Change Your Image
DMEdolph43
Reviews
The Phantom of the Opera (2004)
Glad I saw it but utterly disappointed
Let me preface this by saying the Phantom of the Opera was one of my favorite musicals and I could most likely recite every single verse although I am not in anyway blind to the repetitiveness, over dramatic undertones etc. Say that this movie is beautiful, Joel has given it his all here but you can clearly see that Webber was in complete control of the baby that made him a legend. About 90 percent of the actual play put to screen, copy/paste style and what people are forgetting here is that what might be great in a theater is not always so in a movie. One can actually feel when ACT one ends and want to stray outside for intermission but Alas no this is movie and there are no breaks in movies. To be honest the very thought that you can take a musical and mime it to the screen and not cast actors with the ability to be actual Broadway veterans is not only mean it is insulting to the actors that starve away in NY with a chance to use their talents on the stage. That said, the actors give it there all but movie actors are not singers and lack the ability to mouth/sing things and make it their own. Minnie Driver has the best performance in the entire show. Emme tries her best and succeeds in driving the movie but lacks the passion and the range to convey a character made famous by Sarah Brightman. The phantom is completely miscast and angered me, although I think Butler is an amazing actor because towards the end there is actual chemistry between him and Rossum. Wilson can be forgotten but tried to play a part that, to be honest, is never a staring or showpiece role. This movie is breathtaking but the spectacle brings you out of the movie. I found myself asking how it could be that bright in the sewers of Paris, what the ** a horse is doing there and (the worst thing of all) Why the *@$ are people voguing?????? The poor editor tried valiantly to hide the horrible choreography but it rears its ugly head like Zit. This movie could have been an easy Oscar contender but instead will be forgotten in 3 weeks. We must remember that it is a very difficult thing to make a musical especially when most of the people who succeeded in making them in the golden era are dead and if you notice the people who make them work started or have their roots deeply in theater.
State of Denial (2003)
An interesting look at South Africa's handling of AIDS
State of Denial, soon to be shown at the Sundance Film Festival, offers a unique view into South Africa and the AIDS Epidemic there. Each story that told is unique look at living with AIDS and gives the viewer a face to connect with the disease. In addition the film offers a glimpse into the South African government's handling of the AIDS epidemic showing how the government is, in a sense, in paralysis to make any effort to combat the disease in anyway.
Each story told has a familiarity that can be associated with anyone which allows for a personal connection to take place between the viewer and the film. The Director has taken great pains and it seems to me, at least, that this is indeed a very personal project for her. In short this film is......A documentary film that makes you think, feel, and respond.
Moulin Rouge! (2001)
The eternal question, Style or substance?
My old film teacher would tell me that a simple story line is best when creating a film that is a masterpiece. There is no doubt in my mind that Moulin Rouge proves this theory true. This movie not only puts new breath in the rotting corpse of the Old musical formula but adds spectacle and astonishment. The movie, in my mind is a masterpiece to and shows how much Baz Luhrmann has grown as an artist and autuer. The first 40 minutes are simply amazing making you feel as if you were in the transportation sequence in "2001". The story is simple boy meets girl, boy falls in love with girl but the girl is promised to another whom she doesn't love. (any of this reminding you of "Shakespeare in love?" But the plot line is simple for a reason. This movie wants to viewer not only to understand the story but to enjoy and be swept away by the visuals that the imagination can create. Some persons may say that this film lacks more multi-dimensional characters and I do not completely disagree but I do like that this is a film for the masses and can be enjoyed by almost everyone from the elderly to the young.
Nicole Kidman and Ewan Mcgregor accomplish great vocal performances for persons without vocal experience in their background but more astonishing is that Luhrmann would make the actors sing as opposed to getting stand in vocals and then ADRing them in. This single act put Luhrmann on my personal idol list; for any director that makes actors fully commit to a role without compromise is genius. But there is more genius in the Art department of this film which is spearheaded by Luhrmann's wife (who in my opinion should win an Oscar for this film). Not since the "Age of Innocence" has a film blown me away with its incredible dazzling sets (which are real and not computer generated alla Gladiator). While watching this film I remembered "Footlight Parade" and the amazing shows of the Busby Berkley's contained in them. In Rouge the spectacular shows and staging are accompanied by amazing cinimatic genius and great vision. Possibly too much because I felt that I would have enjoyed a little less quick cuts in the big show numbers in order to digest the performance but I was not disappointed in the slightest with what I got. All in all this movie is a must see. Simple is best when creating a story line because a simple story line allows everyone to enjoy the performance because it can be easily read. But when you add a simple story line with great cinimatic vision and practice you get a real masterpiece that should not be unnoticed by the academy or any other critic.