This movie was just funny. It had a decent plot line and some great gags to fill it in. The jokes were just isolated, but completely ingrained into the storyline making them even funnier than they would be otherwise. It had some great costumes from Jim Henson's creature shop, and some clever and amusing twists to the plot as we traveled along.
My only complaints were that the main character, on two occasions, made some decisions that rested more with moving the plot than what his character would do. It would have better served the character for him to have been dragged away at the point where he just ran when the girl was captured. It just felt wrong.
The other was near the end when he chose to enter the final structure where I would have felt better had he been more hesitant and wanted to return to the others. I just felt his willingly going in was like abandoning everyone. Granted all this worked out, but again, it seemed odd.
The only other hiccup was an importance stressed on carrying a towel, but the reasoning behind this was never really explained. It is used a couple of times, but anything could have conceivably been used. The bad guys seemed afraid of a towel for some reason, but it seems a small thing to carry a towel to defend against one race.
Other than that, good show. Got a kick out of the Point of View Gun and the Improbability Drive.
Showing posts with label Comedy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Comedy. Show all posts
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Hitch -- 2005 -- PG-13
Through the Queen, I was subjected to this film whose trailers did not paint a promising picture. I was pleasantly surprised, though with a cleverly constructed chick flick with well-rounded characters and individual motivations and stories.
Early on, I was getting lost in the multitude of plots, and I worried they were trying to do too much. However, it all came together as we shot forward and the conflicts reached a satisfying height and resolution. All in all, one of the better romantic comedites I've seen in awhile.
Early on, I was getting lost in the multitude of plots, and I worried they were trying to do too much. However, it all came together as we shot forward and the conflicts reached a satisfying height and resolution. All in all, one of the better romantic comedites I've seen in awhile.
The Producers -- 2005 -- PG-13
This film is based on the Mel Brooks' Broadway musical which also starred Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick, which was based on the 1968 film of the same name which starred Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder.
Probably the easiest part of any musical is characterizing the main characters, and as with any musical, this is done very well. You get a real sense of who the main characters are as well as the supporting cast through their own character songs and moments.
The film had plenty of funny moments to it, and it even had a solid plot. It follows a down-on-his-luck Broadway producer who figures out through his nerdy accountant that with some creative bookkeeping, a producer can make more money with a flop than with a hit. So begins the roller coaster.
The way it all unfolded was just hilarious and the potential for the awful quality was there right from the get-go. The musical ended up being a romp called "Springtime For Hitler." Note this film is set close enough to the end of World War II to make this topic incredibly sensitive, so the potential for this to be a flop was right there. I found myself laughing at a lot of this and the ensuing madness when (surprise) the musical didn't flop.
There were some problems though. One of them is just in the musical to movie translation (and this may have been present in the original film). The first main scene in the office was incredibly long. After the opening scene where our producer is discussed as having another flop, we go to his office where all the principal characters and plot are introduced. This scene runs for over fifteen minutes -- an eternity for a movie. I felt it needed something to break it up a little.
In addition, I didn't quite understand the consequences of the premise. Apparently, if you bring in more money from investors than you spend on the product...you can get into trouble? Why would you get into trouble? Or my main question: if you are caught, why can't you just give the money back? This point was never explained, and I'm guessing they thought the audience would just get it? I didn't. When the musical did not flop, I didn't understand why they couldn't just say they were cooking the books and realized they did not require the funds they'd originally requested and simply return the investors' money. This was the only unexplained point, and it was big enough in my head to make the last third of the movie questionable.
If you can get past that point and just roll with it, it's a fun film though.
Probably the easiest part of any musical is characterizing the main characters, and as with any musical, this is done very well. You get a real sense of who the main characters are as well as the supporting cast through their own character songs and moments.
The film had plenty of funny moments to it, and it even had a solid plot. It follows a down-on-his-luck Broadway producer who figures out through his nerdy accountant that with some creative bookkeeping, a producer can make more money with a flop than with a hit. So begins the roller coaster.
The way it all unfolded was just hilarious and the potential for the awful quality was there right from the get-go. The musical ended up being a romp called "Springtime For Hitler." Note this film is set close enough to the end of World War II to make this topic incredibly sensitive, so the potential for this to be a flop was right there. I found myself laughing at a lot of this and the ensuing madness when (surprise) the musical didn't flop.
There were some problems though. One of them is just in the musical to movie translation (and this may have been present in the original film). The first main scene in the office was incredibly long. After the opening scene where our producer is discussed as having another flop, we go to his office where all the principal characters and plot are introduced. This scene runs for over fifteen minutes -- an eternity for a movie. I felt it needed something to break it up a little.
In addition, I didn't quite understand the consequences of the premise. Apparently, if you bring in more money from investors than you spend on the product...you can get into trouble? Why would you get into trouble? Or my main question: if you are caught, why can't you just give the money back? This point was never explained, and I'm guessing they thought the audience would just get it? I didn't. When the musical did not flop, I didn't understand why they couldn't just say they were cooking the books and realized they did not require the funds they'd originally requested and simply return the investors' money. This was the only unexplained point, and it was big enough in my head to make the last third of the movie questionable.
If you can get past that point and just roll with it, it's a fun film though.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
The Brothers Grimm -- 2005 -- PG-13
This movie looked intriguing from the trailers I watched, but the final product was actually kind of disappointing. I guess it's still possible to make a good trailer.
The main problem here from the beginning was the pacing. It moved slowly and continued to take its time meandering through the opening plot lines. I had some difficulty following how the brothers ended up in their precarious situation and what the emperor had to do with it as well.
After about an hour, the pace picks up a little bit and it becomes somewhat interesting, but as we continue through it, too much goes on. They are in and out of the forest too much which causes it to lose its nature of being a threat. They are captured, released, and chased over and over again. The final battle throws in nearly every character we've met so far, and it becomes more of an eye roller than anything else.
The outcome to the final battle strikes me as ill-conceived and very hard to believe, even for a fairy tale.
So what began as a good idea just kind of foundered in the making of the film. I think the script has some issues as well that should have been corrected prior to filming. Terry Gilliam, the director and of Monty Python fame, has directed perfectly good films before, but it seems he missed the mark on this one with a film that is too slow and too contrived for its own good.
The main problem here from the beginning was the pacing. It moved slowly and continued to take its time meandering through the opening plot lines. I had some difficulty following how the brothers ended up in their precarious situation and what the emperor had to do with it as well.
After about an hour, the pace picks up a little bit and it becomes somewhat interesting, but as we continue through it, too much goes on. They are in and out of the forest too much which causes it to lose its nature of being a threat. They are captured, released, and chased over and over again. The final battle throws in nearly every character we've met so far, and it becomes more of an eye roller than anything else.
The outcome to the final battle strikes me as ill-conceived and very hard to believe, even for a fairy tale.
So what began as a good idea just kind of foundered in the making of the film. I think the script has some issues as well that should have been corrected prior to filming. Terry Gilliam, the director and of Monty Python fame, has directed perfectly good films before, but it seems he missed the mark on this one with a film that is too slow and too contrived for its own good.
Must Love Dogs -- 2005 -- PG-13
Guess who got subjected to another chick flick the other night? If you said you did, then clearly we're in the same boat...just like the people in this movie were at one point.
We've reached the age of Internet dating and there's no better way to bring this into the social consciousness than to make it the backbone of a film about a divorcee who is afraid to "get back out there." Her sister places an ad for her, and she meets the love interest because his best friend responded for him...because he is also a divorcee afraid to "get back out there." The two have some good chemistry together and their scenes are really amusing and you want the best for the relationship.
This whole thing gets complicated by the "don't touch that one, he's still married" love interest which she goes after anyway. I know she has a journey to go through, but the film struggles with keeping these two plots remaining interesting as between their introductions and then the parts going, a lot of time passes as a lot of other things happen. For a time, I wondered if the one she shouldn't was out of the picture since the final love interest was in, but then he showed right back up.
Call it a personal preference, but I feel like the girl sleeping with anyone other than the final guy during the film only hurts her character and makes her less appealing. Final guy told his easy-to-bag date "no." Points for him. Must admit that cross-town condom hunt was very funny.
It has its ups and downs, but in the end everything was tied up nice and neat, and it was done as well as it could be done. I think we could have had a cleaner movie without the married (sorry, "separated") guy, but it still worked pretty well. It's no Sleepless in Seattle, though, which I'm sure I'm be watching soon...
We've reached the age of Internet dating and there's no better way to bring this into the social consciousness than to make it the backbone of a film about a divorcee who is afraid to "get back out there." Her sister places an ad for her, and she meets the love interest because his best friend responded for him...because he is also a divorcee afraid to "get back out there." The two have some good chemistry together and their scenes are really amusing and you want the best for the relationship.
This whole thing gets complicated by the "don't touch that one, he's still married" love interest which she goes after anyway. I know she has a journey to go through, but the film struggles with keeping these two plots remaining interesting as between their introductions and then the parts going, a lot of time passes as a lot of other things happen. For a time, I wondered if the one she shouldn't was out of the picture since the final love interest was in, but then he showed right back up.
Call it a personal preference, but I feel like the girl sleeping with anyone other than the final guy during the film only hurts her character and makes her less appealing. Final guy told his easy-to-bag date "no." Points for him. Must admit that cross-town condom hunt was very funny.
It has its ups and downs, but in the end everything was tied up nice and neat, and it was done as well as it could be done. I think we could have had a cleaner movie without the married (sorry, "separated") guy, but it still worked pretty well. It's no Sleepless in Seattle, though, which I'm sure I'm be watching soon...
Corpse Bride -- 2005 -- PG
Whoa, now this was wild. A perfect romantic musical comedy set against a horrific, gloomy backdrop. Probably the only cross-genre horror-romance I've ever seen. The only trouble you run into was when it's over, how do you feel? Were you scared? Did you laugh? Did you get that warm, fuzzy romantic comedy date movie feeling? Are you as confused as I am?
The cross-genre thing aside, this was a really great film. It played up all the classic "dead" conventions of body parts falling off and such, while simultaneously constructing a great romantic storyline with one of the best conflicts (live guy marries dead girl). It ran through the film wonderfully creating awkward situations and a wonderful climax.
The characters worked well for me, the pacing and transitions show that Tim Burton is a skilled director, and the Danny Elfman music and songs, while definitely sounding out of character for the traditionally dark Elfman, are quite good.
The only downfall is the musical sequences primarily serve to lengthen the dreadfully short 77 minute run time. I can't help but wonder why it was so short. Granted it moved really fast, but I kind of felt a little cheated when it ended so quickly. We could have tried to spend a little more time getting to know these characters, and it would have only benefited the film as a whole.
If you can wrap your mind around the bizarre genre cross in this one, it's definitely worth watching.
The cross-genre thing aside, this was a really great film. It played up all the classic "dead" conventions of body parts falling off and such, while simultaneously constructing a great romantic storyline with one of the best conflicts (live guy marries dead girl). It ran through the film wonderfully creating awkward situations and a wonderful climax.
The characters worked well for me, the pacing and transitions show that Tim Burton is a skilled director, and the Danny Elfman music and songs, while definitely sounding out of character for the traditionally dark Elfman, are quite good.
The only downfall is the musical sequences primarily serve to lengthen the dreadfully short 77 minute run time. I can't help but wonder why it was so short. Granted it moved really fast, but I kind of felt a little cheated when it ended so quickly. We could have tried to spend a little more time getting to know these characters, and it would have only benefited the film as a whole.
If you can wrap your mind around the bizarre genre cross in this one, it's definitely worth watching.
Madagascar -- 2005 -- PG
This was a cute little film that followed 4 animals as they are taken from their cushy zoo life to the jungle. The plot follows their life in the zoo, and then adapting to the jungle, and then overcoming a minor conflict between old friends who fall into different places on the food chain...oops.
This movie is not one to be taken seriously. The plot seems to primarily serve as a rail upon whcih gag after gag can be delivered, and as with all gag movies: sometimes they're funny, and sometimes, the aren't. The scenery and situations are meant to be funny and never to be realistic in any way as many, many, many quite impossible things occur.
There are also a fair amount of movie homages, but one they should have left out was Planet of the Apes. Sorry to spoil the ending if you've never seen that one, but the homage was clear as day for Charleton Heston viewing the Statue of Liberty, but the lion in this says, "Darn you all to heck." I've watched it twice now, and that line still sounds downright idiotic in its "censored" form.
It works for laughs and comedy, but there's nothing terribly deep here. The kids should enjoy it for its physical humor and those penguins. There's not much here for the adults this time.
This movie is not one to be taken seriously. The plot seems to primarily serve as a rail upon whcih gag after gag can be delivered, and as with all gag movies: sometimes they're funny, and sometimes, the aren't. The scenery and situations are meant to be funny and never to be realistic in any way as many, many, many quite impossible things occur.
There are also a fair amount of movie homages, but one they should have left out was Planet of the Apes. Sorry to spoil the ending if you've never seen that one, but the homage was clear as day for Charleton Heston viewing the Statue of Liberty, but the lion in this says, "Darn you all to heck." I've watched it twice now, and that line still sounds downright idiotic in its "censored" form.
It works for laughs and comedy, but there's nothing terribly deep here. The kids should enjoy it for its physical humor and those penguins. There's not much here for the adults this time.
Mr. & Mrs. Smith -- 2005 -- PG-13
This is the story of a couple that has been married for 5 or 6 years. They both own their own companies, and seem to be well of. Of course, their companies are competing assassination companies, and they end up being assigned to kill each other. If you ask me, that's not a bad premise.
The movie flows with some good pacing from point to point, and feels rather natural in its presentation. The fact that they've been able to keep their secrets from each other is a little hard to swallow, but if we let that slide, it works pretty well, especially in their confrontation against each other.
The believability slips in the final battle. I can't slip much without spoiling the movie, but since this is my primary complaint, I'll try to speak without spoiling. Let's say the outcome is hard to believe, and I don't feel like it ties up the loose ends of the movie well enough to accept the ending as being truly satisfying.
This rather large point aside, it makes for a good ride and not too big a waste of time like so many films tend to be.
The movie flows with some good pacing from point to point, and feels rather natural in its presentation. The fact that they've been able to keep their secrets from each other is a little hard to swallow, but if we let that slide, it works pretty well, especially in their confrontation against each other.
The believability slips in the final battle. I can't slip much without spoiling the movie, but since this is my primary complaint, I'll try to speak without spoiling. Let's say the outcome is hard to believe, and I don't feel like it ties up the loose ends of the movie well enough to accept the ending as being truly satisfying.
This rather large point aside, it makes for a good ride and not too big a waste of time like so many films tend to be.
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory -- 2005 -- PG
I really liked this adaptation of the Roald Dahl novel. It dealt with the material a little differently than the 1971 musical version, however, it did it in a masterful way.
It looks like this movie was made FOR Tim Burton, not just by him. Danny Elfman set Roald Dahl's lyrics straight out of the book to clever and singable music (always enjoyed Oingo Boingo, his band). Willy Wonka was characterized like never before, and it even ended with a touching third act that does not exist in either the book or the 1971 film.
Really, the only weakness I felt the film had was an undercharacterization of the 4 other children that went into the factory. That being the weakest point of this whimsical tale in my opinion makes this a movie that is very much worth watching. Tim Burton is still a master of his art.
It looks like this movie was made FOR Tim Burton, not just by him. Danny Elfman set Roald Dahl's lyrics straight out of the book to clever and singable music (always enjoyed Oingo Boingo, his band). Willy Wonka was characterized like never before, and it even ended with a touching third act that does not exist in either the book or the 1971 film.
Really, the only weakness I felt the film had was an undercharacterization of the 4 other children that went into the factory. That being the weakest point of this whimsical tale in my opinion makes this a movie that is very much worth watching. Tim Burton is still a master of his art.
Casino Royale -- 1967 -- NR
This "send-up" of the James Bond films to date (those being Dr. No, From Russia With Love, Goldfinger, and Thunderball) was not as good as I imagine the filmmakers were hoping for.
Having seen all of the other Bond films released now as well as read several of the books, this film failed to even make a mediocre Bond film. It had its share of silliness, but most of it wasn't funny. It spoofed very little of the Bond empire and made only passing references to its nature of women and gadgets. The majority of its comedic attempts fell absolutely flat; several scenes had no bearing on plot, character, nor did they produce any laughs; at several points in the movie, there were glaring holes in the structure as if there were supposed to be scenes, but they don't exist.
If you want a good spoof of the James Bond empire, try Austin Powers.
I can now say, however, that I have seen every Bond film that has been released. Yay for me.
Having seen all of the other Bond films released now as well as read several of the books, this film failed to even make a mediocre Bond film. It had its share of silliness, but most of it wasn't funny. It spoofed very little of the Bond empire and made only passing references to its nature of women and gadgets. The majority of its comedic attempts fell absolutely flat; several scenes had no bearing on plot, character, nor did they produce any laughs; at several points in the movie, there were glaring holes in the structure as if there were supposed to be scenes, but they don't exist.
