Classic 1934 romantic comedy starring Clark Gable and Claudette Colbert and directed by Frank Capra. A simple plot, Colbert the daughter of a rich tycoon is secretly trying to get from Miami to New York to reunite with her husband, her father is sparing no expense in trying to stop her because he disapproves of her husband and Gable is the street smart reporter who decides to help Colbert so he can have the exclusive story. Like all great road movies, their travel from Miami to New York brings about many little adventures all of which are rather humorous. What makes this movie special is the relationship that strikes up between Gable and Colbert, the rich spoiled woman and the street smart, quick thinking reporter. Initially cold to Gable, Colbert warms up to him and Gable's initial dislike of Colbert also melts away.
This is the first time I have seen Colbert and she is wonderful, full of spirit with great eyes that reveal the various emotions her character has. This is a wonderful movie, having seen it, I can see why it always shows up in the top movies of all time. Highly recommend
I've a fondness for screwball romance comedies. I think this one is the template. What other movie can boast that sales of men's undershirts plummeted and innovative new ways to hitch-hike were born.
The other day I read Ray Bradbury's short story, "The Foghorn". Inspired by it's words, I decided to watch the film that was created around it. Ray Harryhausen's first solo effort. "The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms"
The black and white-stop motion is fantastic. Scenes of the Rhedosaurus tearing up NY city is amazingly realistic. But my favorite scene is when the beast is shown in sea water glistening silhoutte attacking the lighthouse!
It took Clint to kill "Tarantula", but it took Lee Van Cleef to kil the Beast!
Such as Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House or The Bachelor and the Bobby-Soxer - That's the screwball comedy I LIKE
Not the biggest fan of Capra. It Happened One Night is an exception to the rule. It's like a Bing & Bob roadtrip. It's a classic and the qualities Barry describe are also the reasons I love it. (Opposites attract, when done right, pure gold)
Used to like Mr Smith as a kid, but today it's too sappy. Good people in politics, how quaint.
Everyone on this site seems to dislike Capra; NP, JD, you. Am I the only member who loves Capra and for whose all-time favourite Christmas film is It's a Wonderful Life? Please tell me that my love for Capra and IAWL doesn't belong in the 'confessions' thread.
Such as Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House or The Bachelor and the Bobby-Soxer - That's the screwball comedy I LIKE
My favourite screwball comedy is Bringing up Baby with Grant and the extraordinary Katharine Hepburn. After that would come His Girl Friday, also with Grant but with Rosalind Russell as the female lead.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Everyone on this site seems to dislike Capra; NP, JD, you. Am I the only member who loves Capra and for whose all-time favourite Christmas film is It's a Wonderful Life? Please tell me that my love for Capra and IAWL doesn't belong in the 'confessions' thread.
I love It's a Wonderful Life and I now love It Happened One Night, I saw Mr. Smith many years ago and liked it, but as Alex said, not sure the honorable politician theme holds up in today's environment. Haven't seen anything else of his.
Everyone on this site seems to dislike Capra; NP, JD, you. Am I the only member who loves Capra and for whose all-time favourite Christmas film is It's a Wonderful Life? Please tell me that my love for Capra and IAWL doesn't belong in the 'confessions' thread.
I love It's a Wonderful Life and I now love It Happened One Night, I saw Mr. Smith many years ago and liked it, but as Alex said, not sure the honorable politician theme holds up in today's environment. Haven't seen anything else of his.
-{ Delighted to hear it. Regarding Mr Smith, yes it's quite idealistic in today's world, but I like that. I don't think that all political films need be realist or cynical. In fact, in a world where politicians prove to be so disillusioning, a film like Mr Smith is sometimes IMO exactly what is needed.
BTW, you should see Mr Deeds Goes to Town and Meet John Doe, both starring Gary Cooper. While neither IMO are on the level of the three above-mentioned films, they are nonetheless both very good.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
It's a colorized version of It's a Wonderful Life... {:) )
"Do I hear the bells tinkling? No it's Alex gritting his teeth..."
