Change Your Image
tempus1
Reviews
BUtterfield 8 (1960)
contains spoilers
Hmmmmm--the usual collection of 'reviews' from imbeciles who cannot spell, punctuate, write a complete sentence, or manage to learn anything about historical periods before Facebook. I cannot decide what the stupidest comments are here: the ones which blame Fisher for being lackluster in a nothing and hardly-written part? the ones which scream and carp about O'Hara's novel being trash and the film consequently being the same? the ones which backbite about Taylor's gorgeous and truly voluptuous figure, calling her 'chubby' and 'fat'? the ones bitching out Merrill for elegantly underplaying a thankless female- doormat role? the ones which think Fisher has to be 'gay' because he doesn't screw Liz? the ones which shriek about how 'ugly' and 'charmless' the handsome and talented Harvey is? the ones which call Taylor's character a WHORE although the novel and movie are both at pains to convey that she is in fact a 'loose woman', a party girl, and NOT a hooker? It's difficult to choose from such a cornucopia of MORONS. The movie itself is an O'Hara potboiler (which is what he wrote--get used to it, morons)based loosely on the life of Starr Faithful, and it is a melodrama, and Taylor didn't want to make the film. That said, she is surprisingly vivid and good, and the rest of the cast acquits itself more than gracefully. Taylor's delivery of laugh lines, never appreciated by most morons, is excellent here, and without the cheesy score (Kaper usually did much better at least than this) the movie would probably make it up to GREAT trash. Taylor is also drop-dead gorgeous, whether wearing a mink or a slip, and worth seeing even in a movie she disliked and did not want to make.
Handsome Harry (2009)
astoundingly Neanderthal reviews..
of a fine, finely acted little movie. Wonder what kind of person is so petty that s/he makes snotty posts about the spelling of actors' names with attempts at snippy remarks about them 'never becoming stars until they learn to spell the name correctly'?!!? Astoundingly juvenile and asinine--and, I might add, I'm sure that JamEY Sheridan couldn't care less what people think of his 'lack of stardom' OR his name or the spelling of same. He's a fine actor who has toiled in relative obscurity so that cretins who love Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt can get their idiot fix. I suppose that any movie which is not solid car chases, noise, screaming, and bad sex scenes will bore such viewers, but why do they choose to SEE movies like this one? Go see Mission Impossible 12 or the latest idiocy with any current Hollywood 'star'--do us all a favor. LOL
Raising the Bar (2008)
lackluster, sadly
When I heard that Gloria Reuben, who is unusually vibrant, talented, subtle, and gifted, had a new show, I rushed to see it. Unfortunately, the only thing Reuben has to do here is add class and ability to the mix--the writers are giving her nothing interesting, challenging, or different, and one could probably say this about several other actors on Raising the Bar. The show has none of the raucous, riotous, shameless satire or humor of Boston Legal, or even of LA Law in its heyday.. Even worse, the blonde yuppie icebitch ADA has become one of the tiredest, weariest clichés in lawyer shows, and this particular actress makes it even more loathsome. she is almost a reason never to watch the show again...
Now, Voyager (1942)
may contain spoilers
One of Davis' all-time best, with a divine score by Max Steiner, the doyen of perfect Hollywood scores for years (GWTW, among others) which is so ravishing, and so radiantly performed (by an orchestra from the time before string playing and orchestral playing DIED never to be revived) that Davis actually asked the producers to can it! She obviously felt that the score was too good and distracted from her performance....imagine such a thing for the past forty or fifty years. Impossible. Davis underplays exquisitely in this film, and is assisted by a terrific cast; pay no attention to imbecilic comments about the movie being 'brain dead'; what is brain dead is cinema for the past thirty years, and its idiot viewers who are unaware of any history beyond the past five minutes.
Gilda (1946)
may contain spoilers
Anyone noticing the (several)absolute imbeciles on here saying that Rita Hayworth isn't beautiful, isn't sexy, isn't a good actress, and can't dance? I cannot imagine being that stupid, that utterly clueless, that devoid of taste, style, any knowledge of the world, or of any knowledge period for that matter. Yes, this movie has certain peculiarities and flaws (NEWS FLASH: nothing is perfect--GASP!!!!!!!!!!!!), and yes, Glenn Ford, though handsome, is not on the level of Hayworth. Hayworth, however, is beyond dispute. she was a trained Spanish dancer whose father was a well-known professional, a great beauty if not a classic one, and a remarkable actress. I feel terribly sorry for the MORONS here; I'm gay, and I'd be in bed with Hayworth in a nanosecond. Rita, not Gilda, btw.
