What is the last movie you saw? and rate it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Idril

It's so nice to see that someone actually realizes that that accent is, indeed, overdone. Most people think we North Dakotans really do talk like that. :rolleyes: I suppose I do have to admit there are a few old Norwegian farmers that have that exaggerated accent but your average North Dakotan does not. :p

---

Yes, but the exaggerated accent was so much fun, wasn't that the idea?....and just the fact that the top investigator was a woman who was very very pregnant. I thought the scene where her old friend meets her at a bar and tries to pick her up was hilarious. Fargo is such a fun movie to watch. I really loved it and I did not see it until a few years ago. I had heard of it for so long....it has become such a cult film. People are always immidating that accent when they tell you about it. I am sure that accent was exaggerated for laughs; also who now could forget the film just by that one device - that accent? I guess some people would think it was for real though (I never thought of that fact), not knowing what the local accent really sounds like.

Idril, I liked your post and all the reasons to see each movie, as you outlined them. That was really good and precise, although I have not seen the second one yet. I am sure that is the 'darker' of the two.

I saw "Silk" the other night. I don't want to review it entirely, now but want to see if anyone has seen it and what they thought.
I can say I was less than thrilled with the story and acting, and yet it is visually one of the loveliest films I have ever seen, drop-dead gorgeous scenery and cinamatography.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janine

Yes, but the exaggerated accent was so much fun, wasn't that the idea?....and just the fact that the top investigator was a woman who was very very pregnant. I thought the scene where her old friend meets her at a bar and tries to pick her up was hilarious. Fargo is such a fun movie to watch. I really loved it and I did not see it until a few years ago. I had heard of it for so long....it has become such a cult film. People are always immidating that accent when they tell you about it. I am sure that accent was exaggerated for laughs; also who now could forget the film just by that one device - that accent? I guess some people would think it was for real though (I never thought of that fact), not knowing what the local accent really sounds like.

---

That scene was hilarious, rofl!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seabird111

That scene was hilarious, rofl!

---

hi Seabird,Welcome...I saw you were new here; you will love this forum. I love your user-name, because I love the sea and all the natural elements in relation to oceans...especially the seabirds. Love to see albatross soaring, especially. Did you see "Winged Migration"? It is such an amazing film!

Yes, wasn't that scene just the funniest? I laughed and laughed.:lol: It has been awhile since I saw it and hoping now it returns to my library so I can rewatch it soon..... but she had no idea, right? that he was about to propose such a thing, and just the fact, of a 8 month pregnant woman being propositioned - is that hilarious, or what? Brilliant! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janine

Yes, but the exaggerated accent was so much fun, wasn't that the idea?

---

Oh, I have no problem with the accent in the context of the movie, it works brilliantly in that regard. I guess I'm just overly sensitive to it because it often seems like the first thing people ask when they find out I'm from ND is if we all talk like they do in "Fargo". :rolleyes: My usual response, especially if the question comes after having talked to these people for awhile is..."Do I talk that way?" and then they usually say, "Well, I hear a little bit of it but not like in the movie" and then I say, "Well, there you go then". :lol: :lol:

Quote:

---

Idril, I liked your post and all the reasons to see each movie, as you outlined them. That was really good and precise, although I have not seen the second one yet. I am sure that is the 'darker' of the two.

---

That one wasn't me, Janine. I talked about the Armenian movie, Seabird was the one talking about the Coen Brothers' movies. He was the one with the thoughtful outlines for each movie, I'm rarely ever able to organized my thoughts that well. ;) :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Idril

Oh, I have no problem with the accent in the context of the movie, it works brilliantly in that regard. I guess I'm just overly sensitive to it because it often seems like the first thing people ask when they find out I'm from ND is if we all talk like they do in "Fargo". :rolleyes: My usual response, especially if the question comes after having talked to these people for awhile is..."Do I talk that way?" and then they usually say, "Well, I hear a little bit of it but not like in the movie" and then I say, "Well, there you go then". :lol: :lol:

---

Oh that is so funny, Idril, but I know it can be annoying as well...people get impressions from media and films and often they are the wrong ones. That is like when I used to tell someone I was an artist and the first thing they would say - oh, do you oil paint? Like oil painting was the only media on earth. I would also just roll my eyes and then shy far away from any more discussion about art. Obviously, their view was a little limited.

