Reviews

I wonder why the user below felt the need to criticize this film not once, but twice. Strange.

At any rate, I couldn't allow those negative and misleading comments to be the first read by those who haven't seen "Meet Me in St. Louis". This movie is NOT plotless, obnoxious or racist.

"Meet Me in St. Louis" is what is sometimes called a "slice of life" story. Basically, it tells the story of one year (1903-1904) in the lives of the Smith family. What gives the story its charm is that everyday yearnings and incidents become the stuff of major drama, just as they do in real life. Older sister Esther (the wonderful Judy Garland) is determined to get the attention of the object of her affections, the boy next door (Tom Drake). Youngest sister Tootie (Margaret O'Brien) uses Halloween to prove that she can be a mischief-maker on a level with the older kids.

Taken by themselves, neither of these events seems terribly exciting. What is great about "Meet Me in St. Louis", however, is that it gives these events the importance that they hold in the minds of the characters. As Esther sings in "The Trolley Song": "As he started to go, then I started to know how it feels when the universe reels!"

Most of us will never rule a nation or go on a great adventure. But we can all identify with what it's like to be seventeen, NEEDING to win the love of your crush. Or when you're five and MUST prove that you're not a baby anymore. This is why this film is so beloved and timeless.

As to the criticisms levelled at the color-saturation, I saw this as a way of showing how we always see our youth as a bright place. Don't we tend to imagine our youth as brighter, sunnier and more colorful than it actually was?

And as for the songs...well, if you can't appreciate and enjoy songs like "The Trolley Song", "The Boy Next Door" and "Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas", I feel sorry for you. No one sings "Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas" with the yearning and pain that Judy gives the song. And "The Trolley Song" makes me smile every time I hear it.

It's true that "Meet Me in St. Louis" isn't for everyone. The overly-cynical and pessimistic probably won't enjoy it at all. But for those of us who like to look back and smile on our youth and escape to a less-complicated world for a couple of hours, there's no place like St. Louis.

Everything that I previously wrote about "Passions" is true (the show moves at a pace that gives new meaning to the phrase "slower than molasses" and there is a preponderance of stupid characters)...but I CAN'T STOP WATCHING! I admit it--I'm addicted, mainly because of the Luis/Sheridan romance, but also because of the sheer campiness and fun of the show. Are my standards falling? Has Tabitha put a spell on me? Someone help me!!!

I completely agree with the majority of comments posted here about "Anne 3". As a longtime fan of the first two films (and books), I was so excited for this third installment. When I first saw it, I didn't fall in love with it the way I did the first two films. Upon a subsequent viewing and discussions with my sister, I was able to pinpoint what bothered me about this movie. Most of these issues have been covered by other viewers (drastic change from the books, almost completely joyless, weird quasi-unfaithfulness to Gilbert, etc.), but I thought I would add a couple of thoughts that my sis and I discussed.

The "Anne" books contain the simple stories of one woman's life, from madcap girlhood to mature motherhood. When she becomes an adult and marries, the Anne books cover the themes of life, death (loss of children), joy, despair and hope...in other words, the books are about experiences that women of the time could identify with. Apparently, the creators of this third movie didn't think that a "woman's story" was interesting enough. Aside from changing the time frame, they changed the location of the (majority of) the action from Prince Edward Island to World War I-era Europe, chock-full of blood, gore, "action" and spies. If the period of the story's setting had to be changed to WWI, wouldn't it have been more interesting (and truer to the spirit of the books) to portray Anne as a woman coping with the war on the homefront? But, like I said, the story of a woman dealing with life and war must not have seemed as important to the writers/director/producer as spy capers and battlefield scenes.

Also...I'm surprised that none of the other viewers commented on the movie's tiresome anti-American bias. I lost count of the times that we were insulted. Thousands of American soldiers gave their lives to help end World War I and the pointless jibes at "the Yanks" in this film belittles their contribution in ending the stalemate that the war had turned into. If the filmmakers wanted to promote Canadian nationalism, there are better ways to do that than at the expense of Americans.

For a movie that seemed to want to extoll the virtues of Canada, there was precious little of Canada (and Prince Edward Island) shown on-screen. Like Anne and Gilbert's life together, I guess Canada wasn't considered exciting or dramatic enough for the setting of this movie. What a shame.

...it's pretty awful, but you just can't tear yourself away. In my case, I think it's because I keep telling myself, "This is the episode where something is going to HAPPEN." Of course, it never does. Actually, you could probably watch one episode of "Passions" every two months and you wouldn't have missed a thing.

The show moves at the pace of real life, and that's not a good thing. Most residents of Harmony are incredibly dense and can't figure even the most obvious things out to save their lives. The male characters, especially, are incredibly stupid, with the exceptions of Chad Harris and Luis Lopez-Fitzgerald (don't forget to include both the "Lopez" and the "Fitzgerald".

