DVDizzy.com

I just got around to seeing it this weekend and now that I have I would like for PrincePhillipFan to post a review of The Slipper and the Rose when he gets the time to, since he commented on the movie recently saying how much he liked it.

I remember someone (I'm going to say Disneykid) posting a link to one of the songs here years ago and I didn't find it all that amazing at the time. Now having seen the whole thing I can honestly say I really liked it. I did think some of the songs were pretty forgetable and the ending was dragged out a bit, but overall it was a very satisfying version of the Cinderella tale with the best prince I've seen attached to the story and some great songs like "What a Comforting Thing" and "He/She Danced with Me".

_________________

Oh good, this is back.

For some reason, I want to see Dr. Frankenhole review Die Hard. I'll think of more to add to that.

I'd love to see Goliath review The Lord of the Rings trilogy.

_________________

Oh dear - I forgot to watch and review Metropolis all that time ago. Sorry.

_________________
http://onethousandandonemovienights.blogspot.com/

... dammit. And I was looking at your name, too.

Oh, I want Laz to review the 1930's Murders in the Rue Morgue, with Bela Lugosi. I saw it a while ago, and was wondering what he thought about it.

I'm not very skilled with classic horror (but, hey, 60's to 90's- I'm your guy; and that's 40 years in the genre, so I don't think that's too shabby). I just haven't seen most of the Universal b&w-ers.

I'd be willing to watch it and form an opinion (crude as it would likely be) but Netflix just doesn't have it on Watch Instant and I can't seem to find it on YouTube.

_________________

4 Disney Atmosphere Images

Hmm, I can look around for it. I caught it on TCM myself. It's okay if you can't tackle it, though.

I wish I could, now more than ever. But I'd have to buy it and that's not possible at present.

_________________

4 Disney Atmosphere Images

Hey Laz,

If you're a horror guy I'd be interested in hearing your opinion on The Cremator. I adore it but I don't have much experience with horror beyond some monster movies, The Exorcist and The Omen.

_________________
Fountain of Thought - My views on cinema past and present

Bump

So Doc, have you seen Die Hard yet?

I missed this reply back in March. I don't really know anything about the movie but I'll see what I can dig up. If I find anything, I'll check it out and come back.

EDIT (7/19/12): no luck.

_________________

4 Disney Atmosphere Images

This is a good thread and shouldn't quietly die.



Sorry it's ridiculously late, but I have now.

I was uncertain about what to expect, quality-wise. It could be a generic and cliche film, or could be a surprisingly good or even great one. Well, at the very least, I can say I enjoyed it. There were moments of genuine suspense that made it worthwhile (like when Willis was in the elevator shafts, or when he was nearly dragged out of a window by the hose) and it's hard to shirk being caught up in the deliriously fast-paced thrills and against-the-clock type tension. John McClane was a surprisingly well-crafted character - he is made human and down-to-Earth at the start, and instead of being an unstoppable force of vaguely sadistic masculinity, he is panicky, febrile and initially out of his depth. But besides McClane, most of the characters are very cliche archetypes and I did find the scenes with the deputy constantly being wrong and the sergeant right overdone and rather annoying. One device that I wasn't expecting was the dramatic irony of the villain pretending to be a guest and going along with McClane. It was frustratingly underdeveloped and cut too short, yet was compelling while it lasted. As for the humour (of which there was an unexpectedly abundant amount), I could be generous and say it was hit-and-miss, although most of it did miss. In fairness, there was a handful of genuinely amusing lines and moments, but in short supply compared to how much comic relief there was.

On the whole, Die Hard is an efficient escapist fantasy, almost like a modernised, explosion-filled Hitchcock, but wholly lacking the wit and ingenuity.

_________________
http://onethousandandonemovienights.blogspot.com/

Die Hard is one of my very favorite action movies. It isn't particularly deep, but I do think that the film is an effective spin on the general good-versus-evil tropes you see in movies like these, treating it like a cat and mouse game with your standard crass hero, and a charismatic, cerebral villain taking charge. Bruce Willis and Alan Rickman are thankfully both insanely talented actors, and are able to pull this off completely well.

