PhilauraJ
Joined Jan 2002
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews31
PhilauraJ's rating
First let me say that there was nothing that I liked about the first Rocky Horror Picture Show with the exception of Tim Curry whom I adored. The script was horrible, and everything else about the film was amateurish. I say again, with the exception of Tim Curry whose performance was fresh, shocking, exciting and mesmerizing.
I must give credit where credit is due here. SO many people hated this film. This amazes me as everything about the film was stepped up in quality with the exception of the script and, of course, the role of Dr. Frank-N-Furter which could not be out done, but to my utter amazement was a performance matched in fresh, shocking, mesmerizing excitement by Laverne Cox.
I suppose the quality that the original so lacked was the very thing that attracted many of it's fans. I just am not taken by that sort of film. But lets give credit where credit is due. The filmmakers in this latest version did a fabulous job of making this - not really a diamond in the rough - shine, but shine it does.
I must give credit where credit is due here. SO many people hated this film. This amazes me as everything about the film was stepped up in quality with the exception of the script and, of course, the role of Dr. Frank-N-Furter which could not be out done, but to my utter amazement was a performance matched in fresh, shocking, mesmerizing excitement by Laverne Cox.
I suppose the quality that the original so lacked was the very thing that attracted many of it's fans. I just am not taken by that sort of film. But lets give credit where credit is due. The filmmakers in this latest version did a fabulous job of making this - not really a diamond in the rough - shine, but shine it does.
Production value is fabulous. Acting spectacular. But I cannot conceive how anyone in their right mind could conclude that this was the story and script to put all this talent into. This film was so depressing and long I couldn't wait for the end. It had to be FANTASTIC to make up for all the torture the filmmakers put me through. But no. The end came - that was the end wasn't it? I don't know. It didn't seem like an end. IT just seemed like more of the same depression that goes on apparently beyond (thank God) what the viewer gets to see. Holy smokes...what a downer. My conclusion is that I wasted my time and money. I hope that if you go to see this that you have a much better experience than I did.
"50 Shades of Grey" is a rehashed storyline taken from the beautifully done film, "9 1/2 weeks". I would skip this one and go straight to Micky Rourke and Kim Bassinger in the original version. Every aspect of 9 1/2 weeks is a much richer depiction of the emotional adventure of the S&M lifestyle. The script is much more believable. The scenes are much more varied, artistically crafted and interesting - even fun. And the ending?? While 50 Shades trails off with a whimper, 9 1/2 weeks hits you with a crushingly powerful ending that matches the intensity of the game that is spotlighted in both of these two films. 9 1/2 weeks offers all of this and you get to see why Micky Rourke was known as one of the sexiest men alive.