|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:24:21 GMT -5
«SaltheGal Reply #10 on: 2. May at 12:48 »
I cant wait till next week!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:25:05 GMT -5
« Reply #11 on: 3. May at 18:46 »
I think my chair will be ruined.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:26:09 GMT -5
«Yuliya Reply #12 on: 3. May at 22:28 »]
Something made me go and look at the credits and user comments... Boileau and Narcejac? Really? It's incredible! Are you sure the movie is as bad as... er... everybody says it is...? Now I must watch it just to see this train wreck for myself.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:26:36 GMT -5
« Myrtle Groggongs Reply #13 on: 3. May at 22:49 »
I saw Hot Ticket, I believe on Friday, and they 'critiqued' Laws of Attraction. They weren't kind, especially Joyce. She criticizes everything, except for how nice Pierce is to look at. She gave it her "NOT" vote and wasn't happy when Leonard Maltin gave the movie "HOT", although he said it was a very lukewarm "HOT".
Joyce said she didn't like Julianne Moore in it. She said her character had given no explanation for being as hateful as she was, there was no reason for them to get together, blah, blah, blah.
On the other hand, Leonard Maltin said he thought they were a great looking couple to watch even though the movie was dull. So he couldn't condemn it totally. Or words to that effect.
They didn't give away too much of the plot, since they didn't think there was one. So they really didn't ruin the film for me. I'm hoping to see it this week.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:27:13 GMT -5
« Ace Reply #14 on: 3. May at 23:29 »
Yuliya didn't I dub that "film" for you. If so why haven't you ff'd through it er watched it yet? The only thing good to come out of Entangled is PB who's far too good for that film that it's criminal, and that he got two weeks in Paris to make it. Like that reviewer on the IMDB said he's very good in it and makes the last 1/2 hour actually interesting which is saying something because it still has Judd Nelson's rancid performance in it! Ptooey!
Ace
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:28:01 GMT -5
«Yulyia Reply #15 on: 4. May at 05:59 »
Gosh. Jeez. Tough question. Yeah, you did dub it for me. Didn't I give you my one and only copy of Broken Chain at the same time? I guess you've worn that out by now, seeing as a while ago you claimed he was so bloody gorgeous in it.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:28:38 GMT -5
«Ace Reply #16 on: 4. May at 18:06 »
But but... Entangled is sooo much easier to watch, he's about 2 minutes of the first hour so you can FF then watch the last 1/2 hr and drool. Now if you could tell me the quickest and least painful way to watch Broken Chain I'd be most obliged.
Ace
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:28:58 GMT -5
Sparkling Reply #17 on: 5. May at 20:06 »
My VCR displays the running time of the tape. I take a note of the times of his scenes and FF from one to the next.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:29:39 GMT -5
« Yuliya Reply #18 on: 5. May at 21:36 »
It was my one and only tape, remember? Watch the beginning, he's younger there.
As for Entangled - noooooooo. I'll have to know what's going on. I'll have to watch the entire movie. Especially now that I know it's based on the work of such great writers, no matter how mangled it is.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:29:56 GMT -5
« Ace Reply #19 on: 5. May at 21:51 »
OK, watch the whole thing, just don't blame me when you go blind from one too many (and one is too many) Judd Nelson sex scenes.
Ace
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:30:20 GMT -5
« Yuliya Reply #20 on: 5. May at 22:15 »
Ewww... I'm so lucky, i've never seen him in anything. The image of him in IMDB doesn't look enticing. I'll think about your suggestion.
Should I know about anything that's going on to only watch the last half an hour? Or is there any reason to listen to that last half an hour at all? Maybe I should just watch.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:30:42 GMT -5
« Sparkling Reply #21 on: 5. May at 22:27 »
Watch it once, then you'll know why everybody is skipping large parts of the movie.
