list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Moonstruck on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Moonstruck/23182/default.aspx Title: Moonstruck
Year: 1987
Director: Norman Jewison
Plot: When there's a full moon over Brooklyn, anything can happen, and everything happens in the neighborhood where widowed bookkeeper Loretta Castorini (Cher) lives. First, Loretta agrees to marry a man she does not love, Johnny Cammareri (Danny Aiello), simply because he knows how to propose properly. Before the wedding can take place, Cammareri must visit his dying mother in Sicily. In his absence, Loretta is supposed to try to patch up the differences between Johnny and his brother, bakery operator Ronny Cammareri (Nicolas Cage). Having never forgiven Johnny for indirectly causing the accident that crippled him, Ronny flies into a rage whenever his brother's name is mentioned. He does, however, fall for Loretta like a ton of bricks. After a torrid affair, Loretta tries to avoid Ronny out of respect to Johnny, but he's just too fascinating to resist. Meanwhile, Loretta's father (Vincent Gardenia) is fooling around with his mistress Mona (Anita Gillette), while Loretta's mother (Olympia Dukakis) is wooed by a college professor (John Mahoney). These brief flings are forgiven and forgotten, but there's still the delicate situation of Loretta being in love with her future brother-in-law. A now-classic romantic comedy, Moonstruck won Oscars for Cher, Olympia Dukakis, and screenwriter John Patrick Shanley. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 42
Number of Lists: 23
Number of blog posts: 4
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 20:12:07 GMTMoonstruck1987Norman JewisonWhen there's a full moon over Brooklyn, anything can happen, and everything happens in the neighborhood where widowed bookkeeper Loretta Castorini (<a href="/players/P____12664/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Cher</a>) lives. First, Loretta agrees to marry a man she does not love, Johnny Cammareri (<a href="/players/P______421/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Danny Aiello</a>), simply because he knows how to propose properly. Before the wedding can take place, Cammareri must visit his dying mother in Sicily. In his absence, Loretta is supposed to try to patch up the differences between Johnny and his brother, bakery operator Ronny Cammareri (<a href="/players/P____10155/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Nicolas Cage</a>). Having never forgiven Johnny for indirectly causing the accident that crippled him, Ronny flies into a rage whenever his brother's name is mentioned. He does, however, fall for Loretta like a ton of bricks. After a torrid affair, Loretta tries to avoid Ronny out of respect to Johnny, but he's just too fascinating to resist. Meanwhile, Loretta's father (<a href="/players/P____25883/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Vincent Gardenia</a>) is fooling around with his mistress Mona (Anita Gillette), while Loretta's mother (<a href="/players/P____20452/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Olympia Dukakis</a>) is wooed by a college professor (<a href="/players/P____44655/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>John Mahoney</a>). These brief flings are forgiven and forgotten, but there's still the delicate situation of Loretta being in love with her future brother-in-law. A now-classic romantic comedy, Moonstruck won Oscars for Cher, Olympia Dukakis, and screenwriter <a href="/players/P___110969/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>John Patrick Shanley</a>. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide42Tag Target (>10)2343http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/u47067gw2oe.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Moonstruck/23182/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/pippin06/archive/2009/12/7/44491.aspx Post By: pippin06
Post To: Reel Thoughts
Post Date: 12/7/2009 3:25:03 PM
Body: What's the AFI Project, you ask? For more information, or if you just enjoy my bemused ramblings, read here:http://www.spout.com/blogs/pippin06/archive/2008/3/1/25756.aspx Moonstruck is on the following AFI lists: 100 Funniest Films (#41)100 Years...100 Passions (#17)100 Movie Quotes (#96 - Loretta Castorini: "Snap out of it!")10 Top 10's (#8 Romantic Comedy) This film also represents a very big cheat on my part. I have hitherto advertised a sequence of nine Oscar nominated-dramas topping my Netflix queue. Well....that would be true only if Moonstruck was counted as a drama. Most lists and critics and people who decide to pin genres on films have listed this as a romantic comedy. Because I regard it as more of a dramedy, given the fact that the true laughs are rare and many of the scenes in Moonstruck actually originate from serious, non-funny type situations, and given the fact that to call it a comedy would break what was naturally my stream-of-consciousness queuing with an aberration to what would otherwise be a sequence of nine dramas, I just went with it. Hey, it's my party here, right? So, this represents the eighth of (roughly) nine Oscar-nominated dramas (ish) topping my Netflix queue, just in case you were keeping track. I have always wanted to see Moonstruck but never really found an opportunity to do so for one reason or another. Perhaps, it's because that I'm not a huge Cher fan; I mean, I respect her, and I think she's a great artist, but