I have watched many versions of this, my favorite story of all time, and have found this to be the best, most comprehensive version ever. Yes, the lighting is bad and it is filmed on video tape, but unlike the other adaptations done by the BBC at the time (Pride & Prejudice, Sense & Sensibility, and most especially Persuasion, a version that screams the 1970's) this version has beautiful sets, beautiful characters and some of the best acting of the series. It truly is the jewel in the crown for Jane Eyre fans. While Timothy Dalton is truly too handsome to play Rochester,(remember, Rochester is supposed to be homely too) his powerful acting makes it work. He is truly a Shakespearean actor, full of fire and brimstone, as well as sweetness and heartbreak. He is the essence of the Regency era. Zelah Clarke, while not the prettiest actress to play the character, plays the character with a lot of pluck and spunk. The two actors have incredible chemistry which is very evident in the scene where Jane confronts Edward after the revelation of his mad wife. The power between these two wonderful actors reverberates off the screen. This is my favorite version because it takes the time to tell the whole story, being an 8 part miniseries, it has all of the wonderful scenes from the book which is sadly left out of most other movie versions. This is one of my favorite movies of all time and any true Jane fan will not be disappointed.
Reviews
13 Reviews
Ready to Wear
(1994)
This movie sucked! SPOILER...
17 October 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I hated this movie, and to be honest, I don't know why I am posting a comment about it all these years later.
This movie went on and on and on for what seemed like an eternity. I never did quite understand the plot and even Julia Roberts presence couldn't save this turkey for me.
**SPOILER-The ending with all of the naked models walking down the runway grossed me out and made what was already an awful experience even worse.
Save your money, this is another Hollywood bomb made by people just out to impress themselves rather than an audience. Yuck!
This movie went on and on and on for what seemed like an eternity. I never did quite understand the plot and even Julia Roberts presence couldn't save this turkey for me.
**SPOILER-The ending with all of the naked models walking down the runway grossed me out and made what was already an awful experience even worse.
Save your money, this is another Hollywood bomb made by people just out to impress themselves rather than an audience. Yuck!
You've Got Mail
(1998)
Hated this movie
1 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Okay, maybe I don't hate it as much today as I did when I first saw it.
When I learned they were making a modern day version of my favorite movie "The Shop Around The Corner", (actually, I love the musical version with Judy Garland much better, titled "In The Good Old Summertime"), I was so happy.
Then I saw it, and with the exception of the scene where Tom Hanks and Dave Chappell first see that Meg Ryan is his email pal, while she is waiting for him in a restaurant, the whole movie is completely different, and not for the better if you ask me.
First of all, I would never, ever forgive anyone who shut down my mother's beloved shop, I don't care if he is Tom Hanks.
Second, the movie doesn't have what I think is one of the best elements of both the original and the musical version, these were two ordinary people leading ordinary lives. The male character was a struggling salesman who works hard to impress his manager, a hard, but vulnerable man. And the woman was desperate to get a job for the holiday season and when the male refuses to give her a job, she goes right over his head and gets it from his boss, thus setting up a great rivalry between them. And while there was some rivalry between Tom and Meg's characters, there was no passion, or real sexual tension between them.
This is a typical, Nora Ephron movie. Taking something that wasn't broke and making it worse.
Too bad.
When I learned they were making a modern day version of my favorite movie "The Shop Around The Corner", (actually, I love the musical version with Judy Garland much better, titled "In The Good Old Summertime"), I was so happy.
Then I saw it, and with the exception of the scene where Tom Hanks and Dave Chappell first see that Meg Ryan is his email pal, while she is waiting for him in a restaurant, the whole movie is completely different, and not for the better if you ask me.
First of all, I would never, ever forgive anyone who shut down my mother's beloved shop, I don't care if he is Tom Hanks.
Second, the movie doesn't have what I think is one of the best elements of both the original and the musical version, these were two ordinary people leading ordinary lives. The male character was a struggling salesman who works hard to impress his manager, a hard, but vulnerable man. And the woman was desperate to get a job for the holiday season and when the male refuses to give her a job, she goes right over his head and gets it from his boss, thus setting up a great rivalry between them. And while there was some rivalry between Tom and Meg's characters, there was no passion, or real sexual tension between them.
This is a typical, Nora Ephron movie. Taking something that wasn't broke and making it worse.
Too bad.
One of my favorites
9 October 2005
This is one of my favorite movies. It's a nice portrait of a show business family. It's a little on the corny side, but that's what's great about it. This is a great look at a family that began in Vaudeville, and worked their way up to headliners in their own act. The Film does a good job portraying the families closeness, and while it's a little hard to swallow a good looking actor like Dan Daily with someone like Ethel Merman for a wife, the two share a definite chemistry and a lot of humor.