If you want a good spoof of the James Bond empire, try Austin Powers.
I can now say, however, that I have seen every Bond film that has been released. Yay for me.
Big Fish -- 2003 -- PG-13
This fantasy tale from Tim Burton was a wonderful little yarn blurring the line between fact and fiction. The basic plot is a son's father's tall tales of his younger life. The son does not believe they are true at all beyond the very basest part of it might have happened.
As he moves through his father's tales (along with the tales showing us that fantasical life his father led), he finds more and more that the stories have more truth than fiction to them.
The story has a beautiful ending showing that Burton's flair for the dark and strange can easily be adapted to a very touching tale. Worth watching.
As he moves through his father's tales (along with the tales showing us that fantasical life his father led), he finds more and more that the stories have more truth than fiction to them.
The story has a beautiful ending showing that Burton's flair for the dark and strange can easily be adapted to a very touching tale. Worth watching.
American Graffiti -- 1973 -- PG
This was George Lucas's second film following the bizarre THX-1138. This one followed a group of graduates on a single night before two of them were slated to go off to college. Cleverly scored by an all night radio station playing songs of the era, the character development and resolutions were downright perfect with clever twists and funny moments throughout. I had a little difficulty getting into some of the situation at the beginning, just because I couldn't relate, but once we got past that point, it was very good, and its success gave Lucas the money and clout he needed to produce his space movie a few years later.
While the cast would have originally been headed by the star, Ron Howard, along with a slew of unknowns, almost every major member of the cast still has a movie career to this day (over 30 years later), only one of the top seven listed in IMDB not having a film out in 2005 and most with something in 2006. Beyond these top 7 (which include Richard Dreyfuss and Cindy Williams (Shirley from Laverne and Shirley)), we also have Harrison Ford hidden further down the list, and I believe he are aware of the bigger, better things he went onto including working for Lucas again on his space movie a few years later.
Overall, a very good movie with the elements it takes to make a good film.
While the cast would have originally been headed by the star, Ron Howard, along with a slew of unknowns, almost every major member of the cast still has a movie career to this day (over 30 years later), only one of the top seven listed in IMDB not having a film out in 2005 and most with something in 2006. Beyond these top 7 (which include Richard Dreyfuss and Cindy Williams (Shirley from Laverne and Shirley)), we also have Harrison Ford hidden further down the list, and I believe he are aware of the bigger, better things he went onto including working for Lucas again on his space movie a few years later.
Overall, a very good movie with the elements it takes to make a good film.
The Apartment -- 1960 -- NR
At its base, this film is a formulaic romantic comedy following the old form faithfully from beginning to end. However, this film does this very, very well.
Although the running time is over 2 hours, I barely noticed the time passing, it was paced so well, and the plot and development continued moving effortlessly from scene to scene, each of which was remarkably well written. A few scenes started running a little unnecessarily long, but they were very few and still served a purpose by doing so.
This film had a very clever plot to begin with, and it continued twisting into something equally clever and heart-wrenching with the girl hung up on someone else, and the boy doing his best to deal with his secret feelings for her.
Everything tied up real nicely without a cheesy line around. Very excellent movie. It did earn itself a best picture for its work.
Although the running time is over 2 hours, I barely noticed the time passing, it was paced so well, and the plot and development continued moving effortlessly from scene to scene, each of which was remarkably well written. A few scenes started running a little unnecessarily long, but they were very few and still served a purpose by doing so.
This film had a very clever plot to begin with, and it continued twisting into something equally clever and heart-wrenching with the girl hung up on someone else, and the boy doing his best to deal with his secret feelings for her.
Everything tied up real nicely without a cheesy line around. Very excellent movie. It did earn itself a best picture for its work.
Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery - 1997 - PG-13
Having watched all of the James Bond films since the last time I saw this first installment of the Austin Powers Trilogy, I found it funnier than ever before. It follows Superspy Austin Powers (a clear James Bond knockoff) as he is crygenically frozen in case Dr. Evil (a clear Ernst Blofeld knockoff) returns to wreak havoc on the world. Not only are several Bond locales and lines and situations spoofed in this films, but several spy film standards are commented upon and torn apart (such as placing the victim in an easily escapable situation using an overly elaborate scheme to destroy them while all the while, a modern character insists he just get a gun and shoot them, but he is told tht's not the way it is done).
