|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 327 responses total. |
gregb
|
|
response 285 of 327:
| 
Mar 4 19:44 UTC 2003 |
Yeppers. Normally, these aren't my kind of flicks, but I'll probably
rent them just to see Williams doing something different.
|
furs
|
|
response 286 of 327:
|
Mar 4 20:02 UTC 2003 |
I thought Insomniac was ok and thought he was ok in it. He was much
creepier in One Hour Photo. Insomniac is worth the watch, but I don't
think as good as he was in One Hour Photo.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 287 of 327:
|
Mar 4 23:02 UTC 2003 |
re #283: A matter of personal preference, I guess. I won't feel sorry
if I never see another movie in which Robin Williams plays a character
who's heartwarming and puckish.
|
other
|
|
response 288 of 327:
|
Mar 5 01:27 UTC 2003 |
I read that as One Hour Potato...
|
gelinas
|
|
response 289 of 327:
|
Mar 5 03:04 UTC 2003 |
(I've not seen it, but I thought he played a nutso in The Fisher King.)
|
mcnally
|
|
response 290 of 327:
|
Mar 5 03:24 UTC 2003 |
Yes, but in that film he was a heartwarming nutso..
|
janc
|
|
response 291 of 327:
|
Mar 5 04:52 UTC 2003 |
Rented "King of Texas". Patrick Stewart and Colim Meany set aside their
Star Fleet togs to do King Lear reset as a Western. I guess this is
mostly a curiousity. But it's not nearly as bad as one might reasonably
expect it to be. Quite watchable, really. Patrick Stewart really is a
good actor, as are several of the other performers.
|
janc
|
|
response 292 of 327:
|
Mar 5 04:53 UTC 2003 |
Oh, and the film is called "Insomnia" not "Insomniac".
|
furs
|
|
response 293 of 327:
|
Mar 5 13:50 UTC 2003 |
oops! I almost didn't even come up with that, so thanks!
|
scott
|
|
response 294 of 327:
|
Mar 5 14:00 UTC 2003 |
Watched a fair amount of "Ishtar" (yes, *that* bad movie) last night - didn't
really watch it will attention, and the friend who bought had to leave early
to avoid the snowstorm. No opinion on it yet.
|
gregb
|
|
response 295 of 327:
|
Mar 5 18:33 UTC 2003 |
Re. 291: I think you mean "Colm Meaney."
I just finished watching the TV-movie remake of The Lone Ranger. I
didn't recognize any of the actors but I enjoyed it. Although it took
place in the old west, you could definitely see modern-day influences,
like the way they talked and particularly the fighting style of Tonto
which had plenty of martial arts-style moves.
|
bhelliom
|
|
response 296 of 327:
|
Mar 9 19:05 UTC 2003 |
I've enjoyed Robin Williams evolution as an actor. He's continued to
mix up both comedy and more serious roles as his film career
progresses. If you haven't seen it yet, I'd highly recommend "Robin
Williams, Live on Broadway." It's fabulous!
|
richard
|
|
response 297 of 327:
|
Mar 10 01:46 UTC 2003 |
I think Williams deserved to be nominated for an academy award for
"One Hour Photo", but it was a smaller film and released earlier in the year
and not the end of it, and lacked the marketing muscle of other films. But
he was great in it.
|
edina
|
|
response 298 of 327:
|
Mar 10 15:23 UTC 2003 |
Saw "Chicago" on Saturday. Ok - how badly do I want to take jazz classes now?
Talk about a great show!
|
mynxcat
|
|
response 299 of 327:
|
Mar 10 15:34 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
edina
|
|
response 300 of 327:
|
Mar 10 15:36 UTC 2003 |
I still can't get over how great Richard Gere was!!! I mean, he's an ok
singer, but the tapdance he did was great. And how can I forget John C.