Quote:

---

That one wasn't me, Janine. I talked about the Armenian movie, Seabird was the one talking about the Coen Brothers' movies. He was the one with the thoughtful outlines for each movie, I'm rarely ever able to organized my thoughts that well. ;) :D

---

Oh, sorry, Idril, and sorry to Seabird, as well.
I am like you, Idril, in that I don't feel I can't often organize my thoughts as well as I wish to; I can be rather scatterbrain and I desire to be more organised in my thoughts and posts. So, I commend you, Seabird, in that respect!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janine

hi Seabird,Welcome...I saw you were new here; you will love this forum. I love your user-name, because I love the sea and all the natural elements in relation to oceans...especially the seabirds. Love to see albatross soaring, especially. Did you see "Winged Migration"? It is such an amazing film!

Yes, wasn't that scene just the funniest? I laughed and laughed.:lol: It has been awhile since I saw it and hoping now it returns to my library so I can rewatch it soon..... but she had no idea, right? that he was about to propose such a thing, and just the fact, of a 8 month pregnant woman being propositioned - is that hilarious, or what? Brilliant! :D

---

Thanks, it's great to be here. And no, I haven't seen Winged Migration, but I'll have to check it out!

I love it how Coen Brothers movies get better with repeat viewings. You notice new things every time.

The Shawshank Redemption (1994). Almost cried! 8.5/10

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Antiquarian

I'm an anomaly, and not in a good way. For some reason, I wasn't moved by that movie until the very end, when they were on the beach. For years I've wondered why and for years, I haven't known why.

---

The one point where it does get really sad for me is when the old prisoner gets out and can't cope with life out of prison and well, you know what he does...:(

But hey, I don't get moved by some films either, which are regarded as 'sentimental': Titanic (when it came out all my friends were crying their eyes out) and Pearl Harbor. Just two I remember at the moment...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vheissu

The Shawshank Redemption (1994). Almost cried! 8.5/10

---

Oh I love it!!! :)

And Antiquarian, it's ok not to be moved by a movie, it really is a question of sensibility and maybe in this movie there was something lacking for your own sensibility. :)
Oh, I was moved by Titanic. :p

videodrome - 3.0/4.0 :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Antiquarian

"Evening" based on the book by Susan Minot.

It was lovely in many ways, with a wonderful performance by the great Vanessa Redgrave, but I found it slow moving and rather thin, with none of the characters very likable.

I have to admit I CAN'T STAND Claire Danes, so she pretty much ruined the movie for me.

Still...

6/10

---

Antiquarian, Oops, sorry if I steered you the wrong way on this one. I do agree with you; Redgrave was wonderful, as usual. I don't recall ever seeing her in a bad performance, have you? I thought her daughter, Natashia Richardson, looked a little tired and worn out, but maybe that was the point and they played her looks down. Yes, the story was slow-moving and choppy at times, too - but so many films these days, pop back and forth, between memory and reality, I guess I am finally getting used to that method, though I can't really admit I like it that much. It tends to break up the film and lose the flow. Someone on an Amazon review said 'why would everyone be in love with Harris?' I have to agree with that one. He was so benign. I just did not find him that enchanting, did you? He really lacked that certain 'charm' that so many actors have today and in the past, especially. I don't know - to me if they had only cast the two main characters - his character and Claire Danes was played by someone else, for instance, I think the movie would have been a better success. I didn't think it was a total failure, but it could have been much better. Did you say you did read the book, Antiquarian? I bet the book is better than the film, by far.
It was interesting to see the two mother/daughter combos in this film. I thought the revisiting of the old friend, played by Glenn Close, at the end was a bit much, unrealistic and so close to the woman's death. Oh, come on...how did she know to come there? Oh, I guess the daughters up and called her, but how did they even know about her...since they did not seem to know a bit about this part of their mother's life? I could relate to the two sisters, since I have a sister, who I have a difficult and mixed relationship with; one I do argue with, like they did, even though I know I love her...still we are so different. I could relate to the mother's passing, also. That is something someday I will have to experience myself.
I thought the imagery and the cinematography were lovely and the music score a fine one.
The weakest parts of the film were the slow 'thin' plot (you are accurate in calling it 'thin', the casting for the Harris character; I actually, did not hate the casting for the Dane's character, although she is far from my favorite actress, as well. I thought at one point in her grief, she would have shown more emotion than she did. That seemed to be totally strange to me - so she goes and sits silently in a sailboat. And what exactly was the significance of that sailboat, anyway? I think that was a little sketchy. I guess I did not expect too much out of this film, so I found it enjoyable in aspects. Afterall, it was free from my library and I have seen far worse. Sorry you had to pay to rent it and then was disappointed, Antiquarian.
Did you feel Dancy did a good job of his role or just so-so? I actually liked him best in the independent film, I just saw recently "The Jane Austen Book Club"...but of course, his performance was a much lighter one in that film.
My last comment is on the star thing. Wasn't that done much better in "A Beautiful Mind"? It seemed like the copied the idea. Also why did the brother designate a star to Claire Dane's character and then Harris did the same thing - kind of a copycat, don't you think? Couldn't he be a little more original. I also did not see much passion between he and the Danes...absolutely no chemistry there.