I'm not always necessarily jiving with the art she creates. I'm even less of a fan of Nicolas Cage, who always seems to play a version of Nicolas Cage in his movies, or at least it seems to me. He has such a distinctive voice and set of physical features that it is hard for me to suspend disbelief with each new project of his; however, Moonstruck's story always interested me, and I do enjoy romantic comedies, particularly when they offer a spark of originality and deviate some from what is otherwise the tried-and-true blueprint of one of the most formulaic genres in film. Plus, it's an AFI movie, so it was a necessary addition to the queue. Apparently, as the plot summary above says so much more eloquently than I could out of the box, "when there's a full moon over Brooklyn, anything can happen." Loretta Castorini (Cher) is a widow who believes that her love life and brief previous marriage, after which she became a widow, is cursed with bad luck. She agrees to marry Johnny Cammareri (Danny Aiello) because he seems like a nice man who could help take care of her and because he knows how to propose on one knee, and though she does not love him, she takes these facts as good signs that her bad luck is over. Though Loretta wants the wedding to take place in one month, Johnny will not marry Loretta until he visits his dying mother in Sicily, but while he is gone, he asks Loretta to mend broken fences between him and his brother, bakery operator Ronny (Cage). What Loretta soon discovers, however, is that Ronny blames Johnny for indirectly causing an accident at the bakery that cost him his hand, but when Loretta doesn't give in to Ronny's demonstrative theatrics, Ronny falls head over heels in love with Loretta. Though she tries her hardest to avoid Ronny out of respect for Johnny, she finds him too hard to resist and begins having a tempestuous and passionate affair with him. In the meantime, Loretta's father (Vincent Gardenia) is having an affair of his own, and while Loretta's mother (Olympia Dukakis) suspects this is happening, she finds herself being wooed by a college professor (John Mahoney) who normally gets involved with his students. When the family coalesces around the breakfast table in anticipation of Johnny's return, the confessions fly. Moonstruck can definitely be appreciated for its quirky deviations from the otherwise tedious romantic comedy blueprint. Loretta, as the heroine, is motivated to marry less for her own livelihood than for a cure to her mid-life ennui, but the man she initially chooses almost seems to exacerbate that ennui. Ronny seems to teach Loretta passion, even as Loretta teaches Ronny a few things about adulthood and maturity. While Moonstruck boasts some of the same old romcom ingredients, the vivid characters spice up the picture and give the film its Shakespearean-like tenor (consider some of the comedies). The characters would not be so vivid without some of the most notable ingredients of all. Cher won an Oscar for her performance, and it is simply because she makes Loretta all at once world-weary and charming yet still able to be surprised. She's the window into this slice of life, and without her very organic and grounded performance as a woman acclimating to the changes in her surroundings and her personal attitude, Moonstruck would have been very dull indeed. All of the actors did an amazing job, though, and formed a terrific ensemble that was delightful to watch. Nicolas Cage was actually quite funny, and it was one of the only times in my memory that my disbelief was actually suspended for one of his performances. Olympia Dukakis and Vincent Gardenia had pitch-perfect delivery in their respective parental roles; Dukakis' wizened mother (for which she also won an Oscar) with an acerbic wit was easily my favorite character, while Gardenia kept his philandering father from descending into despicable depths and gave him a slight lovable-but-naughty oaf undercurrent that made him endearing. The script was wonderful (it also won an Oscar) and provided this ensemble and director Norman Jewison some great material with which to work. This family and this odd little romance was truly given all three dimensions; Moonstruck has a lot of heart but not only from its romance side. The film is as much a story about family and the ties that bind than it is about the unpredictability of love. I didn't love Moonstruck completely, though, only because I didn't find the film all that funny, at least until the very end. The scene in the Castorini kitchen, in which the confessions start to fly, prompts many a witty barb from its in-house peanut gallery and prompted this viewer to laugh out loud on a couple of occasions, but this was the only time throughout watching the film. There were some chuckles to be elicited from Dukakis and Cher (the famous "snap out of it" line is far funnier in context), but the rest of the film didn't boast as much comedy as all of the rankings would leave a potential viewer to believe. Also, this film would really be most meaningful to a woman in Loretta's situation (or in her parents' situation), who is faced with certain life prospects and encounters new information that influences her choices. I'm not condemning the film on these ideas, but I was less inclined to love it for these reasons, and I think that limits to a film's appeal can be considered something of a flaw when evaluating it for its overall rating. I also am less apt to like a "comedy" that I only occasionally found truly funny. I think because the story was cute and contained a breath of originality in its execution of an otherwise formulaic concept in its writing and performances, Moonstruck is a wonderful film, even if it's not one of my favorites. Therefore, I feel it's fair to give the film an 8 for minor flaws/very good. As to the test, I would have to watch it once or twice more before deciding to invest in it for the possibility of many repeat viewings. I liked Moonstruck quite a bit, and other romcom fans, I believe, would too, for its originality and vivacious characters and story; there are simply others I like better, including others on the above AFI lists.