Each character has his/her own line that he/she is forced to repeat in every episode. Poor, beleagured Pilar Lopez-Fitzgerald is constantly telling Theresa/Ivy that it would be a "disaster" if: Theresa continues to pursue Ethan Crane/Ivy continues to pursue Sam Bennett. Theresa Lopez-Fitzgerald's mantra is that "it's FATE" that her and Ethan be together. Of late, Theresa's new line regarding Ethan is "if ONLY he weren't a Crane!"

Of course, we in the audience know that Ethan really isn't a Crane, but the dawn of the 22nd Century may be upon us before Theresa (or anyone else in Harmony) knows it.

There are three separate female characters pursuing men that have repeatedly rejected them: Theresa, Ivy and Kay would, ordinarily, be committed to some kind of mental institution or at least sent to counseling, but in Harmony, their mentally-unhealthy behavior apparently fits right in.

"Passions" is pure camp and does provide some laughs--especially when Tabitha and Timmy are on the screen. But I can't help but miss a show like "Another World" in its best days: a show about realistic characters in which the story actually progresses.

I saw "The Big House" last night as part of Turner Classic Movies' tribute to Frances Marion, the great female screenwriter. Marion became the first woman to win an Academy Award for screenwriting for her work on this film.

"The Big House" is a fascinating character study, showing how three very different men deal with being imprisoned. Butch (Wallace Beery) lords over all of the men with a knife and threats of violence. John Morgan (Chester Morris) is smart enough to befriend Butch and his crew, but keeps his own set of values. Newcomer Kent Marlowe (Robert Montgomery) is terrified of prison and eventually turns "rat" in hopes of being released.

The film also infers that the public at large is partly to blame for the discontent (and eventual unrest) within the prison: at one moment, the head warden says something to the effect of the public wanting to put criminals in prison, but not wanting to spend the money to build more prisons to accommodate them. This is issue is still debated to this day.

I also found the portrayal of the lone female character, Anne Marlowe (Kent's sister, played by Leila Hyams), very refreshing and unexpected. Instead of the crying, simpering type we might expect in a prison movie, we are given a smart and compassionate woman who owns her own business.

All of the actors gave excellent, realistic performances and Frances Marion's screenplay was well-deserving of the accolades it received. The insight and sensitivity that she used to write about these characters and this place surpasses most of the scripts written by men on the same subject.

"Before Sunrise" touched me very deeply. Jesse and Celine seem so real because Richard Linklater gives us the time to get to know them. And because they seem so real to us, we become more emotionally involved in the story and what happens to these two people.

The shots near the end of the film (of places Jesse and Celine were the night before) are lovely and elegiac. Have you ever driven or walked by a place where something significant once happened to you? To anyone else, that place might seem like a drab alleyway or commonplace bench, but to you it holds a special memory. These shots capture that feeling perfectly.

This entire movie plays like a beautiful memory...wonderful.

If you enjoyed "Before Sunrise", I highly recommend "The Clock", a 1945 film with Judy Garland and Robert Walker. Walker is a soldier on leave who (literally) runs into Garland at New York's Penn Station, and they only have two days to get to know each other. While different in tone from "Before Sunrise", it is definitely of the same spirit.

I finally saw this movie on the big screen this weekend (at the Egyptian Theatre)--the way it was meant to be seen. I have loved this movie since my mother first showed it to me about 12 years ago, but seeing it with colors vibrant, larger than life, the glorious score surrounding me...well, it was like a religious experience.

One thing: would everyone just lay off of Richard Beymer's Tony? I think he was fine! Tony's supposed to be a lovesick character. If you read that as wimpy, then you've just missed the entire point of the movie.

"Beauty and the Beast" is one of the finest movies ever made. Notice that I didn't say "one of the finest animated movies"--it is a great film--period.

I still remember how excited I was to see this movie, from the day I saw a cardboard stand-up at the local mulitplex. I went on the night it opened, and I was moved from the haunting prologue onward. This is the rare film that exceeded my expectations. I've lost count of how many time I've seen it, but I did see it twelve times while it was in theatres (hey, it was out for eight months or something!).

The animation is excellent, but the real key to "Beauty"'s success is its wonderfully real characters. There is nothing false about any of them. The songs, by Howard Ashman (lyrics) and Alan Menken (music), are moving, funny and catchy. We all lost a great treasure when Howard Ashman died. His lyrics were never dumbed down and always clever, enjoyable for adults and children alike.

Special praise also goes out to the voice cast, who infuse their character s with life and real emotion. Before Disney starting casting voices just because they belonged to famous movie stars, they actually cast people on the basis of talent. Paige O'Hara, Robby Benson, Angela Lansbury, Richard White, Jerry Orbach, David Ogden Stiers, and everyone else are fabulous!

I forever lost faith in the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences when they gave the Oscar to "Silence of the Lambs" instead of "Beauty and the Beast".

This will always be one of my all-time favorites!!

Kenneth Branagh's version of "Much Ado About Nothing" is so much fun and extremely accessible. His Benedick and Emma Thompson's Beatrice are funny and fabulous. The scene in which the two acknowledge their love for one another, capped by his spree in a fountain and her on a swing, is the best in the film. Thompson is also very moving in the scene right after Claudio rejects Hero at the wedding ('God! That I were a man!'--sorry if I didn't quote it correctly).

