Reviews

8 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
1/10
Completely awful
22 February 2004
I can't imagine why someone didn't remind the people responsible for this film that in order to have a movie, you need a screenplay. The writing was egregiously bad, the story was uncompelling and trite, the direction was lackluster, the editing was atrocious, and although the actors try valiantly none of them come off at all well. Sometimes it's just bad casting - Carol Kane has the ability to lower the overall quality of any film and whoever they cast as that rock star should definitely keep his day job. The snotty popular girl was wooden and looked like a model who just started taking acting classes. Lindsay Lohen, although a talented actress, was dressed like a 9th Avenue hooker and looked about 35 years old.

On the Disney channel they hyped the hell out of this film, featuring the director prominently (who looked like the director Peter Sellars' annoying younger sister). I'm glad she had fun making the film, but instead of making home movies during her shoot she might have paid more attention to the complete and utter mess her film was turning out to be. Parents really resent being dragged to this kind of film, especially when there are films around like Finding Nemo, which are actually entertaining for everyone.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
One of the Great Overlooked Comedies
20 February 2004
This film is so smart, so imaginative and so artfully played that it flew over the radar of the average movie-goer when it first came out. Michael Caine is at his brilliant best as the suave Laurence Jamison and Steve Martin's 'Ruprecht' is a comic masterpiece. As Freddy, he's the perfect boob -- smart enough to con women into giving him small sums of money, too stupid to realize there's a world going on around him where the stakes are much, much higher. It is also easy to underestimate the work of Glenn Headly, but once you've seen the whole movie you realize how her simple choices add up to a very complicated performance indeed. Every time I see this movie I laugh out loud.
17 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Formulaic, soft focus and annoying
15 January 2004
Why do we keep having to watch movies where Jack Nicholson is the love interest? GIVING AWAY THE ENDING NOW, SO READ NO FURTHER IF YOU SIMPLY CAN'T GUESS....I did NOT want to see her end up with him, the same way I did NOT want to see Helen Hunt end up with him in the similarly titled Good as it Gets. The last time I cared whether Jack got the girl was about 1981. Diane spends her time giggling and making faces and trying to come up with the maximum number of expressions within any given three second period. The fabulous Frances McDormand is totally wasted, and I think I've seen a number of those locations in any number of other movies. You could plunk any Steve Martin movie on those sets, or any Nora Ephron film. Think innocuous, safe, intermittently amusing, and altogether a waste of time.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Who Knows? (2001)
1/10
Dull,turgid, annoying
3 May 2003
The cover of the box said it was a comedy. NOT ONE funny moment, I assure you. Bad acting, especially the main brunette girl who is unfortunately also extremely uninteresting to look at. Static indoor shots of people standing and talking to each other. (Only one good exterior shot, on the Seine.) You can practically hear the director shouting action at the top of each shot, it looks so stagey.

I had no idea the French and American sensibilities could be so far afield of each other. Did French audiences really laugh at this.
5 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Chicago (2002)
10/10
Sensational in Every Way
10 January 2003
This film was obviously heavily influenced by the Liza Minelli Cabaret, but it goes it many steps better: the screenplay (Bill Condon) is more muscular and imaginative, the editing is stunning, and there is no one on this planet like Catherine Zeta Jones. To be that beautiful and talented, well it's just unfair but you can only gaze in wonder and appreciation. Gere, too, seems completely in his element (He can really sing!) and even though I kept thinking to myself, "Who else could have played this role?" while watching Rene Zellwegger, she has a lovely voice and was still more than serviceable as a dancer. (Too bad they had to put her in that Marilyn Monroe garb, however; the comparison is unfair.)

It's hard with a musical to know just who to give credit to, but given that Rob Marshall both directed and choreographed it I think we can start right there. Bob Fosse's shoes are big ones to try to fill, but the dancing is brilliant, and the direction fluid and kinetic at the same time. Yes, I've heard comments that the editing was too jagged, you couldn't look at the dancers for long enough, etc. To some extent this is true, but let's remember they were directing this film to a public that has just come off the almost epilepsy-inducing short cuts of Moulin Rouge. This editing in this film is much more judicious, in my opinion. The only place where I could have used longer dance shots were with Zeta Jones, who is so clearly a great dancer I would have enjoyed seeing what she can do, unassisted.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Astoundingly good
4 November 2002
Initially I was skeptical about the choice to telescope the first part of the book, the story of Ingrid and Barry and the events that lead to his murder. Actually, I'm guessing they actually shot it, then decided to lose it, since Billy Connolly played what ended up being essentially an extra role. Finally I realized it made good editing sense. The true drama is Astrid's, her passage (and passing around) from one dysfunctional family to another, the cumulative damage, and her relationship with her mother. It ended up being, for me, tremendously powerful, probably more so than the book, because sections of the book I found so distasteful that I drew away from it emotionally. Here I was able to abandon myself to the characters much more. Michelle Pfeiffer was a revelation, I had no idea she was capable of such complexity and steel of character. Her prison scenes froze my blood, and I had no problem with her being so beautiful because she is described (in the book and the movie) as a beautiful, removed creature. Alison Lohman is perfect as Astrid, and Renee Zellweger breaks your heart. Ultimately, it was an extremely satisfying couple of hours and I think a lot of the credit goes to Mary Agnes Donohue, the screenwriter.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Improves on repeat viewing -- great for children
14 September 2000
When I first saw this film on the big screen, I was somewhat less than impressed. The production values seemed skimpy, Stanley Tucci wore on me a bit, Michelle Pfeiffer's voice lacked the command one would expect from a Titania (never mind her California cadence) and Calista Flockhart seemed clumsy with the dialog and too much like her TV character. But we recently rented it and showed it to my five year old, and she is absolutely fixated on it. She speaks along with the dialog, adores the fairy sequences, thinks Bottom (Kevin Kline) is a riot, loves the music -- in short, all the magic that seemed to be lacking for me is there in spades for her. Additionally, now that we've watched it approximately twenty times (no kidding) I find myself appreciating Michael Hoffman's direction very much, little things like the introduction of Bottom, the foreshadowing of Titania and Oberon's arrival, and I also think the text was judiciously edited, which isn't easy. Anna Friel is also absolutely lovely and so easy with the text, she's a joy to watch.

I still hate the mud bath cat-fight, however. It makes me cringe every time.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Runaway Bride (1999)
3/10
Rolling out the cliches
12 September 1999
I knew it wasn't going to be great, all my friends told me, but I'm a sucker for romantic comedy so I went anyway. God, it was boring! Every old cliche rolled out for the umpteenth time -- if I see a couple stroll through a picturesque spot as one of them says, "Do you believe there's just one person for everyone?" one more time I'm going to scream. And the obvious set-ups. Gere's speech about "I can promise you there will be bad times" might as well have had a banner on it -- Big Speech to be Parroted Back at End of Movie. You know these actors have script approval -- what are they thinking? Are they so aware that they could read the phone book and people would pay anyway that they don't care about the quality of the material? As for Joan Cusack -- I know she needs to work, but she should turn down these quirky girlfriend roles on principal. A character who actually says she's quirky! Just in case we didn't get it. Ditto Hector Alessandro -- use a little discrimination. The dialog was inept and trite.

Did I mention I didn't care for the movie?
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed