Movie Reviews
I've seen a few movies in recent days, mostly on video/DVD. Last night, I saw Deliverance for the first time ever. (See blog entry for June 16 for more details on that.) It was about what I expected, capturing the moment-to-moment plot of the book, but none of the tone. There were a couple of times when the filmmaker obviously was striving for that (the scene in which Ed, Jon Voight's character, heads out into the woods on his own with his bow, and just misses shooting a deer, for example; though in the movie's terms, that's really just setting up his later encounter with the "toothless hillbilly"), but didn't succeed. Unfortunately, the video I rented was "formatted for the screen", meaning it was full screen, rather than wide screen, so I know I missed a lot of the scenery of the original movie, which I'm sure added a lot.
Earlier last night, I watched Kinsey on DVD. I really reccommend this for anyone who isn't put off by a frank discussion of sex. It's well made, really very interesting, and features a prominent role for Peter Sarsgaard, one of my favorite actors. The ending was a bit abrupt, but other than that, a fascinating piece of work.
The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou was a film I'd been looking forward to watching. Knowing that is was a Wes Anderson film, I thought I was prepared for the strangeness evident in his work. However, I couldn't get into this one for some reason. There was some dry, sardonic humor (which I usually appreciate), but then there were psuedo-action scenes that took on more gravity and seriousness than I was ready for. A very odd film, but one I wouldn't necessarily suggest anyone rush out to see.
Yesterday I went to the local movie theatre to see Pirates of the Carribean: Dead Man's Chest. Let me say that I liked the first Pirates movie; it was light, entertaining, with likeable characters having adventures. None of that carries over in the sequel. A friend of mine suggested it was "funny" though I can't remember laughing once, and that it had "great effects." I'll grant that, but that doesn't make for a good movie in my opinion. There was no coherent storyline; it was never clear why anyone on screen was doing what they did. I just kept waiting for it to be over. I didn't feel any sympathy for any of the characters in this convuluted mess. Even though it featured Keira Knightly (probably one of the top five most beautiful women on the planet), that couldn't save it. I have no desire to see the third installment.
Earlier last night, I watched Kinsey on DVD. I really reccommend this for anyone who isn't put off by a frank discussion of sex. It's well made, really very interesting, and features a prominent role for Peter Sarsgaard, one of my favorite actors. The ending was a bit abrupt, but other than that, a fascinating piece of work.
The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou was a film I'd been looking forward to watching. Knowing that is was a Wes Anderson film, I thought I was prepared for the strangeness evident in his work. However, I couldn't get into this one for some reason. There was some dry, sardonic humor (which I usually appreciate), but then there were psuedo-action scenes that took on more gravity and seriousness than I was ready for. A very odd film, but one I wouldn't necessarily suggest anyone rush out to see.
Yesterday I went to the local movie theatre to see Pirates of the Carribean: Dead Man's Chest. Let me say that I liked the first Pirates movie; it was light, entertaining, with likeable characters having adventures. None of that carries over in the sequel. A friend of mine suggested it was "funny" though I can't remember laughing once, and that it had "great effects." I'll grant that, but that doesn't make for a good movie in my opinion. There was no coherent storyline; it was never clear why anyone on screen was doing what they did. I just kept waiting for it to be over. I didn't feel any sympathy for any of the characters in this convuluted mess. Even though it featured Keira Knightly (probably one of the top five most beautiful women on the planet), that couldn't save it. I have no desire to see the third installment.
posted by Kootch | 2:32 PM
2 Comments:
But when have you ever seen a sequel that was as good as the original movie?
I know, you're going to say The Empire Strikes Back was better than the original Star Wars/ However, I would argue that Empire is not so much a sequel as it is a continuation.
Same theory applies to The Two Towers and Return of the King.
While I would agree about Two Towers (Lord of the Rings isn't three separate novels, after all, just one, published for convenience in three books), I don't agree with you about Empire. While George Lucas might have had ideas for a 3-part (or 9-part, or even 12-part; the stories vary) sequence of films, when he made the first Star Wars, there was no certainty that he could make a sequel. Sci-fi movies were not much for money-makers in 1977, and Fox actually took quite a chance with Star Wars. The first Star Wars movie is a complete story, in and of itself. Empire, while picking up the threads of the original, is definitely a sequel to the first film in a way that Two Towers certainly isn't. Now Return of the Jedi, on the other hand...
Post a Comment
<< Home