This is probably the best that Ethel Merman ever looked and she is fantastic as the family matriarch and her comic talents work great with her hard-to-handle brood.
Although her part is pretty much left to singing and dancing, Mitzi Gaynor gives a spirited performance that we later see her give in the hit movie "South Pacific" as Nellie Forbush.
Donald O'Connor takes a more dramatic turn as the troubled son Tim. I have to admit, while some of his attempts to act like a drunk are a little hard to believe, his performance is one of his best, and his dancing in the film is almost as good as it was in "Singing In The Rain".
The odd duck out is the eldest brother Johnny Ray, who could certainly belt out a song with all the flamboyance and gusto that made him a star in the fifties. However, his acting skills left a lot to be desired. Still, his bad acting works for the character who was struggling to find his own identity when he decides becomes a priest. Perhaps Johnnie projected his own struggles with his bisexuality to guide him.
The most memorable aspect of this movie is Marilyn Monroe, who star was at it's zenith when this movie was being made. In a smart move, Monroe agreed to star in the film if the studio allowed her to also star in "The Seven Year Itch", but in a lot of ways, I feel this is one of her best movies.
First of all, she was clearly head and shoulders above the rest of the cast in terms of molten sexuality.
An example is in the number "Heatwave", which was initially intended for Mitzi Gaynor. The studio made a wise decision handing it over to Monroe who performed the number with so much heat that it's hard to envision the sweet Gaynor conveying that kind of performance.
The number "After you get what you want you don't want it" was also a standout and Marylin's costume was amazing and a precursor to the outfit Britney Spears would later make famous.
Marilyn also brings her tremendous vulnerability that no other comic actress could convey with believability, Marilyn could play wounded characters, perhaps because she was so wounded herself.
Watching her character suffer over her love for Tim and her desire for a career is very believable.
For me, the most amazing part of this movie are the gorgeous costumes. This movie, surprisingly has fantastic costumes made by the famous Travilla, who had already worked with Marilyn in almost all of her films including "River Of No Return", "Monkey Business" as well as "Gentleman Prefer Blondes" and "The Seven Year Itch".
Every costume seemed tailor made for every character.
This is a treat of a movie, with great music, great dancing, wonderful costumes and mostly Marilyn, who proves she could make anything work. It ranks right up there with some of her greatest work.
This is probably the best that Ethel Merman ever looked and she is fantastic as the family matriarch and her comic talents work great with her hard-to-handle brood.
Although her part is pretty much left to singing and dancing, Mitzi Gaynor gives a spirited performance that we later see her give in the hit movie "South Pacific" as Nellie Forbush.
Donald O'Connor takes a more dramatic turn as the troubled son Tim. I have to admit, while some of his attempts to act like a drunk are a little hard to believe, his performance is one of his best, and his dancing in the film is almost as good as it was in "Singing In The Rain".
The odd duck out is the eldest brother Johnny Ray, who could certainly belt out a song with all the flamboyance and gusto that made him a star in the fifties. However, his acting skills left a lot to be desired. Still, his bad acting works for the character who was struggling to find his own identity when he decides becomes a priest. Perhaps Johnnie projected his own struggles with his bisexuality to guide him.
The most memorable aspect of this movie is Marilyn Monroe, who star was at it's zenith when this movie was being made. In a smart move, Monroe agreed to star in the film if the studio allowed her to also star in "The Seven Year Itch", but in a lot of ways, I feel this is one of her best movies.
First of all, she was clearly head and shoulders above the rest of the cast in terms of molten sexuality.
An example is in the number "Heatwave", which was initially intended for Mitzi Gaynor. The studio made a wise decision handing it over to Monroe who performed the number with so much heat that it's hard to envision the sweet Gaynor conveying that kind of performance.
The number "After you get what you want you don't want it" was also a standout and Marylin's costume was amazing and a precursor to the outfit Britney Spears would later make famous.
Marilyn also brings her tremendous vulnerability that no other comic actress could convey with believability, Marilyn could play wounded characters, perhaps because she was so wounded herself.
Watching her character suffer over her love for Tim and her desire for a career is very believable.
For me, the most amazing part of this movie are the gorgeous costumes. This movie, surprisingly has fantastic costumes made by the famous Travilla, who had already worked with Marilyn in almost all of her films including "River Of No Return", "Monkey Business" as well as "Gentleman Prefer Blondes" and "The Seven Year Itch".
Every costume seemed tailor made for every character.
