M: V and I took a break from our Halloween movie spree to watch the 1981 movie On Golden Pond. I am glad we did. I cannot say enough about this movie. Here it is, 11:15 at night, we just finished the movie, and I had to sit down and write. This movie is both heart wrenching and heart warming. Katherine Hepburn and Henry Fonda play two "old poops" (their words, not mine) spending a summer at their cabin on a lake in the woods. They learn to cope with their increasing age and the inevitability of death, while mending their relationship with their adult daughter (Jane Fonda) with the help of her 13 year old step-son to be. The wit and love between the main characters is so fun and touching. Henry Fonda gives a masterful performance, well-deserving of the many awards he received for the part. In fact, On Golden Pond was nominated for academy awards for best picture, best actor, best actress, best supporting actress, best screenplay, and best director (a total of 10 nominations). It won best actor and best actress, deservedly. Chariots of Fire edged it out for best picture. The music and filming are beautiful and add the final touch to this masterpiece. Plenty of swearing, but all done in good humor. This is an absolute must see. One of the best movies I have ever seen. 4 stars.
V: The dialogue in On Golden Pond is some of the best and most charming I can remember in a movie. It was clever and funny and, at times, really touching. The final scene is so very poignant. The acting was wonderful, the setting so beautiful - in New Hampshire - I want to go to there. It really was a pleasure to watch. The relationship of this couple who had been together for decades was so sweet and tender. Am I using "so" a lot? It was just so good. Cuddle up with your sweetheart and watch this. Rated PG. 4 stars.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Count Dracula
M: Over the past 2 nights V and I watched the 1977 BBC miniseries Count Dracula (at 2 1/2 hours it is really a mini series). The part of Dracula was played by Louis Jourdan, and he was really compelling. This movie apparently tracks very closely to the Bram Stoker novel. The show had the right amount of scariness with limited gore (which I imagine is uncommon in a Dracula movie). All and all, a good scary show.
But, and I am going to sound like an old movie hater when I say this, there were some moments of really poor effects that took me out of the moment. Also, a character of an American from Texas was played by a British guy putting on the worst accent I have ever heard, and I lived in England for 2 years and everybody I met tossed their American accent my way. Couldn't they find an actual American to play the role, I am sure there were some in England in 1977. I was even offered a job as a DJ when I was in England by a guy on the street. The BBC should have known better.
Anyway, a good scary Halloween season movie with limited gore and only a few effects that will make you giggle. Not so bad, giggles chase away the boogie man. Oh, and some of the scenes are pretty sexy and may make you blush, but the giggles will chase the blushes away too. 2 1/2 stars.
V: Yeah, some pretty lame effects here and there. For some reason, since it was done by the BBC, and since it was staying close to the book, I thought this would be less scary. But it's still pretty ooky, and scary. Have you seen Gigi? Well, that handsome leading man plays dracula. He really does have the perfect face (mouth) for it. This show gave me the creeps. I guess that's what it's supposed to do. So it succeeded. 2 1/2 stars.
But, and I am going to sound like an old movie hater when I say this, there were some moments of really poor effects that took me out of the moment. Also, a character of an American from Texas was played by a British guy putting on the worst accent I have ever heard, and I lived in England for 2 years and everybody I met tossed their American accent my way. Couldn't they find an actual American to play the role, I am sure there were some in England in 1977. I was even offered a job as a DJ when I was in England by a guy on the street. The BBC should have known better.
Anyway, a good scary Halloween season movie with limited gore and only a few effects that will make you giggle. Not so bad, giggles chase away the boogie man. Oh, and some of the scenes are pretty sexy and may make you blush, but the giggles will chase the blushes away too. 2 1/2 stars.
