Joan of Arc is indeed my biggest hero of all time! Everything about her, beauty,brains and her remarkable courage. Leelee Sobieski is incredible in this film, she takes it all in total stride. The passion with which she portrays her role is..... I am at a loss for words! I admit it with pride, I cried like a baby. It's that good. The medieval fight scenes were well done, in many aspects too. Some of the special effects are somewhat unrealistic, but it gets the point across. Very well, actually. The other actors did their parts well. They definitely showed their love for her, as it does in the true story. If you want to see a true, fascinating story of faith then, see this movie!
Reviews
3 Reviews
The Incredibles
(2004)
Something I got out of the film...
23 November 2004
It mirrors real life events. No, really. I'm not kidding.
I scanned the user comments to see if anyone else noticed this, but stopped after the first two pages of comments (Boy! This created a response.)
I should introduce myself as an avid comic book reader. And comic historian. So I paid attention to the timeline.
As I recall, the opening sequence occurs in the last years of the 1940s. At this point, superheroes are incredibly popular, at an all-time high, swinging from rooftops, saving the day... and then they get sued. Public opinion turns against them. A book, "Seduction of the Innocent", is published. The supers are limited in what they are allowed to do. (And yes, in every word after "1940s" I'm referring to our world.) They were considered too sexual, or violent, or frightening for children. Those who survived the purge became more "silly" (Not saying the stories weren't good, just that they weren't serious.) Only five super-hero characters enjoy continuous publication: Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman and Green Arrow (these last two due to "Piggy-backing" on the other heroes' titles) While every other superhero character disappears into the background... until 1960, when the "Silver Age" of superhero comics began. One of these breakthrough series was the Fantastic Four, featuring two characters from the Golden Age (Human Torch and the Thing), and consisting of a real "family" of superheroes. (Mr. Fantastic married Invisible Girl, Human Torch was her brother. The Thing was Mr. F's longtime best friend and basically brother-figure.)
As far as I can see, it was out of these basic concepts that "The Incredibles" was born. A family of Supers emerging at the dawn of the 1960's. "What would it be like if this had happened to real Superheroes? What if the world, in effect, told the Super-people to "Go away?" Well, this film fills in that period, devoid of believable heroes, and how they returned.
And it tells a dang good mid-life crisis story in the midst of all this.
And takes potshots at James Bond, to boot. (Also a 60's staple.)
As for the commenter who mentioned that there weren't "in-jokes", (and liked that fact, so I'm not intentionally trying to burst your bubble, but...) well, there's a lot of them. It's just that they're fairly behind-the-scenes for the most part, but one of the most direct references was the appearance of (a version of) the MOLE MAN! at the end. (For those not familiar with Mole Man, he was the very first villain that the FF faced, in Fantastic Four #1.) Yep. Okay, I'm done now.
All in all, an amazing movie, with a completely different view if you know your comics history.
10/10.
I scanned the user comments to see if anyone else noticed this, but stopped after the first two pages of comments (Boy! This created a response.)
I should introduce myself as an avid comic book reader. And comic historian. So I paid attention to the timeline.
As I recall, the opening sequence occurs in the last years of the 1940s. At this point, superheroes are incredibly popular, at an all-time high, swinging from rooftops, saving the day... and then they get sued. Public opinion turns against them. A book, "Seduction of the Innocent", is published. The supers are limited in what they are allowed to do. (And yes, in every word after "1940s" I'm referring to our world.) They were considered too sexual, or violent, or frightening for children. Those who survived the purge became more "silly" (Not saying the stories weren't good, just that they weren't serious.) Only five super-hero characters enjoy continuous publication: Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman and Green Arrow (these last two due to "Piggy-backing" on the other heroes' titles) While every other superhero character disappears into the background... until 1960, when the "Silver Age" of superhero comics began. One of these breakthrough series was the Fantastic Four, featuring two characters from the Golden Age (Human Torch and the Thing), and consisting of a real "family" of superheroes. (Mr. Fantastic married Invisible Girl, Human Torch was her brother. The Thing was Mr. F's longtime best friend and basically brother-figure.)
As far as I can see, it was out of these basic concepts that "The Incredibles" was born. A family of Supers emerging at the dawn of the 1960's. "What would it be like if this had happened to real Superheroes? What if the world, in effect, told the Super-people to "Go away?" Well, this film fills in that period, devoid of believable heroes, and how they returned.
And it tells a dang good mid-life crisis story in the midst of all this.
And takes potshots at James Bond, to boot. (Also a 60's staple.)
As for the commenter who mentioned that there weren't "in-jokes", (and liked that fact, so I'm not intentionally trying to burst your bubble, but...) well, there's a lot of them. It's just that they're fairly behind-the-scenes for the most part, but one of the most direct references was the appearance of (a version of) the MOLE MAN! at the end. (For those not familiar with Mole Man, he was the very first villain that the FF faced, in Fantastic Four #1.) Yep. Okay, I'm done now.
All in all, an amazing movie, with a completely different view if you know your comics history.
10/10.
Kermit's Swamp Years
(2002 TV Movie)
I didn't see this movie,
23 November 2004
although I couldn't put my finger on why. I could have picked it up at Wal-Mart for five bucks, and yet I didn't. There was something about the packaging and the ads I'd seen that made me think "This isn't a Muppet film. This is a kids' movie by people who think they know what kids like" and I didn't know what made me think that way.
Until a few minutes ago, when the answer struck me like a lead brick: Color.
In most, if not all, Muppet productions to date, it has been much easier to ignore the fact that the characters are fairly brightly colored, felt objects, because of the surrounding color. The Muppet Show took place in a dimly lit theater, with dark burgundy curtains serving as Kermit's introductory backdrop. Sesame Street is, for the most part, dark grey. Fairly subdued, real-type places. The Muppet Movie ranges the gamut, but it always takes place in real locations, with no bright colors added for the sake of bright colors. And that's what was missing from (at least the promotional portions of) this movie. It seemed like they were aiming for kids because nothing seemed real. Including the grass. Including the swamp. None of it seemed like it was even *attempting* to be real, and so it was difficult for me to take it seriously enough to even desire to watch it.
It might be a good movie. I don't know. Maybe I'll learn different sometime.
But for this Muppet fan, it was just asking for one unbelief-suspension too many.
Until a few minutes ago, when the answer struck me like a lead brick: Color.
In most, if not all, Muppet productions to date, it has been much easier to ignore the fact that the characters are fairly brightly colored, felt objects, because of the surrounding color. The Muppet Show took place in a dimly lit theater, with dark burgundy curtains serving as Kermit's introductory backdrop. Sesame Street is, for the most part, dark grey. Fairly subdued, real-type places. The Muppet Movie ranges the gamut, but it always takes place in real locations, with no bright colors added for the sake of bright colors. And that's what was missing from (at least the promotional portions of) this movie. It seemed like they were aiming for kids because nothing seemed real. Including the grass. Including the swamp. None of it seemed like it was even *attempting* to be real, and so it was difficult for me to take it seriously enough to even desire to watch it.
It might be a good movie. I don't know. Maybe I'll learn different sometime.
But for this Muppet fan, it was just asking for one unbelief-suspension too many.
Tell Your Friends