]]>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 20:25:03 GMTpippin06Reel Thoughts12/7/2009 3:25:03 PM What's the AFI Project, you ask? For more information, or if you just enjoy my bemused ramblings, read here:http://www.spout.com/blogs/pippin06/archive/2008/3/1/25756.aspx Moonstruck is on the following AFI lists: 100 Funniest Films (#41)100 Years...100 Passions (#17)100 Movie Quotes (#96 - Loretta Castorini: "Snap out of it!")10 Top 10's (#8 Romantic Comedy) This film also represents a very big cheat on my part. I have hitherto advertised a sequence of nine Oscar nominated-dramas topping my Netflix queue. Well....that would be true only if Moonstruck was counted as a drama. Most lists and critics and people who decide to pin genres on films have listed this as a romantic comedy. Because I regard it as more of a dramedy, given the fact that the true laughs are rare and many of the scenes in Moonstruck actually originate from serious, non-funny type situations, and given the fact that to call it a comedy would break what was naturally my stream-of-consciousness queuing with an aberration to what would otherwise be a sequence of nine dramas, I just went with it. Hey, it's my party here, right? So, this represents the eighth of (roughly) nine Oscar-nominated dramas (ish) topping my Netflix queue, just in case you were keeping track. I have always wanted to see Moonstruck but never really found an opportunity to do so for one reason or another. Perhaps, it's because that I'm not a huge Cher fan; I mean, I respect her, and I think she's a great artist, but I'm not always necessarily jiving with the art she creates. I'm even less of a fan of Nicolas Cage, who always seems to play a version of Nicolas Cage in his movies, or at least it seems to me. He has such a distinctive voice and set of physical features that it is hard for me to suspend disbelief with each new project of his; however, Moonstruck's story always interested me, and I do enjoy romantic comedies, particularly when they offer a spark of originality and deviate some from what is otherwise the tried-and-true blueprint of one of the most formulaic genres in film. Plus, it's an AFI movie, so it was a necessary addition to the queue. Apparently, as the plot summary above says so much more eloquently than I could out of the box, "when there's a full moon over Brooklyn, anything can happen." Loretta Castorini (Cher) is a widow who believes that her love life and brief previous marriage, after which she became a widow, is cursed with bad luck. She agrees to marry Johnny Cammareri (Danny Aiello) because he seems like a nice man who could help take care of her and because he knows how to propose on one knee, and though she does not love him, she takes these facts as good signs that her bad luck is over. Though Loretta wants the wedding to take place in one month, Johnny will not marry Loretta until he visits his dying mother in Sicily, but while he is gone, he asks Loretta to mend broken fences between him and his brother, bakery operator Ronny (Cage). What Loretta soon discovers, however, is that Ronny blames Johnny for indirectly causing an accident at the bakery that cost him his hand, but when Loretta doesn't give in to Ronny's demonstrative theatrics, Ronny falls head over heels in love with Loretta. Though she tries her hardest to avoid Ronny out of respect for Johnny, she finds him too hard to resist and begins having a tempestuous and passionate affair with him. In the meantime, Loretta's father (Vincent Gardenia) is having an affair of his own, and while Loretta's mother (Olympia Dukakis) suspects this is happening, she finds herself being wooed by a college professor (John Mahoney) who normally gets involved with his students. When the family coalesces around the breakfast table in anticipation of Johnny's return, the confessions fly. Moonstruck can definitely be appreciated for its quirky deviations from the otherwise tedious romantic comedy blueprint. Loretta, as the heroine, is motivated to marry less for her own livelihood than for a cure to her mid-life ennui, but the man she initially chooses almost seems to exacerbate that ennui. Ronny seems to teach Loretta passion, even as Loretta teaches Ronny a few things about adulthood and maturity. While Moonstruck boasts some of the same old romcom ingredients, the vivid characters spice up the picture and give the film its Shakespearean-like tenor (consider some of the comedies). The characters would not be so vivid without some of the most notable ingredients of all. Cher won an Oscar for her performance, and it is simply because she makes Loretta all at once world-weary and charming yet still able to be surprised. She's the window into this slice of life, and without her very organic and grounded performance