Delila's Reviews

One chick's opinion.

Index:
2046 (2004 - Wong) 4/5
The 400 Blows (1959 - Truffaut) 4.5/5
Adam's Rib (1949 - Cukor) 4/5
Aguirre, The Wrath Of God (1972 - Herzog) 4.5/5
Angels In America (2003 - Nichols) 5/5
The Apartment (1960 - Wilder) 4.5/5
Batman Begins (2005 - Nolan)4/5
Before Sunset (2004 - Linklater) 3.5/5
Being Julia (2004 - Szabo) 2/5
Big Fish (2003 - Burton) 3/5
Brazil (1985 - Gilliam) 4.5/5
Buffalo '66 (1998 - Gallo) 4/5
Cabin in the Woods 4/5
Capturing The Friedmans (2003 - Jarecki) 4.5/5
Chopper (2000 - Dominik) 4/5
Chungking Express (1994 - Wong) 4.5/5
Crash (2004 - Haggis) 4.5/5
The Crime Of Padre Amaro (2003 - Carrera) 3/5
Dark Blue (2002 - Shelton)
Dawn Of The Dead (2004 - Snyder) 3.5/5
Day For Night (1973 - Truffaut) 3/5
The Debt (2010/1 - Madden) 4.5/5
Dirty Harry (1971 - Siegel) 4.5/5
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004 - Kaufman) 4/5
Finding Nemo (2003 - Stanton/Unkrich) 3.5/5
Finding Neverland (2004 - Forster) 4.5/5
Fitzcarraldo (1982 - Herzog) 4.5/5
Flirting With Disaster (1996 - Russell) 2.3/5
The Forgotten (2004 - Ruben) 1/5
The French Connection (1971 - Friedkin) 1/5
Garden State (2004 - Braff) 3.5/5
Genghis Blues (1999 - Belic) 4.5/5
Get Carter (1971 - Hodges) 3/5
Hamlet (2009 - Doran)
Hedwig And The Angry Inch (2001 - Mitchell) 4/5
House Of Yes (1997 - Waters) 4/5
The Hulk (2003 - Lee) 1.5/5
I Heart Huckabee's (2004 - Russell) 4/5
In the Mood for Love (2000 - Wong) 5/5
The Iron Giant (1999 - Bird) 5/5
Jean de Florette; Manon des Sources (1986 - Berri) 5/5
Kill Bill, vol. 1 (2003 - Tarantino) 3.5/5
Kill Bill, vol. 2 (2004 - Tarantino) 4/5
The Last Picture Show (1971 - Bogdanovich) 5/5
The Long Goodbye (1973 - Altman) 3/5
Lost In Translation (2003 - Coppola) 5/5
The Machinist (2004 - Anderson) 4.5/5
May (2003 - McKee) 4/5
Malena (2000 - Tornatore) 4/5
The Manchurian Candidate (1962 - Frankenheimer) 4/5
The Manchurian Candidate (2004 - Demme) 3.5/5
The Man Without A Past (2002 - Kaurismäki) 3/5
M*A*S*H (1970 - Altman) 3.5/5
Muriel's Wedding (1994 - Hogan) 3.5/5
On the Waterfront (1954 - Kazan) 5/5
The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928 - Dryer) 5/5
Phantom of the Opera (2004 - Schumacher) 3.5/5
Picnic At Hanging Rock (1975 - Weir) 3.5/5
The Player (1992 - Altman) 4.5/5
Raising Victor Vargas (2003 - Sollett) 4/5
Rebecca (1940 - Hitchcock) 5/5
Reservoir Dogs (1992 - Tarentino) 4/5
Return Of The King (2003 - Jackson) 5/5
Return To Me (2000 - Hunt) 4/5
Roxanne (1987 - Schepisi) 5/5
Session 9 (2001 - Anderson)
Shine (1996 - Hicks) 4/5
Sliding Doors (1998 - Howitt) 4.5/5
Sling Blade (1996 - Thornton) 4/5
Spider (2002 - Cronenberg) 4/5
Spiderman 2 (2004 - Raimi) 3.5/5
Strangers On A Train (1951 - Hitchcock) 4.5/5
Straw Dogs (1971 - Peckinpah) 3.5/5
Sullivan's Travels (1941 - Sturges) 4.5/5
Sweeney Todd (2007 - Burton) 4.5/5
Taxi Driver (1976 - Scorsese) 5/5
The Tick: The Entire Series (2001 - Edlund) 4/5
Troy (2004 - Petersen) 2/5
Truly Madly Deeply (1992 - Minghella) 3.5/5
Whispers of the Heart (1995 - Miyazaki) 4/5
Wit (2001 - Nichols) 2.5/5
Woman In The Dunes (1964 - Teshigahara) 4.5/5
Wordplay (2006 - Creadon) 4.5/5
XX/XY (2002 - Chick) 2/5

