Sergio Leone Web Board
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 28, 2022, 11:22:27 AM
:


Show Posts

* Messages | Topics | Attachments

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - titoli

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 609
2
The Split, watched it the other day it was OK, nothing special, don't have to watch it again.

Me too, as I wrote in my mini-review.

3
Once Upon A Time In The West / This was published in 1915
« on: November 26, 2022, 04:06:31 AM »

4
Off-Topic Discussion / Mise a' sac (1967)
« on: November 24, 2022, 12:56:06 AM »
Well, it is noir because it is almost entirely shot at night. But Parker (Michel Constantin: he surely could play the character) is hardly the protagonist as this is about a caper involving  a gang of criminals emptying various safes in a little town after having captured cops, firemen and what else. The first hour passes without tension, just showing the criminals at work. It's in the last half hour, when the usual idiot who organized the coup but who's actually out there for revenge starts the chain reaction which will cause the failure of the enterprise, that the action develops. 6-7/10. On youtube

5
In the meantime I can say I really don't remember if the novel's plot was similar to the movie's, with Parker (Peter Coyote: come on. He could play some soft-hearted PI, not a strong character like this one) being haunted by a professional killer hired to kill him for revenge. The last sequence in the amusement park it's effective though longish. The pace is a bit slow in the middle (the search for his friend) but I give it a 6-7/10 anyway.

6
Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Li'l Duce's Reviews Palace
« on: November 23, 2022, 01:14:53 AM »
Mary Poppins Returns  (2018) I didn't expect much musically: the original had the best score for any Disney movie ever, in the same league as some of the best Broadway musicals: hard to get even near. Songs were just run-of-the-mill stuff, thank God in line with classic american song tradition instead of some rap or rock stuff: at least the fact that the movie is set in the 30's of last century provided a stop to that insult. But the unexpected minus came from casting: only 1 out of the 4 leads is right for the (little) part: the other three just shouldn't be there. Emily Mortimer looks pretty and I can imagine she's an adult Jane Banks. But the fella playing her brother, apart from not looking like an adult Michael Banks if you're familiar with the original, just doesn't look right for the part: lomg-haired and big mustached and too nervous acting: it just doen't rhyme with the character. So we come to the substitute for the Van Dyke part, here a street-lighter. In the movie we are told 2 or 3 times that he's "beautiful": uh? He's anonymous at best and thee is not a single element to make him remarkable. How he ended up in business is a mystery. And finally Mary. To play this character you must have a girl who looks pretty, with delicate, gentle features as she must look funny while playing an apparently strict nanny. Emily Blunt looks like a Swiss governess, she hasn't got a particularly pretty face, she's tall and strong looking like a British guard: so all the point of the character gets lost. So one should be left with the CGE. Nothing special there, too. Actually, when you compare the sequence of the music hall with the one of street picture in the original (both adopting the humans with drawn characters) you easily realize how much of inventiveness in the drawings of the characters was there. Meryl Streep (an actress I have always detested) has been assigned the weakest number and she does nothing to elevate it. Van Dyke and Lansbury inject a small touch of vitality in the scheme and the last number, the one with the balloons is  visually superior to the Let's Fly a Kite in the original as it probably is the  Street-Lighters choreography compared to the Step in Time one: but musically those numbers were  of another class, of course. 6/10

7
Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Li'l Duce's Reviews Palace
« on: November 22, 2022, 02:53:17 PM »
Thor: Ragnarok (2017) It is chromatically attractive but only the fight in the arena between Thor and Hulk is notable, the rest is the usual fare. 6/10

8
I didn't count the two french ones because the Godard simply sucks (the other one I'll check). About The Split: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgm9QUsKB2M. Slayground and Parker shouldn't be so hard for you to get.

9
Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Li'l Duce's Reviews Palace
« on: November 22, 2022, 09:09:43 AM »
The Split (1968) Whoever made the casting should have won an Oscar: it was just incredible. The problem is with Jim Brown: he was not an actor and it shows, alas. And then, it's a B movie and it shows but it must be seen not only because it's a Parker movie but because of the 2-3 actors involved who will be Stars 3-4 years later. And then: Carroll is simply the '60's Lena Horneand Harris is playing against type. 6/10 

10
Off-Topic Discussion / Parker (2013) Best action movie of the Millennium?
« on: November 21, 2022, 05:54:34 PM »
I can't say because, of course, I haven't watched the others, or at least the great part of them. This is the 5th movie based on the Parker character created by Donald Westlake and although the first 2 had Marvin and Duvall playing the lead  (the third one had Jim Brown!; the fourth I have yet to watch) this is the first one which renders justice to the spirit of the series. And Statham, though he may lack the screen presence of the first two, it fits perfectly in the no-frills approach the director and the the script writers have adopted toward the story. The movie is good from the very first shot to the last one; I had feared that JLo might be a minus and instead she adds to the final result (I have read all the series of 27 novels 3-4 years ago, but I can't seem to remember her character: if it was created from the screenplayer kudos to him). The criticisms I could levy toward the movie are very few but they are minor ones and all of them are anyway debatable. So this is 10/10. Visually I don't think this can be considered a neonoir or whatever you may want to call it, but as the story is, of course, noir as can be, I'll be waiting for Judge Cigar to settle the matter.     

11
Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Li'l Duce's Reviews Palace
« on: November 20, 2022, 09:28:31 PM »
Thor: The Dark World (2013)  This one has got the London fight which is good. I was about to give it a 7/10 but the unexpected finale raise it to 7-8/10.

12
Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Thor (2011)
« on: November 20, 2022, 07:19:14 PM »
Thought I had reviewed it but the search says I didn't. Rewatching it I realized it was directed by Branagh and it shows in the narrative pace and in the care (at least what  comic book heroes can allow) in rounding just a little more than usual the characters. One thing that I can'y understand in the series is how Loki manages to survive his demise here. Probably an explanation is given in one of the 22 movies of the Marvel saga but I must have missed it so far. A minus is Natalie Portman, who looks like a Margot Kidder's little sister: how these girls made it in the business is a mystery. 7-8/10

13
Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Li'l Duce's Reviews Palace
« on: November 20, 2022, 02:58:12 PM »
Captain Marvel (2019) At IMDB some say that this starts slowly and then acquires momentum. For me is the other way round: as many other movie based on the hero who doesn't remember the past and what the plot is all about, this is interesting in the first part and loses speed in the second half.  6-7/10 because of Jackson as an early Fury.

14
Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Li'l Duce's Reviews Palace
« on: November 20, 2022, 10:53:48 AM »
Avengers: Infinity War (2018)  I see that at IMDB they agree with me; it's better than Endgame and one of the best Marvel. The pace is fast, action scenes effective and  dialogues, sentimental relationship and everything that slows down the story disposed of fast. 8/10

15
Off-Topic Discussion / Re: Li'l Duce's Reviews Palace
« on: November 20, 2022, 02:49:16 AM »
X-Men: Dark Phoenix (2019) The problem with this one is, even more than the two final combat scenes, one between the two factions of mutants and the other with mutants vs. aliens, both shot in the dark, the fact that the aliens are terrible only in the short scenes when they deal with defenceless humans. So one doesn't know what kind of power they have that might be a threat to the mutants. 6/10

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 609



Visit FISTFUL-OF-LEONE.COM

SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
0.10142