as a woman acclimating to the changes in her surroundings and her personal attitude, Moonstruck would have been very dull indeed. All of the actors did an amazing job, though, and formed a terrific ensemble that was delightful to watch. Nicolas Cage was actually quite funny, and it was one of the only times in my memory that my disbelief was actually suspended for one of his performances. Olympia Dukakis and Vincent Gardenia had pitch-perfect delivery in their respective parental roles; Dukakis' wizened mother (for which she also won an Oscar) with an acerbic wit was easily my favorite character, while Gardenia kept his philandering father from descending into despicable depths and gave him a slight lovable-but-naughty oaf undercurrent that made him endearing. The script was wonderful (it also won an Oscar) and provided this ensemble and director Norman Jewison some great material with which to work. This family and this odd little romance was truly given all three dimensions; Moonstruck has a lot of heart but not only from its romance side. The film is as much a story about family and the ties that bind than it is about the unpredictability of love. I didn't love Moonstruck completely, though, only because I didn't find the film all that funny, at least until the very end. The scene in the Castorini kitchen, in which the confessions start to fly, prompts many a witty barb from its in-house peanut gallery and prompted this viewer to laugh out loud on a couple of occasions, but this was the only time throughout watching the film. There were some chuckles to be elicited from Dukakis and Cher (the famous "snap out of it" line is far funnier in context), but the rest of the film didn't boast as much comedy as all of the rankings would leave a potential viewer to believe. Also, this film would really be most meaningful to a woman in Loretta's situation (or in her parents' situation), who is faced with certain life prospects and encounters new information that influences her choices. I'm not condemning the film on these ideas, but I was less inclined to love it for these reasons, and I think that limits to a film's appeal can be considered something of a flaw when evaluating it for its overall rating. I also am less apt to like a "comedy" that I only occasionally found truly funny. I think because the story was cute and contained a breath of originality in its execution of an otherwise formulaic concept in its writing and performances, Moonstruck is a wonderful film, even if it's not one of my favorites. Therefore, I feel it's fair to give the film an 8 for minor flaws/very good. As to the test, I would have to watch it once or twice more before deciding to invest in it for the possibility of many repeat viewings. I liked Moonstruck quite a bit, and other romcom fans, I believe, would too, for its originality and vivacious characters and story; there are simply others I like better, including others on the above AFI lists. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/3/27/41301.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 3/27/2009 5:00:55 PM
Body: This has been quite the week for me to wish Nicolas Cage still made good movies. Besides crying over the fact that his latest sci-fi action thriller involving disaster prophesy was #1 at the box office despite being panned by critics, some of my unrelated experiences over the past seven days have coincidentally included the following: watching Wild at Heart for the first time; learning from locals that Moonstruck was partly shot in my neighborhood; discussing, at a party, not only the merits of The Rock, but also its qualifications for inclusion in the Criterion catalog. I’m now thinking I should stay home tonight and watch a marathon of Raising Arizona, Face/Off and Adaptation. Or, maybe I can just lay back and think about how Disney’s The Sorcerer’s Apprentice is going to be Cage’s return to quality. I know, I know, those of you who didn’t stop reading at my profession of love for The Rock are now wondering if I’m crazy. “Certainly this movie is going to be terrible,” you’re saying to yourself (as you plan your derisive comment). And besides, Herzog’s Bad Lieutenant “remake” shall be his next good film. Well, maybe, but after seeing the new production photos from Apprentice circulating the net (originating at JustJared), I’m prophesizing that the Fantasia-inspired film will be the Moonstruck to Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans‘ Raising Arizona, or the Face/Off to Lieutenant’s Con Air, or the Adaptation to Lieutenant’s Windtalkers. Perhaps I am soiling my reputation by confessing my overextending appreciation of Cage’s career, but you have to respect a guy who allows himself to look and be so ridiculous for his art. The rest of the film blogosphere’s responses to the photos after the jump: As usual, Dan Hopper at Best Week Ever has the best jokes: “…on the set of his new movie Something Surely Worth Seing Dangerous. He’s about to change out of his normal clothes and hairpiece and into his costume (zuhhhh-zinggg!!!).” Pajiba headlines that this could be Cage’s “Most Hilarious Role Ever.” Let’s hope so. Mark at I Watch Stuff compares the look to WWE wrestler The Undertaker and Sega video game character Chakan: The Forever Man. Cinematical’s Elizabeth Rappe sees Cage instead as “apparently ripping his look off Hugh Jackman’s Gabriel Van Helsing” in the site’s “LOL of the Day” post. “The only thing that has me curious about this