This is a treat of a movie, with great music, great dancing, wonderful costumes and mostly Marilyn, who proves she could make anything work. It ranks right up there with some of her greatest work.
Jewels
(1992)
Great movie, not as good as book-some spoilers
7 May 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I remember reading the book Jewels a long time ago. I was going through a Danielle Steel faze and fell in love with this book.
So I was thrilled when they made a movie about it.
I have to admit, I loved the first part of the movie best. The romance between Sarah and William was my favorite part in the book and in the movie.
My other favorite aspect of the movie was Anthony Andrews as William. I love this actor, ever since I saw him as a kid in two movies I loved, Ivanhoe and The Scarlett Pimpernel. Casting him in the role of William Whitfield lent the TV melodrama a real sense of legitimacy. He is a great actor, and the perfect choice to play the Duke. Not only is he devastatingly handsome, he has a great sense of humor. You first saw it in The Scarlet Pimpernel, and was very important for this movie.
I say that hesitantly though because I have to say that I was very disappointed that almost all of the humor shared between William and Sarah was taken out of the movie. I remember when I read the book, I had tears rolling down my cheeks because I was laughing so hard. And I was horrified to hear only one or two lines from the book shared between both characters.
While I loved Anthony Andrews as William, I was not as certain about the actress playing Sarah. I like Annette O'Toole, I really do, but I didn't in this movie. I felt her acting was too over the top in some scenes and she was described much differently in the book and maybe I was too influenced by that description to really enjoy the performance. I found Annette's shaking her head from side to side to be too distracting.
Like the book, I lost interest during the Nazi invasion, and there was another major change. In the book, the character of Philip actually loved the character of Joachim Von Mannheim, the Nazi who had taken over the château during the war, but in the movie, he hated him.
The rest of the story involving the children interested me even less. With the exception of the brothers all being cute, the last part of the movie was very boring. Typical spoiled brats all making huge mistakes, hurting their mother.
Spoiler:
The ending was the dumbest I have ever seen for a miniseries. The idea that Julian would associate not only with his brother, but his ex-wife, who left Julian for Philip, and gave him their son, without caring a thing about it was ludicrous. There was the whole family, at a christening, including Philip and Julian's ex-wife, standing next to her son, and everyone is happily smiling at one another. Please!
This ending did not happen in the book, and I was very disappointed by it.
This is really the Jewel in the crown of all Danielle Steel novels made into a TV movie. But for anyone who read the book and loved it like me, there are some big disappointments.
Still a good watch, very romantic in many places.
So I was thrilled when they made a movie about it.
I have to admit, I loved the first part of the movie best. The romance between Sarah and William was my favorite part in the book and in the movie.
My other favorite aspect of the movie was Anthony Andrews as William. I love this actor, ever since I saw him as a kid in two movies I loved, Ivanhoe and The Scarlett Pimpernel. Casting him in the role of William Whitfield lent the TV melodrama a real sense of legitimacy. He is a great actor, and the perfect choice to play the Duke. Not only is he devastatingly handsome, he has a great sense of humor. You first saw it in The Scarlet Pimpernel, and was very important for this movie.
I say that hesitantly though because I have to say that I was very disappointed that almost all of the humor shared between William and Sarah was taken out of the movie. I remember when I read the book, I had tears rolling down my cheeks because I was laughing so hard. And I was horrified to hear only one or two lines from the book shared between both characters.
While I loved Anthony Andrews as William, I was not as certain about the actress playing Sarah. I like Annette O'Toole, I really do, but I didn't in this movie. I felt her acting was too over the top in some scenes and she was described much differently in the book and maybe I was too influenced by that description to really enjoy the performance. I found Annette's shaking her head from side to side to be too distracting.
Like the book, I lost interest during the Nazi invasion, and there was another major change. In the book, the character of Philip actually loved the character of Joachim Von Mannheim, the Nazi who had taken over the château during the war, but in the movie, he hated him.
The rest of the story involving the children interested me even less. With the exception of the brothers all being cute, the last part of the movie was very boring. Typical spoiled brats all making huge mistakes, hurting their mother.
Spoiler:
The ending was the dumbest I have ever seen for a miniseries. The idea that Julian would associate not only with his brother, but his ex-wife, who left Julian for Philip, and gave him their son, without caring a thing about it was ludicrous. There was the whole family, at a christening, including Philip and Julian's ex-wife, standing next to her son, and everyone is happily smiling at one another. Please!
This ending did not happen in the book, and I was very disappointed by it.
This is really the Jewel in the crown of all Danielle Steel novels made into a TV movie. But for anyone who read the book and loved it like me, there are some big disappointments.
Still a good watch, very romantic in many places.
Shall We Dance?
