Author |
Message |
Anonymous
|
I hope you didn't have to watch Bewitched and Herbie during the same day Makeshift.
|
Wed Jun 29, 2005 5:49 pm |
|
 |
makeshift
Teenage Dream
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 12:20 am Posts: 9247
|
loyalfromlondon wrote: I hope you didn't have to watch Bewitched and Herbie during the same day Makeshift.
Wouldn't you know it, I saw them both on Sunday. ](*,)
|
Wed Jun 29, 2005 5:50 pm |
|
 |
Anonymous
|
makeshift wrote: loyalfromlondon wrote: I hope you didn't have to watch Bewitched and Herbie during the same day Makeshift. Wouldn't you know it, I saw them both on Sunday. ](*,)
We need to set up a victims fund for you.
|
Wed Jun 29, 2005 5:56 pm |
|
 |
Bradley Witherberry
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm Posts: 15197 Location: Planet Xatar
|
Bewitched was very, very well done. I think the key misunderstanding is in exactly what it was trying to get done. This movie was not a "post-modern remake" of the original series as so many reviewers have said... that is what the fictional TV series within this movie was. No, this is an out-and-out love letter to the original TV series - an homage of the highest order. And from that point of view they did perfect - problem is, how many authentic fans of the original series are there out there to buy tickets? I'm a pretty big fan of the 60's show myself - I saw all the episodes in first-run - but then I knew people who were fanatics about the show - Elizabeth Montgomery as Samantha was a very powerful role model to many girls growing up in that era. The acting was solid - Nicole Kidman, perfectamundo as always - Will Ferrell, funny natch, but also played the romantic lead to a T - supporting actors were all good with 2 notable exceptions - the 2 Steve's from The Daily Show: Colbert and Carell - the former was underused and the latter was sadly the only mis-step in this whole movie - his crappy imitation of Uncle Arthur and the way it was presented at the end, almost soured the whole pickle for me. (Especially disappointing given how extraordinary Steven Carell was in last year's Anchorman!)
For fan and/or fanatics of the original series this is a celebration, a work of reverence - prepare to witness magic!
(For everyone else, start working on your DVD boxsets of the original series, so that you can join us in our joyous celebration...)
5 out of 5. (A)
|
Fri Jul 08, 2005 9:19 am |
|
 |
makeshift
Teenage Dream
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 12:20 am Posts: 9247
|
bradley witherberry wrote: Bewitched was very, very well done. I think the key misunderstanding is in exactly what it was trying to get done. This movie was not a "post-modern remake" of the original series as so many reviewers have said... that is what the fictional TV series within this movie was. No, this is an out-and-out love letter to the original TV series - an homage of the highest order. And from that point of view they did perfect - problem is, how many authentic fans of the original series are there out there to buy tickets? I'm a pretty big fan of the 60's show myself - I saw all the episodes in first-run - but then I knew people who were fanatics about the show - Elizabeth Montgomery as Samantha was a very powerful role model to many girls growing up in that era. The acting was solid - Nicole Kidman, perfectamundo as always - Will Ferrell, funny natch, but also played the romantic lead to a T - supporting actors were all good with 2 notable exceptions - the 2 Steve's from The Daily Show: Colbert and Carell - the former was underused and the latter was sadly the only mis-step in this whole movie - his crappy imitation of Uncle Arthur and the way it was presented at the end, almost soured the whole pickle for me. (Especially disappointing given how extraordinary Steven Carell was in last year's Anchorman!)
For fan and/or fanatics of the original series this is a celebration, a work of reverence - prepare to witness magic!
(For everyone else, start working on your DVD boxsets of the original series, so that you can join us in our joyous celebration...)
5 out of 5. (A)
I don't think you saw Bewitched. :razz:
|
Fri Jul 08, 2005 12:29 pm |
|
 |
Libs
Sbil
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:38 pm Posts: 48677 Location: Arlington, VA
|
makeshift wrote: bradley witherberry wrote: Bewitched was very, very well done. I think the key misunderstanding is in exactly what it was trying to get done. This movie was not a "post-modern remake" of the original series as so many reviewers have said... that is what the fictional TV series within this movie was. No, this is an out-and-out love letter to the original TV series - an homage of the highest order. And from that point of view they did perfect - problem is, how many authentic fans of the original series are there out there to buy tickets? I'm a pretty big fan of the 60's show myself - I saw all the episodes in first-run - but then I knew people who were fanatics about the show - Elizabeth Montgomery as Samantha was a very powerful role model to many girls growing up in that era. The acting was solid - Nicole Kidman, perfectamundo as always - Will Ferrell, funny natch, but also played the romantic lead to a T - supporting actors were all good with 2 notable exceptions - the 2 Steve's from The Daily Show: Colbert and Carell - the former was underused and the latter was sadly the only mis-step in this whole movie - his crappy imitation of Uncle Arthur and the way it was presented at the end, almost soured the whole pickle for me. (Especially disappointing given how extraordinary Steven Carell was in last year's Anchorman!)