I thoroughly enjoyed this film, and having a thorough understanding of the Bond saga made it all the more funnier.
I caught references to Dr. No, Goldfinger, Thunderball (lots), You Only Live Twice, and Diamonds Are Forever. There are likely more. This is a really great send-up on the Bond films. But as a stand alone films, if you've never seen and spy flick, it still works just as well, has a solid plot, well-rounded characters, and a solid and satifying resolution.
I thoroughly enjoyed this film, and having a thorough understanding of the Bond saga made it all the more funnier.
I caught references to Dr. No, Goldfinger, Thunderball (lots), You Only Live Twice, and Diamonds Are Forever. There are likely more. This is a really great send-up on the Bond films. But as a stand alone films, if you've never seen and spy flick, it still works just as well, has a solid plot, well-rounded characters, and a solid and satifying resolution.
Christmas With The Kranks -- 2004 -- PG
Based on the book entitled SKipping Christmas by John grisham (of all people), this is a film that deals with one extreme after another, and not always in a totally believable fashion.
The basic premise follows a couple whose daughter is gone, and so in order to save money, they opt to skip out of Christmas and take a cruise instead (saving them $3000 overall for the Christmas season). While the premise is clever enough, it is taken to such an extreme that believability falters in the presentation.
I can understand, perhaps, not doing a lot of the expensive things that makes Christmas such a great expendature, but they refuse to do the inexpensive and even free stuff just to be good neighbors or friends. They completely shut out the world in order to boycott Christmas, which did not strike me as the intention. Additionally, the wife is both ok and not ok with this throughout the film at times praising his genious and at other times condemning his stupidity but all the while playing along with his idea.
Many of the situations are funny and decent conceptions, but too many times, the jokes are not played out to their fullest potential. It's there and then gone.
It's difficult to say whether Tim Allen's character is supposed to be likable or not. He spends a fair amount of time being a Grinch, and one wonders whether he really enjoys Christmas as an annual occasion. Near the end, his personality begins flowing in one direction only to take a complete turn to complete an almost forgotten subplot and deliver the message of the film and get him his grand character development moment. It would have been more beautiful if he remained as he had been throughout the film instead of going more with the flow.
Act III begins with a great twist to it that jump starts the momentum of the film and carries us to the end, but Act II almost gets dull with the continuous motion of "here's another Christmas tradition", "No", "here's another Christmas tradition", "No." And let's take a moment to prepare for the cruise, and back to the tradition-no routine.
So, bottom line. Is this the greatest film the world has ever known? No. Does it make for an amusing film to watch with the family so laughs are shared and a good is had by all. Sure. The comedy is easy and funny. The story is easy to follow. It has a feel-good, sappy, Christmas-movie ending. So, if you want a film to just watch to escape another round of Rudolph. Here you go. If you're looking for an award-winning Christmas movie, time to put It's a Wonderful Life back in.
The basic premise follows a couple whose daughter is gone, and so in order to save money, they opt to skip out of Christmas and take a cruise instead (saving them $3000 overall for the Christmas season). While the premise is clever enough, it is taken to such an extreme that believability falters in the presentation.
I can understand, perhaps, not doing a lot of the expensive things that makes Christmas such a great expendature, but they refuse to do the inexpensive and even free stuff just to be good neighbors or friends. They completely shut out the world in order to boycott Christmas, which did not strike me as the intention. Additionally, the wife is both ok and not ok with this throughout the film at times praising his genious and at other times condemning his stupidity but all the while playing along with his idea.
Many of the situations are funny and decent conceptions, but too many times, the jokes are not played out to their fullest potential. It's there and then gone.
It's difficult to say whether Tim Allen's character is supposed to be likable or not. He spends a fair amount of time being a Grinch, and one wonders whether he really enjoys Christmas as an annual occasion. Near the end, his personality begins flowing in one direction only to take a complete turn to complete an almost forgotten subplot and deliver the message of the film and get him his grand character development moment. It would have been more beautiful if he remained as he had been throughout the film instead of going more with the flow.
Act III begins with a great twist to it that jump starts the momentum of the film and carries us to the end, but Act II almost gets dull with the continuous motion of "here's another Christmas tradition", "No", "here's another Christmas tradition", "No." And let's take a moment to prepare for the cruise, and back to the tradition-no routine.
