SCREEN-L Archives

March 1999, Week 4


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Richard Davies <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mon, 22 Mar 1999 23:33:33 -0000
text/plain (95 lines)
Hi all,

Have just watched replay of Oscars, and have to say that I'm rather glad
SIL won. Not a great movie, but one with a good deal going for it - well
written and excellent art direction, music to cover the uneven editing,
some nice acting, and above all a sense of momentum that sets it apart from
the more lugubrious movies released last year.
Also, and I think this is the crucial point, a very clever concept.

SPR got its just reward - as well directed as anything by Mr S, but
lumbered with a dreadfully leaden script in its second half. TRL also got
what it deserved - not a whole lot - since it craved the indulgence of its
audience a little too much. Shame Sean Penn didn't get best actor.

I thought Pleasantville would appeal to the retro crowd, and was delighted
it got nothing. Sorry to be negative.

Benigni (sp?) showed how far Jerry Lewis could have got had he been
Italian, and my personal choice for best movie - Central Station - never
stood a chance.

Richard Davies
> From: [log in to unmask]
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Shakespeare in Love
> Date: 22 March 1999 19:16
> I rest my case about its overrating, since most of us saw that last
> It made my ten best list, but barely, when I decided it was better than
> _Bulworth_.  all the other best pcture nominees did, too, but that
> mean a whole lot when I only got to see (I think) seventeen 1998 films,
> the only really bad one being Emmerich's _Godzilla_, which as a fan of
> Ishiro Honda, Yoshimitsu Banno, and Takao Okawara, I had been dreading it
> so much that it was actually better than I expected it to be, but not
> much.
> My belated ten-best list of 1998, as meaningless as it might be, and
> however changeable it will be in the future, goes to (in alphabetical
> order, because quibbling among very different films is tough):
> Buffalo 66
> Dark City
> Elizabeth
> Saving Private Ryan
> Shakespeare in Love
> A Simple Plan
> Smoke Signals
> The Thin Red Line
> The Truman Show
> La Vita E Bella
> Ther others I saw were _Bulworth_ (pretty good), _Godzilla_ (entertaining
> ONCE-and that's giving it too much credit), _Small Soldiers_
> (Dante--witty), _T-Rex: Back to the Cretaceous_ (starring a fellow former
> NCHS student whom I've seen on stage--pretty decent first film role, not
> counting her cameo in _Can't Hardly Wait_), _One True Thing_ (good, but
> nothing special), _Waking Ned Devine (sweet and funny), and _What Dreams
> May Come_ (visually splendid, but I didn't think it was all that great).
> I wish I had gotten to see more indie films.
> Of this years films, I've seen _Ravenous_ and _Trekkies_.  I hope one of
> Antonia Bird's goals in that film was to make the audience vegetarians,
> because the though of eating red meat, especially ribs, has made me
> nauseous, like the Ludovico Method, ever since I saw the film Saturday.
> Everything about it was exceptionally well done except the story, which
> was reasonably good.  It's a quirky little film that's obviously not
> to do well.  Go buy the soundtrack (if you can find it):  it's worth it.
> A les brief, a little more scholarly, review should show up on the IMDb
> page for it soon.
> Scott
> Scott Andrew Hutchins
> Oz, Monsters, Kamillions, and More!
> "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously."--Noam Chomsky
> ----
> Online resources for film/TV studies may be found at ScreenSite

Online resources for film/TV studies may be found at ScreenSite