Whenever you hear a bell ring, it's Clarence hustling Dan for another round of drinks.
"Lad, I don't think I'll ever get my wings, but perhaps you could help me simulate the effect."
Dan in a state of inebriation:"My girlfriend makes me watch torture porn!!"
) Great post Alex. This is a major reason why I love this site. -{
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
I recently saw two films, both of which disappointed me.
The Box- an adaptation of a short story by Richard Matheson, and directed by Richard Kelly (Donnie Darko). It essentially tells of a couple (the woman is played by Cameron Diaz) who are given an unusual offer by a stranger (Frank Langella). The film isn't particularly good. It's biggest problem is that adapting a short story for the screen, and a story that works best as a short story, Kelly had to add alot of additional plot which was absurd and took away from the power of the premise. Diaz also has an annoying accent; it may or may not be accurate, but why bother with an accent if it's just going to be distracting? Personally I'm with Sean Connery on this. Forget the accent, just act. )
The film is superbly shot, however the screenplay really lets it down. Not just in terms of the absurd plotting, but also Kelly's habbit of shifting focus to a banal sub-plot involving a wedding causes the film to descend into tedium at times.
I will say though that Langella was terrific. But then again, he was always going to be great, especially with the role that he had; it's most other things that are the problem.
Moon- Sam Rockwell stars as an astronaut who has some interesting experiences whilst working on the moon. The director is Duncan Jones, the son of David Bowie. This film has earned rave reviews, especially in regards to Rockwell's performance, however I was unimpressed with the film (Rockwell was pretty good actually, but not Oscar-worthy). The concept is interesting, however it's far too thin, and the lack of characters also prevent the filmmakers from developing the story sufficiently. The film therefore failed to hold my interest for much of it, with a major reason being (as well as the thin concept and lack of characters) that I didn't really care all that much about the main character. He felt more like a construct than a fully realised charactter. One of my favourite moments, as well as one of my frustrating, was when a character started to play Katrina And The Waves's 'Walking On Sunshine', yet was interrupted before he got really into it. ) The fact that this moment was one of my highlights, and I was annoyed when the song stopped, playing must surely say everything one needs to know about my views on the film.
I saw both Moon and The Box tonight. Interestingly enough, if they have one thing in common, it's that both arguably would have worked better as short films. The Box was based on a short story, which was originally made into an episode of The Twilight Zone, and was not meaty IMO to be made into a feature, without expanding the plot in absurd ways. Moon was not originally a short film, but if it had been, it could have been great. As a proper feature, it just feels too much like a short film.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,993Quartermasters
"2012"
Well...Roland Emmerich likes to blow s**t up more than anyone in the film business these days. He makes Michael Bay look like Merchant/Ivory...and he's essentially been making the same film (with the exception of The Patriot, which I rather enjoyed) since Independence Day But at least I had no illusions going into 2012 (which the Loeffelholz boys wanted to see), since the trailers gave every indication that Mr. Emmerich hasn't acquired any remarkable new sense of self-restraint since his junk-science-fest The Day After Tomorrow ...
So the surprises were few, but the FX were a blast---which is really what I pay for when I fork out $$$ for the popcorn for events like this. Still and all, the 'barely outrunning disaster' motif grows quite wearisome by the end of Act 2, where we get a nice twist
...that the government's scheme actually involved seagoing 'arks,' rather than spacecraft
on a very shopworn theme. Still, it's not enough to lift this one out of the mediocrity to which it so obviously aspires. In a sense, like all Emmerich disaster flicks, this one echoes the Irwin Allen model and features nice little performances from various big-time present- and past-tense stars: John Cusack, Amanda Peet, Danny Glover, George Segal, et al...Woody Harrelson is notable as a 'Coast to Coast'-style, underground conspiracy-buff radio host who gets a front row seat at The Rapture
Did I enjoy it? Yeah...but it's way too long at 2:45 or so, with a protracted third act and a shameless
...happy ending
that it could have done without. 2.5 out of 5 stars. It's a nice cinema 'big screen' experience, but it will benefit from the 'pause' button, at home, when the quart-sized soda or beer has had its wicked effect...