V: Yeah, some pretty lame effects here and there. For some reason, since it was done by the BBC, and since it was staying close to the book, I thought this would be less scary. But it's still pretty ooky, and scary. Have you seen Gigi? Well, that handsome leading man plays dracula. He really does have the perfect face (mouth) for it. This show gave me the creeps. I guess that's what it's supposed to do. So it succeeded. 2 1/2 stars.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Rear Mirror
M: The other night we watched Hitchock's 1954 Rear Window, staring James Stewart and Grace Kelly. I think this is the first movie I have ever watched staring the famous Grace Kelly. Checking IMDB, she was really not in many movies, and even less classics, for a person with such a famous name. V tells me it is because she married a prince. I can only assume it is because of her striking beauty. Anyway, she was pretty good in this movie. Once again, James Stewart plays a man who is loved by a woman way out of his league to whom he is generally grumpy and rude. What a life. As with all old movies, I have to grade this one on a scale of relativity. It wasn't really as suspenseful as I was expecting, actually it was a bit predictable. But, all in all, it is a decent show with great actors and probably the first movie plot involving a husband chopping up his wife to slowly remove her from the house. All and all, just a light-hearted lark. 2 1/2 stars
V: Can you believe M said "light-hearted" right after a sentence containing "a husband chopping up his wife?" Okay, that's gross. (Post-edit: I was too tired when writing this to realize that M was being sarcastic.) Thank you, Hitchcock, for giving us the hints but not showing the actual disgusting and horrible stuff. I have seen this movie before, but was glad to see it again. I thought it was great! I'm reminded of when I was a kid and liked to imagine up crazy things. It's a good thing to do when you're bored and have a broken leg. I think "predictable" is not always a bad thing in suspense movies. Follow me here . . . part of what makes something scary is that you know trouble is coming. The when and how keeps you interested. And you're sitting there wincing waiting for it to hit you. This movie is not just about the creepy guy, it's about all the people you see through the window and their relationships, particularly the male-female relationships, as Stuart's character is contemplating his own situation with Grace Kelley's character. (Has there ever been a bigger duh?) It's not over-the-top. I appreciate a movie that doesn't make those alarms ("That would never happen in this scenario!") ring in my head. Rear Window has suspense, humor, and sensitivity. I'm sticking with the "Hitchcock is a master" club on this one. 3 1/2 stars.
V: Can you believe M said "light-hearted" right after a sentence containing "a husband chopping up his wife?" Okay, that's gross. (Post-edit: I was too tired when writing this to realize that M was being sarcastic.) Thank you, Hitchcock, for giving us the hints but not showing the actual disgusting and horrible stuff. I have seen this movie before, but was glad to see it again. I thought it was great! I'm reminded of when I was a kid and liked to imagine up crazy things. It's a good thing to do when you're bored and have a broken leg. I think "predictable" is not always a bad thing in suspense movies. Follow me here . . . part of what makes something scary is that you know trouble is coming. The when and how keeps you interested. And you're sitting there wincing waiting for it to hit you. This movie is not just about the creepy guy, it's about all the people you see through the window and their relationships, particularly the male-female relationships, as Stuart's character is contemplating his own situation with Grace Kelley's character. (Has there ever been a bigger duh?) It's not over-the-top. I appreciate a movie that doesn't make those alarms ("That would never happen in this scenario!") ring in my head. Rear Window has suspense, humor, and sensitivity. I'm sticking with the "Hitchcock is a master" club on this one. 3 1/2 stars.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
State of Play
V: I always look forward to seeing Russell Crowe in a movie, ever since A Beautiful Mind. He's just a really great actor. This movie didn't give him a whole lot to go on, though. State of Play must have been sponsored by the Save-the-Newspapers Club. And then there's a whole lotta whodunit and why. Except the "why" is really not there. That's what ultimately made this movie a disappointment. When it all unravels - and oh, yes, it continues to unravel, and unravel . . . - you're left thinking, "Really? Why did . . .? Why would . . .? But wouldn't . . .?" The implausibility of it is pretty heavy. But, remember, it's a good thing there was a newspaper, and not just a blog! So, it's kinda entertaining. Good cast - even Mike's fave, Ben Affleck. And there's an oddly unhilarious turn by Jason Bateman. (His roles should always be hilarious.) But the movie just becomes increasingly irrelevant. Like newspapers. 2 stars.
M: *SPOILER ALERT* Ben Affleck is the actor I love to hate. Russell Crowe, my go-to overrated actor (with the exception of Beautiful Mind and to a lesser extent Cinderella Man). But I think they were both pretty good in this show. I even liked Jason Bateman' s part, he makes me giggle (although he wasn't supposed to). State of Play has some moments that get your heart racing, so it is good there. But, in the end, the movie really loses steam and misses the boat. The whole movie we are led to believe that there is a big masterminded conspiracy afoot, which makes your mind whirl, and revs up the excitement. The twist at the end is that there was no grand conspiracy, and all the events were just the unfortunate acts of a crazy person. There was simply no reason for all the adventure. That bugged me. But I really dug the ongoing ode to newspapers. I mean, really, is there anything cooler than a movie about how great newspapers are? I heard a rumor about a newspaper article about how great movies are, but I couldn't find anyone who had read it. 2 1/2 stars.