(2004)
One of the best movies I have ever seen!
28 October 2004
Don't listen to the naysayers! This movie was awesome from beginning to end.
Not having seen the Japanese version, I didn't come in with any preconceptions.
Also, not being a huge Richard Gere fan, I wasn't that enthused.
But this movie was a delight. I can't remember having so much fun.
All the characters were funny and I laughed so hard I almost cried at some of the funny moments in the movie.
And Richards scenes with Susan were touching and romantic.
I loved, loved, loved this movie and recommend it highly...
Not having seen the Japanese version, I didn't come in with any preconceptions.
Also, not being a huge Richard Gere fan, I wasn't that enthused.
But this movie was a delight. I can't remember having so much fun.
All the characters were funny and I laughed so hard I almost cried at some of the funny moments in the movie.
And Richards scenes with Susan were touching and romantic.
I loved, loved, loved this movie and recommend it highly...
Tipping the Velvet
(2002)
Don't be fooled....
24 October 2004
First, let me say that I liked this movie very much. Although I thought it had all the look and feel of a typical period piece, it's story was a bit racier and was very touching (pardon the pun) in many places. In particular, between the latter romance between Nan and Florence. And I thought the performance on Rachael Stirling, though a bit stilted and wooden at times, became sensitive and impressive towards the end.
Still, I have read some of the other comments on here that state that this is not a lesbian movie, and all I have to say that if this isn't a lesbian movie, then I don't know what is..
There are, to say the least, some very explicit love scenes, especially between Nan and Kitty, and later, between Nan and Diana, and then Nan and the maid. What I found interesting is the choice not to show anything between Nan and Florence. There was a little kissing, but nothing more. I found this interesting.
Anyway, I found the movie to be a bit interesting in places, but feel the whole "Lesbian sex" subject was just thrown in for publicity, rather than to tell a story.
It's a good movie, but not a great one.
Still, I have read some of the other comments on here that state that this is not a lesbian movie, and all I have to say that if this isn't a lesbian movie, then I don't know what is..
There are, to say the least, some very explicit love scenes, especially between Nan and Kitty, and later, between Nan and Diana, and then Nan and the maid. What I found interesting is the choice not to show anything between Nan and Florence. There was a little kissing, but nothing more. I found this interesting.
Anyway, I found the movie to be a bit interesting in places, but feel the whole "Lesbian sex" subject was just thrown in for publicity, rather than to tell a story.
It's a good movie, but not a great one.
Helter Skelter
(2004 TV Movie)
Boy This Movie Stunk!
17 May 2004
When I heard that there was to be a remake of the movie Helter Skelter, I was curious and excited. I have always had a mild fascination with the so-called Manson family, and thought the original film of Helter Skelter, that was a riveting, fact based movie that gave us a glimpse of not only the disgusting work of the twisted "family", in the murders of Sharon Tate and the LaBianca's, but it also provided us with some great courtroom scenes as well. This movie fell far short. The movie showed us glimpses of the horrible murders, but seemed to focus primarily on two people, Charles Manson and Linda Kasabian. There were some scenes involving Roman Polanski (and the actor playing him was awesome, could have been Polanski's twin), but mostly the movie revolved around Charles Manson's fake, rambling and thorougly annoying speeches. While I do admit that Jeremy Davis gave a pretty dead on impression of the modern day
psycho, I began to find his stares and long arduous monolouges boring and it began to get on my nerves. While the character of Linda Kasabian did nothing but stare in horror the whole time. The worst part of the whole movie was that the entire trial of the whole movie was left out! How can this be? This was the most interesting part of the whole story. Charles defending himself, the women chanting, shaving their heads etc. There was so much to this story that was left out that it felt incomplete. This was supposed to be a remake of the original movie? It was nothing like it. And even if it wasn't, did it have to leave out so much? Instead of focusing so much on the gorey details, the movie should have focused more on the trial and outcome of the movie, how it affected the familys, and where they are today. This was a boring, nonsensical waste of time, and a waste of a great story.
psycho, I began to find his stares and long arduous monolouges boring and it began to get on my nerves. While the character of Linda Kasabian did nothing but stare in horror the whole time. The worst part of the whole movie was that the entire trial of the whole movie was left out! How can this be? This was the most interesting part of the whole story. Charles defending himself, the women chanting, shaving their heads etc. There was so much to this story that was left out that it felt incomplete. This was supposed to be a remake of the original movie? It was nothing like it. And even if it wasn't, did it have to leave out so much? Instead of focusing so much on the gorey details, the movie should have focused more on the trial and outcome of the movie, how it affected the familys, and where they are today. This was a boring, nonsensical waste of time, and a waste of a great story.