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I too saw 2012. It did what it said on the tin (an English phrase that) and delivered in spades. Okay, so it's CGI special effects but this was the first time I felt impressed by them and enjoyed them. But I felt ambivalent at times; half of you is gripped by a chase from the elements type scene, the other half knows it isn't realistic and couldn't happen like that. The way an aeroplane dodges endless flying masonry and fireballs.
Finally you have a black guy in the White House and it's not liberal wishful thinking. But how unfortunate that the actual incumbent is younger and more Hollywood than Danny Glover. Of course, if Barack Obama popped up and said the end of the world was nigh, no one would believe him eh Loeffs! They'd just think, it's Democrat scaremongering...
Then again, if it were Dubya, he'd be the one flying over the destruction, going "Wow, look at that!" like during Katrina... X-(
Just a bit of politics....
As for the finale, yeah, where's Hugo Drax when you need him? It's testament to how seriously I did take it (and the whole thing does evoke real awe at the world's end) that little jokes, such as the one involving the Queen (not what you think, it doesn't involve her corgis getting squashed by meteorites a la Fish Called Wanda) seemed in poor taste.
See it on the big screen if you see it at all. {[]
MoonThe film therefore failed to hold my interest for much of it, with a major reason being (as well as the thin concept and lack of characters) that I didn't really care all that much about the main character. He felt more like a construct than a fully realised charactter..
I liked Moon. I saw it at the Prince Charles just off Leicester Square when I was down in London last month. Nice cinema. First one I've been in where the seating is looking up at the screen on a slope. Kind of fitting for a space movie. I thought the film was a good little genre piece. Nothing groundbreaking or surprising. It owes a lot to other films as well, but it was a promising debut for Zowie Bowie.
I liked Moon. I saw it at the Prince Charles just off Leicester Square when I was down in London last month. Nice cinema. First one I've been in where the seating is looking up at the screen on a slope. Kind of fitting for a space movie.
So you remember the cinema more than the film? :v (BTW it does sound like a cool cinema. )
I thought the film was a good little genre piece. Nothing groundbreaking or surprising. It owes a lot to other films as well, but it was a promising debut for Zowie Bowie.
I guess I went in with higher expectations than that. If I had approached it simply as a 'good little genre piece,' I might have enjoyed it more. However with all the hype, I expected more. Thus I was disappointed. But even so, while I did expect more, I don't think it's a particularly great film. I do agree that Bowie holds promise; but what he promises, based on Moon, isn't really my cup of tea.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Hi JD, that's where I saw Moon! However, you saw it in Screen 2 of Prince Charles, which only recently opened (in the last year). The main screen is downstairs, where you sort of look up at the screen more.
Hi JD, that's where I saw Moon! However, you saw it in Screen 2 of Prince Charles, which only recently opened (in the last year). The main screen is downstairs, where you sort of look up at the screen more.
I went downstairs too. I didn't word that too well. I was looking up at the screen. A bit like a plane just as it takes off. Nice cinema. Most of the film festival screenings were in the VUE which was OK. I went to the big Empire multiplex to see The Imaginarium etc and wasn't too keen on that place. Great film though.
I've seen this film a while ago, however I only had time to write a review on it recently.
I should start by saying that I am a huge fan of Michael Mann. His Heat remains among my all-time favourite films, and I have found something to like in each of his other films (some more so than others.) Thus, I went in with high expectations.
