|
Grex > Cinema > #25: Siskel & Ebert & Grex-- the Movie Review item |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 165 responses total. |
remmers
|
|
response 106 of 165:
| 
Mar 7 17:36 UTC 1999 |
Re resp:102 - "Snake Eyes" would work better on a big wide theater
screen, I think. That's how I saw it. Director Brian DiPalma's
camera pyrotechnics play better in a theater. That and Nicholas
Cage's incredible screen presence made the movie enjoyable for me,
even though the story was a bit weak. The incredible long take at
the beginning rivals the one in Oroson Welles' "Touch of Evil"
(and was no doubt inspired by it).
|
scg
|
|
response 107 of 165:
|
Mar 7 17:46 UTC 1999 |
I saw Snake Eyes in the theater. I guess the camera work was pretty good.
However, no amount of good camera work can make up for a plot like that.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 108 of 165:
|
Mar 7 17:58 UTC 1999 |
I thought the plot of "Snake Eyes" was no worse than average for the
suspense genre (a sad commentary in and of itself..) and that the movie
was better than average for its genre, largely because of Cage..
I wouldn't recommend it unreservedly but it's worth watching..
|
scg
|
|
response 109 of 165:
|
Mar 7 18:22 UTC 1999 |
I didn't think it was horrible. I just didn't get as much out of it as I do
from most movies I watch.
|
mary
|
|
response 110 of 165:
|
Mar 7 21:14 UTC 1999 |
"8mm" is a mediocre thriller. Not awful and not great.
The script needed more work and it would have been better
with somelike like Kevin Costner in the lead if they wanted
to have the hero appear uncomfortably outside of his morality zone.
Not a good film for first date entertainment. (C)
"Affliction" is a powerful film and it's probably the best
work Nolte has ever done. No happy endings here, no explanations,
no apologies, just a stark view of a dysfunctional family. (A)
|
md
|
|
response 111 of 165:
|
Mar 8 03:37 UTC 1999 |
EVER AFTER (A) - The accents don't make much sense,
and there are some anachronistic usages ("Have you lost
your marbles?" "I could care less.") which are either
post-modern irony or just poor writing. Probably the
former, in view of Drew Barrymore's spunky American girl
role. (The action is set in 16th century France.)
Which is to say the writers were deliberately playing
with the genre. Not important, though. *Love*
that Drew. Anjelica Huston is a wonderful actress, but
even she seemed to have trouble preventing her affection
for Barrymore from shining through her character's
contempt for Barrymore's character. The words were mean,
but everything else about her radiated affection and
warmth toward Barrymore. Or did I just imagine that?
|
jazz
|
|
response 112 of 165:
|
Mar 8 16:06 UTC 1999 |
I'm pretty sure that was an intentional contrast; recall when Huston
told Barrymore how much she reminded her of her father?
|
md
|
|
response 113 of 165:
|
Mar 8 17:08 UTC 1999 |
Yes! Interesting movie.
|
jazz
|
|
response 114 of 165:
|
Mar 8 17:29 UTC 1999 |
It is at that. I enjoyed the modern perspective on a fairy tale, and
I wished they'd done it more in-context of a modern perspective, instead of
attempting to do it as a period piece. I'm looking forward to seeing "Cruel
Intentions", which seems to be a remake of "Les Liasons Dangereux".
|
md
|
|
response 115 of 165:
|
Mar 8 17:38 UTC 1999 |
Stanley Kubrick has died at his home in England. He was 70.
|
mooncat
|
|
response 116 of 165:
|
Mar 8 21:58 UTC 1999 |
Gah... wanna see Ever After! <grins> I really like Drew Barrymore too. :)
|
md
|
|
response 117 of 165:
|
Mar 9 16:12 UTC 1999 |
Reading around, I see that Ever After got mixed reviews.