Reilly? Talk about a great actor. I can't believe that Gere didn't get an
Oscar nod.
|
bhelliom
|
|
response 301 of 327:
|
Mar 10 16:03 UTC 2003 |
Yep, I REALLY did enjoy that movie. I went out and bought the
soundtrack immediately upon leaving the theater!
|
furs
|
|
response 302 of 327:
|
Mar 10 16:10 UTC 2003 |
Watched "Shall We Dance" over the weekend. Cute Japaneese movie.
reminded me a little of Strictly Ballroom, which I love. (Which is on
Bravo this week.)
|
mynxcat
|
|
response 303 of 327:
|
Mar 10 16:34 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 304 of 327:
|
Mar 10 17:12 UTC 2003 |
Rented "The Fast Runner" (on Jan's enthusiastic recommendation in #278).
We were "glued to our seats" (but were happy for video so we could pause
for potty runs). It IS a movie - not a documentary - but the closeness
to either earlier or remote Inuit life is well done. No "modern conveniences"
are evident, except for a pot in which they boiled water or rendered fat,
which may have been a snowmobile oil pan (??). We thought the cinematography
was excellent - it was just that the scenery is so barren. The focus is
therefore mostly on the people and their lives.
It is a story of an internal feud in a remote Inuit tribe based on
jealousies over both a woman and leadership. Although a murder is
committed most public violence is ritualistic, with elders having enormous
influence. The story and characters are a little hard to follow because of
unfamiliar faces, and the langauge being Inuktitut with English subtitles.
If you can't pronounce a character's name it is harder to follow their
place in the story.
I had read "Confessions of an Igloo Dweller" by James Houston some years
ago. It would have been complementary to have seen this movie immediately
after having read the book. Many of the objects of daily use described in
the book were employed in the film - the ulu, igloos of course and kayaks,
the tangle of the dogsleds, an angakuk, kamotiks,..... (I think there is a
review of _Confessions..._ in the book cf) - as well as the social and
work lives of the Inuit.
|
edina
|
|
response 305 of 327:
|
Mar 10 18:36 UTC 2003 |
You know, Jeanne - "Strictly Ballroom" is easily one of my favorite movies.
Where on earth is Paul Mercurio?
|
furs
|
|
response 306 of 327:
|
Mar 10 19:59 UTC 2003 |
Me too Brooke. I'll be watching it again this Friday on Bravo. :)
|
fitz
|
|
response 307 of 327:
|
Mar 12 06:29 UTC 2003 |
JUNGLE BOOK 2 C+
Kids under 10 will like it well enough. It has songs and characters from the
first movie and has similar story line. This resemblance to the previous
Jungle Book is the selling point.
However, the ordinary evaluation comes from an adult perspective. In the past
I have been amazed that Disney could retell an old story and make it great.
Such is not the case here, where the plot is as thin as one peril after
another in the jungle.
The animation is uninspired: coloration was just plain clumsy with the shadow
areas of head shots looking as though faces were blemished by a creeping,
irregular bruise.
The direction managed to get the story told, but there were few instances of
extra effort. In lparticular, the musical number W-I-I-ILD is the only part
with novel POV.
I paid matineee prices and did not get my money's worth. This movie is good
enough to rent though.
|
gull
|
|
response 308 of 327:
|
Mar 12 14:33 UTC 2003 |
This seems like another totally unnecessary sequel from Disney. The first
time I went to a movie where the trailer for it played, people *booed* it.
|
gregb
|
|
response 309 of 327:
|
Mar 12 15:55 UTC 2003 |
Return to the Batcave: The Misadventures of Adam and Burt
If you watched the '60s Batman series as a kid you'd probably get a
grin off this spoof of a spoof.
As in the original episodes, the storyline is thin. The original
Batmobile is stolen from a charity auction and Adam West and Burt Ward--
in Batman and Robin style--follow clues left by the mysterious thief.
Intermixed are flashbacks of how the show got started, problems with
censors, Adam's sexual excapades, Burt's problem with the battle of
his "buldge," et al.
In addition to the original Dynamic Duel, Julie Newmar and Frank
Gorshin make appearances as themselves. As for the flashback actors, I
wasn't impressed with Jack Brewer, who played a young Adam West. He
only sorta looked like him and IMO, didn't sound like him at all.
Jason Marsden, who played yound Burt Ward, I thought was alright; not
great, but alright. The best casting was with the young villains. I
particularly liked the guy who played Burgess Meredeth (Penguin).
All-in-all, a fun romp.
|