Excalibur
(1981)
Don't listen to the first review
24 March 2004
I don't know what the first reviewer was smoking, but don't listen to his review. This is probably one of the, if not the best movie about King Arthur ever made. I have seen a bunch of movies about King Arthur and none come close to this version. This one smokes all others out of the water. There are some stories from King Arthur that didn't make it into this movie, but considering all the material they had to cover, I think they did a great job. I loved Nicole Williamson, Helen Mirren was riveting as a sexy Morgana and Nigel Terry was awesome, playing Arthur from boy to manhood. And the soundtrack is especially stirring. The scenes with the knights racing across a green field with the sounds of, "O Fortuna" from Carmina Burana playing in the background. I love this movie and always will. Give it a try, you won't be sorry.
The Glass Slipper
(1955)
One of the best Cinderella stories ever!
15 February 2004
I can't remember when I first saw this movie, but it was one of those movies that you can remember somewhere in the back of your mind. Then someone gave me a copy of it years later and it all came back. In terms of scripts, well, it's not the best written movie there is. Some of the actors seem a little out of place, including Leslie Caron. Although she's adorable, and can dance like no one else can, she is difficult to understand. And though the story of Cinderella is a french tale, and the story is set in France, Caron is mixed in with English and American actors, and sometimes has difficulty getting the words out. And the character actor Keenan Wynn, while not offensive seems an odd choice as a French Duke. But the musical numbers are spectacular, not to mention the ballgown that Ella "borrows" for the ball. This is such a good movie and I can't wait for it to come out on DVD.
It's magical, colorful and makes you believe in fairytales..
It's magical, colorful and makes you believe in fairytales..
Boogie Nights
(1997)
Awful!
10 February 2004
Knowing this was a movie about the porn industry, I was persuaded to watch it by people who saw it and liked it. But I was appalled. This was the grossest movie I have ever seen. For all the bru-ha ha about how wonderful this movie is, I found it to be nothing more than a more glorified porn movie. Shame on Julianne Moore and Mark Wahlberg for participating in this movie. The porno scenes were graphic and disgusting. The end scene was the grossest thing I have ever seen. I know Hollywood is constantly into pushing the envelope but why does it feel it necessary to venture into a genre that already has more movies than we need. Yuck!
Grease 2
(1982)
I love this movie!
25 January 2004
Don't let the naysayers fool you. No, this movie wasn't as good as the original, but I loved it just as, well, nearly as much as the first.
I have to admit, I wasn't wild about the whole biker-in-disguise bit, but if you can get away from that, and the fact that most of the students look like they should be graduating from college, not high-school, this is a heck of a good movie. The big problem with this movie, is that none of the music had the feel of the sixties to it. It had some good, but generic music. Although I admit to loving two of the movies songs, "Cool Rider" was my absolute favorite. So many girls I know have expressed how they saw themselves as Stephanie Zinone, climbing that ladder, lamenting for her Cool Rider fantasy lover. The second is the "Girl For All Seasons" number, I just wished they had finished it, before launching into the laughable "Biker Heaven" sequence.
Michelle Pfeiffer may be embarrassed by this movie. But this fan isn't embarrassed to say how much she loves it and how much pleasure it brought to me as a child. Go Grease 2! You rock!
I have to admit, I wasn't wild about the whole biker-in-disguise bit, but if you can get away from that, and the fact that most of the students look like they should be graduating from college, not high-school, this is a heck of a good movie. The big problem with this movie, is that none of the music had the feel of the sixties to it. It had some good, but generic music. Although I admit to loving two of the movies songs, "Cool Rider" was my absolute favorite. So many girls I know have expressed how they saw themselves as Stephanie Zinone, climbing that ladder, lamenting for her Cool Rider fantasy lover. The second is the "Girl For All Seasons" number, I just wished they had finished it, before launching into the laughable "Biker Heaven" sequence.
Michelle Pfeiffer may be embarrassed by this movie. But this fan isn't embarrassed to say how much she loves it and how much pleasure it brought to me as a child. Go Grease 2! You rock!
One Of The Best Movies Ever Made
14 August 2003
I don't care what some of the so so-called critics have to say about LOTR's. Peter Jackson's film is a visual delight and stays as true to the spirit of Tolkien's novels as anyone ever has. Beginning with the happy beauty of the Shire to the most amazing battle scenes ever filmed, this movie is a feast for the eyes. The cast is spectacular and work well together. The movie has a wonderful mix of the latest technology and good old-fashioned storytelling. So don't be fooled by the nay-sayers. This movie is definitely worth the watch!
Tell Your Friends