Citizen Rules...Cinemaesque Chat-n-Review

I second that! It's a great film. I'm wanting to watch it again and I usually don't do that. I requested 2 more Candy films. One that you mentioned, Summer Rental and forgot the title of the other one. It's not a well known film.

You've made me want to watch it again too, Rules! I originally saw it in the theater. I've seen bits of it on TV over the years but don't think I've ever sat down and watched the whole thing again - so it's time for a re-watch. One thing I do know - I'm always a mess at the end!

Cool Runnings is "cool." I think it was one of the few (if any) John Candy starred in that was based on a true story. (He appeared in JFK, but that was just a cameo, but what a cameo - John was totally unlike the usual characters he played. He had the ability to be dramatic.

I always remember the scene in Splash where John lays into his brother (Tom Hanks) about how lucky he really is - the movie is a comedy, and John is comic relief in it, but he shines in that one dramatic moment where he stops being funny and exposes his character's inner loneliness and vulnerability.

You know I've never seen Splash and I only seen Cool Runnings once back when it came out...so you might as well say I never seen it. Two films that I'm going to watch.

I'm working my way through both John Candy films and John Hughes. I got to get back to finishing off Molly Ringwald. Then I might work on Steve Martin.

Pure Luck (1991)
Director: Nadia Tass
Cast: Martin Short, Danny Glover, Sheila Kelley
Genre: Comedy

Synopsis (spoiler free): A beautiful but klutzy, bad luck daughter of a wealthy businessman mysteriously disappears while vacating in Mexico. No one can find her so a psychologist is called in to help. He comes to the conclusion that the only way to find her is to send another person to look for her who has just as much bad luck as she does. That person is an employee of the businessman, perennial bad luck man, Marin Short.

Review: What's wrong with a movie being watched just for the fun of it? Nothing! Pure Luck is intended to be pure fun. It's not trying to be anything other than entertainment and it succeeds brilliantly. I was instantly interested in the story line and the characters and cared what happened to them, as silly as they might seem. The time flew by as I watched this. At no time was I bored or did I lose interest in this zany movie.

The missing girl who has bad luck was brilliantly cast with Sheila Kelley. She looks the part and is as klutzy as she is pretty.

Martin Short is a funny guy, all he has to do is show up on the set and he's funny. His character is likable in this movie. This is also a buddy film, so his side kick Danny Glover needs to balance out Short's funny persona and Glover is perfect at doing that. He's stern, he's grumpy and annoyed at Martin Short, but at heart he's a good guy too.


I liked the real on location shooting in Acapulco, what a beautiful place to set the film and it makes a big difference too. It's clear they spent some money on this film and it really looks good. But most importantly it's funny.

Attachments

   

I liked Pure Luck more than I thought I would; it's good, easy fun.

I'm willing to give Planes, Trains and Automobiles a chance. I have nothing against John Candy or his movies. I just haven't seen any of them because they don't seem like my type of humor. But you never know. I've been surprised by movies before, so I'll add this to my watchlist.

I watched Pure Luck for the Comedy HoF. I thought it was a pretty good movie, but I didn't find it very funny. There were some funny scenes, but basically it was just an enjoyable movie with some chuckles and grins, but no real laugh-out-loud moments.

Mon Oncle (1958)
Director: Jacques Tati
Cast: Jacques Tati, Jean-Pierre Zola, Adrienne Servantie
Genre: Comedy
Language: French
Length: 117 minutes

Mon Oncle (My Uncle) is about Monsieur Hulot, a simply, older man who visits the technology advanced home of his sister and her husband. Hulot bonds with his nephew but he can't quite get the hang of the new modern house. To make things more difficult his brother-in-law, who's the manager of a modern plastics factory, gives the older man a job at his high tech factory. Monsieur Hulot is completely out of his element.


I really liked this one! I found it simplistically charming in it's story telling. It's not an intimate film but shows us life from afar, that takes place in and around the ultra-mod house.

I was impressed with the attention to the color palette used in the art/set decorations. Vincente Minnelli would have been impressed with the look of this film. The entire movie looks great with it's ultra modern 1950s look.

The uncle reminds me of a Buster Keaton character in how he's a bit of an eccentric who's content in his own world but thanks to his sister's instances he ends up in the modern world of plastic manufacturing. A world he's ill equipped for, hence the juxtaposition.

Like most comedies I didn't burst out in laughter and that's OK as Mon Oncle has it's own quiet charm.