Hamlet (2000)
Abominable
It is hard, even after having SEEN it, to conceive of a movie version of Hamlet worse than the one Mel Gibson perpetrated. However, this travesty pulls it off--employing actors who could not play a period role if their lives depended on it, destroying every line of some of the greatest dramatic poetry in English. Nonexistent diction, nonexistent brains, nonexistent timing, delivery, movement, vocal training, or any other sort of rudimentary acting technique... It is possible to schtick one's way through the kind of movies Ethan Hawke usually appears in , with no talent; it is not possible for him, or his fellow criminals here, to say one line of Shakespeare without mortifying himself and exposing his utter imbecility, inadequacy, and uselessness. The line readings are so dreadful that one wonders if he knows what these words MEAN. Even Kyle MacLachlan and Diane Venora, who are not completely devoid of talent, embarrass themselves; Julia Stiles is of the same toneless, unskilled school of 'acting' as our hero. Everything about this movie is ludicrous to the point of being parodic; what made this director and these 'actors' think they could **** with Shakespeare?
The Matchmaker (1958)
amazing bad taste. Spoilers....
I am astounded at many to most of these imbecilic comments. The Matchmaker is an excellent play by a serious playwright; Hello, Dolly is a cheesy schtick, an excuse for a musical perpetrated by the felon also responsible for MAIM (oops, Mame). Shirley Booth is a multiple Tony-winning stage actress and star who is marvelous as always; Barbra Streisand, years too young for this part, plays herself as she always does, speaking of unbearable schticks. Walter Matthau is UTTERLY miscast as Horace; Paul Ford is dazzling in his usual style (which has nothing to do with 'bluster'). Shirley MacLaine is charm personified as Irene Malloy; Marianne McAndrew is synthetic and fake. I could go on, but there's no point. for anyone to compare these terrific performances with the overblown, hideous, bloviated mugging of the musical film version, much less to compare them unfavorably, is too ludicrous.
Longtime Companion (1989)
may contain spoilers
It amazes me that so many people gush and rhapsodize over this movie. There have been enough good gay-themed movies (Parting Glances, To Forget Venice, My Beautiful Laundrette, Maurice, Alive and Kicking, to name only a few) in the past twenty-five years; by comparison, how is it that people are able to project all sorts of virtues and emotions onto a thin, tiresome, badly acted (save Bruce Davison) problem play which has no subject other than AIDS IS BAD?! The interminable Fire Island scenes are not only shallow, stereotypical, and embarrassing, both in script and execution, they are unwatchably dated. The 'characters'--if one could refer to one-dimensional, wooden, solipsistic, Yuppie brats as 'characters'--have no inner lives or any genuine concerns beyond dick, dunes, and dish, and the attempt to gin up emotion later in the movie, and to have the Yuppie fags suddenly develop 'consciences' and 'feeling', is utterly EMETIC. I use the word 'fags' advisedly; I am a gay man myself, and this rehash of the most unattractive and boring NYC/Fire Island stereotypes leaves no other appropriate word to describe it. Bruce Davison gives a good performance, very fine at the end; what a waste of a fine actor and his skill.
The Train (1964)
There's always one, isn't there?
Astounded by the pathetic attempted condescension by 'mundsen' of New Zealand; this poster tries to put down "The Seventh Seal" (one of the great movie masterpieces of all time); the acting of Burt Lancaster and Paul Scofield--apparently any speech longer than two sentences is 'scenery-chewing' to 'mundsen'; and we are also favored with one or two sophomoric, juvenile, gratuitous attempted snipes at American movie-making in general. Such solipsistic and flatulent remarks always seem to appear in any comments on any movie; It seems that no matter how fine the work of art, some 'naff' (to use 'mundsen's own adjective) poseur feels the need to inject his ludicrous pretensions into the discussion of it. Welcome to the wonderful world of the internet, home of imbecilic 'instant experts' deluxe...