One thing that seems to have rubbed a few people the wrong
way is that the movie purports to show the "real" Cinderella
story, without the fairy godmother, the magic pumpkin. the
transformation at the stroke of midnight, or any of that. They
want the fairy tale to remain a fairy tale. The problem with that
complaint is that Ever After isn't a naturalistic or realistic
retelling at all. I mean, the real fairy godmother turns out to
be -- Leonardo da Vinci?
|
jazz
|
|
response 118 of 165:
|
Mar 9 17:11 UTC 1999 |
It would figure her best friend was gay. :)
I was a bit wrong-way-rubbed by Ever After in parts; it should've been
more honest about being a politically-correct modern-cliche stab at a fairy
tale, instead of the "real" Cinderella story. Aside from that it was well
directed, and the acting was fairly good. The story kept me interested
throughout all but the most drawn-out music-and-strong-emotion scenes.
|
katie
|
|
response 119 of 165:
|
Mar 9 18:43 UTC 1999 |
I also learned many years ago that in the original Cinderella story, the
slippers were made of fur, not glass. Someone mistook the similar French
words.
|
md
|
|
response 120 of 165:
|
Mar 9 20:48 UTC 1999 |
Yep. "Vair" instead of "verre," or something. Grey squirrel fur,
to be precise.
|
md
|
|
response 121 of 165:
|
Mar 9 21:12 UTC 1999 |
[Btw, that image has always brought to mind a pair of those fuzzy
slippers in the shape of bunnies or tigers or lambs, only in this case
made out of a pair of real squirrels.]
Re the "politically correct" angle: Danielle's ideas were more republican
(small "r") than PC. It borders on anarchist in a few places. She repeatedly
takes the side of the servants and peasants. "They are the legs you
stand on," she defiantly tells Prince Henry. What really is hard to believe
is that such a woman could live happily ever after with any absolute
monarch, even a lovestruck sap like Henry, who founds the Sorbonne
out of love for his bibliophile sweetheart (his bibliofilly?).
|
md
|
|
response 122 of 165:
|
Mar 9 21:23 UTC 1999 |
[Probably not the Sorbonne, actually, which was founded 400 years
or so before Leonardo da Vinci was born. Probably best not to look
too closely at the names and dates of this movie.]
|
aruba
|
|
response 123 of 165:
|
Mar 9 21:56 UTC 1999 |
Re 119-120: Hmmm. I'm sure there are many versions of the Cinderella story,
but the one in Grimm's fairy tales ("Aschenputtel") was from Germany of the
early 1800s. I don't remember exactly what the slippers were made of, but it
was something hard, because the stepmother cuts one of the stepsisters' heel
off to make it fit. The Prince only realizes she's the wrong girl when he
sees all the blood pouring out of the shoe. (It was rather different from
the Disney version. :))
|
anderyn
|
|
response 124 of 165:
|
Mar 10 01:16 UTC 1999 |
My favourite re-telling has the heel cut off the first girl, the toes cut
off the second sister, and then the birds pluck out their eyes when Cinderella
finally does snag her prince. Gory. But did you know there's a Cinderella-
type story on Egyptian papyrus? I mean, there's this story told in ancient
Egypt that parallels the ideas -- this young girl, brought up away from
society, who is found by the pharaoh when birds carry off her shoe/sandal.
|
mooncat
|
|
response 125 of 165:
|
Mar 10 01:27 UTC 1999 |
My sister collects Cinderella stories... My favorite one is CinderEdna
Cinderella's next door neighbor, who married the 'Not-So-Hansome' Prince.
They were more fun. <grins>
|
mcnally
|
|
response 126 of 165:
|
Mar 10 06:24 UTC 1999 |
re #124: Falling in love with a girl based on a shoe or sandal seems to
be a popular theme in some of the Arabic folk tales I've read, too..
|
cyklone
|
|
response 127 of 165:
|
Mar 10 13:06 UTC 1999 |
Interesting
|
md
|
|
response 128 of 165:
|
Mar 10 15:06 UTC 1999 |
Another complaint I've heard about Ever After is that when the gypsies
steal the "Mona Lisa" from Leonardo, it's a rolled-up canvas; but the
real "Mona Lisa" is painted on wood. A more serious complaint, I
guess, is that Leonardo himself is trivialized into a "kindly old
curmudgeon" movie cliche'. How much does any of this matter?
|
other
|
|
response 129 of 165:
|
Mar 11 01:54 UTC 1999 |
i remember noticing the mona lisa fallacy.
|
darbha
|
|
response 130 of 165:
|
Mar 11 07:53 UTC 1999 |
Hey looking at the kind of movies that are coming now and making waves...like
all the classics of Shakespeare will soon be filmed. And not just that, may
be the works of the rest of all poets/playwrights of Elizabethian age will
be filmed in the coming days. Well it may look nice for us viewers, but
actually it speaks of a gradual loss of ideas in Hollywood and elsewhere.
|