Movie news on your iPhone today!
Advertisement
Sign in
Username   Password         Forgot password?
Wanna join? Sign up
Find movies you'll love

You should go there

  • Fun but forgettable

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    The Devil Wears Prada is fun, but forgettable. Not that I was looking for something profound in a movie with Prada in the name, but it could've been well, more fun. Meryl Streep is predictably excellent.

  • Prairie Home Companion

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    I thought this was a good film, what one comes to expect from recent Altman films. It's an audio-visual collage and a study on character and acting that captures random and poignant moments on film, seemingly only loosely based on a script. I like Garrison Keillor, and if you do, you'll probably like the film. You have to hand it to a guy for writing a screenplay about his own show's demise. I enjoy his introspective observations and meanderings on American culture in his real radio program, much more than his way-down-yonder-in-the-yankety-yank music selection, which can seem forced. I do enjoy Keillor's bold throwback orientation on music, that it's to be performed and enjoyed, not just downloaded and worshiped. He sings from the heart, but he's no singer. The film focuses on both observational character sketches and music from the heart, like the real Prairie Home Companion. And like the actual show, the film has spiritual overtones, but so overtly Christian that it might turn some away. It comes off like the radio show and like many of Altman's films, almost like improv, where at times it seems cluttered and excessive, and others it seems unusually genuine and liberating.

  • Nicotine ethics

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    I thought this was a wonderfully engaging film, with a great script and acting. I'm reminded that my father, a smoker of many years with roots in the Bronx and the Air Force, quit smoking when my oldest brother was young after seeing a TV commercial about the effects of smoking. My brother is 40 now, and my father says there isn't a day that goes by that he doesn't think about smoking. His sister smoked for 50 years until she was forced away from it after one of lungs collapsed. Nicotine is powerful stuff and gives one pause when considering the nature of freedom and free will.

    The part of the film I didn't like was characterizing, however comically, the alcohol, tobacco, and firearms industries (and at the end, others) as conspiring together somehow against the public and bragged about the damage they contribute to. The most redeeming part of the fim is how the main character, brilliantly played by Aaron Eckhart, is a thinking man, seemingly aware of the social and ethical issues at stake, but an advocate for free speech or more broadly about the value of debate (and let the best man win). He's nothing but a pawn and a bouy, but Eckhart plays the role with conviction, not with cynicism, but - dare I say - integrity? Confronting basic, important questions about what an indivdual is accountable for beyond putting bread on the table, as a role model for a child or a social agent on talk shows, is far more interesting than cartoonish conspiriacy theories.

  • Another inconvenient truth

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    This is a good film, and Gore comes across in a less wood-like manner than usual. The information is compelling. At times it seems like it's an ad for Apple's PowerPoint-like Keynote, as if we have to be reminded of the demographic for this film. Still, it's a good film, worth seeing, discussing, and acting upon. Interesting to note that Jimmy Carter, in a recent Charlie Rose interview, suggested that if Gore really wants to affect change, he should run for president again and not make films.

  • New pedigree?

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    Casino Royale  (2006)

    I liked it. At first I wasn't sure, even after having read a few reviews and knowing more or less what to expect, I was still geared up to see the usual frivolity and glibness. It's what I've grown to expect, having been originally introducted to In Theaters Bond by Moonraker and ever since. TV Bond is different. But alas, no Jaws, nothing too superhero-like. Even turning its back on "shaken, not stirred." Yes, it was more gritty, Bond gets bloodied, it rains. But more than that, it actually seemed like a movie that could exist on its own, as a theatrical release today, without the pedigree. Which is saying something.

 

Like what you're reading?

Subscribe
Search
  Go

Browse previous
<December 2006>
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
262728293012
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31123456


Categories
 


Advertisement