So, bottom line. Is this the greatest film the world has ever known? No. Does it make for an amusing film to watch with the family so laughs are shared and a good is had by all. Sure. The comedy is easy and funny. The story is easy to follow. It has a feel-good, sappy, Christmas-movie ending. So, if you want a film to just watch to escape another round of Rudolph. Here you go. If you're looking for an award-winning Christmas movie, time to put It's a Wonderful Life back in.
Barbie as The Princess and the Pauper -- 2004 - NR
Figured I've been subjected to this video about a hundred times, I might as well post something on it.
This is a musical film starring (yeah, you might have guessed already) Barbie blonde and Barbie brunette as Anneliese and Erika, the twins born to different sets of parents and who end up switching places. And that's where the similarities to the Mark Twain story end. Where the prince and the pauper switched places by choice, the princess and the pauper switched by circumstance and drama -- a better way, in my opinion.
The music was actually quite good, and I do find myself humming the tunes. The composer is obviously quite talented. The lyrics, on the other hand, are lacking a bit in the talent arena. The most glaring example or poor lyrics is the reference of "calico" to a male cat. The lyrics occasionally served to move the story, but on the whole, just were there to give the actors something to sing. One of the more popular songs (I say so, because I've been subjected to it through matching dolls -- girls are fun), "A Girl Like You," made little sense in the context of the plot, although parts of it worked to establish a little character.
As for the film, the plot, itself, was solid enough, but jam packed with contrivances. It is painfully clear that this movie was made for children since even the premise of the whole thing is contrived -- a kingdom is bankrupt because the mine ran out of gold. Let's think about this. This kingdom is positioned in the mountains and isolated. This means it should be economically self-sufficient, for the most part. Even if we consider that it trades with other kingdoms, trade is a two way street. If they are bankrupt, that means either poor management of assets or that the kingdom has nothing to offer for trade except gold. If that is all the kingdom has, though, it wouldn't be a kingdom. What we are supposed to accept from the very beginning to accept any portion of the story is that this kingdom's sole provider has been their gold mine as opposed to ANY exports, and rather than practicing good economics among their own people of this isolated kingdom in the mountains, the monarchy just bought stuff from other kingdoms and gave away all the kingdom's assets. Since the kingdom has clearly been in place long enough to build an ostentatious castle, this seem unlikely, but if the movie is to make any sense, we need to accept it.
Another contrivance was Preminger ordering that the princess be seized once he learned the truth. Let's be honest: can anyone other than the queen order that her daughter be seized. I mean, Preminger can suggest it, but if I were a guard and he said to seize the princess, I'd have some serious reservations.
The movie also implied that Preminger's gold was iron pyrite, but while this was interesting, it was never pursued.
So, overall we have good music, shaky lyrics, good plot, but bad believability. I've been subjected to a few of these Barbie videos, and this was the start of a downhill slope for the films.
This is a musical film starring (yeah, you might have guessed already) Barbie blonde and Barbie brunette as Anneliese and Erika, the twins born to different sets of parents and who end up switching places. And that's where the similarities to the Mark Twain story end. Where the prince and the pauper switched places by choice, the princess and the pauper switched by circumstance and drama -- a better way, in my opinion.
The music was actually quite good, and I do find myself humming the tunes. The composer is obviously quite talented. The lyrics, on the other hand, are lacking a bit in the talent arena. The most glaring example or poor lyrics is the reference of "calico" to a male cat. The lyrics occasionally served to move the story, but on the whole, just were there to give the actors something to sing. One of the more popular songs (I say so, because I've been subjected to it through matching dolls -- girls are fun), "A Girl Like You," made little sense in the context of the plot, although parts of it worked to establish a little character.
As for the film, the plot, itself, was solid enough, but jam packed with contrivances. It is painfully clear that this movie was made for children since even the premise of the whole thing is contrived -- a kingdom is bankrupt because the mine ran out of gold. Let's think about this. This kingdom is positioned in the mountains and isolated. This means it should be economically self-sufficient, for the most part. Even if we consider that it trades with other kingdoms, trade is a two way street. If they are bankrupt, that means either poor management of assets or that the kingdom has nothing to offer for trade except gold. If that is all the kingdom has, though, it wouldn't be a kingdom. What we are supposed to accept from the very beginning to accept any portion of the story is that this kingdom's sole provider has been their gold mine as opposed to ANY exports, and rather than practicing good economics among their own people of this isolated kingdom in the mountains, the monarchy just bought stuff from other kingdoms and gave away all the kingdom's assets. Since the kingdom has clearly been in place long enough to build an ostentatious castle, this seem unlikely, but if the movie is to make any sense, we need to accept it.
Another contrivance was Preminger ordering that the princess be seized once he learned the truth. Let's be honest: can anyone other than the queen order that her daughter be seized. I mean, Preminger can suggest it, but if I were a guard and he said to seize the princess, I'd have some serious reservations.
The movie also implied that Preminger's gold was iron pyrite, but while this was interesting, it was never pursued.
So, overall we have good music, shaky lyrics, good plot, but bad believability. I've been subjected to a few of these Barbie videos, and this was the start of a downhill slope for the films.
Mrs. Winterbourne -- 1996 -- PG-13
This was a fun little romantic comedy with a slew of funny moments, a great plot, and nothing too annoying about it. It follows a young, pregnant girl who has nothing running into a nice guy on a train. She meets the nice guy's wife who allows her to wear her clothes (because the girl's clothes were wet), and even lets the girl try on her wedding ring. Shortly thereafter, the train crashes killing most of the people on board.
So she ends up with this guy's family who think she is their daughter-in-law that they never met. She tries in the beginning to come clean, but never has the chance. It is a film that actually stay interesting throughout without those annoying "ok, let's get this thing going again" moments.
The characters are developed really well, and you get a true sense of who they are and feel for them by the time the end comes around. It can be said that maybe she gets off a little too easy for the deception in the end, but it is forgivable because the family is setup very well to forgive, and let's be honest, there really wasn't time to dwell on it.
So, in the end, it was a good little comedy.
Hello Again -- 1987 -- PG
This was a cute little romantic comedy involving a woman who chokes to death and is broughtback to life by her transcendentalist sister who owns a shop of items such as crystal balls and books on myticism. Trouble is she was married and wasn't brought back until a year after her death giving her husband ample time to find himself a new life. The film follows her picking up the pieces of her life and working to move forward. Of course, there is a fair amount of jealousy and conflict from both hubby's new wife and everyone who doesn't believe she actually died.
This is a sweet little film and has plenty of laughs and goofiness along with some nice characters and a happy ending.
Don't Tell Her It's Me (The Boyfriend School) -- 1990 -- PG-13
The Queen had me on a Shelley Long marathon with this one and Hello Again. Shelley takes more of a back seat to Steve Guttenberg here, and he plays her overweight, bald brother (having just undergone "radiation treatment") who transforms himself into a suave hunk on a motorcycle with long flowing hair that the girl totally falls for.
Long plays a romance writer who uses her writer creativity to setup her brother with the girl he loves. So her brother plays along but gets second thoughts along the way since he feels like he's deceiving the girl and no good will come of it. This being a typical RomCom, this revelation comes about right on schedule at the third act break.
Like Hello Again, not much to complain about. It's a firm story with some good characters, and a happy ending. Makes for a easy evening of movie watching.
Over the Hedge -- 2006 -- PG
Dreamworks' most recent venture into the CG animation world gives us the story of a bunch of animals who wake up to find they're in the sole remaining part of the forest in the midst of a massive residential development. The goal here, oddly, is not to find a way out of this predicament, but to gather food for the winter. This plot not being enough to carry the film, we have an outsider to the group who shows them the wonders of the development and how much food there is to be had. He, of course, has his own agenda of gathering food for a homicidal bear that he stole the food from the begin with, but after endearing himself to this group of animals, he predicatably has second thoughts.
The film follows a classic kid fare plot of a dozen cute and distinct characters who move along for awhile, get betrayed, and then live happily ever after. That being said, though, it does have a multitude of funny moments that bring on more than a few laughs. The story's engaging enough to keep you going to the end (not to see how it ends, but to see the antics it takes to get there), it moves along at a really good pace, and it really doesn't leave any loose ends. The little hyper chipmunk character steals the show quite often and is wonderfully setup for his part in the climax.
So, this ranks as another film that isn't bad at all. If you want a good little film that leaves you feeling good in the end, this one does its job very well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
