A re-imagined version of Frankenstein, this time with a young Black girl bringing back her brother who is killed in violence on the street. A very well done version of the Frankenstein story in my opinion.
Ah, I saw the first one, which I really enjoyed but forgot about because the naming gives me nothing to remember about it. I was unaware of the sequel which I will hunt down now. Thanks.
Having nothing to watch on a Saturday evening, I opened-up the big box of DVDs and pulled out one of my two favorite movies of all time, Casablanca, which I haven’t watched in at least a decade. I’ve seen it dozens of times, at home and in a theater, and enjoy it every bit as much each time. This was a digitally-restored release and it looked great on my 55-inch TV. It’s the perfect movie of that era, or any era.
My other favorite movie is The Wizard of Oz. I’ve always had an old soul.
I agree with everything Gyrate stated. I will say that Anderson is doing somewhat better with expressing human emotional content.
For me, growing up in the 60’s as a huge space nerd, and transitioning later into a theatre kid, with a nostalgic fondness for the “serious method actor” Lee Strasberg NY world of the 50’s and 60’s, this film was like a shot of heroin.
But, as I described it to my friends and family afterwards, I told them that I DO NOT recommend it to the general audience. You really do have to have an established appreciation of Anderson’s live-actors-as-puppet-show vibe.
About 10 years ago, my daughter, ex-wife, and I got into a discussion re: the word “cute”. I had used the word to describe something Sophia was wearing, and they both told me that describing something as “cute” was rather dismissive, that it signified that something may be good but… not really. That “cute” was the go-to compliment when there wasn’t really anything to compliment.
But also fun. Like much of the media from the era Anderson is so fond of, there is something very ephemeral about his films. They are a pleasant experience that are kind of hard to appreciate or intellectually defend after the credits have rolled.
Bolding mine. I recorded this the other day and was going to rewatch it to comment at length. The dancing and singing are outstanding; really catchy and exciting, and I thought Gene Kelly was in even better form than in Singin’ in the Rain, but the parts in between aren’t very good. The love story is unconvincing, the plot development is confusing and the resolution is a disappointment. Still, the song/dance numbers are very good.
What isn’t good at all is how badly the film has aged. The new restored version is excellent; I’m referring to the outdated treatment of women. Kelly’s character becomes infatuated with a woman and stalks her until she agrees to a date. Stalk isn’t too strong a word, as she makes it clear that she isn’t interested, without a hint of flirtation, and he calls her at home and shows up at her workplace unannounced with the intention of wooing her. That kind of stuff can be overlooked easily enough in an old film, but there’s a line of dialogue that is just unforgivable. Someone’s complaining about wimmin these days and says, “they want to act like men but be treated like women.” I think there’s another groaner in the dialogue somewhere, and I was going to rewatch to quote it here. Now I think I’ll just skip everything but the musical bits.
I posted earlier today about watching “Casablanca,” made in 1942. I love that movie, but there is one line that really takes me out of it. The character played by Ingrid Bergman asks the waiter about “the boy playing the piano.” The piano player is Sam, played by Dooley Wilson, who was black, and was in his 50s when the movie was made. I don’t believe in censoring the art of a different time, but I wish that line could be changed. Perhaps now with Artificial Intelligence…
Don’t you hate that in a movie you otherwise love? I was watching The Mighty Quinn yesterday, and I know it has its faults, but I just love it. But the “governor” used the n-word, and even though it was a black character describing another black character, it grated.
I’d never seen it despite its fame. I found it to be middling and mostly uninteresting. The very famous shot of the girl coming out of the TV, which I was spoiled about knowing, was about the only real thrill in the movie. The rest was a mostly boring affair and I honestly expected more.
I have not seen the Japanese original and obviously have not seen any follow-ups. Are any recommended?
The Ring just doesn’t hold much thrill, but maybe a few queasy moments. The most interesting thing about it is the kid actor, who went on to a different kind of career.
Which will never happen because DC is rebooting the entire universe. So the movie really is meaningless. Doesn’t make it unenjoyable. It’s just pointless.
Sounds perfect. I am one of those people that loves his weird, twee vision. I think The Royal Tenenbaums is still my favorite. I’m very much a fan of directors who you can immediately tell by looking at a shot who is the director. Like that Eggars guy.
A clean, non-offensive version of “Blazing Saddles” would run about 5 minutes! Most of it would be Frankie Laine’s main title song.
That’s one you gotta take just as it is, and for anyone offended, there’s an “off” button. Remember, Richard Pryor was a co-writer, and was Mel Brooks’ first choice to play Sheriff Bart, but the studio said no. Personally, I think Pryor might have been too far over the top and Cleavon Little played it just right.