For fan and/or fanatics of the original series this is a celebration, a work of reverence - prepare to witness magic!
(For everyone else, start working on your DVD boxsets of the original series, so that you can join us in our joyous celebration...)
5 out of 5. (A) I don't think you saw Bewitched. :razz:
Neither do I, but I don't think I've agreed on one movie with B.W. yet. Heh.
|
Fri Jul 08, 2005 12:38 pm |
|
 |
Bradley Witherberry
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm Posts: 15197 Location: Planet Xatar
|
Libs wrote: makeshift wrote: bradley witherberry wrote: Bewitched was very, very well done. I think the key misunderstanding is in exactly what it was trying to get done. This movie was not a "post-modern remake" of the original series as so many reviewers have said... that is what the fictional TV series within this movie was. No, this is an out-and-out love letter to the original TV series - an homage of the highest order. And from that point of view they did perfect - problem is, how many authentic fans of the original series are there out there to buy tickets? I'm a pretty big fan of the 60's show myself - I saw all the episodes in first-run - but then I knew people who were fanatics about the show - Elizabeth Montgomery as Samantha was a very powerful role model to many girls growing up in that era. The acting was solid - Nicole Kidman, perfectamundo as always - Will Ferrell, funny natch, but also played the romantic lead to a T - supporting actors were all good with 2 notable exceptions - the 2 Steve's from The Daily Show: Colbert and Carell - the former was underused and the latter was sadly the only mis-step in this whole movie - his crappy imitation of Uncle Arthur and the way it was presented at the end, almost soured the whole pickle for me. (Especially disappointing given how extraordinary Steven Carell was in last year's Anchorman!)
For fan and/or fanatics of the original series this is a celebration, a work of reverence - prepare to witness magic!
(For everyone else, start working on your DVD boxsets of the original series, so that you can join us in our joyous celebration...)
5 out of 5. (A) I don't think you saw Bewitched. :razz: Neither do I, but I don't think I've agreed on one movie with B.W. yet. Heh.
It's our special bond...
(For those who disagree with my review - Are you fans of the original TV series?)
|
Fri Jul 08, 2005 1:18 pm |
|
 |
movies35
Forum General
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 1:53 pm Posts: 8627 Location: Syracuse, NY
|
makeshift wrote: bradley witherberry wrote: Bewitched was very, very well done. I think the key misunderstanding is in exactly what it was trying to get done. This movie was not a "post-modern remake" of the original series as so many reviewers have said... that is what the fictional TV series within this movie was. No, this is an out-and-out love letter to the original TV series - an homage of the highest order. And from that point of view they did perfect - problem is, how many authentic fans of the original series are there out there to buy tickets? I'm a pretty big fan of the 60's show myself - I saw all the episodes in first-run - but then I knew people who were fanatics about the show - Elizabeth Montgomery as Samantha was a very powerful role model to many girls growing up in that era. The acting was solid - Nicole Kidman, perfectamundo as always - Will Ferrell, funny natch, but also played the romantic lead to a T - supporting actors were all good with 2 notable exceptions - the 2 Steve's from The Daily Show: Colbert and Carell - the former was underused and the latter was sadly the only mis-step in this whole movie - his crappy imitation of Uncle Arthur and the way it was presented at the end, almost soured the whole pickle for me. (Especially disappointing given how extraordinary Steven Carell was in last year's Anchorman!)
For fan and/or fanatics of the original series this is a celebration, a work of reverence - prepare to witness magic!
(For everyone else, start working on your DVD boxsets of the original series, so that you can join us in our joyous celebration...)
5 out of 5. (A) I don't think you saw Bewitched. :razz:
I just love it when people accuse others of not seeing a movie that said they saw  People sure do it a lot on here.