Speaking of films that are worse, last night I took a leap and tried this film in from my library called:

"The Stone Merchant" - starring Harvey Keital, F. Murray Abraham , Jordi Molla, Jane March

Good actors and a terrible mundane script and some of the secondary actors were just dreadful. I could not believe how 'wooden' their performances were...it was laughable. Don't rent this film; after I saw it I said - what a waste of time and what exactly was the point? I am still pondering that.

I would have to number rate this 5 out of 10 - really. I will be anxious to see what people are rating it on Amazon. Such a waste of good talent, too....sad...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Antiquarian

Oh, no, no, Janine. I liked the movie very much. In fact, I may even watch it again before I have to return it. I just didn't like Claire Danes, that's all.

I also had to wonder why everyone would be in love with Harris. He wasn't all that interesting to me. The Hugh Dancy character, Bobby, I guess, was more interesting, but he was always drunk, of course. I guess it had to be Harris they were in love with because the bride was Bobby's sister.

I liked the fact that the friend (Meryl Streep) came to see Vanessa Redgrave's character at the end. I didn't like the fact that Redgrave's character would sometimes "see" the night nurse in a formal (bridal?) dress. I thought that was a bit much, but it was a little thing in the overall movie.

Yes, I do have the book, Janine, and it's right downstairs on my bookshelf, but I have yet to read it, like so many other. LOL

You did not steer me wrong. I liked it very much. Even my husband liked it, but at first, poor guy, he was unaware that Claire Danes and Vanessa Redgrave were playing the same character. Poor guy! He likes his storytelling more straightforward.

I'll have to rent "The Jane Austen Book Club" next. I have read, and loved, that book.

---

Oh good, Antiquarian, sure glad you were not mad at me for suggesting that film. Did you see how I slashed the poor movie to threads above? :lol: well not really...but I actually, do have to agree that Claire Danes is not my favorite actress - well neither is Tony Collette, but I think she did a good job in this film, although I kept wondering 'just what is her problem, anyway?' She had this sweet boyfriend who would do anything for her apparently, and she just could not commit. What was wrong with that girl? Then she gets in her state (won't ruin it for anyone) and she is indecisive still. It seemed they had been together awhile. I could not quite figure out what her problem was; what was holding her back? And the guy who played Harris - Patrick somebody - I don't recall seeing him in a film for sometime now. He is just plain a dull type guy - no dimension to his character. I would have gone for Buddy, even if he drank too much. I would have straightened that boy out. He would have been worth the effort; now he was cute and had a personality.
Your poor hubby. Now I get confused too but right away I did know that the younger woman was the older on. That is funny, but glad at least, you both did enjoy the film. I thought the single image of the boat floating with her hand in the water, at the beginning, was lovely. I don't know - the film looked really stunning on my new HD tv so that might have influenced me. I like dramas also that basically take place in a few environments so one can concentrate on the drama. I am getting truly sick of slick special effects that one knows blantantly are CGI.
Well, I hope I am not steering you wrong on the other film. I liked it, but that is me. It was lighter than some and yet I thought it was well-done. I enjoyed it and laughed at the comical parts. I guess I should read the books for both and 'Atonement', also. I don't think any of those books are that long, are they?

I finally saw Atonement- LOVED IT. Why is Keira Knightly so good?

Atonement- Brilliant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Antiquarian

Oh, no, you did not steer me wrong, and even if you had, it wouldn't matter. I did like the film, just not Claire Danes and I also wondered what the other girl's problem was. I didn't like her. She seemed jealous of her sister.

I, too, loved that opening image of the boat. It was beautiful.

I just couldn't reconcile the wonderful Vanessa Redgrave character with the selfish Claire Danes character. But I still like the movie, and thought it had a beautiful fragility.

Evening and The Jane Austen Book Club are both relatively short books. Atonement is a little longer, but it's a pretty fast read.

---

Antiquarian, sorry I had not answered this. I got tied up with other threads, really busy ones.;) Wasn't that scene interesting and lovely with the boat. I think at that point I thought - wow, this movie is going to be something great. Of course it was not great but I did enjoy it more than some I have seen lately.

I see everyone is loving "Atonement" - I loved it, loved it, loved it! One of the best this year in my opinion. *Classic*Charm* - is your guestion real or are you just kidding? I did like Keira in this film, but I didn't like her in all films I have seen her in. Her acting ability is getting better I think.




Here are a few films I just saw:

"The Stone Mason" - good cast, partly very bad acting and some good acting. It was a waste to me, of the good acting. Story was greatly lacking and confusing as heck; the screenplay was poorly written and trite and the plot was ok. The ending was unreal and totally pointless in my opinion. Ok, enough said about that film. I probably would rate it a 5 out of 10, just because it did have some interesting aspects and scenes. Otherwise don't waste your time.

"Cache" - French film with Juliet Binoche and Daniel Auteil; ok, this is a really really slow-paced film. It is pretty easy to follow although some things are out of time sequence. Curious to know if anyone has seen this film. It has some Hitchock type devices with little symbols and such and touches and a sort of framing device that is reminescent of Hitchcock's films. There is a truly shocking scene in this film but I don't know. I think I have seen far better performances from both actors before. The film ends very, very open-ended, so if you don't like that sort of ending, you will truly hate this film. In fact, I had to view the extras on the DVD, just to make sense of what the ending was all about. It also helped me understand other elements of the film. I don't know if I liked it; I would not see it a second time - I would fall asleep:yawnb: It has some interesting moments but certainly not enough to go out and rent the movie.

I just finished watching the 1995 Sense and Sensibility. I loved it, although that may only be because Alan Rickman was dashing as Colonel Brandon.:blush::lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EchtraNerai

I just finished watching the 1995 Sense and Sensibility. I loved it, although that may only be because Alan Rickman was dashing as Colonel Brandon.:blush::lol:

---

EchtraNerai, I love that movie too, and have seen it now about 5 times. I agree - I fell for Rickman as Colonel Brandon, from the first minute I saw him watching her play the piano and singing. That scene was great and I loved the part when he was reading to her after Mr. Gorgeous went off and married that other girl. I loved it when he gave her the piano-forte. I think Brandon was actually my favorite male character in that film. I own the film on tape, but my library has the DVD, so I will have to watch it again real soon. I thought it was so well-done. Did you know that Emma Thompson wrote the screenplay?

EchtraNerai, I forgot to welcome you to the forum. I see you are new here. I am from NJ, also. Enjoy exploring the site; it is a great one and offers so much.

I am Legend...

Very well done... but don't watch it right before bed.

Gave me nightmares.


Rating on a scale of 1-10... strong 8

Quote:

---

EchtraNerai, I love that movie too, and have seen it now about 5 times. I agree - I fell for Rickman as Colonel Brandon, from the first minute I saw him watching her play the piano and singing. That scene was great and I loved the part when he was reading to her after Mr. Gorgeous went off and married that other girl. I loved it when he gave her the piano-forte. I think Brandon was actually my favorite male character in that film. I own the film on tape, but my library has the DVD, so I will have to watch it again real soon. I thought it was so well-done. Did you know that Emma Thompson wrote the screenplay?

EchtraNerai, I forgot to welcome you to the forum. I see you are new here. I am from NJ, also. Enjoy exploring the site; it is a great one and offers so much.

---

I had no idea that Thompson had adapted it, I have a bad habit of not paying attention to the ending credits. She was lovely in it as well. I'll admit to being furious towards Marianne when she turned her favour towards "Mr. Gorgeous." I think I have to watch it again now.

