Author | Message |
Perfect review of Under The Cherry Moon. Now here is a critic who saw the film for what it was:
http://dir.salon.com/ent/...9tayl.html The guy gets everything right, I would say. About time we had a coherent, and fair review of the film. All you others say Hell Yea!! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
sounds like the writer is a prince fan...thats kool...it is a mindless little prince parade | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
2freaky4church1 said: Now here is a critic who saw the film for what it was:
http://dir.salon.com/ent/...9tayl.html The guy gets everything right, I would say. About time we had a coherent, and fair review of the film. I agree that was a very nice read. Thanks! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
The article is well-crafted, but its arguments are pretty hollow:
"Prince captures the essence of '30s comedies better than any of the directors (from Peter Bogdanovich to Woody Allen) who have slavishly imitated them." "Everyone who deals with them winds up feeling three steps behind, just as the poor straights who tried to have a conversation with Groucho or Chico did." "As Christopher and his partner Tricky, Prince and Benton are something like Bob Hope and Bing Crosby doing Amos and Andy." Perhaps that's the effect that Prince was attempting to achieve but, like so much of it, the outcome falls flat. . ALT+PLS+RTN: Pure as a pane of ice. It's a gift. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
A real Prince fan would not say that..lol All you others say Hell Yea!! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
OK, so we all know that the guy just can't edit himself, but that aside, it does bug me a little when people go on about how bad a director he is. I personally think he's a pretty good director - ok, not brilliant or one of the greats by any means, but he's not terrible - the guy has a good eye. I remember having a nice little debat with Jon Bream about it once (we agreed to disagree)
If UTCM had been my debut as a director (and let's not forget that he took control of the film when it transpired that Mary Lambert just wasn't working out) I'd be more than happy with it. Hell, if his direction was good enough to impress Steven Berkoff, it's good enough for me. Can't help wonder though what the film would have turned out like with Martin Scorsese or Jean-Baptise Mondino at the helm | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I don't think the direction was dire for the most part, particularly as a first attempt - part of its charm (for me) is the two-dimensional portrayal of characters ... and people like Berkoff, Spinetti and others have spoken up for some of the qualities Prince displayed as a first-time director. (Equally, Terence Stamp didn't exactly wax lyrical about the brief experience). ALT+PLS+RTN: Pure as a pane of ice. It's a gift. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
langebleu said: I don't think the direction was dire for the most part, particularly as a first attempt - part of its charm (for me) is the two-dimensional portrayal of characters ... and people like Berkoff, Spinetti and others have spoken up for some of the qualities Prince displayed as a first-time director. (Equally, Terence Stamp didn't exactly wax lyrical about the brief experience).
Yeah, I know - I didn't think there was much point though from my pov Must meet for that tasty refreshing beverage sometime... | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |