MovieChat Forums > ebertfan91 > Replies
ebertfan91's Replies
[quote]At the beginning of the movie, I focused on the words, allowing myself to settle into the rhythms of the conversation between these old friends getting re-acquainted. Over time, however, I found myself becoming less interested in what the characters are saying and more intrigued by how Malle chooses to present the conversation: shot selection, editing close-ups into the master shots, etc. Expressions and reactions (especially Shawn’s, because much of his emoting occurs without words) are of paramount importance. Although My Dinner with Andre may be of minimal interest to mainstream movie-going audiences in the 2020s, it should be required viewing for would-be actors and behind-the-camera craftspeople. Although what Gregory and Shawn have to say may have lost a share of its relevance, how it’s presented offers a clinic in the importance of the non-verbal aspects of filmmaking.[/quote]
[quote]Originally, Donen wanted an established actress (albeit a young one) to play Jennifer but the nudity (which he was upfront about) scared potential choices away. At the time, Michelle Johnson was a model and he was captivated when he saw her on the cover of a magazine. Looks, therefore, became the prime motivation for hiring her. Her inability to act wasn’t taken into account. Granted, she looks great (with or without clothing) but her thespian abilities are threadbare (as evidenced by her post-Rio filmography, which was highlighted by a stint on The Love Boat). Her reason for making the film was that she felt it might advance her career. Thinking about this, I get distinct vibes of Elizabeth Berkeley and Showgirls.
For Stanley Donen, this marked the end of a career that spanned 35 years. It wasn’t the last time he would be behind the camera – he subsequently directed an episode of the TV series “Moonlighting,” a music video (Lionel Richie’s “Dancing on the Ceiling”), and a made-for-TV-movie (1999’s Love Letters) – but this was his last theatrical offering. As swansongs go, this was lamentable. For Michael Caine, it was a bump in the road, a paycheck to cash. Two years later, he would win an Oscar. A year after that, he would make Jaws: The Revenge, probably the only movie on his filmography to contend with Blame it on Rio as the worst thing he made. (Although he had a great quote about the Jaws sequel: “I have never seen it, but by all accounts it is terrible. However, I have seen the house that it built, and it is terrific.”)
A lot of bad 1980s films have long since been forgotten but the co-association of Donen and Caine has kept this one floating around, like flotsam in a stream of sewage. Sometimes, bad old movies can be enjoyable to revisit but that’s not really the case with Blame it on Rio. It’s so misbegotten and awkward that it’s better being left ignored.[/quote]
#1 on his Top 10 of the year:
[url]https://www.reelviews.net/reelthoughts/reelthought_1704292333[/url]
#2 on his Top 10 of the year:
[url]https://www.reelviews.net/reelthoughts/reelthought_1704292333[/url]
#3 on his Top 10 of the year:
[url]https://www.reelviews.net/reelthoughts/reelthought_1704292333[/url]
#4 on his Top 10 of the year:
[url]https://www.reelviews.net/reelthoughts/reelthought_1704292333[/url]
#5 on his Top 10 of the year:
[url]https://www.reelviews.net/reelthoughts/reelthought_1704292333[/url]
#6 on his Top 10 of the year:
[url]https://www.reelviews.net/reelthoughts/reelthought_1704292333[/url]
#7 on his Top 10 of the year:
[url]https://www.reelviews.net/reelthoughts/reelthought_1704292333[/url]
#8 on his Top 10 of the year:
[url]https://www.reelviews.net/reelthoughts/reelthought_1704292333[/url]
#9 on his Top 10 of the year:
[url]https://www.reelviews.net/reelthoughts/reelthought_1704292333[/url]
#10 on his Top 10 of the year:
[url]https://www.reelviews.net/reelthoughts/reelthought_1704292333[/url]
#1 on his Bottom 5 of the year:
[url]https://www.reelviews.net/reelthoughts/reelthought_1704292333[/url]
#2 on his Bottom 5 of the year:
[url]https://www.reelviews.net/reelthoughts/reelthought_1704292333[/url]
#3 on his Bottom 5 of the year:
[url]https://www.reelviews.net/reelthoughts/reelthought_1704292333[/url]
#4 on his Bottom 5 of the year:
[url]https://www.reelviews.net/reelthoughts/reelthought_1704292333[/url]
#5 on his Bottom 5 of the year:
[url]https://www.reelviews.net/reelthoughts/reelthought_1704292333[/url]
[quote]So I raise my glass to the DCEU – a decade-long cinematic excursion that, done differently, might have left behind more than a few, widely-scattered good memories. Some want to blame the pandemic for its failure but this is more a case of deep structural instability exacerbated by egomaniacal personalities and inept planning. The first Aquaman may have been low-brow fun but the second is a chore from start to finish. Momoa, we are told, will be back with DC in a different role. Hopefully this time he’ll have a screenplay worthy of his larger-than-life personality.[/quote]
[quote]One of the small pleasures of The Iron Claw comes from the way in which it pulls back the curtain to provide insights into the “fakery” that exists within wrestling. On their first date, Kevin explains the reality to Pam and we later see supposedly mortal opponents joking with one another and discussing storylines. Overall, however, while the behind-the-scenes elements add color, the way in which Durkin navigates the warped family dynamics provides The Iron Claw with its fuel and energy. This is an American tragedy. Although the participants may be famous, the demons they fight in their intimate moments are familiar and relatable.[/quote]
[quote]Artistic overreaching and almost non-existent narrative aside, The Zone of Interest is powerful in the way it depicts the Holocaust and the ability of seemingly normal people to compartmentalize the evil of their actions. This is one of the most effective depictions of Arendt’s “banality of evil” that I have seen and that’s in large part due to the unconventional tactics employed by Glazer in bringing this story to the screen.[/quote]