As for Broken Chain, the first 40 minutes (or better--portions of them ) are most watch-worthy.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:31:19 GMT -5
« Myrtle Groggins Reply #22 on: 10. May at 04:30 »
Entangled - ugh! I watched it once, partially. It was awful, so awful that I didn't see the end of the movie. I didn't care for it at all. Someone did tell me the secret to enjoying PB in it - fast forwarding. I'll get around to it sometime. That is one horrible movie. ::::barf::::
I've been reading the threads for Laws of Attraction, one has 34 pages!! Where am I supposed to put my 'review' of the movie? Has anyone else posted their opinions? I can't find them.
clueless
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:31:44 GMT -5
«Ace Reply #23 on: 10. May at 05:36 »
The last part is the only good part of Entangled! So yes FF and watch it. PB on a horse, PB looking gorgeous, PB torturing Judd Nelson... the only reasons for this film to exist!
You can post your LOA Review here in reviews. I think mine is the only other member one here that I recall. So post and keep it company.
Ace
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:32:31 GMT -5
« Myrtle Groggins Reply #24 on: 10. May at 19:00 »
ROTFL I can picture this as one of these short reviews on the package of the DVD/video.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:33:23 GMT -5
« Myrtle Grggins Reply #25 on: 12. May at 05:42 »
Back to Laws of Attraction Here's the review from The Times-Picayune, New Orleans
TRIALS OF LOVE
Despite a fundamental flaw, 'Laws of Attraction' has its charms
Friday, April 30, 2004 By Michael H. Kleinschrodt - Movie critic
Although they never will be mistaken for Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn, Pierce Brosnan and Julianne Moore make for one crackling couple in "Laws of Attraction," a romantic comedy from British director Peter Howitt.
And for adults, there's at least one more reason to buy tickets now: It's likely to be the last movie until September that's not geared to teens.
Brash Daniel Rafferty (Brosnan) and insecure Audrey Woods (Moore) are feuding divorce attorneys in New York. He's not opposed to taking shortcuts to legal victory, but she's a stickler for playing by the rules. Both are incredibly successful. Naturally, they hate each other.
One day, they find themselves on opposite sides of a case involving philandering rock star Thorne Jamison (Michael Sheen) and his fashion designer wife, Serena (Parker Posey).
Their divorce could be settled, except both Thorne and Serena want possession of their castle in Ireland. Off the lawyers go to take depositions from the castle staff. Daniel and Audrey arrive during a romantic festival, and, after a night of heavy drinking, wake up married. Is the booze to blame, or is it true love?
Brosnan ("Die Another Day") and Moore ("Far From Heaven") make the most of their contentious dialogue, but they are handicapped by a fundamental flaw in the screenplay by Aline Brosh McKenna and the Louisiana-raised Robert Harling ("Steel Magnolias").
The flaw is this: Daniel and Audrey cannot stand to be in the same room for more than five minutes, so how are audiences to believe that they might actually be in love?
It's also a disappointment that the screenplay doesn't fully explore the irony of divorce lawyers marrying each other.
Still, if you accept the premise, the movie has its charms.
Sheen ("Underworld") nails his performance as the preening British rock star, but two actresses in smaller roles nearly steal the film.
Radiant Frances Fisher ("Titanic") is an acerbic delight as Sara Miller, Audrey's youth-obsessed mother (a word Audrey isn't permitted to speak in public). Sara is utterly amused by her daughter's sudden vulnerability to the love bug.
"Saturday Night Live" alumna Nora Dunn ("Runaway Jury") also curries favor for her no-nonsense portrayal of Judge Abramovitz, who quickly tires of Daniel and Audrey's competitiveness in court.
Director Howitt's credits include "Sliding Doors" and "AntiTrust." Happily, "Laws of Attraction" is much closer in quality to the former than to the latter. More recently, Howitt directed "Johnny English." _________________________ LAWS OF ATTRACTION (2 1/2 stars)
Plot: Opposing divorce attorneys one day wake up married. Should they blame it on Irish booze or true love?
What works: There is some witty banter, and the supporting players deliver great performances.
What doesn't: The romance between the leads is unconvincing, a fundamental flaw.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:34:07 GMT -5
«Myrtle Groggins Reply #26 on: 12. May at 06:09 »
I had hoped to write an enlightened review, however, since I saw the movie one week ago, and only once, I'm having trouble remembering all of it. I wanted to sit through it twice, but my body couldn't take sitting that long. So I may go again this week. I hope Pierce appreciates the extra cash.