movie,” she adds, “is how Baruchel ends up as his apprentice. Because if I was approached by a ‘magician’ who looked like that, I’d run screaming the other way.” Rob Bricken at Topless Robot agrees with Rappe’s comparison but seems a tad more hopeful of the film: I admit, despite my utter hatred and fear of Jerry Bruckheimer movies, I did really enjoy the first Pirates of the Carribbean movie. And I love Fantasia, so I’ll — very regretfully — be giving this a shot. But the fact that Cage is dressed exactly like Hugh Jackman in Van Helsing means I probably won’t be watching sober. Jeremy at We Are Movie Geeks also agrees: “Looks like Cage is trying out for ‘Van Helsing 2.’” Mike Sampson at JoBlo.com sees Cage more as a “geriatric Criss Angel” and tells us how to respect this film: if I hear any “raping my childhood” crap, I’m gonna reach through the computer screen and smack you across the head. This movie has nothing to do with the Mickey Mouse cartoon. The story is a German poem written by Goethe. Get that in your head now and you’ll be OK. Somehow Josh Radde at Film School Rejects thinks Cage “appears to be doing his best Kris Kristofferson,” before once again concentrating on the actor’s hair: Add this hairdo to the pretty amazing collection of Cage ‘Dos so far. In fact, Rotten Tomatoes created a game linking a pic of his hair to the movie it appears in and it’ll surprise you how many twisted coifs this man has sported over the years. The typically optimistic Alex Billington of FirstShowing.net argues on Cage’s behalf: I would say, don’t be so quick to judge these and Cage’s new hairdo and leather outfit, but I’m sure you’ve already made up your mind. I don’t know if these will help Cage any more, or potentially ruin him entirely again, but honestly, I’m still looking forward to The Sorcerer’s Apprentice. And Sean at FilmDrunk also defends the powers of Cage, at least as box office gold: “In all seriousness though, you can make fun of Nicolas Cage all you want, but if the past has taught us anything it is that America loves his movies. National Treasure + Harry Potter = $$$.” In additional Nic Cage-is-nuts bloggery from today: Graeme McMillan at io9 shares the actor’s recent statements regarding his preference for science fiction, abandonment of gratuitous violence and overall desire to go more “into the abstract”: Does this mean that Cage sees science fiction as a gateway drug to take audiences into indulgently abstract movies? I hope so, if only because I’d love to see just how abstract the man behind Ghost Rider, Bangkok Dangerous and Adaptation can get when he puts his mind to it. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 27 Mar 2009 21:00:55 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com3/27/2009 5:00:55 PMThis has been quite the week for me to wish Nicolas Cage still made good movies. Besides crying over the fact that his latest sci-fi action thriller involving disaster prophesy was #1 at the box office despite being panned by critics, some of my unrelated experiences over the past seven days have coincidentally included the following: watching Wild at Heart for the first time; learning from locals that Moonstruck was partly shot in my neighborhood; discussing, at a party, not only the merits of The Rock, but also its qualifications for inclusion in the Criterion catalog. I’m now thinking I should stay home tonight and watch a marathon of Raising Arizona, Face/Off and Adaptation. Or, maybe I can just lay back and think about how Disney’s The Sorcerer’s Apprentice is going to be Cage’s return to quality. I know, I know, those of you who didn’t stop reading at my profession of love for The Rock are now wondering if I’m crazy. “Certainly this movie is going to be terrible,” you’re saying to yourself (as you plan your derisive comment). And besides, Herzog’s Bad Lieutenant “remake” shall be his next good film. Well, maybe, but after seeing the new production photos from Apprentice circulating the net (originating at JustJared), I’m prophesizing that the Fantasia-inspired film will be the Moonstruck to Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans‘ Raising Arizona, or the Face/Off to Lieutenant’s Con Air, or the Adaptation to Lieutenant’s Windtalkers. Perhaps I am soiling my reputation by confessing my overextending appreciation of Cage’s career, but you have to respect a guy who allows himself to look and be so ridiculous for his art. The rest of the film blogosphere’s responses to the photos after the jump: As usual, Dan Hopper at Best Week Ever has the best jokes: “…on the set of his new movie Something Surely Worth Seing Dangerous. He’s about to change out of his normal clothes and hairpiece and into his costume (zuhhhh-zinggg!!!).” Pajiba headlines that this could be Cage’s “Most Hilarious Role Ever.” Let’s hope so. Mark at I Watch Stuff compares the look to WWE wrestler The Undertaker and Sega video game character Chakan: The Forever Man. Cinematical’s Elizabeth Rappe sees Cage instead as “apparently ripping his look off Hugh Jackman’s Gabriel Van Helsing” in the site’s “LOL of the Day” post. “The only thing that has me curious about this movie,” she adds, “is how Baruchel ends up as his apprentice. Because if I was approached by a ‘magician’ who looked like that, I’d run screaming the other way.” Rob Bricken at Topless Robot agrees with Rappe’s comparison but seems a tad more hopeful of the film: I admit, despite my utter hatred and fear of Jerry Bruckheimer movies, I