Sadly, my expectations weren't met at all as I was extremely disappointed with Public Enemies. I've been looking forward to seeing this film for quite a while, and yet I don't think this is one of Mann's (or Johnny Depp's) better efforts; in fact, I don't think it adds to their resumes at all. The plot, which whilst obviously based upon real events, is terrific and is one of the classic plots which never grows old; law enforcement agent pursues criminal who proves to be quite a challenge. The attention to detail in the art direction is precise, as is the costume design, and both look fantastic. The robberies are both exciting and revealing, while the gunfights are brillaintly brutal. Depp is great, and reminds me just what a great actor he really is.
Now the negatives, and there are alot of them. I was hugely disappointed with Marion Cotillard. Her performance in La vie en rose, which won her a much-deserved Oscar, was magnificent. In this film, however, she was IMO almost completely miscast. I say almost, as she had two wonderful scenes. But for much of the film, I thought she was bland. I could not see what Dillinger saw in her; until the very end. But by then, it was too late. It wasn't all her fault; the script didn't allow for any character development, and not once in a 2 1/2 hour film, did I see any passion between her and Dillinger. It was taken for granted, almost, and if it weren't for Depp's charismatic performance, I don't think I would have cared.
Then there was Christian Bale; yes, he was fine, but he was never better than merely fine and when he was on screen, I missed Depp. Bale also wasn't given much to work with. Unlike in Heat, I didn't really feel that an attempt was made to explain just why getting Dillinger was so important to Bale's Federal Agent. He was obsessed with him, but why, the film was unclear on. The film was also unclear on the socio-economic conditions which led to Dillinger being idolised as a hero by the ordinary person. In a film about a bank robber who was mythologized, it didn't provide the basis for the myth. So, as an example, I didn't get a sense of why people hated banks; obviously I know the answer, but without spoon-feeding the viewer, the film IMO didn't provide a context for Dillinger's being regarded as a hero.
The film also felt far too long, and while Mann is not a director known for tight running times, in the case of Public Enemies, his indulgence really let him down. The film is IMO quite, dare I say it, boring at times. Not every gangster film has to have the electricity of a Goodfellas, Bonnie and Clyde or Scarface. However, unlike the first two Godfather films, Public Enemies also lacked focus, and it didn't delve into its characters or setting nearly as much as I would have liked. A shorter and more focused film, or even just a more focused film, would have been far superior. This leads to another complaint of mine.
The film didn't seem interested in any of the characters; not Dillinger, not Purvis, not Contillard's damsel in distress and certainly not any of the minor characters. It's hard to feel for a character when one isn't interested in him, and so, with the exception of Dillinger, it didn't concern me when any of them were killed. With Dillinger, I became quite teary when he got killed, but I don't know if it was more because of Depp's performance or that, for all of its flaws, the film managed to craft an extremely sad climax. Regardless, he was the only character I really cared about.
Finally, arguably the film's biggest flaw; the use of HD video. I don't like it. I think it looks ugly, I'm not so sure whether it was JD or someone on another site who noted that he could tell that Depp was wearing makeup, and I agree with that. I really wish that it had been shot on film as the look, combined with the use of clumsy handheld camerawork, is absolutely dreadful. There aren't any memorable shots and where as the use of digital on Collateral and Miami Vice was superb, in this case, it's both inappropiate for the time period and quite horrifying to behold. The handheld camerawork, which I mentioned above was also incredibly confusing and very shabbily done; all inl in all, the film is IMO a visual embarassment, especially considering Mann's usual stardards. Whereas he is usually incredibly stylish; in this film, any style he had went out the window as soon as one got past the art direction and costume design (which he's not primary responsible for).
I was extremely disappointed with Public Enemies. I hope that Mann recaptures his greatness, because if his next film is as ordinary as Public Enemies, I won't be rushing out to see it. I would not recommend this film.
EDIT-it was not JD who mentioned being able to tell that Depp was wearing makeup, but rather Cosmo Landesman of The Sunday Times, as revealed by NP. Thanks for the clarification NP. {[]
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Finally, arguably the film's biggest flaw; the use of HD video. I don't like it. I think it looks ugly, I'm not so sure whether it was JD or someone on another site who noted that he could tell that Depp was wearing makeup, and I agree with that.