Denzel Washington is also very good, as is most of the cast. Robert Sean Leonard is a little on the whiny side, but, then, so is the character of Claudio. Gotta love Keanu for trying.

My heart broke when Kenneth and Emma split up, but I am grateful that I can forever watch them together in this joyous movie.

If you didn't first see this movie between the ages of 8 and 15, you probably won't experience the same joy and nostalgia as those of us lucky enough to have seen it in those golden years of our lives.

Today I found out that two girls in my office also love this movie, and it was like finding two kindred spirits. My sister and I used to watch this movie over and over again on cable. Yes, it's predictable and cheesy, but that's what's so fun about it! And was 80s pop culture (cheeseball pop music, teased hair, Velcro, loud clothes and dance TV programs--think "Solid Gold") ever so well documented on film?

Yes, you can watch Helen Hunt in her Oscar-winning performance in "As Good As it Gets"...but wouldn't you rather watch her become "Miss D-TV"?

Ah, the memories...

This is by far a superior film to the glossy, Technicolor 1951 version, which (among other things) totally weakens the character of Magnolia. The cast is uniformly wonderful and the film forever preserves the legendary performances of Helen Morgan, Paul Robeson and Charles Winninger. The Oscar Hammerstein II and Jerome Kern score is wonderful--particularly the immortal "Ol' Man River".

Directed by James Whale (recently the subject of "Gods and Monsters"), this version shows a real sensitivity towards blacks and women. Both groups were severely oppressed in American society at the time, and one can't help but feel that Whale brought his own unique perspective as an outsider to this story.

Yes, there are a couple of uneasy moments (ie-Magnolia's number in blackface), but remember that such practices were commonplace in the theatre in late 19th century America. It is important that we do not gloss over these facts, but rather fully recognized the prejudices and bigotry of the past.

A great movie and important view into our past.

I've now seen "The Phantom Menace" twice. I was lucky enough to be amongst the opening-night audience at the Chinese Theatre, which I can only describe as raucous, hilarious and surreal. But onto the movie itself.

The first time I saw "Phantom", I enjoyed it very much, but was a bit disappointed. I think I, like so many others, set my expectations way too high. Then I saw it again this past weekend and just sat down to watch and enjoy a movie. What a difference my change in attitude made. I had such a great time and appreciated things about the film I had not noticed before.

I don't want to take up too much space by listing out every little thing, but I especially loved Ewan McGregor and Natalie Portman, the majorly a**-kicking lightsaber duel near the end of the movie (fabulous fight choreography), the pod race sequence and the costumes and visuals.

Like most people, I was seriously annoyed by Jar Jar the first time I saw "The Phantom Menace". But when I saw it again, the character did not bother me nearly as much and actually amused me several times. I think this movie improves upon further viewings.

Did anyone notice the brief sound of the famous Darth Vader breathing at the very end of the credits?

Can't wait for Episode II!!!

Well, it doesn't get much worse than "Manos, the Hands of Fate". When I saw this on MST3K, I couldn't believe that it was a real movie. It looked like something I would've made with my Dad's old movie camera in junior high, but a lot worse.

Even with my robot buddies and Joel, I found this extremely difficult to sit through in any kind of coherent state. I think I actually drifted out of consciousness a couple of times, crippled by this "film's" horridness. My sister actually managed to watch every agonizing minute, so she's made of stronger stuff than I am.

Torgo and his leitmotif cracked me up (especially when reprised at the end of the MST3K version), as did the ridiculously redundant title (as pointed out by another astute viewer here). I just have flashes of this movie in my mind, like something from a surreal, horrible nightmare.

At first, I was going to say that "Manos" should be able to inspire anyone to make a movie, since there's a pretty darn good chance that it would be better. Then again, someone could just go out and inflict another "Manos" on an unsuspecting world.

"Manos" proves that the movie camera is a weapon that can inflict real suffering on viewers and should never be used lightly! Watch this movie with extreme caution!

WEST SIDE STORY changed my life. I first saw this movie when I was about 13 years old. It was the first musical I ever saw, and it opened up my eyes to the joys of musicals and the classic films of Hollywood.

The romance is heartbreaking and the Leonard Bernstein-Stephen Sondheim score is one of the best ever written. Jerome Robbins' choreography is also amazing. The film itself is visually stunning.

One of my faves!!

THE CLOCK is a perfect movie within its genre. Set during World War II, the film tells the story of a young corporal (Robert Walker) who has a two-day leave in New York City. He (literally) runs into an office worker (Judy Garland), and the two of them soon fall in love and decide to get married before his leave is up.

Garland and Walker are so appealing and right for these parts, and add such a human element to the story. They have great chemistry and their romance is completely believable. Director Vincente Minnelli does a fine job of showing New York as the backdrop of this story. THE CLOCK is a thoughtful and sensitive metaphor on finding your "one in a million".