_________________ Top 10 Films of 2016
1. La La Land 2. Other People 3. Nocturnal Animals 4. Swiss Army Man 5. Manchester by the Sea 6. The Edge of Seventeen 7. Sing Street 8. Indignation 9. The Lobster 10. Hell or High Water
|
Fri Jul 08, 2005 1:21 pm |
|
 |
Libs
Sbil
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:38 pm Posts: 48677 Location: Arlington, VA
|
movies35 wrote: makeshift wrote: bradley witherberry wrote: Bewitched was very, very well done. I think the key misunderstanding is in exactly what it was trying to get done. This movie was not a "post-modern remake" of the original series as so many reviewers have said... that is what the fictional TV series within this movie was. No, this is an out-and-out love letter to the original TV series - an homage of the highest order. And from that point of view they did perfect - problem is, how many authentic fans of the original series are there out there to buy tickets? I'm a pretty big fan of the 60's show myself - I saw all the episodes in first-run - but then I knew people who were fanatics about the show - Elizabeth Montgomery as Samantha was a very powerful role model to many girls growing up in that era. The acting was solid - Nicole Kidman, perfectamundo as always - Will Ferrell, funny natch, but also played the romantic lead to a T - supporting actors were all good with 2 notable exceptions - the 2 Steve's from The Daily Show: Colbert and Carell - the former was underused and the latter was sadly the only mis-step in this whole movie - his crappy imitation of Uncle Arthur and the way it was presented at the end, almost soured the whole pickle for me. (Especially disappointing given how extraordinary Steven Carell was in last year's Anchorman!)
For fan and/or fanatics of the original series this is a celebration, a work of reverence - prepare to witness magic!
(For everyone else, start working on your DVD boxsets of the original series, so that you can join us in our joyous celebration...)
5 out of 5. (A) I don't think you saw Bewitched. :razz: I just love it when people accuse others of not seeing a movie that said they saw  People sure do it a lot on here.
Oh, goodness. Makeshift was saying it playfully, as if he doesn't think B.W. saw a train wreck (well, at least I think so) such as Bewitched if he loved it so much. It's akin to saying "I don't think you saw the same movie I did."
|
Fri Jul 08, 2005 1:24 pm |
|
 |
movies35
Forum General
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 1:53 pm Posts: 8627 Location: Syracuse, NY
|
Very average movie that was saved by Kidman. It was cute, a film to see on a rainy day.
7/10 (B-)
_________________ Top 10 Films of 2016
1. La La Land 2. Other People 3. Nocturnal Animals 4. Swiss Army Man 5. Manchester by the Sea 6. The Edge of Seventeen 7. Sing Street 8. Indignation 9. The Lobster 10. Hell or High Water
|
Sun Jul 17, 2005 11:27 pm |
|
 |
Maguire
laneyboy
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 5:14 pm Posts: 2172
|
It was enjoyable. Some funny parts that I laughed at and the performances were good. The ending though was overlong and boring with absolutely nothing funny in it. It could have been cut by 15 or 20 minutes. A pretty average movie though. B-
|
Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:40 pm |
|
 |
BacktotheFuture
I'm Batman
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:53 pm Posts: 5554 Location: Long Island
|
Is it weird that two people saw it tonight? Well anyway romantic-comedies aren't my cup o' tea so I wasn't expecting anything at all. Kidman is cute as hell, Ferrell isn't as funny as always but still has his moments, and that all really. Nothing else in this movie is good, but it has it slight moments.
C+
|
Thu Jul 21, 2005 12:51 am |
|
 |
Mister Ecks
New Server, Same X
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:07 pm Posts: 28301 Location: ... siiiigh...
|
This film is wildly... horrific. I did not think it was remotely possible for a group of actors/comedians that I love (Kidman, Ferrell, Carell, Colbert, Conan, etc.) to be so unlikable and unfunny in one single movie. This film is the most uneven mess I have seen in a long, long time. And it's so unfunny. I didn't even laugh once! Didn't laugh at Will Ferrell, didn't laugh at Steve Carell (I was hoping for some laughs, since he was impersonating the great Paul Lynde), didn't laugh at anything in this movie.
Kidman is barely passable in her role, and I think she did the best with the little she had (TRUST me when I say that that isn't saying much for her). Will Ferrell is not funny in this movie. I love Ferrell like mostly everyone else, but this is his worst work to date, and will likely live on as his worst work. He tries to make us laugh with his usual schtick, but it doesn't work here. It just fails miserably.
If you asked me what happened with the TV show in the movie, I couldn't tell you. All I know for sure is the love story with Kidman and Ferrell. It's such an uneven mess, I couldn't even get into this film to even care about the story at all.
To put it in better terms: Rebound, Herbie: Fully Loaded, The Wedding Date, and Son of the Mask are all better than this movie, and I could watch all four of those movies in a row before I subject myself to this ever again. But, don't worry, that's still like saying "It would be much better to have my legs chopped off than having my arms chopped off."