Attachments

 

Is Mon Oncle the movie that was in the Comedy HoF recently?

Yes. Did you watch that one? It was one of my favorite films out of all the comedy Hof noms and was very high on my list.

I have some unfinished reviews that I will be posting in the near future, (once I finish them of course) and they will be of the films I seen in the Comedy Hof.

No, I haven't watched it yet, but it was one of the few movies in that HoF that got good reviews, so it's on my watchlist for the 1950s countdown.

Director: Mel Brooks
Writers: Gene Wilder, Mel Brooks
Cast: Gene Wilder, Madeline Kahn, Marty Feldman, Terri Garr, Peter Boyle, Cloris Leachman
Genre: Comedy


Dr. Frankenstein (Gene Wilder) is the modern day American grandson of the infamous scientist who created the original 'Frankenstein's monster'. In an attempt to prove that his ideas are not crazy, young Dr. Frankenstein travels to his ancestral home and takes up residents in the old family castle. There he discovers his grandfathers recipe for reanimating the dead.

I loved the look of this film, there were many nods to the film making of the early 1930s. Of course the most visible 30s retro look is Mel Brooks' decision to shoot in glorious black & white. I love black & white for a subject like this one. With all of the extraneous colors stripped out we're left with form, texture and shadows. The film becomes dream like and the lighting can readily show the texture of the old castle's bricks or the frazzled hair of Dr Frankenstein after he has emerged from the act of creation. Black & White allows side and back lighting to work to greater effect...it makes the movie great.

Another nod to the serials and matinee films of the 1930s was the scene transition wipes. The wipes come when one scene ends and another begins. There are all sorts of cool scene wipes used: diagonal wipes, shrink to a hole-then expand back to full screen wipes, rotating wipes. Very cool! and it shows how much care was put into this film to make it look like an authentic early 30s film.

Many of the same electronic lab equipment that was used in the original Frankenstein film was used in Young Frankenstein.


Wow! does Gene Wilder deliver some of the most dramatic dialogue ever! The man is a master of diction! I wish we had a time machine and could send Gene Wilder back to play Dr. Frankenstein in the original 1930s movie. My gawd! can you image how much more powerful that film had been with Gene Wilder belting out He's alive!

And how about Marty Feldman, he has to be one of the most memorable character actors to grace the screen as Eyegur. With stellar performances being turned in by Madeline Kahn and Cloris Leachman too.

And let's not forget the adorably cute, Terri Garr!

This is Mel Brooks and Gene Wilder at their best.

+

Attachments

     

I expect Mon Oncle to place well on the 1950s countdown. I know I liked it.

I watched Young Frankenstein for the 1970s countdown, but I just don't get the appeal of that movie. I usually like both Mel Brooks and Gene Wilder, and I've always heard how funny the movie is, so maybe my expectations were too high, but I just didn't find it funny.

I don't know, I loved it. I think it might have won the Comedy Hof too.

I thought the Comedy HoF was still open? How many people actually sent in their lists?

2 and mine was 1 of them. And yes it's still open.

I think it might be a little bit too early to predict a winner yet.

Have you guys ever seen Mel Brooks' Dracula: Dead and Loving It (1995) ?
I think it's underrated, particularly because of the success of Young Frankenstein.
Basically, Brooks did the same thing as he followed the original Tod Browning Dracula (1931) movie very closely.

Why Brooks didn't do his Dracula in black & white, I don't know. Maybe he thought it would be seen as merely capitalizing on Young Frankenstein - but it was doing that already, so why not go b&w? I think making it b&w would have made it a sequel of sorts to Young Frankenstein, but that could have been a good thing - it would have put it in a series, kind of. It would also have given it the look of the source it was spoofing.

But I think if you reversed the dates on the movies (having Dracula before Young Frankenstein) and had them both in b&w, then Brooks' Dracula would be what Young Frankenstein is today, and Young Frankenstein might be considered the lesser sequel. (Just a guess.)

Anyway, for anyone that has an appreciation for the Universal Monster movies or the works of Mel Brooks, you may find Dracula: Dead and Loving It an equal homage & almost as funny as Young Frankenstein.

I've never seen Dracula: Dead and Loving It. That title does come up from time to time and I seem to recall that GBG seen it? But I'm not known for having the best memory. Perhaps it's Leslie Nelson that keeps it from being as highly regarded as Young Frankenstein? That's not a slight on Leslie he's darn fun in the Airport movie but when I think of him I think way over the top style comedy.