It was me, but I was quoting Cosmo Landesman of The Sunday Times. You can read his review here:
Finally, arguably the film's biggest flaw; the use of HD video. I don't like it. I think it looks ugly,
I went to the cinema to watch this film and didn't really notice the use of HD video until the shootout at the lodge. The whole film seemed to 'change' at that moment. It was as if I was in the lodge with them, or I was watching a play rather than a film - and I honestly don't know if I liked that or not. It certainly made the film feel more 'real' to me, but I do like the way a movie looks on film.
The movie itself was/is very entertaining but like Dan Same, I too would have liked to have seen a bit more of the story between Dillinger and Frechette.
YNWA 97
Mr MartiniThat nice house in the sky.Posts: 2,700MI6 Agent
So Dan or Sir Miles or anyone else who has seen Public Enemies , is this movie as good as The Untouchables ?
Some people would complain even if you hang them with a new rope
Finally, arguably the film's biggest flaw; the use of HD video. I don't like it. I think it looks ugly,
I went to the cinema to watch this film and didn't really notice the use of HD video until the shootout at the lodge. The whole film seemed to 'change' at that moment. It was as if I was in the lodge with them, or I was watching a play rather than a film - and I honestly don't know if I liked that or not. It certainly made the film feel more 'real' to me, but I do like the way a movie looks on film.
The movie itself was/is very entertaining but like Dan Same, I too would have liked to have seen a bit more of the story between Dillinger and Frechette.
Yeh, it would have been great if the romantic sub-plot had been better developed. I also much prefer the way a movie looks on film, although I do think that Mann has utilised digital well. Just not in the case of Public Enemies.
So Dan or Sir Miles or anyone else who has seen Public Enemies, is this movie as good as The Untouchables ?
Nowhere near as good. While I don't think The Untouchables was as great as its reputation suggests, it was mostly brilliant and I don't think that Public Enemies comes close.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
I hated the HD in Public Enemies. I much prefer film. I have to say I liked the film a lot though and it was nice to see Johnny Depp being subtle instead of prancing around.
I wish they'd used celluloid like they do in the last film I saw Emmanuelle in Bangkok. That's what the professionals do. Laura Gemser goes to meet a member of the Thai royal family, who is quite clearly European and like all great investigative journalists ends up losing her clothes. This is one of the better entries into the franchise with Gemser as impassively beautiful as ever.
I hated the HD in Public Enemies. I much prefer film. I have to say I liked the film a lot though and it was nice to see Johnny Depp being subtle instead of prancing around.
I loved Depp's performance. That was one of the things about the film I really liked.
When you find about it, could you let me know? :v )
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Comments
Classic 1934 romantic comedy starring Clark Gable and Claudette Colbert and directed by Frank Capra. A simple plot, Colbert the daughter of a rich tycoon is secretly trying to get from Miami to New York to reunite with her husband, her father is sparing no expense in trying to stop her because he disapproves of her husband and Gable is the street smart reporter who decides to help Colbert so he can have the exclusive story. Like all great road movies, their travel from Miami to New York brings about many little adventures all of which are rather humorous. What makes this movie special is the relationship that strikes up between Gable and Colbert, the rich spoiled woman and the street smart, quick thinking reporter. Initially cold to Gable, Colbert warms up to him and Gable's initial dislike of Colbert also melts away.
This is the first time I have seen Colbert and she is wonderful, full of spirit with great eyes that reveal the various emotions her character has. This is a wonderful movie, having seen it, I can see why it always shows up in the top movies of all time. Highly recommend
The other day I read Ray Bradbury's short story, "The Foghorn". Inspired by it's words, I decided to watch the film that was created around it. Ray Harryhausen's first solo effort. "The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms"
The black and white-stop motion is fantastic. Scenes of the Rhedosaurus tearing up NY city is amazingly realistic. But my favorite scene is when the beast is shown in sea water glistening silhoutte attacking the lighthouse!