did really enjoy the first Pirates of the Carribbean movie. And I love Fantasia, so I’ll — very regretfully — be giving this a shot. But the fact that Cage is dressed exactly like Hugh Jackman in Van Helsing means I probably won’t be watching sober. Jeremy at We Are Movie Geeks also agrees: “Looks like Cage is trying out for ‘Van Helsing 2.’” Mike Sampson at JoBlo.com sees Cage more as a “geriatric Criss Angel” and tells us how to respect this film: if I hear any “raping my childhood” crap, I’m gonna reach through the computer screen and smack you across the head. This movie has nothing to do with the Mickey Mouse cartoon. The story is a German poem written by Goethe. Get that in your head now and you’ll be OK. Somehow Josh Radde at Film School Rejects thinks Cage “appears to be doing his best Kris Kristofferson,” before once again concentrating on the actor’s hair: Add this hairdo to the pretty amazing collection of Cage ‘Dos so far. In fact, Rotten Tomatoes created a game linking a pic of his hair to the movie it appears in and it’ll surprise you how many twisted coifs this man has sported over the years. The typically optimistic Alex Billington of FirstShowing.net argues on Cage’s behalf: I would say, don’t be so quick to judge these and Cage’s new hairdo and leather outfit, but I’m sure you’ve already made up your mind. I don’t know if these will help Cage any more, or potentially ruin him entirely again, but honestly, I’m still looking forward to The Sorcerer’s Apprentice. And Sean at FilmDrunk also defends the powers of Cage, at least as box office gold: “In all seriousness though, you can make fun of Nicolas Cage all you want, but if the past has taught us anything it is that America loves his movies. National Treasure + Harry Potter = $$$.” In additional Nic Cage-is-nuts bloggery from today: Graeme McMillan at io9 shares the actor’s recent statements regarding his preference for science fiction, abandonment of gratuitous violence and overall desire to go more “into the abstract”: Does this mean that Cage sees science fiction as a gateway drug to take audiences into indulgently abstract movies? I hope so, if only because I’d love to see just how abstract the man behind Ghost Rider, Bangkok Dangerous and Adaptation can get when he puts his mind to it. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/jonmstanley/archive/2008/9/18/35290.aspx Post By: jonmstanley
Post To: jonmstanley Blog
Post Date: 9/18/2008 8:25:39 PM
Body: Moonstruck, for me, is one of those movies that gets better every time I watch it. Back in the day when a movie only had to be an hour and a half, Moonstruck makes every minute count. It's filled with laughs, wonderful acting and a great family dynamic that feels real and believable. Whenever I'm feeling blue or I need a little pick me up, I'll pop in Moonstuck and by the end of the movie I've snapped outta it.
]]>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 00:25:39 GMTjonmstanleyjonmstanley Blog9/18/2008 8:25:39 PMMoonstruck, for me, is one of those movies that gets better every time I watch it. Back in the day when a movie only had to be an hour and a half, Moonstruck makes every minute count. It's filled with laughs, wonderful acting and a great family dynamic that feels real and believable. Whenever I'm feeling blue or I need a little pick me up, I'll pop in Moonstuck and by the end of the movie I've snapped outta it. http://www.spout.com/blogs/shaunhuston/archive/2008/6/18/31391.aspx Post By: ShaunHuston
Post To: ShaunHuston filmblog
Post Date: 6/18/2008 9:01:56 PM
Body: For me, the romantic comedy Top 10 is the most solid compilation of the group. Not only is the rom com a clearly established American film genre, but the individual selections are all eminently reasonable and defensible. This is not to suggest that I wouldn't make alternate suggestions, because I would, but I understand the reasoning behind each of the ten films on the AFI's list. And I don't have any strong contrarian or idiosyncratic preferences that would lead me to tilt at a windmill like arguing against the selection of, say, City Lights (1931) as number one, or its inclusion on the list altogether. The one film on this list that I do question is Sleepless in Seattle (1993). There isn't anything outstandingly wrong with the film, but it isn't especially remarkable, either. It doesn't represent a particularly clever or innovative take on the genre. It doesn't push any boundaries. It doesn't mark any point in the development of the form (indeed, I would argue that it is fairly typical of the post-Harry and Sally rom com, including being less enjoyable than its progenitor). And Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan do not have any special chemistry together (maybe one reason why they spend most of the movie apart). Replacing Sleepless in Seattle is fairly easy; the one gaping hole in the AFI's list is the absence of anything by Preston Sturges. But what to pick? Just about any of his films would be a better choice than the more contemporary film, but, for me, it's a tough call between: Sullivan's Travels (1941), The Lady Eve (1941), and The Palm Beach Story (1942). I probably lean in the direction of Sullivan's, largely because of how sharply written the first meeting between Sullivan (Joel McCrea) and The Girl (Veronica Lake) is; all I'll say here is that Nora Ephron wishes she could write dialogue like the snappy back-and-forth in this scene. On the other hand, there are