I enjoyed it. Pierce has to work really, really hard to look scruffy, and it still doesn't come across as such. I'm afraid when one looks like him, it's difficult to look the "regular Joe type". His longish uncombed hair only makes him look like a handsome man with longish uncomber hair. :::sigh:::
After having seen the movie, I now know what Joyce of Hot Ticket (see one of my above posts) meant by not understanding Julianne Moore's character. I mean, what red-blooded woman in her right mind would not like HIM Another thing about Julianne, she never smiles. Why is that? Too much botox? My goodness she looks boney! Her face (even at the size of a movie screen!) looks too thin. And she ate all the junk food, without gaining an ounce That was unbelievable for a woman her age. Now I know some women are perpetually thin, but this seemed odd to me.
I felt like I was watching the CBS soaps of the 1980s, with Julianne Moore and Parker Posey (As the World Turns) and Frances Fisher (Guiding Light). Frances Fisher was never my favorite but she is really good in this movie.
You knew from the beginning how Pierce's character felt about Moore's, but it was a real puzzle to see what was up with Moore's Audrey.
Also, the story needed more, for continuity. Me thinks someone edited too much. The traveling to and from Ireland was a sticking point to me. It would have made more sense if there had been a more intriquing point to going there, rather than just interviewing the servants.
But as a whole, the movie is fun, romantic, and a nice distraction from everyday life. Pierce is top notch in a sloppy sort of way, except the one time he appears dapper (wow) and she in her shrunken suit in court. I left wanting more but not disappointed.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:34:35 GMT -5
« Ace Reply #27 on: 12. May at 18:06 »
Hmmm, well yes her resisting him that hard, not very believable but then she didn't resist for FOUR YEARS which frankly is insane.
As for the smiling and laughing the character was too tightly wound for that, everything was sooo serious to Audrey. It usually is in the life of the neurotic insecure control freak over achiever. Julianne on the other hand from watching all her recent interviews is a very bubbly giggly laughing person. It would have been nice if we got some of that in Audrey by the end, see her softening up a bit more, so we could see more of why he tried so hard to pursue her. Maybe one of those lovely montages could have been actual talking scenes!
But really in the end who cares about plot or character or writing, Pierce was wonderful and just fun to watch and look at .
Ace
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:35:08 GMT -5
«Myrtle Groggins Reply #28 on: 16. May at 07:18 »
I saw the movie again today and must say I enjoyed it so much more this time. I'm thinking a third time would be the charm. I went today as sort of a birthday present to Pierce and myself.
On this second viewing, I did notice a few smiles on Julianne/Audrey. The story made a bit more sense. I still think it was too short and not because of the obvious reason of Pierce being in it. We needed to see why he is so gaga over this nasty woman.
Also, we need to see why she starts out being so nasty. Her excuse about her teenage pimples and her wild mother only seems to be a small part of the reason. Also, we should have seen more of Pierce and why he was such a mess. I think too much of this story landed on the cutting room floor.
I did think the closing song of "Signed, Sealed and Delivered" was highly appropriate. It gave the end a real boost.
Noticed that Sean Brosnan was his dad's stand in. Cool.
There was quite a bit of Remington Steele in the story. I wondered if PB was aware of that? And I don't just mean the castle and the reluctant woman. Daniel Rafferty acted a lot like our Mr. RS.
Last week when I saw the movie, there were seven audience members. This time there were six. Today's audience were better behaved. Last week, the people sitting near me kept saying things like: "Are they married?" "She doesn't like being called "Mother"?" "Do you think he really likes her?" "They're not married?" "He must be on the plane." "That guy could get into trouble if he tells her he's on the plane."
Now I know why I like to watch movies at home. It's quieter. I'm already waiting for the DVD.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2006 23:35:36 GMT -5
CG Reply #29 on: 17. May at 23:43 »
Couldn't agree more about seeing movies at home. Guess that's why I haven't been out there to LOA yet. I hate it when people talk through movies, or bring kids too young to pay attention who proceed to play and/or make noise and/or run around....
Still hoping to see it in a theater, though.
cg
|
|