It took Clint to kill "Tarantula", but it took Lee Van Cleef to kil the Beast!
http://www.amazon.com/Wonderful-Life-Color-Roach-Classics/dp/B0001WDAX6
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Such as Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House or The Bachelor and the Bobby-Soxer - That's the screwball comedy I LIKE
Not the biggest fan of Capra. It Happened One Night is an exception to the rule. It's like a Bing & Bob roadtrip. It's a classic and the qualities Barry describe are also the reasons I love it. (Opposites attract, when done right, pure gold)
Used to like Mr Smith as a kid, but today it's too sappy. Good people in politics, how quaint.
My favourite screwball comedy is Bringing up Baby with Grant and the extraordinary Katharine Hepburn.
It's a colorized version of It's a Wonderful Life... {:)
"Do I hear the bells tinkling? No it's Alex gritting his teeth..."
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I love It's a Wonderful Life and I now love It Happened One Night, I saw Mr. Smith many years ago and liked it, but as Alex said, not sure the honorable politician theme holds up in today's environment. Haven't seen anything else of his.
BTW, you should see Mr Deeds Goes to Town and Meet John Doe, both starring Gary Cooper. While neither IMO are on the level of the three above-mentioned films, they are nonetheless both very good.
"Lad, I don't think I'll ever get my wings, but perhaps you could help me simulate the effect."
Dan in a state of inebriation: "My girlfriend makes me watch torture porn!!"
{[]
When I first wrote it, I looked back, and thought to myself, "stupid!"
But in the long run, it's about having fun.
The Box- an adaptation of a short story by Richard Matheson, and directed by Richard Kelly (Donnie Darko). It essentially tells of a couple (the woman is played by Cameron Diaz) who are given an unusual offer by a stranger (Frank Langella). The film isn't particularly good. It's biggest problem is that adapting a short story for the screen, and a story that works best as a short story, Kelly had to add alot of additional plot which was absurd and took away from the power of the premise. Diaz also has an annoying accent; it may or may not be accurate, but why bother with an accent if it's just going to be distracting? Personally I'm with Sean Connery on this. Forget the accent, just act.
The film is superbly shot, however the screenplay really lets it down. Not just in terms of the absurd plotting, but also Kelly's habbit of shifting focus to a banal sub-plot involving a wedding causes the film to descend into tedium at times.
I will say though that Langella was terrific. But then again, he was always going to be great, especially with the role that he had; it's most other things that are the problem.
Moon- Sam Rockwell stars as an astronaut who has some interesting experiences whilst working on the moon. The director is Duncan Jones, the son of David Bowie. This film has earned rave reviews, especially in regards to Rockwell's performance, however I was unimpressed with the film (Rockwell was pretty good actually, but not Oscar-worthy). The concept is interesting, however it's far too thin, and the lack of characters also prevent the filmmakers from developing the story sufficiently. The film therefore failed to hold my interest for much of it, with a major reason being (as well as the thin concept and lack of characters) that I didn't really care all that much about the main character. He felt more like a construct than a fully realised charactter. One of my favourite moments, as well as one of my frustrating, was when a character started to play Katrina And The Waves's 'Walking On Sunshine', yet was interrupted before he got really into it.
I saw both Moon and The Box tonight. Interestingly enough, if they have one thing in common, it's that both arguably would have worked better as short films. The Box was based on a short story, which was originally made into an episode of The Twilight Zone, and was not meaty IMO to be made into a feature, without expanding the plot in absurd ways. Moon was not originally a short film, but if it had been, it could have been great. As a proper feature, it just feels too much like a short film.
