Change Your Image
milady_1625
Reviews
The Man in the Iron Mask (1998)
One of my all time favourites
Okay, so let's not pretend that this film is anything like the book. But in my opinion it is better.
This film has everything to make it a success- wonderfully stirring music, fantastic sets and gripping fight scenes. There is lots of humour as well - especially when Porthos is trying to hang himself - I laughed and laughed! Leo's acting is not great but it is more than made up for by the 4 older men. Jeremy Irons is absolutely fantastic as the arrogant yet incredibly likeable Aramis (His voice is so gorgeous!) and Gabriel Byrne is also really good as d'Artagnan - he adds devotion and dignity to the role. Both of them really successfully convey the secret agony they are bearing that they cannot share. The women are good as well, Christine's grief always really gets to me and Anne Parillaud makes a really strong Queen.
It does take a while to really get into it and the mixture of accents is a bit annoying but I really love this film and watch it all the time.
Emma (1996)
Absolutely Charming!
Gwyneth Paltrow is a perfect Emma- snobby and interefering yet a completely adorable character. As Mr Knightly is also very good - just how I imagined him too be.
The only character I think is really miscast is Toni Collete as Harriet Smith. She's an okay actress but this is just not the part for her. Harriet should be small and frail and much more of a country girl - I couldn't see her matching with Robert Martin at all.
This is a good overall film and Jane Austen's world comes across very well. The Frank Churchill episode of the book is skipped over a bit quickly but apart from that it is fairly accurate. I imagine it would encourage younger people to try reading some Austen.
The Three Musketeers (1993)
Awful, Awful, film of a great story
This film is terrible!! Have the scriptwriters even read the book???! It's as if all they have bothered to research is 'All for one and one for all' - which is repeated again and again (even though it is in fact the wrong way round!) There are so many bits missed out so many vital parts of the plot - (there is no diamond studs episode, Constance survives etc) and so many inventions (musketeers disbanded, Rochefort as an ex-musketeer murdering D'artagnan's father etc) The characters are mostly miscasted - mainly because they are all about 10 years younger than they ought to be (or 30 years younger in the case of the king). The are a few comic lines from the Three Musketeers who do their best in an awful movie, and Tim Curry is quite evil but unfortunately has one awful line after another which completely undercut his leering and evil grins. Rebecca DeMournay gives a pretty flat performance as Milady but this is simply because of the appalling script. In most cases the actors are trying their best but with such a film they are doomed to failure.
I understand that this is Disney and they want to make a film that children will enjoy that has action and adventure etc. However I fail to see why they have to ruin a masterpiece of a story in order to achieve their aim. As a child I adored the 1949 version with Gene Kelly so there is no reason why the plot has to be changed so much for children to enjoy it. Dogtanian was a brilliant childrens cartoon of the three musketeers which left all of the characters and storyline intact - Why does Disney have to ruin it? It is not even as if the true spirit and honour of the Muskteers and what they stand for, comes across successfully. Having every other character 'All-for-one-ing' all the way through is not the same thing at all. Having a lecherous Cardinal who is more interested in sex than anything else is hardly ideal for a children's film anyway. And what is all that rubbish about the Cardinal inheriting the throne??! What sort of rules of succession did Hollywood think existed in France?
Children might enjoy this film but I will never show it to mine. Unless of course like me they watch it for a laugh (at it rather than with it) and enjoy nit-picking like I have done.
The Clan of the Cave Bear (1986)
I watch it again - and again!
When I saw it was on the TV I got up at 2 in the morning to watch this film! I just couldn't wait until the morning! I thought it was really good but advice to anyone is READ THE BOOK! The story is absolutely captivating and involving from the start. Darryl Hannah is a good Ayla (if not a little old - she is supposed to be 12!) and the film does well with the language problem. The hand signals are good and there aren't too many sub-titles. I really like the music as well. I think this is a good attempt at summarising Jean Auel's work (which is really very difficult to film successfully) - But summary is the right word so you are really missing out until you read the novel - there is so much more to it- I think the film could be a little longer - it is a 800 page book! Even though it doesn't live up to the book it's still really good fun to see. I also think that a film of her later books would be a success - especially as the language isn't a problem then. My sister watched it before reading the book and she was hooked, so it's definitely a success whether you are familiar or otherwise with this compelling story. I think it's a real shame that it's deleted in the UK! It should be on TV more often so people have a chance to watch it.
On the whole I would advise any fan who is prepared to be open-minded to watch it - you are in for a treat. If you are just going to nit-pick about the plot - Forget It!
The Lord of the Rings (1978)
Worth watching...again and again
I think people have judged this film unfairly. How on earth do people expect the entire book to be condensed into 2 hours without leaving stuff out? And I very much doubt that the coming trilogy will be entirely accurate either so comparing it with that is unreasonable. I think this is a very good attempt at capturing the true magic and mystery of Tolkien's books. John Hurt is fantastic as Aragorn - his voice is beautiful and captivating! The Black Riders are truly chilling at the start and instil a suitable amount of fear. Gandalf is powerful and in control and the battle scenes work well with rotoscoping and make it suitably adult. There are improvements to be made however - it utterly bewilders me why the film makers decided to stop halfway through and some bits of the film tend towards being funny when I am sure they are not supposed to be (These include Aragorn falling over whenever an enemy approaches and some of Sam/Bilbo's ridiculous faces) The problem with this film is that I do not think the script writers knew which type of people they were aiming this film at -Adults/children (As a child I did not much like the cartoon but now I appreciate it much more.) and also between those who knew Tolkien's books/ Those who didn't. It is such a large work that I think it is necessary to decide which- I believe this tried to aim for those who did not know the book, which was a mistake for it is only dedicated fans who are watching it.
On the whole I would advise any fan who is prepared to be open-minded to watch it - you are in for a treat. If you are just going to nit-pick about the plot - Forget It!