I had no actual intention of reviewing this movie when I brought it to a friends house to watch it on his giant screen, but as we were packing it in for the night Loud turned to me and said "I can't wait to read your take on this!" I feel a little obliged, since he was nice enough to watch it with me. Considering how hilariously awful it is.
Apart from our wonder woman Jane Fonda, the cast is built up of mostly nobodys and one-hit wonders. You may remember Ms. Fonda from such cinmatic masterpieces as Fun with Dick and Jane ('77) and Step and Stretch Workout. This woman was smoking hot in the sixties. She's still easy on the eyes today, but wow. Wowie wow-wow. If you're not following here, this woman is attractive. Fonda takes on the role of Barbarella, the naive Earthling astronaut, searching out and stopping the evil Durand Durand who is threatening the ancient univversal peace. Yeah, I'm not a fan of their tunes either but I think that this astro-manhunt is overkill. Haha, because they're named after the character. See what I did there?
Jane's acting is the best throughout, but that doesn't mean anything when you're comparing her to our darling Pygar, played by John Philip Law. I've never heard of this guy before, so bear with me as I slander his acting credibility based on this one film. I realize that this is the definition of prejudice and I'm awful for holding this against the guy, but it is just so awful. Pygar is the other leading protagonist, the last of the ornithanthropes, or birdmen. This angelic sidekick, was blinded by The Evil Tyrant. He becomes her hero and lover in the labyrinth, but soon becomes more of a dead weight to her cause.
The whole movie is nudity, sex and avant garde costumes. Not that it's entirely a bad thing, and seems to keep true to the french sci-fi comic book it is otherwise very loosely based on. If all you're interested in it a good show of Jane Fonda T & A, you really don't have to watch much futher than the opening credits, which involves the beauty sprawled out in a plexy glass zero-gravity.
Overall, the entire cast needs a few acting lessons. I'm going to have to hand out my very first low grade here. 3/10. Jane Fonda, see me after class.
In other news! For all of my True North brothers, on the Space Network on Thanksgiving day, they will be airing a Turkey-thon.That's right. Terrible movies. ALL. DAY.
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Sunday, August 30, 2009
The Producers, as promised (8/10)
First and foremost, I hate remakes. This I'm sure comes to no great surprise to anyone. It just seems like a sleezeball move by Hollywood to get more cash out of the same idea over and over again, like movie-goers are too brain dead from staring unblinkingly at the big screen for hours on end to realize what is going on around them. Frankly, I find it insulting and I refuse to hand over my hard earned money to be insulted. As Loud pointed out to me after my last review, there are some good remakes that deserve mentioning (though they seem to be few and far between these days). The 2005 Mel Brooks picture 'The Producers" is one of those rare exceptions that deserves some recognition. While this is a remake of his own film of the same name, the later adaptation is much more in Brooks' style with upbeat musical numbers, larger than life characters and loads of overacting. Like I said, this was a remake of a film that was his originally so I'm not sure if this could be classed as a remake or if it is more of a 'do-over' but that's just symmantics.
Musicals have always been one of my favorite genres. Every Disney movie tossed my way with dancing woodland creatures and a beauty with the voice of an angel is likely to have this snarky cynic by the heartstrings. Watching 'Snow White' or 'Cinderella' or 'Beauty and the Beast' for the hundredth time will still capture my attention as if I were a grade-schooler.
Speaking of Disney, Nathan Lane (playing the role of Max Bialystock) has the famous voice of Timon the meerkat from 'The Lion King' films. This rotund little man brings to the table the same larger-than-life personality that her has thrown into voice acting this scheming, furry little creature. Though, I must admit that seeing such an animated voice come from this bulbous human seems kind of odd and maybe he is better suited for voice acting. On the other hand, the surprise did not come unaccompanied by a hearty laugh, so maybe he is just perfect for comedic roles and children's movies. There is a close resemblance to the original Bialystock, Zero Mandol and I have to give Brooks points for that.