Well...Roland Emmerich likes to blow s**t up more than anyone in the film business these days. He makes Michael Bay look like Merchant/Ivory...and he's essentially been making the same film (with the exception of The Patriot, which I rather enjoyed) since Independence Day
So the surprises were few, but the FX were a blast---which is really what I pay for when I fork out $$$ for the popcorn for events like this. Still and all, the 'barely outrunning disaster' motif grows quite wearisome by the end of Act 2, where we get a nice twist
on a very shopworn theme. Still, it's not enough to lift this one out of the mediocrity to which it so obviously aspires. In a sense, like all Emmerich disaster flicks, this one echoes the Irwin Allen model and features nice little performances from various big-time present- and past-tense stars: John Cusack, Amanda Peet, Danny Glover, George Segal, et al...Woody Harrelson is notable as a 'Coast to Coast'-style, underground conspiracy-buff radio host who gets a front row seat at The Rapture
Did I enjoy it? Yeah...but it's way too long at 2:45 or so, with a protracted third act and a shameless
that it could have done without. 2.5 out of 5 stars. It's a nice cinema 'big screen' experience, but it will benefit from the 'pause' button, at home, when the quart-sized soda or beer has had its wicked effect...
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Finally you have a black guy in the White House and it's not liberal wishful thinking. But how unfortunate that the actual incumbent is younger and more Hollywood than Danny Glover. Of course, if Barack Obama popped up and said the end of the world was nigh, no one would believe him eh Loeffs! They'd just think, it's Democrat scaremongering...
Then again, if it were Dubya, he'd be the one flying over the destruction, going "Wow, look at that!" like during Katrina...
Just a bit of politics....
As for the finale, yeah, where's Hugo Drax when you need him? It's testament to how seriously I did take it (and the whole thing does evoke real awe at the world's end) that little jokes, such as the one involving the Queen (not what you think, it doesn't involve her corgis getting squashed by meteorites a la Fish Called Wanda) seemed in poor taste.
See it on the big screen if you see it at all. {[]
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I liked Moon. I saw it at the Prince Charles just off Leicester Square when I was down in London last month. Nice cinema. First one I've been in where the seating is looking up at the screen on a slope. Kind of fitting for a space movie. I thought the film was a good little genre piece. Nothing groundbreaking or surprising. It owes a lot to other films as well, but it was a promising debut for Zowie Bowie.
I guess I went in with higher expectations than that. If I had approached it simply as a 'good little genre piece,' I might have enjoyed it more. However with all the hype, I expected more. Thus I was disappointed. But even so, while I did expect more, I don't think it's a particularly great film. I do agree that Bowie holds promise; but what he promises, based on Moon, isn't really my cup of tea.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I went downstairs too. I didn't word that too well. I was looking up at the screen. A bit like a plane just as it takes off. Nice cinema. Most of the film festival screenings were in the VUE which was OK. I went to the big Empire multiplex to see The Imaginarium etc and wasn't too keen on that place. Great film though.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I've seen this film a while ago, however I only had time to write a review on it recently.
I should start by saying that I am a huge fan of Michael Mann. His Heat remains among my all-time favourite films, and I have found something to like in each of his other films (some more so than others.) Thus, I went in with high expectations.
Sadly, my expectations weren't met at all as I was extremely disappointed with Public Enemies. I've been looking forward to seeing this film for quite a while, and yet I don't think this is one of Mann's (or Johnny Depp's) better efforts; in fact, I don't think it adds to their resumes at all. The plot, which whilst obviously based upon real events, is terrific and is one of the classic plots which never grows old; law enforcement agent pursues criminal who proves to be quite a challenge. The attention to detail in the art direction is precise, as is the costume design, and both look fantastic. The robberies are both exciting and revealing, while the gunfights are brillaintly brutal. Depp is great, and reminds me just what a great actor he really is.
Now the negatives, and there are alot of them. I was hugely disappointed with Marion Cotillard. Her performance in La vie en rose, which won her a much-deserved Oscar, was magnificent. In this film, however, she was IMO almost completely miscast. I say almost, as she had two wonderful scenes. But for much of the film, I thought she was bland. I could not see what Dillinger saw in her; until the very end. But by then, it was too late. It wasn't all her fault; the script didn't allow for any character development, and not once in a 2 1/2 hour film, did I see any passion between her and Dillinger. It was taken for granted, almost, and if it weren't for Depp's charismatic performance, I don't think I would have cared.
