|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 6 posts ] |
|
| Author |
Message |
|
zingy
College Boy Z
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:40 pm
Posts: 36662
|
 Frida Frida Quote: Frida is a 2002 biographical film which depicts the professional and private life of the surrealist Mexican painter Frida Kahlo. It stars Salma Hayek in her Academy Award nominated portrayal as Kahlo and Alfred Molina as her husband, Diego Rivera.
The movie was adapted by Clancy Sigal, Diane Lake, Gregory Nava, Anna Thomas and Edward Norton (uncredited) from the book Frida: A Biography of Frida Kahlo by Hayden Herrera. It was directed by Julie Taymor. It won Oscars for Best Makeup and Best Original Music Score (recipient: Elliot Goldenthal).
|
| Wed Sep 14, 2005 9:35 pm |
|
|
|
dolcevita
Extraordinary
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:24 pm
Posts: 16061
Location: The Damage Control Table
|
What a dreadful nightmare of a bio. Made one of the more accomplished internationally reknown painters (not only due to her own ability, but also the contemporary need to open up gender in painting, politics, her relations, and post-humous marketing of her image) into some second rate marginal activist. She apparently occasionally kissed girls, slept with other guys, had nervous breakdowns over Diego, and pretty much just spit out hor air, albeight with some sound of authority.
It dealt with almost nothing that she addressed in her work outside of two or three inserted one-liners, and her spinal injuries seemed more about showing Hayek's cleavage (oooooh, how risque). Ehtnicity, guests, her travels, and mostly just her paintings, were pretty much unaddressed.
Technically, the scenes that Taymor occasional inserted of something like a mexican skeleton doll buring in its bed could have been marvelous imagery had one not seen the fishing wire and the generic school pictureday blue backdrop the "artistic and cultural" visions were shot against.
I don't mind their choice of topic, and it wasn't so much offensive as just falling very incredibly flat.
C
|
| Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:36 am |
|
|
|
matatonio
Teh Mexican
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 11:56 pm
Posts: 26066
Location: In good ol' Mexico
|
i dont know, it wasnt the best thing ever, just OK!
sometimes i wish the movie was made in spanish and by a TRUE mexican artists! meh!
C+
|
| Fri Sep 16, 2005 5:39 pm |
|
|
|
Atoddr
Veteran
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:07 am
Posts: 3014
Location: Kansai
|
It's one of those bio-pics where events in a person's life are rehashed but you walk away feeling like you still know nothing about the character. It should have been a lot better. Salma Hayek is good, but Alfred Molina is even better. My grade - C+.
|
| Fri Sep 16, 2005 6:01 pm |
|
|
|
Dr. Lecter
You must have big rats
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:28 pm
Posts: 92093
Location: Bonn, Germany
|
B+
I am very much srprised by the negative responses here. It is one of the best biopics of recent years, better than the likes of Ray or Capote for instance. Salma Hayek was fully deserving of her Oscar nom in a performance of a lifetime and I loved the artistic approach of the film. A couple of scenes dragged and Norton/Rush were wasted, but overall it left a good impression on me despite me not really being interested in the subject matter.
_________________The greatest thing on earth is to love and to be loved in return!
|
| Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:16 am |
|
|
|
thompsoncory
Rachel McAdams Fan
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 11:13 am
Posts: 14544
Location: LA / NYC
|
This was a very good film. Visually stunning and full of fantastic performances.
B+
|
| Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:30 am |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 6 posts ] |
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 67 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
|
|
