shriekingeel
Guest
Nov 24, 2024 8:33:22 GMT -4
|
Post by shriekingeel on Aug 27, 2005 15:03:15 GMT -4
It's awful.
After an hour and a half of being screamed at by the characters onscreen, I longed for the calm, understated elegance of a Michael Bay film.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 8:33:22 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2005 16:50:19 GMT -4
I've heard the movie is horrible...it's been on the shelf for a while. That's generally not a good sign. I was going to spend the 7.50 for the movie, but now I guess I'll wait for the DVD.
|
|
eleanorrigby
Guest
Nov 24, 2024 8:33:22 GMT -4
|
Post by eleanorrigby on Aug 27, 2005 23:29:09 GMT -4
I liked it. It's not a perfect movie by any means but I was entertained. My friend, who usually despises these kinds of movies, liked it too. Maybe we're just weird. I didn't find it that screamy. Nothing like the Island where I kept ducking away from the screen as things were thrown at me.
I thought Matt and Heath did pretty well actually. The accents didn't really bother me. I mean they're not great, but they're not bad either. I actually thought a lot of their reaction shots were really funny. I don't know, maybe I just wasn't in a critical mood, but I seriously did enjoy it. Maybe its because I like to be like "what the fuck is going on?" once in awhile while watching a movie. I don't always need or expect a movie to make a ton of sense as long as I'm having a good time. Plus its a fun movie to comment on with your friends. "Why the hell are you following that stupid scarf you dumb girl?? I would be like, you can have it! These are the dumbest kids in the world" etc. Good times.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 8:33:22 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2005 5:31:02 GMT -4
I think the movie swings between drama and broad comedy and never quite works. Parts of it are very good and Damon and Ledger are both pretty good (although the characters themselves are not that clearly drawn), but as a whole, I left feeling disappointed. The strange reaction shots and over-acting that are the norm in most Gilliam films really bring the pace to a halt again and again. It seemed like Gilliam wanted to wring as much comedy as possible out of the movie, and that bogged down the pace and obscured/confused the plot. It is unfortunate because there is some real talent behind (and in) The Brothers Grimm and the ideas behind the story seem pretty awesome, but the movie just doesn't work for me.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 8:33:22 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2005 2:00:15 GMT -4
I thought there was something incredibly Van Helsing about this movie. I'm sad to say that I enjoyed VH more. I think The Brothers Grimm had amazing potential to be so much greater than it was. I could relate to Jake, his frustration with reality and his love of fantasy. I agree with the poster who said the story had some interesting ideas: is there a scientific explanation for everything? should the inner child be put to rest in a world that is harsh and cold?
|
|
foxyepicurean
Guest
Nov 24, 2024 8:33:22 GMT -4
|
Post by foxyepicurean on Aug 30, 2005 14:24:53 GMT -4
Don't forget the question that gave me a sleepless night: Should German children in French-occupied territory speak with a British/Cockney accent?
I liked the look/style of the film, but got the impression that the art direction was running the show. A potentially great story got shuttled to the side in the attempt to make a visually stunning movie. And what's with the ridiculous wolf CGI? It was worse than some of the silly CGI in Van Helsing--which is to say that it looked like a not-particularly-bright 6th grader's school project.
For all my whining, I didn't hate the movie. But I was disappointed, because it could have been so much better. If it had come closer to meeting its potential, it would have had a chance at becoming one of my favorites. All the elements were in place, but the mixture was off.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 8:33:22 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2005 13:32:33 GMT -4
Maybe it was because I went in with low expectations, but I liked it a lot. It's definitely not the most brilliant film ever, but it kept me entertained and interested to the end - something that is becoming increasingly rare, I'm afraid. The characters didn't have much depth, unfortunately, but if you let that slide and watch the movie for mindless entertainment's sake, it's quite enjoyable. The only thing that really bugged me was the love triangle, which was annoying and seemed slapped on.
I remember reading that Terry and Matt wanted Samantha Morton for a 'lead role' (whichever that was) and some bitching about how the Weinstiens insisted on prettier women like Monica. As much as I like SM, I can't see her as the Mirror Queen - that part really did need a ridiculously beautiful woman. If that was the role they were talking about, I have the misfortune of agreeing with the Weinstiens. *shudders*
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 8:33:22 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2005 5:11:27 GMT -4
TG's fessed up that he would rather have seen the part of the tomboy being played by Samatha Morton, which I can see, rather than Lena Heady, altho I think she did a fine job.
I liked it, it was funny and entertaining, it did remind me of Time Bandits one of my favorite movies. It has Terry Gilliam stamped all over it is what I tell people who say they heard it sucks. If you like his type of movies, you'll like this.
|
|
karin
Guest
Nov 24, 2024 8:33:22 GMT -4
|
Post by karin on Sept 11, 2005 22:51:21 GMT -4
Sad to say, I classify this film as "time I will never be able to get back"....in other words, hated it....
IMHO, too many "special" effects, really shallow acting.
Bummer.
|
|
razzy
Guest
Nov 24, 2024 8:33:22 GMT -4
|
Post by razzy on Sept 12, 2005 11:25:08 GMT -4
I can't believe I haven't flocked to see something starring my Imaginary Fratty Boyfriend and My "I Would Kill to Look Like Her Girlfriend (Damon and Bellucci, respectively) but I haven't heard any good things about the movie at all. Maybe I'll netflix it.
|
|