Grade: D- (I only give this a D- because it's still not in the same league as Alone in the Dark, but it's only one notch above it.)
_________________ Ecks Factor: Cancelled too soon
|
Sun Sep 04, 2005 1:41 pm |
|
 |
Shack
Devil's Advocate
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:30 am Posts: 40226
|
So I saw this tonight. My town theatre finally brought it in, 2.5 months late.
B
A light-hearted movie, they don't have much to work with, as in the script isn't that good, but the cast completley saves the movie. Every one of them warms you. Kidman, Ferrell, Caine, Carrell. Will Ferrell actually isn't funny whatsoever. He uses the same shticks, baffling, ripping off the Bruce Almighty scene, and so forth. In this factor he is far below his regular pace. But when I didn't mind him, was when he wasn't being a bafoon. As a loser who wants another life he somewhat shines, and the unorthadoxed chemistry between him and Kidman is what makes the movie work. They are in my mind in the best movie dating-angle pairing so far of the year. Though there hasn't been much movie-pairing couples thus far this year, this stands out as the most legit and genuine. They do it well and convincingly. Micheal Caine as the 3rd main character in the story as the father as always is on his game. The Iris/Endora was also up to par as supporting. And I actually liked Carrell. The movie fails to be all that funny, but its a light-hearted enjoyment with some great scenes between Kidman and Ferrell. I liked it.
_________________Shack’s top 50 tv shows - viewtopic.php?f=8&t=90227
|
Mon Sep 05, 2005 2:03 am |
|
 |
Dr. Lecter
You must have big rats
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:28 pm Posts: 92093 Location: Bonn, Germany
|
C-
I really didn't imagine to dislike the movie as much as I actually did. I thought that The Stepford Wives was an okay, even if not very good movie, but this one looked much better from the previews and also it had a better male lead, the usually funny Will Ferrell. How was I disappointed!
I just wanted a decent romcom with a fantasy touch and good laughs, but I got almost nothing of that. The worst and unexcusable thing about the movie is that Will Ferrell and Nicole Kidman have no chemistry with each other whatsoever. I spent a lot of time asking myself why on earth her character would fall for him... Ferrell himself was probably disappointed me the most of the whole movie. He was simply unfunny. The script didn't leave him much room to be funny anyway, but also his improv didn't impress me either. And he is supposed to be one of the best comedians out there at the moment?
I did laugh during the movie a couple of time, but all the laughs were because of Michael Caine and Shirley MacLaine, the only real highlights of the movie. I enjoyed all the scenes with them, especially when they were together. "Hey there! I have Hepatitis C!" This was probably the funniest scene in the entire movie that actually made me laugh outloud. Too bad Caine and MacLaine simply disappeared towards the end of the movie. Nicole Kidman was actually decent as well, at least with the material she was given. As far as the rest of the cast goes, Jason Scwartzman was entirely wasted as was Steve Carell with his pointless appearance towards the end.
As far as the romance in the movie goes, nothing of it worked. There were nos aprks between Kidman and Ferrell and this hurts the second half of the movie quite a bit. The scenes with them just appeared awkward most of the time. I didn't buy Ferrell's sudden change of character either. The Stepford Wives was a blad, but quite entertaining and dark-humored film. This one is simply dull and pointless that drags in many scenes with little humor and a badly-choses couple, but at least some good performances. If the movie focused more on Caine and MacLaine it'd have been at least somewhat more enjoyable, but just making their characters disappear toards the end was a bit mistake.
_________________The greatest thing on earth is to love and to be loved in return!
|
Thu Sep 08, 2005 10:32 am |
|
 |
getluv
i break the rules, so i don't care
Joined: Sun May 15, 2005 4:28 pm Posts: 20411
|
A fun ride.
Grade: B
|
Tue Nov 15, 2005 11:15 pm |
|
 |
matatonio
Teh Mexican
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 11:56 pm Posts: 26066 Location: In good ol' Mexico
|
Didnt find it funny at all, just a little "hehe" here and there, from the moment Steve Carrell appeared that was it for me, just stupid!
Ferrell was just to annoying and unfunny and Kidman cute like always
C-
|
Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:10 pm |
|
 |
BacktotheFuture
I'm Batman
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:53 pm Posts: 5554 Location: Long Island
|
Dropping my grade to a C-. Not funny, not smart, nothing really at all except a few bright spots from Ferrell and Kidman being cute.
|
Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:16 pm |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 77 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|