The sequels are hit-or-miss in quality, but that first one is a killer.

But yeah, anyone have a request for me?

I know you like Tarantino, so what do you think of Django Unchained? Where do you think it ranks against his other films? Personally, I really enjoyed it, but I don't think it's as great as Inglourious Basterds or Pulp Fiction (still, it was better than Reservoir Dogs).

_________________
http://onethousandandonemovienights.blogspot.com/

Well I personally liked Django a lot, but it was missing something from Tarantino's usual work- Sally Menke. There was some serious gaps in the film's editing, and a few too many scenes that didn't need to be there at all, most of all near the end, when it started to become all too redundant. I know that QT likes to have an appearance in all of his movies, but his scene really didn't have to be there.

But I am positive on just about everything else in regards to the film, though. I very much liked Tarantino's script. In some ways, it feels more mature than his others in that it doesn't rely on his keen ear for dialogue as much and allows for the character's conversations to add to the story when needed instead of have the story rely on them. I love the discussions about Madonna, skills of foot massages and Superman seen in his other films, but this is a step in the right direction for Quentin's skills as a filmmaker. The story has some hiccups, but his script itself is a hoot.

The acting was uniformly excellent. Jamie Foxx was sensational as the titular character, so much so that I was incredibly disappointed to see that he wasn't nominated for Best Actor. Django works well as a stoic assassin, in comparison to the more lively portrayals in the film. I think Leonardo DiCaprio might have had the best performance in the movie, as he showed off his eclectic chops with ease, but Samuel L. Jackson wasn't too far behind as his vicious lackey. Christoph Waltz was also great as King (guess to whom his name is a reference to), playing an eccentric, hearty bounty hunter, although I am a little disappointed to see that of the film's three great supporting roles, his was the sole Oscar-nominated character, when he more or less played another take on Hans Landa, a performance he already won for. But it's Waltz. He could make a Michael Bay character seem likable, so it's not too hard to understand.

So yeah, I do like Django Unchained, but I don't think I'd call it Tarantino's best. Not when Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs are still there, but it's hard to knock one of his screenplays and his ability to pull a great performance out of nearly anyone.

Here's my review of a more recent film "Side Effects"

“Side Effects” is a movie, well, about side effects to prescription drugs. However, that’s just on the surface. When you delve deeper into this psychological thriller, it becomes more about the side effects to different choices we make, whether it be positive or negative. The effects it has on us and the ones around us. It is a fairly thought provoking film that let’s us take a look into corruption.

Steven Soderbergh is a great director, but his biggest complaint maybe that he takes a while to get his movies going. He takes his time to set stuff up, but rewards you at the end with a psychological mind *beep. The attention to detail is commendable, but at times certain things feel a bit contrived. However, when everything starts coming together, it all starts making sense and you can’t help but wonder why you didn’t see it before. The writing is top notch, but the dialogue is all to memorable. The shots are inventive, but feel classic Soderbergh, who always has unusual artsy camera angles. At the end of the day, it is a thought provoking and engaging story.

Acting from the entire cast is fantastic. Rooney Mara gives a stunning performance. She has little quirks that make her character enthralling to watch. However, the biggest scene stealer for me is Judd Law, who gives a remarkable performance. He delivers his lines eloquently and with a British flair where you’re captivated by what he says. The whole cast is great and together they make the unmemorable dialogue sensational with their delivery.

Overall, “Side Effects” is a engrossing movie that keeps you guessing till the very end. With Soderbergh’s fantastic direction and performances by a dedicated cast this film is a winner by all means. While it may feel disjointed and confusing in the beginning, it becomes entrancing when things start coming together leaving the viewers with a satisfying conclusion. This a great send off for Soderbergh and he will be remembered as a great director for years to come. I give it 4.5/5, well directed and performed film that is riveting.

_________________
http://theconnoisseurreviews.tumblr.com/