moments of clear genius in The Lady Eve, from both Barbara Stanwyck and Sturges. However, the film does have one central flaw, and it's an important one from a genre perspective: the lead characters are not evenly matched. At no point does Henry Fonda's Charles Pike have a chance against Stanwyck's Jean Harrington, and practically each time I watch the film I want her to take her revenge without taking him back; he's that much of a drip. While I would replace Sleepless in Seattle with Sullivan's Travels, I would not list it at the bottom. In deference to people who know silent film better than I, I'd put it at number two. I could make an argument for either of the other two Sturges movies, but, as I indicated in the opening, the existing selections are reasonable enough that I don't feel compelled to argue for taking off, even, a film like Moonstruck (1987), the appearance of which I found to be surprisingly charming. Link to introduction. Originally posted on:Short-Circuit Signs
]]>Thu, 19 Jun 2008 01:01:56 GMTShaunHustonShaunHuston filmblog6/18/2008 9:01:56 PMFor me, the romantic comedy Top 10 is the most solid compilation of the group. Not only is the rom com a clearly established American film genre, but the individual selections are all eminently reasonable and defensible. This is not to suggest that I wouldn't make alternate suggestions, because I would, but I understand the reasoning behind each of the ten films on the AFI's list. And I don't have any strong contrarian or idiosyncratic preferences that would lead me to tilt at a windmill like arguing against the selection of, say, City Lights (1931) as number one, or its inclusion on the list altogether. The one film on this list that I do question is Sleepless in Seattle (1993). There isn't anything outstandingly wrong with the film, but it isn't especially remarkable, either. It doesn't represent a particularly clever or innovative take on the genre. It doesn't push any boundaries. It doesn't mark any point in the development of the form (indeed, I would argue that it is fairly typical of the post-Harry and Sally rom com, including being less enjoyable than its progenitor). And Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan do not have any special chemistry together (maybe one reason why they spend most of the movie apart). Replacing Sleepless in Seattle is fairly easy; the one gaping hole in the AFI's list is the absence of anything by Preston Sturges. But what to pick? Just about any of his films would be a better choice than the more contemporary film, but, for me, it's a tough call between: Sullivan's Travels (1941), The Lady Eve (1941), and The Palm Beach Story (1942). I probably lean in the direction of Sullivan's, largely because of how sharply written the first meeting between Sullivan (Joel McCrea) and The Girl (Veronica Lake) is; all I'll say here is that Nora Ephron wishes she could write dialogue like the snappy back-and-forth in this scene. On the other hand, there are moments of clear genius in The Lady Eve, from both Barbara Stanwyck and Sturges. However, the film does have one central flaw, and it's an important one from a genre perspective: the lead characters are not evenly matched. At no point does Henry Fonda's Charles Pike have a chance against Stanwyck's Jean Harrington, and practically each time I watch the film I want her to take her revenge without taking him back; he's that much of a drip. While I would replace Sleepless in Seattle with Sullivan's Travels, I would not list it at the bottom. In deference to people who know silent film better than I, I'd put it at number two. I could make an argument for either of the other two Sturges movies, but, as I indicated in the opening, the existing selections are reasonable enough that I don't feel compelled to argue for taking off, even, a film like Moonstruck (1987), the appearance of which I found to be surprisingly charming. Link to introduction. Originally posted on:Short-Circuit Signs http://www.spout.com/blogs/unclefestering/archive/2008/5/9/28429.aspx Post By: unclefestering
Post To: unclefestering Blog
Post Date: 5/9/2008 9:17:37 PM
Body: "Snap out of it!" Whenever anybody says that phrase, I automatically think of Olympia Dukakis in Moonstruck. She plays Loretta's mother, Rose, a cynical woman who sees the deep troubles of her family. Loretta is going to marry Johnny, who she doesn't love. But she's fallen in love with his brother Ronnie, who Johnny hasn't spoken to in years. This movie shows the depth of love as well as its passion. Rose is right that "if you love them, they can walk all over you." But she also knows it is worth it. This movie also shows that nobody can drive you crazy like your family.
]]>Sat, 10 May 2008 01:17:37 GMTunclefesteringunclefestering Blog5/9/2008 9:17:37 PM"Snap out of it!" Whenever anybody says that phrase, I automatically think of Olympia Dukakis in Moonstruck. She plays Loretta's mother, Rose, a cynical woman who sees the deep troubles of her family. Loretta is going to marry Johnny, who she doesn't love. But she's fallen in love with his brother Ronnie, who Johnny hasn't spoken to in years. This movie shows the depth of love as well as its passion. Rose is right that "if you love them, they can walk all over you." But she also knows it is worth it. This movie also shows that nobody can drive you crazy like your family. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/love/MemberTagFilms.aspxlove
Number of films tagged: 12478