Thanks for the welcome.:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EchtraNerai

I had no idea that Thompson had adapted it, I have a bad habit of not paying attention to the ending credits. She was lovely in it as well. I'll admit to being furious towards Marianne when she turned her favour towards "Mr. Gorgeous." I think I have to watch it again now.

Thanks for the welcome.:)

---

Yes, I think she has written other screenplays, too and maybe some books. Emma Thompson is highly intelligent and went to Cambridge, I believe. Not only that, she is highly talented and was just great in S&S and countless other great films. She really started out on British TV in a comedy routine and show of her own.
Did you know, in real life, she married "Mr. Gorgeous", Greg (?) - that is how memorable I think he is; I don't recall his real last name.:( She had a baby a few years ago; she's not so young anymore, maybe 47; she does seem really happy now. I think her former spouse, Kenneth Branagh and she are about the same age and he is 47. They probably collaborated the writing on some of the films, they did together, in the early days. Greg is her second husband and Branagh is remarried, as well. I believe they are still friends, which is nice to know.
Yes, I too was pretty mad at Marianne at that point. She seemed so selfish and so oblivious of poor Brandon. I felt so sorry for him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Antiquarian

I've seen that one, too. In fact, I have the DVD and love it, not just for Alan Rickman, but for the entire cast.

Janine, I did not have any idea that Emma Thompson wrote the screenplay. I don't pay attention to the credits, either. It's a good thing we have you to do that for us. :)

Welcome to the forum, EchtraNerai. :)

---

I didn't notice it in the credits either. I just read it somewhere. I have read about Emma Thompson and Ken Branagh, for years now. They used to call them the the 'royal couple of screen' in England. It is a shame it did not work out for them, but nice to see they both remarried and are happy now. I did see this great interview with Emma on Youtube and I think then it was mentioned on the Charlie Rose show. The interviews are great on there and you can look up any of your stars and see ones from way back, years ago. I get mesmerized and could be on there all day long, if I wasn't careful. ;) :lol:
Oh, I forgot to mention - she won an Oscar for that screenplay for S&S. I think it was well deserved, don't you?

I just watched "A Bridge Too Far." It is, by far, my favorite WWII movie ever. And what a great cast; Lawrence Olivier, Anthony Hopkins, Gene Hackman, Sean Connery, Michael Cain, Dirk Bogarde... the list of great actors just goes on and on. 9.9/10

stepmom!
dont know why i liked it that much...:)

Haha Janine- It was really a rhetorical question. Unlike everyone else around here, I love Keira Knightly. I think that considering she's only 22 or 23, she's an excellent actress. Loved her in everything I saw her in.

I can't say I'm crazy about that version of Sense and Sensibility. Yes, Alan Rickman is excellent (he's not bad for an old guy either haha;) ), but I always thought that Emma Thompson was too old to play Eleanor. It bothered me a little. SHe did do an excellent job with the screenplay though. I seem to think she got an Oscar for her writing as well, though I could be wrong on that.

oops, just read the above post that confirms that she did indeed win an oscar. Guess I should read more closely!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *Classic*Charm*

Haha Janine- It was really a rhetorical question. Unlike everyone else around here, I love Keira Knightly. I think that considering she's only 22 or 23, she's an excellent actress. Loved her in everything I saw her in.

---

*Classic*Charm*, Is she only 22 or 23? I think she seems a little older than that; maybe it is because she seems to exude a lot of self-confidence. I didn't really like the version of "Pride and Prejudice" she starred in so that might be the problem, but that is just me, and I did like some aspects of it; I can't really say I disliked it. I just felt as though something was missing.
I sometimes get annoyed at her lower lip, the way it protrudes - isn't that just plain silly of me? I also get annoyed at her posture, the way she holds her arms sort of behind her at her sides limbly with shoulders back...another silly fetish of mine. Other than those picky little quirps of mine, I do think she is an 'excellent' actress and going places in the future, definitely. She is a young talent and time will tell if she has staying power. I hope that she does and can be versatile, as well. I thought she did a fine job in "Atonement".

Quote:

---

I can't say I'm crazy about that version of Sense and Sensibility. Yes, Alan Rickman is excellent (he's not bad for an old guy either haha;) ), but I always thought that Emma Thompson was too old to play Eleanor. It bothered me a little. SHe did do an excellent job with the screenplay though. I seem to think she got an Oscar for her writing as well, though I could be wrong on that.