Also starring is the baby-faced Mathew Broderick. His character, Leopold Bloom (previously played by Gene Wilder) is a skittish, spaztic, neurotic young accountant brought in to Bialystock's office to do the books. Little did he know this would be the beginning of an epic song-and-dance adventure. No, really. Epic. This film has a run-time of 134 minutes. Coming in just over two hours,this version is longer than its 1960's brother running at 88 minutes.
Comparing Broderick to Wilder is comparing apples to oranges. Gene Wilder has a very special place in my heart, but I must admit that I found his performance lacking. This was his first movie with Brooks, which may account for his reserved manner. This is not to say that Wilder was not an asset to the production. He was great, but his other work is far superior. Broderick, on the other hand could be considered a Hollywood veteran by the time of his adaptation of the role.
Another big name appearing is the stunning Uma Thurman in the role of the Swedish secretary-slash-receptionist Ulla. This woman is on fire! Woof. I'm not sure what kind of accent she is trying to pull off. It didn't sound terribly Swedish to me, but I suggest you take that with a grain of salt considering I've only known two Swedes in my life, and one is a muppet. I would call her performance lacking, but it is clear that she wasn't cast for her range if you know what I'm saying.
Ms. Thurman isn't the only eye candy floating around on set either. There are chorus girls pouring out of every nook and cranny for the big music numbers. One song in particular, "I want to be a Producer' makes it quite clear that Brooks has a passion for the stage. There is very little to speak of for special effects but the elaborate costumes and sets will have your jaw dropping. This more than makes up for the total absence of computer graphics.
The only thing missing is the one thing you always look for in a Brooks production. Mel Brooks! If he isn't a main character, he'll at least make a cameo. Alas, nien. Though I'm fairly sure he is the voice of one of the nazies in the production of 'Springtime for Hitler' Whatever. Overall a wonderful film and a wonderful concept that deserved a second chance. 8/10
Musicals have always been one of my favorite genres. Every Disney movie tossed my way with dancing woodland creatures and a beauty with the voice of an angel is likely to have this snarky cynic by the heartstrings. Watching 'Snow White' or 'Cinderella' or 'Beauty and the Beast' for the hundredth time will still capture my attention as if I were a grade-schooler.
Speaking of Disney, Nathan Lane (playing the role of Max Bialystock) has the famous voice of Timon the meerkat from 'The Lion King' films. This rotund little man brings to the table the same larger-than-life personality that her has thrown into voice acting this scheming, furry little creature. Though, I must admit that seeing such an animated voice come from this bulbous human seems kind of odd and maybe he is better suited for voice acting. On the other hand, the surprise did not come unaccompanied by a hearty laugh, so maybe he is just perfect for comedic roles and children's movies. There is a close resemblance to the original Bialystock, Zero Mandol and I have to give Brooks points for that.
Also starring is the baby-faced Mathew Broderick. His character, Leopold Bloom (previously played by Gene Wilder) is a skittish, spaztic, neurotic young accountant brought in to Bialystock's office to do the books. Little did he know this would be the beginning of an epic song-and-dance adventure. No, really. Epic. This film has a run-time of 134 minutes. Coming in just over two hours,this version is longer than its 1960's brother running at 88 minutes.
Comparing Broderick to Wilder is comparing apples to oranges. Gene Wilder has a very special place in my heart, but I must admit that I found his performance lacking. This was his first movie with Brooks, which may account for his reserved manner. This is not to say that Wilder was not an asset to the production. He was great, but his other work is far superior. Broderick, on the other hand could be considered a Hollywood veteran by the time of his adaptation of the role.
Another big name appearing is the stunning Uma Thurman in the role of the Swedish secretary-slash-receptionist Ulla. This woman is on fire! Woof. I'm not sure what kind of accent she is trying to pull off. It didn't sound terribly Swedish to me, but I suggest you take that with a grain of salt considering I've only known two Swedes in my life, and one is a muppet. I would call her performance lacking, but it is clear that she wasn't cast for her range if you know what I'm saying.
