Change Your Image
herstoryian-214-847962
Reviews
The Tamarind Seed (1974)
Intricate and entertaining, although dated
I am really enjoying this film. I've heard of it for 40 years and finally found it to see. Omar Sharif and Julie Andrews are excellent together. The cast and their parts are complicated, as are the intellect of the main characters. This requires a film that moves at a slower pace.
What I find difficult to watch is the dated technology and garish costumes and makeup on all the other performers. I think today the main characters could be surrounded by a more sophisticated environment and still sparkle, instead of being in a cast where everyone else seems slightly more inept. I grew up in the 1970s; I don't expect more than it is from a 1970s film, but the design makes clear that the leads are the more deserving characters, and that might be deliberate on Edwards' part.
I suspect, though, the closer I get to the end, that I will not be surprised. But I am enjoying the ride.
La La Land (2016)
I've seen this film before, but not all at once.
This is a wonderful tribute film to the musicals and films of Fred and Ginger to John and Olivia, updated. And it's a tribute to the audiences who find themselves at old movie houses seeking a good film.
Script-wise, too, I kept thinking it reminded me of "That Thing you Do!", a romance, a dream, with jazz. I think it did to the producers, too.
The creativity in this film is marvelous, how it seamlessly brings together everything it can of what made Hollywood great in the days of movie musical fantasies. The energy level of the full numbers is tops, and I still have the music in my head. I love that Gosling wears spats. There's even the floor from "Begin the Beguine" with Eleanor Powell and Fred Astaire. Tributes everywhere to the musicians, dancers and choreographers, and costume designers of the past. You could probably spend hours searching out all the possible film references. It's a sophisticated film as well. It never doubts its audience.
The Hunger (1983)
Film in Review had it right in 1983
I saw this in the movie theater when it premiered. I had read Film in Review's review, but I still chose to see it.
Their review was the shortest review I've ever read. It was something along the lines of "The lifeblood of this film drains away when Bowie dies." Yep.
Two stars for the time and work people put in creating a stylish film, and the Bowie/Sarandon/Deneuve mystique that draws in people to see it.
An Unfinished Life (2005)
Unexpectedly great cat movie, lol, but it's not for kids.
This seemed like usual fare---man beats his girlfriend, and she runs away back to her former father-in-law. The gruff father-in-law finds out he's got a grandkid and gives in to his feelings. But there's a bad guy out there...
There's a bunch of great actors in this film The story's pretty simple, but the characters make it better. And the director's got an ace in the hole that he uses to save the movie from becoming just a violent good guy/bad guy movie.
There's a lot of violence against both the male and female characters. It's hard to watch as an adult. The 11-year-old granddaughter is a strong character, but the movie has good reasons for its PG-13 rating. Not a movie for unsupervised kids.
Possession (2002)
Beautifully photographed, but a failed film.
The love story of the past is beautifully photographed. Northam and Ehle are excellent and their passion for each other palpable. There are some unclear parts in the plot in the modern story. The modern couple have no reason to even be in the film except to link the writings of the couple in the Victorian romance. And nobody acts like a real archivist with real archivist ethics and beliefs in preservation. The excitement over a find is real for archivists, but none of the archivists or possible purchasers in the film show any of that excitement.
How Do You Know (2010)
Very good!
This was an interesting story. It kept me involved, even after I figured out the theme. The actors were great!. I wonder how the film would have worked if the producers had been a bit more brave about the casting. Still, a very engaging film. I would watch this again.
The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society (2018)
Great, lovely movie until...
There's a lot to like about this film. It's beautifully filmed and the characters are mostly interesting. The romantic leading man is typical: rustic, passionate, talented, hard-working, sensitive, and damaged. But, in the end, she's changed him. I prefer my romance to come with a partnership.
Arrival (2016)
Perfectly splendid!
Language, culture, and context.
It's a beautiful, straightforward, tastefully simple film, with a great many tricks up its sleeve.
Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi (2017)
So much emotional baggage...
The whole movie got better after Luke got better clothes and a haircut.
Arrival (2016)
Perfectly splendid!
Language, culture, and context.
It's a beautiful, straightforward, tastefully simple film, with a great many tricks up its sleeve.
Arrival (2016)
Perfectly splendid!
Language, culture, and context.
It's a beautiful, straightforward, tastefully simple film, with a great many tricks up its sleeve.
Arrival (2016)
Perfectly splendid!
Language, culture, and context.
It's a beautiful, straightforward, tastefully simple film, with a great many tricks up its sleeve.
Peter Pan (2003)
Peter Pan for teens and grown-ups, not children
We only saw this movie because my 14-year-old son and a friend ended up seeing it for free at a theater's summer movie series. They thought it was cool. Turned out it was.
It's more like a grown-up's Peter Pan, one that we can all recognize ourselves in at a particular point in our lives. It's beautifully filmed, and Jacob Isaacs is a splendid Captain Hook.
Jeremy Sumpter and Rachel Hurd-Wood are excellent, reminding me of how Romeo and Juliet should be played, and, yet, never are. And Lynn Redgrave's character, although it wasn't in the book or any other films, is a nice addition.
Houdini and Doyle (2016)
Entertaining and Intentional Anachronistic Fun
This reminds me of Ioan Gruffudd's Forever (2014-15), an edgy, yet cozy, murder mystery story that has likable performers, and is filled with anachronisms and good taste in clothing. (Except Conan Doyle's suits, which get louder as the series goes on, a possible sign of growing confidence in the characterization of the character.)
The hook is that Harry Houdini and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle have partnered to solve murders that have some connection to the supernatural and/or spiritual. It's set in the wrong time period for Houdini and Doyle to have been associated. A choice was made to make it Edwardian rather than in the more accurate 1920s. They use modern language and the modern music is intentionally unsettling. The series relies heavily on the old theater maxim of "a willing suspension of disbelief."
And it's highly entertaining. The actors are personable and talented. It's definitely an ensemble cast that works well together. The sets and costumes are well done (suitable for the time period),and highly detailed.
The story line doesn't explore any real substantial questions of politics, culture, war, or social values...yet. It's enjoyable, mindless entertainment, excellently done, with great potential for more robust story lines. Although the episodes might not have been filmed in the release-date order, the staging, story, and characters appeared to mature as the first season progressed.
But there is one travesty: They do a disservice to a good actor, and to women everywhere, by not giving their excellent female star better billing.