---

It is funny that you point out Emma's age factor; I had the exact same thought/feeling the first time I saw the film. How old was Emma then? Wasn't she well into her late 30's by then or even older. Yes, point of fact, she was too old to play Eleanor. I think she fits other roles better for her age, such as "Howard's End" and "Remains of the Day" - and.. didn't she do those years before S&S? I will have to look that up online. I guess we can take into account that woman in that time period, might have looked more 'aged' than they do now. If you see old photos of people from the 1800's, they really do look more severe and aged, and so severe and serious. I go to a restaurant where they have old photos like this on the walls. Geez, everyone looks ancient and no one smiles either. It must have been a hard life back then. We always remark about those photo portraits. They are kind of scary looking.

I have bought some screenplays from online (Amazon) and they are really interesting to read. Of course, I haven't read an entire one yet; there is never enough time, but I hope to read them someday. Mostly, I have bought some of Kenneth Branagh's Shakespeare screenplays - Hamlet, Much Ado About Nothing, Henry V. I started to read the Hamlet and it was neat, because unlike the Shakespeare play, the screenplay then adds the scenery descriptions and set design, which is beautifully written, and interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janine

[b] I sometimes get annoyed at her lower lip, the way it protrudes - isn't that just plain silly of me? I also get annoyed at her posture, the way she holds her arms sort of behind her at her sides limbly with shoulders back...another silly fetish of mine. Other than those picky little quirps of mine, I do think she is an 'excellent' actress and going places in the future, definitely. She is a young talent and time will tell if she has staying power. I hope that she does and can be versatile, as well. I thought she did a fine job in "Atonement".

---

It's not silly at all. I have tons of little pet peeves like that, things that just bother me. And yes, she does seem a little gangly at times. Hopefully she'll grow out of that. And yes, she was born the same year as my brother, so she was born in 85. Not sure why I know that...

Quote:

---

It is funny that you point out Emma's age factor; I had the exact same thought/feeling the first time I saw the film. How old was Emma then? Wasn't she well into her late 30's by then or even older. Yes, point of fact, she was too old to play Eleanor. I think she fits other roles better for her age, such as "Howard's End" and "Remains of the Day" - and.. didn't she do those years before S&S? I will have to look that up online. I guess we can take into account that woman in that time period, might have looked more 'aged' than they do now. If you see old photos of people from the 1800's, they really do look more severe and aged, and so severe and serious. I go to a restaurant where they have old photos like this on the walls. Geez, everyone looks ancient and no one smiles either. It must have been a hard life back then. We always remark about those photo portraits. They are kind of scary looking.

---

I haven't seen either of those films. I have seen some of Emma Thompson's later work and I do really like her. I actually really liked her in the Harry Potter movies too lol.

Quote:

---

I have bought some screenplays from online (Amazon) and they are really interesting to read. Of course, I haven't read an entire one yet; there is never enough time, but I hope to read them someday. Mostly, I have bought some of Kenneth Branagh's Shakespeare screenplays - Hamlet, Much Ado About Nothing, Henry V. I started to read the Hamlet and it was neat, because unlike the Shakespeare play, the screenplay then adds the scenery descriptions and set design, which is beautifully written, and interesting.

---

I didn't know that screen plays were published like that! There are a number of screenplays I'd love to read. I also didn't know that Kenneth Branagh wrote! Are they well done?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *Classic*Charm*

It's not silly at all. I have tons of little pet peeves like that, things that just bother me. And yes, she does seem a little gangly at times. Hopefully she'll grow out of that. And yes, she was born the same year as my brother, so she was born in 85. Not sure why I know that...

---

That is exactly the word - gangly. Her posture sometimes seems to me a little put on and gangly...effected. She also talks very clipped at times but I am getting used to that about her.

Quote:

---

I haven't seen either of those films. I have seen some of Emma Thompson's later work and I do really like her. I actually really liked her in the Harry Potter movies too lol.

---

OMG, you must see those *Classic*C, those films are wonderful and so well done. They both star Anthony Hopkins. I thought you adored him; how did you miss these fine films of his...two of his best in my opinion? Also, see "Shadowlands" - he is in that, as well. It is wonderful! (Get plenty of tissues). Emma is highly talented and writes, also. Her mother is a film star and has been in many films with her. She was in "Much Ado About Nothing" as the older woman - forget her name now. Philydia Law is her real name, I believe. She is an excellent actress, as well.

