Well... I usually refrain from writing movie reviews for the simple fact that most who do tend to write them in a way that denotes total arrogance as if they are Siskel or Ebert or something and that tone, alone, usually turns my stomach. Who are you movie snobs anyway? So so picky. Anyway, I was trying to find "Georgie Girl" online tonight and although I've got it on DVD I did not feel like getting up and looking for it so I found this movie, instead. Now... my love affair with the old NYC goes back to childhood when my father used to be a truck driver and we were regaled with stories about that crazy town and also my own early memories of it. Suffice to say, I'm pretty hot over old flicks that present excellent street shots of the old NY so I figured I'd watch it, NO idea what to expect. The description made me leery from the start as it already sounded so corny and unoriginal.
It's funny cause I was somewhat embarrassed throughout the entire film, sensing the kind of crappy reviews people must write about it. Much to my surprise, however, not only did most more or less deem it a hidden gem, it was compared multiple times to "Romeo and Juliet"? Huh. Honestly that was the last thing I thought. I love movies and judge the pretty fairly, based on whether or not I enjoyed them, not on how popular they are, how much they grossed at the box office, special effects, or even in comparison to others made by the same person or within the same genre. I don't pretend to be some film connoisseur and use extraordinary language in an attempt to sound more sophisticated like most reviewers do.
As for "sexual chemistry" for those of you who stated there was none, I guess that just means you were wanting boobs and for her to be all over him? Uh, no. This is about as real as awkward teens who barely known each other as it gets even if we only ever see them dancing together. This main theme is obscured by all the racial tension surrounding them. In fact, the first however many minutes of this movie leads one to think that it's only going to be about the gang wars across Canal St. And then back to them, oh yeah, we forgot it was about you guys. Anyway... What I can say is that this movie was OK. It fills a niche. Lots of overkill in the bloodbath department. I don't know if they realized after all their editing but in the end all they did in this film was kill each other and make sure we saw lots of blood. Did they think this is what their audience wanted more of? I thought the "in your face" effort was rather obvious. That made me roll my eyes with embarrassment. The other thing I couldn't help but notice was why are all movies about street gangs or otherwise in NYC involving some other group with or all Italian Americans? NYC is a huge. Little Italy never was. America must think NYC is nothing but little isolated and racially segregated neighborhoods when it's really not. NYC is a huge city and despite the old world culture presence in certain sections, it's still a very diverse place and people don't shoot each other in public generally for being on someone else's turf. Not in 1987 anyway. They get on the subway with ppl from ALL OVER THE WORLD and live among them.
SO now this film is overkill in: 1. bloody violence
2. cultural stereotype (did I mention the old county mother in the kitchen in an apron in every scene no matter what time of day cooking from scratch like it's 1930?
The movie is somewhat one- sided,leaning more towards the Italian community. We see very little of the Chinese community and the inner relationships of those characters. Not saying there is racial preference in this film but it shows what perspective the writer is more familiar with.
It's taking some liberties and I'm sure the makers of this film would be impressed by comparing this movie to Romeo and Juliet. When you think of A Bronx Tale, yet another cliché Italian American mafia theme in NYC but in this story an African American chick on the wrong side of the street, not much difference there but not so much Romeo and Juliet.
All through this film I'm wondering, if these two know how to take the damn subway, why aren't they just meeting out in any of the other many many places that exist out of this 20 or so block radius in which they live? Duh. Its NYC. None of them have accents so they've been in NYC and American long enough to not be stuck in their own hood. It's so embarrassing! It's very unrealistic for its time considering how much of the downtown was already being infiltrated by yuppies and artists so they were, in reality, NOT in some ethnic wasteland.
In conclusion, there's a larger message here (in all seriousness, or not) Neither of the two households at the epicenter of this film seem to have fathers present. In fact, the brother and sister have NO parents, it seems. *How* old are they?? He supports them both on his wages as a waiter? Basically, if you have no father, this is how you will end up. Jk but did anyone else notice this?? This movie was made for some quick, cheap thrills and a quick buck. I'm not surprised it did not do well, outside of what little I mentioned in some half competent analysis.
It's funny cause I was somewhat embarrassed throughout the entire film, sensing the kind of crappy reviews people must write about it. Much to my surprise, however, not only did most more or less deem it a hidden gem, it was compared multiple times to "Romeo and Juliet"? Huh. Honestly that was the last thing I thought. I love movies and judge the pretty fairly, based on whether or not I enjoyed them, not on how popular they are, how much they grossed at the box office, special effects, or even in comparison to others made by the same person or within the same genre. I don't pretend to be some film connoisseur and use extraordinary language in an attempt to sound more sophisticated like most reviewers do.
As for "sexual chemistry" for those of you who stated there was none, I guess that just means you were wanting boobs and for her to be all over him? Uh, no. This is about as real as awkward teens who barely known each other as it gets even if we only ever see them dancing together. This main theme is obscured by all the racial tension surrounding them. In fact, the first however many minutes of this movie leads one to think that it's only going to be about the gang wars across Canal St. And then back to them, oh yeah, we forgot it was about you guys. Anyway... What I can say is that this movie was OK. It fills a niche. Lots of overkill in the bloodbath department. I don't know if they realized after all their editing but in the end all they did in this film was kill each other and make sure we saw lots of blood. Did they think this is what their audience wanted more of? I thought the "in your face" effort was rather obvious. That made me roll my eyes with embarrassment. The other thing I couldn't help but notice was why are all movies about street gangs or otherwise in NYC involving some other group with or all Italian Americans? NYC is a huge. Little Italy never was. America must think NYC is nothing but little isolated and racially segregated neighborhoods when it's really not. NYC is a huge city and despite the old world culture presence in certain sections, it's still a very diverse place and people don't shoot each other in public generally for being on someone else's turf. Not in 1987 anyway. They get on the subway with ppl from ALL OVER THE WORLD and live among them.
SO now this film is overkill in: 1. bloody violence
2. cultural stereotype (did I mention the old county mother in the kitchen in an apron in every scene no matter what time of day cooking from scratch like it's 1930?
The movie is somewhat one- sided,leaning more towards the Italian community. We see very little of the Chinese community and the inner relationships of those characters. Not saying there is racial preference in this film but it shows what perspective the writer is more familiar with.
It's taking some liberties and I'm sure the makers of this film would be impressed by comparing this movie to Romeo and Juliet. When you think of A Bronx Tale, yet another cliché Italian American mafia theme in NYC but in this story an African American chick on the wrong side of the street, not much difference there but not so much Romeo and Juliet.
All through this film I'm wondering, if these two know how to take the damn subway, why aren't they just meeting out in any of the other many many places that exist out of this 20 or so block radius in which they live? Duh. Its NYC. None of them have accents so they've been in NYC and American long enough to not be stuck in their own hood. It's so embarrassing! It's very unrealistic for its time considering how much of the downtown was already being infiltrated by yuppies and artists so they were, in reality, NOT in some ethnic wasteland.
In conclusion, there's a larger message here (in all seriousness, or not) Neither of the two households at the epicenter of this film seem to have fathers present. In fact, the brother and sister have NO parents, it seems. *How* old are they?? He supports them both on his wages as a waiter? Basically, if you have no father, this is how you will end up. Jk but did anyone else notice this?? This movie was made for some quick, cheap thrills and a quick buck. I'm not surprised it did not do well, outside of what little I mentioned in some half competent analysis.