Then there was Christian Bale; yes, he was fine, but he was never better than merely fine and when he was on screen, I missed Depp. Bale also wasn't given much to work with. Unlike in Heat, I didn't really feel that an attempt was made to explain just why getting Dillinger was so important to Bale's Federal Agent. He was obsessed with him, but why, the film was unclear on. The film was also unclear on the socio-economic conditions which led to Dillinger being idolised as a hero by the ordinary person. In a film about a bank robber who was mythologized, it didn't provide the basis for the myth. So, as an example, I didn't get a sense of why people hated banks; obviously I know the answer, but without spoon-feeding the viewer, the film IMO didn't provide a context for Dillinger's being regarded as a hero.
The film also felt far too long, and while Mann is not a director known for tight running times, in the case of Public Enemies, his indulgence really let him down. The film is IMO quite, dare I say it, boring at times. Not every gangster film has to have the electricity of a Goodfellas, Bonnie and Clyde or Scarface. However, unlike the first two Godfather films, Public Enemies also lacked focus, and it didn't delve into its characters or setting nearly as much as I would have liked. A shorter and more focused film, or even just a more focused film, would have been far superior. This leads to another complaint of mine.
The film didn't seem interested in any of the characters; not Dillinger, not Purvis, not Contillard's damsel in distress and certainly not any of the minor characters. It's hard to feel for a character when one isn't interested in him, and so, with the exception of Dillinger, it didn't concern me when any of them were killed. With Dillinger, I became quite teary when he got killed, but I don't know if it was more because of Depp's performance or that, for all of its flaws, the film managed to craft an extremely sad climax. Regardless, he was the only character I really cared about.
Finally, arguably the film's biggest flaw; the use of HD video. I don't like it. I think it looks ugly, I'm not so sure whether it was JD or someone on another site who noted that he could tell that Depp was wearing makeup, and I agree with that. I really wish that it had been shot on film as the look, combined with the use of clumsy handheld camerawork, is absolutely dreadful. There aren't any memorable shots and where as the use of digital on Collateral and Miami Vice was superb, in this case, it's both inappropiate for the time period and quite horrifying to behold.
I was extremely disappointed with Public Enemies. I hope that Mann recaptures his greatness, because if his next film is as ordinary as Public Enemies, I won't be rushing out to see it. I would not recommend this film.
EDIT-it was not JD who mentioned being able to tell that Depp was wearing makeup, but rather Cosmo Landesman of The Sunday Times, as revealed by NP. Thanks for the clarification NP. {[]
It was me, but I was quoting Cosmo Landesman of The Sunday Times. You can read his review here:
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/film_reviews/article6626522.ece
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I went to the cinema to watch this film and didn't really notice the use of HD video until the shootout at the lodge. The whole film seemed to 'change' at that moment. It was as if I was in the lodge with them, or I was watching a play rather than a film - and I honestly don't know if I liked that or not. It certainly made the film feel more 'real' to me, but I do like the way a movie looks on film.
The movie itself was/is very entertaining but like Dan Same, I too would have liked to have seen a bit more of the story between Dillinger and Frechette.
Nowhere near as good. While I don't think The Untouchables was as great as its reputation suggests, it was mostly brilliant and I don't think that Public Enemies comes close.
I wish they'd used celluloid like they do in the last film I saw Emmanuelle in Bangkok. That's what the professionals do. Laura Gemser goes to meet a member of the Thai royal family, who is quite clearly European
And will investigate the movie Dan Same also!
Roger Moore 1927-2017
When you find about it, could you let me know? :v
I've heard it's pretty good. It's a bit like The Adventures of Barry McKenzie meets Caged Heat.
Is none the wiser... ?:)
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I'd imagine Dan Same The Movie being a cross between this
and this