Related:
Roman Holiday (1953)/Lost In Translation (2003), a Comparison
The Kathy & Mo Show (live theater coming to DVD)

__________________
Review: Cabin in the Woods 8/10

Once I settled into the pace of this film, I found it fascinating. Director Werner Herzog has created historical fiction (a favorite genre of mine) about a real man named Don Lope de Aguirre, who wrote a real letter to the king of Spain, informing him that he and his company were no longer the king's subjects. The rest of this film is conjecture on the part of Herzog, mixed liberally with local elements found during the filming - a retarded flute player, a tiny tree-sloth, an unforseen flood that carried away the rafts of the film crew... All of these were added to the film, with the effect that we almost get the feel of watching a documentary. Add to that the fact that lead actor Klaus Kinski shared a drive and a madness to rival his character, and you have a brilliant performance that borders on Fear Factor-esque reality.

The value of this film is its audacity, both in the portrayal of unswerving drive, and the reality of the filmmaking. Aguirre's madness and his drive are so interwoven that the psyche of the character is an impenetrable shell of audaciousness. He appropriates leadership of an expedition through mutiny and applies all available resources to his personal quest for power and fame. This is mirrored in Herzog's methods: filmed with one stolen camera on a budget of $360,000, Aguirre, the Wrath of God is a project that a more seasoned (read: saner) director would hardly dare. It is, in fact, a filmic record of an actual expedition; 400+ people spent 6 weeks cruising down the Amazon on rafts for the shoot.

The tales of Herzog's film and Aguirre's expeditions diverge at their ends, however: Aquirre never finds the City of Gold, but this film established Herzog as an internationally acclaimed filmmaker. I recommend watching once for the story in the film, and then a re-watch with the commentary, for the story of it.

This was great fun to watch! All the major elements are there, in force, in this excellent summer blockbuster: solid script, great performances, kick-ass soundtrack. I'd heard much of Molina's performance, and it was indeed awesome. Also really enjoyed JK Simmons as J Jonah Jameson and Rosemary Harris as Aunt May - both vivid, detailed performances. The Doc Oc contraption is excellent work on the part of the Fx crew, from conception to operation.

LOVED that MJ is not just a damsel in distress - "HEY! < whistle > I'm talking to you!" was an awesome moment! I picked up the soundtrack immediately after, and am especially liking the Dashboard Confessionals' "Vindicated", which starts the end credits. This movie is more than a sequel - it seems to complete the story begun in Spiderman in a really satisfying way.

Hedwig and the Angry Inch marks, as far as I've seen (and I've looked a bit), a turning point in what gets called "gay film". Previous films in this vein have been entertaining and had a certain charm and a somewhat poignant message about acceptance. The Birdcage focused on acceptance of people who are different, Torch Song Trilogy was more about acceptance of the hardships of gay life, and subsequent projects (Priscilla, Queen of the Desert, To Wong Foo, et al) in this genre have celebrated The Individual - the humor, the sensitivity/vulnerability and the style of "royalty". Consistently though, they focus on interpersonal relationships that are largely peculiar to the gay lifestyle.

