FTR, I strongly disagree with judging Mr Bean and The Vicar of Dibley as just “OK”. They’re both classic, brilliant achievements in television. Richard Curtis only co-wrote about half of the Mr Bean episodes, though. Rowan Atkinson and Robin Driscoll co-wrote all of them, with Curtis joining them for the first half and the final episode.
I recall the segment of That’s Entertainment, the 1971 ode to MGM musicals, that goes into the studio’s efforts to make their stars go outside their comfort level: Jimmy Stewart singing, Joan Crawford dancing. And you’re right: she’s terrible.
But the best part of that segment was Clark Gable singing and dancing to “Puttin’ on the Ritz”.
Don’t think I’m stalking you or anything, but I’ve been hoping you’d see this and comment because we often share the same opinion and it’s happened again. James McAvoy’s excellent performance almost balances out the bad changes that were made. I was a bit careful as to who I recommended the original but this version I would recommend to anyone.
Yes, I’m sure some will say they wimped out, but I think if you really think about the original, it feels dark just for the sake of being dark. This one actually feels more satisfying.
- The Boogeyman
It reminds me of The Babadook with the premise of grief, even though it’s played out differently. I absolutely love Sophie Thatchers voice in this and the relationship her character has with the younger sister is pretty cute.
Overral, it’s a simple horror movie, but it’s good. I prefer it to Heretic since there aren’t any religious references.
I need to stop being so picky with the horror subgenre. I realize I don’t need to like it if I don’t want to. I just need to be more open minded.
It’s a reasonable reworking of the Stephen King story, I think. It does like its jump scares, though.
Yeah, I thought the creature looked cool. The jumpscares were fine. Then again, I prefer movies without them.
Pale Rider Clint Eastwood
Watched it on Sundance channel.
It’s not my favorite Eastwood western. But Pale Rider is pretty good. It tries to capture the eerie, unsettling atmosphere of Clint’s spaghetti westerns.
There are strong tie-ins to Shane.
The cowboy is forced to dance as bullets are fired at his feet.
The kid at the end of Shane runs after him yelling, Shane, Come back Shane. Pale Rider substitutes a young woman.
The sexual tension between Shane and Marian Starrett (Jean Arthur). Is complicated because the husband (Van Heflin) is being helped and protected by Shane.
Pale Rider is similiar except its a engaged woman attracted to Clint. Her fiancée is the schmuck that gets Clints help and protection.
I just watched Beetlejuice Beetlejuice. I was not amused.
The Beetlejuice of 1988—a kaleidoscope of Tim Burton weirdness, '80s vibes, and ghostly shenanigans that made the afterlife seem like a wild, bureaucratic mess (in the best way possible). An easy B+ in my book—bonus points for inventing an entire aesthetic that still influences Halloween decorations everywhere.
Then along comes the long awaited Beetlejuice Beetlejuice. A sequel that promised a funny, spooky encore but instead delivered a clunky, cobweb-covered dud. This wasn’t a film; it was a checklist of cinematic sins. Writing? Phoned in. Acting? Wooden. Direction? Lost in the Netherworld. Even the effects felt like they were borrowed from a discount haunted house.
It’s like a studio exec had a séance and summoned the spirit of “Let’s make a quick buck.” Burton and Keaton’s legacy saved this from a zero, but even they can’t exorcise this 1/10 disaster from memory.
Beetlejuice Beetlejuice? Bury it and lose the shovel.
If there was a director for whom people just keep forgetting the last 20 years of bad movies, it’s Tim Burton. I thought the movie industry stopped giving people like this another chance, but Burton seems immune.
It’s disheartening because Burton began his career as a true creative force—his early films radiated a whimsical darkness and Gothic charm that felt irresistibly strange and strikingly original. His unmistakable style, blending twisted fairy-tale aesthetics with a love of the macabre established him as a Hollywood visionary with an unmistakable style. To his credit, Burton’s recent work on the series Wednesday shows that he still has the ability to weave his old magic, creating a world that’s both visually enchanting and perfectly attuned to its dark comedic tone. But bombs like Beetlejuice Beetlejuice taint his legacy. It should be renamed Feeblejuice Feeblejuice.
Beetlejuice Beetlejuice has made $451M on an estimated $100M budget. What’s the most important word in the term “show business”?
You may disagree on the quality of the movie, but that’s not the point for the people who green;ight films like this.
Beetlejuice Beetlejuice had everything going for it and a built-in fan base—those of us hopefuls longing to embrace a sequel we’d been dreaming about for years. Unfortunately, it came off as more of a quick cash grab than a passion project. Sure, the studio execs are probably popping champagne over that $451 million haul, but with a bit more heart and a sharper script, it could’ve scored even bigger numbers and set the stage for yet another round of supernatural shenanigans.
I thought Beetlejuice 2 was OK. It ended up in the middle of my rankings of 2024, just adequate.
A few moments of enjoyment, though.
I commend them for keeping Beetlejuice down to 30(or so) minutes in the movie, not caving in and having him appear the entire time. Pretty similar to the first movie.
There were a few laughs, even.
I dunno, a 6 out of 10?
Mind you, I don’t love the first movie all that much. I do prefer the Alec Baldwin and Gina Davis storyline more, though.
I think after Dumbo, Tim Burton realized how bad things were going. I believe I read that he was miserable during the production of that, a true hired hand just directing a pretty generic live-action remake of another cartoon.
He did lose his talent in general, though. I can definitely say that Pee-Wee, both Batmans, Beetlejuice, etc. were much more original* and fun than anything he does now.
*I mean, Batman isn’t original, but that movie felt pretty fresh when it came out.
By accident, I came across Father Knows Best: Home for Christmas. I loved the series and have seen most episodes multiple times. This movie was made in 1977. I really enjoyed it.
A Mistake. Elizabeth Banks is a surgeon who goes thru a ridiculous amount of fallout from what happened to a patient after a surgery. Set in New Zealand.
Note that IMDb has it at 5.4 while RT has it at 72%. I think the RT rating is more apt. (I usually use IMDb 6 as “the line” for considering watching something.)
Banks is very good here. Generally well made. Note that it might help if you take the title to also be applicable to other things.
Give it 3.5 trocars.
While decorating the tree and wrapping presents, I watched three different versions of A Christmas Carol – the Robert Zemeckis/Jim Carey version (arguably the most faithful, despite the added slapstick), The UPA/Mister Magoo version from 1962(!), the first version I saw and surprisingly faithful (also the very first made-for-TV animated Christmas special), and The Muppet version. I would’ve watched the 1971 Chuck Jones/Richard Williams version (which used the original John Leech drawings as inspiration), but I couldn’t find my copy.
I loved Robert Zemeckis’ version. I agree it is one of the most accurate.
Have to love the Muppet one, though.
I saw that Robert Zemeckis version at my brother’s house over the Thanksgiving weekend. It had the same uncanny valley effect of the Polar Express movie (though that perhaps shouldn’t be a surprise).
Best live-action Carol (b&w): Alistair Sim
Best live-action Carol (color): George C. Scott
Best animated, and also best musical version: Mr. Magoo
Best using puppets: Muppets
While Magoo is largely accurate, he spends Christmas Day with the Cratchits instead of nephew Fred’s…which is my favorite scene in the Sim version.