M: *SPOILER ALERT* Ben Affleck is the actor I love to hate. Russell Crowe, my go-to overrated actor (with the exception of Beautiful Mind and to a lesser extent Cinderella Man). But I think they were both pretty good in this show. I even liked Jason Bateman' s part, he makes me giggle (although he wasn't supposed to). State of Play has some moments that get your heart racing, so it is good there. But, in the end, the movie really loses steam and misses the boat. The whole movie we are led to believe that there is a big masterminded conspiracy afoot, which makes your mind whirl, and revs up the excitement. The twist at the end is that there was no grand conspiracy, and all the events were just the unfortunate acts of a crazy person. There was simply no reason for all the adventure. That bugged me. But I really dug the ongoing ode to newspapers. I mean, really, is there anything cooler than a movie about how great newspapers are? I heard a rumor about a newspaper article about how great movies are, but I couldn't find anyone who had read it. 2 1/2 stars.
Miss Potter
V: We checked this out in the library only to find that my parents own, and love, this movie. Rene Zellweger is an actress who I always think I don't want to see, only to find that she always does a really good job. This is a fun movie based on the life of Beatrix Potter. Who, come to find out, is owed a huge debt of gratitude from those who like some land preserved and not turned into heavy residential or industrial sludge. But I'm getting ahead of myself. Sweet story. The only thing I didn't really love was the way Miss Potter spoke to her "friends", that is, her illustrations. It was more childish than charming for me. I understand the imagination bit, the whimsy, and the loneliness. Maybe I'm a humbug - but Miss Potter seemed to think they were a little too real. It made her look crazy, OK? BUT - that aside, I really liked this movie. 3 1/2 stars.
M: *SPOILER ALERT* I agree with V that, in the beginning of this movie, the use of cartoons is distracting and annoying and probably filled with artistic license (unless Beatrix Potter was schizophrenic). Having said that, the sweetness of the Ms. Potter character, as well as the character played by Ewan McGregor, won me over in the end. My hat's off to McGregor and Zellweger. It was fun to read about Ms. Potter on Wikipedia afterwards and learn that she is the person responsible for the preservation of the lakes district in Lancashire, England. It was weird to learn that she was married, and the love of her life was not the man portrayed as such in the movie. The movie really gives the impression that she didn't marry (it is called Miss Potter - oops spoiler). Anyway, good show, worth seeing, just get past the weird animation bits. 3 stars
M: *SPOILER ALERT* I agree with V that, in the beginning of this movie, the use of cartoons is distracting and annoying and probably filled with artistic license (unless Beatrix Potter was schizophrenic). Having said that, the sweetness of the Ms. Potter character, as well as the character played by Ewan McGregor, won me over in the end. My hat's off to McGregor and Zellweger. It was fun to read about Ms. Potter on Wikipedia afterwards and learn that she is the person responsible for the preservation of the lakes district in Lancashire, England. It was weird to learn that she was married, and the love of her life was not the man portrayed as such in the movie. The movie really gives the impression that she didn't marry (it is called Miss Potter - oops spoiler). Anyway, good show, worth seeing, just get past the weird animation bits. 3 stars
Amazing Grace
M: A touching story about one man's continuing fight for the abolition of the slave trade in England. An interesting story, and I learned a lot. I enjoyed getting a peek at the inner workings of the Parliament of the time, and I imagine that much of the dialogue comes directly from actual argument made and recorded during the slavery debates. I did, however, feel that the movie was a bit over-the-top. I know it is an emotional subject, but at times the movie laid it on a bit thick for me. Aside from a tendency toward the overly dramatic, which can be forgiven given the subject matter, I think it is a movie worth seeing. 3 stars.
V: We watched this over a two-day period. It's not that long, just was hard to find the time. (You always like a movie better when you watch it all at once.) I still really liked it. It's worth your time, if only to hear (watch) the story. Some people are called to do things they themselves don't think they can or want to do. But they've been given a gift and if they accept their call, they can do great things. You should see this movie. It's well done, good story, very clean. And that guy sure looks like Alan Rickman (aka Snape)! But it's not him. 3 1/2 stars.
V: We watched this over a two-day period. It's not that long, just was hard to find the time. (You always like a movie better when you watch it all at once.) I still really liked it. It's worth your time, if only to hear (watch) the story. Some people are called to do things they themselves don't think they can or want to do. But they've been given a gift and if they accept their call, they can do great things. You should see this movie. It's well done, good story, very clean. And that guy sure looks like Alan Rickman (aka Snape)! But it's not him. 3 1/2 stars.
Monday, October 5, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
