is the way
Boulting is costumed, lit, and filmed in her scenes. She glows in these
shots because Kathleen is even more of an ethereal character than
Gatsby's "Daisy", Monroe sees her as extremely delicate and light in a
way that seems too perfect for his world. She is elusive to him, almost
translucent, which only makes her all the more precious. Three years
later this concept would be carried to its extreme in "All That Jazz"
with Jessica Lange's "Angelique" who literally had no physical
substance. The point from a "language of film" perspective is that a
filmmaker presents a character in this manner to immediately clue
viewers into that character representing an all-consuming motivational
force that will drive the hero throughout the story - often to doom.
Kathleen makes her entrance in one of the best scenes in cinema
history; with the post-earthquake chaos of the flooding studio lot
looking like 'thirty acres of fairyland' at night, a radiant mystery
woman climbs down from a gigantic floating head (fabricated to be used
by the studio as a prop the following week) and smiles at Monroe Stahr,
the last of the great Hollywood princes.
To its credit, the screenplay is true to Fitzgerald's vision and
Boulting and DeNiro effectively bring their relationship dynamic to the
big screen. But potential viewers should understand that their often
nonverbal relationship is the core element of the entire film, the rest
of the story is simply a backdrop. Fitzgerald struggled with "The Last
Tycoon" because he was in effect writing two books in one: a
"psychological" novel about Stahr and a social commentary about
Hollywood. Harold Pinter's difficulties with the screenplay stemmed
from the same issue Fitzgerald had been unable to resolve, just where
to strike the balance between the two stories.
The emphasize on Stahr means that the excellent supporting cast, from
Tony Curtis as a troubled movie star to Robert Mitchum as a cynical
studio head to Donald Pleasence as a perplexed English writer, do not
get any substantial screen time; but are relegated to insubstantial
supporting parts in the service of giving DeNiro the room to showcase
his character's roller coaster of elation and sadness. The only
exception is Teresa Russell's Cecilia (the story's Nick Carraway) whose
sense of right and wrong helps to elevate her above the others.
Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.
Very cool movie. "The Girl" (2009) should be required viewing for all
film and video production students. Each shot is a creative tapestry of
composition, light, and shadow. Fredrick Edfeldt's acting-for-the
camera direction is inspired and Blanca Engstrom gives the perfect
nuanced and underplayed performance needed to match the pace and tone
of his film.
But the real star of this remarkable film is Swiss cinematographer
Hoyte Van Hoytema, who has since been the Director of Photography for
"Interstellar" (2014). The film is worth a second watch just to
appreciate each carefully composed shot. I've never seen anyone do it
better, even breaking the 180 rule several times in the service of
underscoring the girl's increasingly disoriented drift from reality.
It is not an entirely original story. There are many of the creepy
elements from "Tideland" (2005) and some from "The Little Girl Who
Lives Down the Lane" (1976), but "The Girl" is much more naturalistic
and gentle than those two films. It could also be considered a placid
"Alice In Wonderland", subtly off-kilter with Louis Carroll's illogic
replaced by the mundane but equally disturbing logic of the modern
adult world.
Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.
"I dropped the pears ... sorry daddy" says the stunned child who will
grow up to become the creator of Mary Poppins. The child (wonderfully
underplayed by Annie Rose Buckley) has returned from the pear fetching
errand to find that her long-suffering father has passed away from
influenza during her brief absence. Thus begins a life of atonement for
P.L. Travers, who will take her father's first name as her surname and
adopt a rather strait-laced no-nonsense existence. The whimsical person
she was to have become is instead incorporated into her creation, a
character modeled on the physical characteristics of her Aunt Ellie
(played by Rachel Griffiths) and the style of J. M. Barrie - who she
admired. The film confirms this in the closing credits with two
different drawings of Mary Poppins, the first one appears when Buckley
is credited and the second one a little later when Griffiths is
credited.
Buckley's is the key performance of the production as she must
non-verbally sell the child's absolute and unqualified adoration of her
father, if the parallel story of Travers' efforts at atonement for not
saving him are to ring true. In this the young Australian actress is
absolutely convincing and John Lee Hancock demonstrates his
considerable acting-for-the-camera directing skills.
The film is an extremely well-crafted tale with two parallel
time-lines, Travers' traumatic coming-of-age story and Walt Disney's
ultimately successful efforts to secure the rights to bring Mary
Poppins to the big screen. Both proceed chronologically, with Travers
recalling her childhood in sequenced flashbacks. More subtle is a third
story, minimalist references to Disney's own childhood, which serve as
a compare and contrast with Travers; with portions of both fathers
blending into the 1964 film's version of Mr. Banks (played by David
Tomlinson who appears at the center of that film's cast photo in the
closing credits) . The film teasingly alludes to a similarity between
these two creative people. Both brought a lot of childhood baggage with
them into adulthood in the way of father issues. And for both these
issues are reflected in the dichotomy of their adult lives. Early in
the film they cut-away to the second floor window of Elias Disney's
office on Disneyland's Main Street, Walt's tribute to the work ethic
instilled in him by his father. Later Disney attributes the motivation
behind his retreat into imagination to bitterness about a childhood
which was anything but whimsical.
Those behind "Saving Mr. Banks" understood what it is like to still be
wrestling with childhood demons throughout adulthood and they knew how
to make the viewer feel the struggle.
On the other hand the saving of Mr. Banks premise is a non-factor in
the Mary Poppins books (the original and the sequels). The film would
be more accurately named "Saving Mr. (Elias) Disney". Apparently
Travers was appalled before, during, and after the screening of the
dumbed down film adaptation of her books. And by all accounts she
carried her litany of objections to her grave, never permitting a
sequel. For 50 years avid readers have been mystified by the
adaptation's unrecognizable theme and its peculiar areas of emphasis.
The adaptation did not include Travers' best chapter (Mary Popping's
birthday party at the zoo among the animals) nor her best character
(the star Maia from the Pleiades cluster of the Taurus constellation -
who Jane and Michael help in her human form to pick out Christmas gifts
for her six sisters). Instead they fabricated additional scenes for the
horribly miscast Dick Van Dyke - whose casting even "Saving Mr. Banks"
acknowledges as being entirely for commercial purposes.
Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.
"We've codified our existence to bring it down to human size, to make
it comprehensible, we've created a scale so we can forget its
unfathomable scale" says Lucy (Scarlett Johansson) by way of summation
of the insights she has achieved under an accidental overdose of a new
and powerful synthetic drug.
"Lucy" is a philosophical film being marketed as science fiction -
action adventure. Since it worked for "2001: A Space Odyssey" back in
1968 I guess they thought it would work here. But the mismatch has
caused "Lucy" to miss much of Luc Besson's intended audience and to
disappoint those looking for Scarlett Johansson doing a "Leon" inspired
"Kick-Ass" number in tight shiny "Black Widow" latex.
The mismatch between the film and its promotional campaign is my only
major criticism. A minor criticism is the poor quality of the digital
effects (the car chase doesn't hold a candle to the old fashion way,
insert 1998's "Ronin" here). Given the budget limitations, the POV, and
the transforming mental condition of title character; the film would
have been far better served had Beeson substituted expressionism for
realism. Cinema greatness was there for the taking.
As in "The Incredible Shrinking Man" and "2001: A Space Odyssey", the
existential theme is not anti-God (or pro Übermensch) but anti-ego.
With a character slowly losing their connection with humanity, finally
connecting with the infinite at the moment they become infinitesimal.
Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.
Page 1 of 70: | [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] |