Ms. Thurman isn't the only eye candy floating around on set either. There are chorus girls pouring out of every nook and cranny for the big music numbers. One song in particular, "I want to be a Producer' makes it quite clear that Brooks has a passion for the stage. There is very little to speak of for special effects but the elaborate costumes and sets will have your jaw dropping. This more than makes up for the total absence of computer graphics.
The only thing missing is the one thing you always look for in a Brooks production. Mel Brooks! If he isn't a main character, he'll at least make a cameo. Alas, nien. Though I'm fairly sure he is the voice of one of the nazies in the production of 'Springtime for Hitler' Whatever. Overall a wonderful film and a wonderful concept that deserved a second chance. 8/10
Saturday, March 14, 2009
This is not mine, but I wish it was! (0/5)
Gentle readers,
In my prolonged absence, I've done more reading than I have since my days in secondary school. I wish I could promise you some sort of upcoming masterpiece, but to be honest, I've been so completely uninspired by Hollywood that I cannot even manage the effort to hate some of their thoughtless drivel. I haven't even been to see the new Friday the 13th film. I did, however, see that 'The Day the Earth Stood Still' remake, but it was not anything noteworthy in either direction, so I passed.
However, this past Friday, while reading (one of) my local newspapers, I stumbled across this hot little number on the front page of the Arts & Life section: 'Last House a Vile Remake; Parents take revenge on thugs for attack on their daughter.' What a gem! What a work of journalistic splendor! Here are a few of my favorite parts:
'Director Dennis Iliadis' version retains the same basic story - a couple of teenage girls on the hunt for pot get abducted and savagely attacked by psycopaths - but there's nothing particulatly special about it artistically.'
'Iliadis puts his vaguely unique spin on the proceedings by prolonging the most violent grotesque elements and making them more graphic. The result is never scary, but instead feels deplorably gratuitous'
'The physical showdown with the bad guys is wildly destructive, protracted and repetitive; rather than sucking you in, it'll' inspire you to look at your watch, wondering when it'll end.'
Oh boy, oh boy! Isn't that just a peach, ladies and gentlemen? I'm grinning as I'm typing this! Up next* (and I'm not entirely sure when that will be) is another of my favorites, Mel Brooks' 'The Producers' so just stick around. Or check back regularly. Who am I kidding?
* subject to change
In my prolonged absence, I've done more reading than I have since my days in secondary school. I wish I could promise you some sort of upcoming masterpiece, but to be honest, I've been so completely uninspired by Hollywood that I cannot even manage the effort to hate some of their thoughtless drivel. I haven't even been to see the new Friday the 13th film. I did, however, see that 'The Day the Earth Stood Still' remake, but it was not anything noteworthy in either direction, so I passed.
However, this past Friday, while reading (one of) my local newspapers, I stumbled across this hot little number on the front page of the Arts & Life section: 'Last House a Vile Remake; Parents take revenge on thugs for attack on their daughter.' What a gem! What a work of journalistic splendor! Here are a few of my favorite parts:
'Director Dennis Iliadis' version retains the same basic story - a couple of teenage girls on the hunt for pot get abducted and savagely attacked by psycopaths - but there's nothing particulatly special about it artistically.'
'Iliadis puts his vaguely unique spin on the proceedings by prolonging the most violent grotesque elements and making them more graphic. The result is never scary, but instead feels deplorably gratuitous'
'The physical showdown with the bad guys is wildly destructive, protracted and repetitive; rather than sucking you in, it'll' inspire you to look at your watch, wondering when it'll end.'
Oh boy, oh boy! Isn't that just a peach, ladies and gentlemen? I'm grinning as I'm typing this! Up next* (and I'm not entirely sure when that will be) is another of my favorites, Mel Brooks' 'The Producers' so just stick around. Or check back regularly. Who am I kidding?
* subject to change
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
