Change Your Image
greer453
Reviews
Pedro (1943)
In Defense of Pedro as South American Travelogue
The criticism that Pedro is not Chilean enough to justify the Disney artists' trip to Chile misses the point. As a viewer, I find Pedro to be a welcome departure from the depictions of regional dance and music that comprises much of Saludos Amigos. Also, the forbidding majesty of the Andes is very much at the heart of Pedro, which was inspired by the artists' own flight over the Andes during their trip. Indeed, Saludos Amigos (and later The Three Caballeros) did not exactly probe the depths of South American culture--for that, we had Orson Welles' It's All True. Besides, what would you rather have preserved for posterity, the Pedro cartoon or yet another sequence showing yet another regional dance?
Miss Potter (2006)
Ginger and Pickles are Turning in their Graves
If I could travel back in time, I would prevent the making of "Jerry McGuire" so as to derail the career of Renee Zellweger before it got started. She is one of those actors who almost make me look forward to old age so that I can have the satisfaction of seeing them retire. I am not a curmudgeon, nor do I dislike Hollywood per se. But Hollywood has been miscasting roles from the beginning, and this is just another example of trying to put a recognizable name on the marquis at the expense of trying to put the right person in the right role. I will admit that I thought Ms. Zellweger was perfectly charming and properly cast in "Jerry McGuire," but that's the same as saying I though Nicole Kidman was perfectly suited for the part she played in "Dead Calm." In both cases, neither actress as done anything since to warrant all the fuss. "Miss Potter" isn't a horrible movie, but if you care about the legacy of Beatrix Potter, it falls way short of doing her the justice she deserves, and the reason for that is Renee Zellweger.
Blood Diamond (2006)
Settling the "Accent" Issue Once and For All
Yes, DiCaprio's acting is fine--he's a good actor, not great, but good enough to carry a movie provided he isn't miscast. However, some actors are particularly adept at doing accents, but DiCaprio isn't one of them. Yes, he tries hard and obviously put a lot of work into it, but for those of us who are sensitive to regional accents in films, it wasn't good enough to pass without criticism. And this leads me to my main point: People who aren't accent savvy really shouldn't waste our time posting their opinions about how good a job an actor does with an accent. If accents don't matter to you, then say so. Accents do matter to me, and when an actor attempts a tough accent but falls even a little short, I find it distracting to the point where it makes it difficult for me to completely lose myself in the film. As an actor, it is DiCaprio's job to create a convincing character, and sometimes an accent is part of that job. This film was a pet project of DiCaprio's, so he set himself up for the task of nailing a subtle and notoriously difficult accent. Why are so many people eager to excuse him for falling short? There are several postings in which some obviously die-hard DiCaprio fans say silly things like, "I am not familiar with the South African accent, but I have a hunch that he got it right." I mean, come off it, people! I think Leonardo DiCaprio can manage to weather a little criticism without your starry-eyed attempts to defend him. We're not talking about a mentally or physically challenged child competing in the Special Olympics here--this is a universally-adored and well-compensated adult actor playing a part in a movie. Get over your adulation and judge his phony accent on its merits. Better yet, if you are not someone who cares about or is sensitive to accents, then keep your hopelessly biased opinion to yourself. By glossing over DiCaprio's shortcomings in the accent department, you take away from the achievements of those actors who really are able to perfect an accent that is foreign to them, such as Christian Bale in "Batman Begins" or Meryl Streep in "Cry in the Dark." DiCaprio should stick to doing an American accent, at which he excels. Case closed.
Crocodile Dundee II (1988)
Makes "Robot Monster" Look Like "Mrs. Miniver"
The only reason I submitted this review was to respond to the other review posted for this turkey. The other reviewer rightfully trashes this sequel to the first "Crocodile Dundee," but makes the unbelievable assertion that the first movie was one of the freshest and funniest comedies ever--'struth! Sure, I was amused by "Crocodile Dundee" when it first came out in 1986, but then again, I enjoyed a lot of films when I first saw them twenty to thirty years ago. Watching the first installment again last week, I was genuinely shocked to see just how poorly "Crocodile Dundee" has aged. The movie was flat, slow, and completely unoriginal, and the acting, particularly that of Linda Koslowski, was atrocious. Even the lines I remembered finding so witty, like the bit about the lens cap being left on the camera, were embarrassingly cheesy and poorly delivered. Both of the first two "Dundee" movies seem to have been directed by a marsupial after one too many Foster's. In truth, the sequel wasn't nearly as disappointing as it might have been had the first film been any good. The best thing about both films is the location filming that shows New York as it used to be. All I can say is, as bad as so many movies today are, and as much as special effects, attractive but empty actors, and hype have taken over Hollywood, we really need to check reality before we start pining for the good old days of the 1980s film world. If you really want to wax nostalgic about movie-making, go back to the 30s and 40s and see just how far we haven't come.
Saturn 3 (1980)
From Hunger
I just read a glowing review of this movie in which the reviewer dismisses the film's legion of critics as a bunch of benighted Star Wars nerds. Well, let me tell you, anyone who thinks Saturn 3 was remotely interesting or cool must have watched it on Ecstasy or acid (basically, I am saying that marijuana would not be enough). I grew up as a rabid Sci-Fi fan who salivated at the prospect of ANY movie set in space, and back when Saturn 3 was made, you took what you could get. I found redeeming qualities in nearly every Sci-Fi flick that came down the pike, so I was not what you'd call picky. Silent Running, Outland, Logan's Run-- you name it, I managed to convince myself that it was good. But Saturn 3? What a turkey! It was pedestrian, it was dull, the story was hackneyed and pointless, and it was annoying. And remember, this was Farah Fawcett BEFORE she won acclaim in The Burning Bed. Oh, and the special effects were not very special at all. The person who praised this movie and registered disdain at all the negative reviews should go back into the archives and look up what every single film critic said about the movie when it premiered. It was panned by everyone in the industry, and for very good reason. It stunk. So please, unless you have a clinical fascination with dreadful movies, don't waste your time. And don't listen to delusional apologists for the film who first saw it when they were 12 years old.