Number of people who tagged: 338

Number of times used: 1480

]]>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 01:28:29 GMT124783381480Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/family/MemberTagFilms.aspxfamily
Number of films tagged: 6288

Number of people who tagged: 226

Number of times used: 1138

]]>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:09:21 GMT62882261138Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Loved-It/MemberTagFilms.aspxLoved-It
Number of films tagged: 509

Number of people who tagged: 179

Number of times used: 921

]]>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:56:35 GMT509179921Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/romance/MemberTagFilms.aspxromance
Number of films tagged: 7162

Number of people who tagged: 169

Number of times used: 1004

]]>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:01:30 GMT71621691004Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Quirky/MemberTagFilms.aspxQuirky
Number of films tagged: 131

Number of people who tagged: 110

Number of times used: 249

]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:54:25 GMT131110249Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/cute/MemberTagFilms.aspxcute
Number of films tagged: 210

Number of people who tagged: 98

Number of times used: 314

]]>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 00:46:12 GMT21098314Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/marriage/MemberTagFilms.aspxmarriage
Number of films tagged: 3471

Number of people who tagged: 67

Number of times used: 267

]]>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:39:11 GMT347167267Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/mother/MemberTagFilms.aspxmother
Number of films tagged: 2522

Number of people who tagged: 53

Number of times used: 152

]]>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:51:56 GMT252253152Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/father/MemberTagFilms.aspxfather
Number of films tagged: 3580

Number of people who tagged: 51

Number of times used: 213

]]>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:51:56 GMT358051213Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/lovetriangle/MemberTagFilms.aspxlovetriangle
Number of films tagged: 2902

Number of people who tagged: 38

Number of times used: 75

]]>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:12:01 GMT29023875Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/brother/MemberTagFilms.aspxbrother
Number of films tagged: 2301

Number of people who tagged: 30

Number of times used: 82

]]>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:51:56 GMT23013082Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/nyc/MemberTagFilms.aspxnyc
Number of films tagged: 90

Number of people who tagged: 29

Number of times used: 113

]]>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:39:05 GMT9029113Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/transformation/MemberTagFilms.aspxtransformation
Number of films tagged: 436

Number of people who tagged: 26

Number of times used: 40

]]>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 23:13:42 GMT4362640Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/infidelity/MemberTagFilms.aspxinfidelity
Number of films tagged: 34

Number of people who tagged: 25

Number of times used: 43

]]>Tue, 08 Sep 2009 18:37:59 GMT342543Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/opera/MemberTagFilms.aspxopera
Number of films tagged: 1016

Number of people who tagged: 25

Number of times used: 32

]]>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:39:16 GMT10162532Tag