Quote:

---

I didn't know that screen plays were published like that! There are a number of screenplays I'd love to read. I also didn't know that Kenneth Branagh wrote! Are they well done?

---

I didn't either till I read about them on Branagh's fan site Kenneth Branagh Compendium - love it! I ordered his autobiography too, and many people criticised him for writing it so early on, (he was working on Henry V or just finished it) but I found it so entertaining and informative about his family life in Ireland and his time at drama school RADA and his first plays/films, encounters with famous actors, who would influence him later on. I like his writing very much so; it was quite human and witty at times. He writes well, a brilliant guy, but very down to earth and he is highly talented - writes, acts, directs, does it all. He has also written some plays the fans say are hits. I only read a portion of his 'Hamlet', but it was good. One of these days I will read it all. He is very poetic and romantic minded. I have a second biography to read of him written by Mark White. I started it but have not gotten too far into it yet, but I will.
Yes, like I said, Emma did start out in comedy so I guess she was a natural for Harry Potter. Come to think of it she wrote a child's movie after that. I can't recall the name of it now. I did not see it but I had thought to. I forgot about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janine

OMG, you must see those *Classic*C, those films are wonderful and so well done. They both star Anthony Hopkins. I thought you adored him; how did you miss these fine films of his...two of his best in my opinion? Also, see "Shadowlands" - he is in that, as well. It is wonderful! (Get plenty of tissues).

---

Really!? Yes, I do adore him, yet it is a number of his works in the "in-between years" that I haven't seen. All of his recent stuff I have seen (with the exception of Fracture), and I have seen some very early films as Arch of Triumph. I'll have to see those! I have lots of time now that summer's here!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *Classic*Charm*

Really!? Yes, I do adore him, yet it is a number of his works in the "in-between years" that I haven't seen. All of his recent stuff I have seen (with the exception of Fracture), and I have seen some very early films as Arch of Triumph. I'll have to see those! I have lots of time now that summer's here!

---

This is so funny. This is in reverse, of how I encountered Anthony Hopkins. I saw all these films first, and took to him right away. I thought he was such a subtle and amazing actor. Truly, he became in my eyes, a huge talent.

Also, isn't it funny, how discussing Emma Thompson, has lead us to Anthony Hopkins?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janine

This is so funny. This is in reverse, of how I encountered Anthony Hopkins. I saw all these films first, and took to him right away. I thought he was such a subtle and amazing actor. Truly, he became in my eyes, a huge talent.

---

:D :D I love him. Too bad he's so old...:bawling:

I wanted to see The Importance of Being Ernest when it first came out and then completely forgot about it. If I remember correctly I didn't get very good reviews.

My mistake! I see what you mean though about her being a quintessential American girl. I felt the same way seeing Kirsten Dunst play Marie Antionette. The worst part was that she didn't even try to fake an accent!

The 'quintessential American girl' I know what you girls mean...about the two actresses mentioned.

I did love Reese in "Walk the Line".

I saw 'Silk' but I did not care for it much. I really did not like the actor who played the lead, I felt he lacked a lot, and the storyline seemed so contrived and trite to me. The lilies were lovely though, weren't they?... and the film had some of the most beautiful cinematography I have ever seen.

I liked 'Much Ado About Nothing' as a fun film, but it did have some very serious flaws - like I just hated Michael Keaton's role - oh please, what was Ken thinking hiring him...ugh? He was so stupid and simple-minded and totally overacted that role. The movie could have been so much better and it should have been longer with more of the Shakespeare text uncut...but that is Hollywood for you. I think they did have some control over that film and wanted it to be a box office hit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Antiquarian

I thought they should have cast someone a little older and more sophisticated for the lead in "Silk," Janine. Oh, those lilies. They were just beautiful. The cinematography was gorgeous, I agree. I also liked the cinematography in "Atonement," especially the part at the house/mansion. But "Silk" was visually gorgeous all the way through.

---

I agree. I kept thinking of other actors with more dimension who would have been great in that role, but Michael Pitt was not great at all - kind of flat and dull to me. I nearly fell asleep in parts accept I really wanted to see the gorgeous scenery. It was amazing - the locations and so well filmed. Same with Atonement. They both were visually stunning films!

I agree with you both about the cinematography in Silk. In fact, I thought it was the film's only redeeming quality. I thought there was no depth to the script or the acting (aside from Keira Knightley). I know I sound like I don't think she could put a foot wrong, which is not true (she was nothing special in King Arthur). She wasn't anything outstanding in Silk, but I found her character a lot more developed and sophisticated than any of the others, and her role was only minor. I thought the lead was terrible. The film was very pretty, I'll give you that, but other than that I didn't think very much of it.

Janine, I'm with you on the Keira Knightly thing. I know my reasons for not liking her are completely petty and shallow but I can't help it. Her teeth drive me nuts, you just see waayyy too much of them and then she's so thin and angular she makes me uncomfortable. :lol: I can't even really notice her acting abilities because I'm so distracted by her 5 million teeth and her jutting jaw. :rolleyes: And yes, I realize how mean spirited that sounds and I'm really not a mean spirited person by nature but there's just something about Keira that brings it out in me...and Gwyneth Paltrow...and Kirsten Dunst...and Angelina Jolie...and don't even get me started on Liv Tyler...ok, so maybe I am a mean spirited person by nature. :p :blush:

The last movie I watched was Yi Yi. A Taiwanese family drama that was absolutely brilliant. The acting was tremendous, the dialogue was sparse but always touching and profound, it was evocative without being manipulative and even though it was almost 3 hours in length, I was so completely enraptured that the time just flew by. I give it a score of 10 out of 10. :thumbs_up

Julia Roberts- now there's a set of chompers.

I won't lie, there are a few young actresses I like. I also like Natalie Portman. Can't think of others off the top of my head right now though...

I watched Charlie Wilson's War today. I'll give it a 7 or 8 out of 10. You can't really go wrong with Tom Hanks, but Phillip Seymour Hoffman's character was my favorite. Antiquarian, you might want to avoid it, Julia Roberts is the female lead :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *Classic*Charm*

I agree with you both about the cinematography in Silk. In fact, I thought it was the film's only redeeming quality. I thought there was no depth to the script or the acting (aside from Keira Knightley). I know I sound like I don't think she could put a foot wrong, which is not true (she was nothing special in King Arthur). She wasn't anything outstanding in Silk, but I found her character a lot more developed and sophisticated than any of the others, and her role was only minor. I thought the lead was terrible. The film was very pretty, I'll give you that, but other than that I didn't think very much of it.

---

*Classic* - I have to admit I was being 'kind' on my post about "Silk". I was bored to death! Was there a plot? If so, it was very thin. It is so 'memorable' a film, I can't recall a thing about the plot except silkworms and some die towards the end, right? I thought it was predictable, also. Geez, I only saw it a week or so ago, and all I really recall are the pretty lilies and the scenery - stunning. I thought the lead actor was just dreadful and even some of the others were truly bad. Keira was ok, but I liked her much better in "Atonement"...still I do think she will be an actress I get tired of easily, sorry to say. She does have annoying teeth and she holds her face and lips funny...I know, I am being petty again. I think to myself, she is a pretty girl, but she is almost too pretty and I don't find her particularly stunning, just pretty and maybe Idril is right - she is a bit too thin, although I did think she looked stunning for once in that green silk gown in "Atonement".

I personally like the actresses you mentioned, Antiquarian - "Judi Dench, Helen Mirren, Vanessa Redgrave. The only younger one I can think of I truly like is Sandra Bullock."
I would add to this list Cate Blanchett, Kate Winslett, Charleze Theron (although I have not seen her in anything recently), and I will have to think of some more to add to my list.
Is Sandra that young still? I was getting tired of her, because everything I saw her in for a time, seemed like the same kind of role, 'the rejected woman type' role. I got a little sick of that. She seemed to always be playing a depressed character in her film choices; yet I do think she is a good actress.
And I totally agree with you about Gwyneth Paltrow - she is just horrible! I hated her films "Great Expectations" and "Emma" - that one made me want to weep I hated that adaptation soooo much!


Idril, your post made me laugh - so true so true! :lol:

I like some obscure actresses you probably don't even know, like Susan Lynch, Imelda Stubbs and other English actresses, that probably do stage more than screen. Oh and I love Juliet Binoche.