That's the corner that Hedwig... turns. It's not about being gay. This is a story about self-acceptance.... about healing, and self-knowledge. It operates on a much deeper level than one expects. John Cameron Mitchell has given us a story about recapturing that which was lost - his own manhood, love of self. It's a fun ride, don't get me wrong. The music is awesome. I downloaded most of the soundtrack while watching the movie a second time. Visually, it's fun to look at - Hedwig's outrageousness is a given, but the film is also nicely peppered with symbolism, with cool animation and with glimses of true human beauty. I speak of Michael Pitt's lips. mrow.

Seen once, this movie is a fun, funny, charming musical ride. On second viewing, I got even more out of it, as the symbolism of Hedwig's pursuit of Tommy gelled for me. There are hints, in the writing and the photography, that Tommy is a part of Hedwig that he needs to understand... and have understanding from... in order to be whole. Seeing that happen is unexpectedly moving.

On a final note, I am pretty awed by John Cameron Mitchell, as his on-screen performance was foocking brilliant, and as writer/director, the supportive symbolism all came from his fertile little brain as well, and credits to a hugely creative intellect. I am already looking forward to his next directorial effort: Short Bus, in pre-production at this writing (6/14/04). IMDB says it's an exploration of relationships, through gender, art, other stuff... This I've gotta see!

So much has been written of Francois Truffaut's ``The 400 Blows'' (1959) that I feel there's little I can add. Ebert's review touches on the major points and considerations that contribute to why this film is so important. To that I can only add that I enjoyed it very much. It's a story about a 13 year old boy with a yearning for an unfortunately undefined "freedom". Truffaut's own childhood is the basis, and for that I greatly admire his objectivity: this film never resorts to sentimentality, never attempts to defend the apparent descent of the main character into a life of crime. It's a straightforward story of a young man with a passion for life, told by a young filmmaker with a passion for cinema. One other thing I'm compelled to mention: the performance of Jean-Pierre Leaud in the lead is positively amazing. I have never seen a better performance by a first-time actor or any unstudied performer for that matter. I recommend watching this film and then a second time with the commentary. While the commentator's urbane drone gets a little monotonous, it can't dampen the love of Truffaut for cinema, nor the merits of this film.

This is a gorgeously filmed story that raises questions about the humane interpretations of "right" and "wrong" in the lives of those committed to serving God. In the end, the church is crippled, innocence is lost and love is dead, so maybe it actually answers the questions as well.

Gael Garcia Bernal (Y Tu Mama Tambien, Amores Perros) shows again why he is one of Mexico's hottest properties: the kid is HOTT.... oh yeah, and he's also really talented. Opposite him is a newer talent, Ana Claudia Talancon, whose performance as the young woman who falls in love with a priest is detailed and moving. Other lumiaries of mexican cinema bring depth to the cast - everyone is excellent.

This story drags just a bit in the middle, as its attention is divided between the love relationship and the political aspects, but it's nothing to be put off by: overall, this is a very watchable story with an empassioned message, deftly told.

Rightly, words have been attached to this film along the lines of "perfect pitch", "well-made" and "brilliant"... also "bleak", "unsparing" and "disturbing". These are all good words for David Cronenberg's story of a schizophrenic man who confronts alone the childhood event that unalterably changed his life.

Small by design, every major character is played by one of three actors: Gabriel Byrne, Miranda Richardson (in a dual role, at least) and Ralph Fiennes. Rounding out the cast was John Neville, another favorite of mine, though I'll admit it's starting to creep me out that he's still around. He was old in the 80's, already...

Such a force in talent need hardly be reviewed. I'd only blather. They're each at the top of their game, and Cronenberg gives them room to prowl a bit in these roles. The performances are top-notch.

The script and the handling of it are what really make this film though. Intelligence and a certain respect for the illness in question elevate this story to a level appreciable to any viewer, lending force and meaning to the intriguing story we're told. This is a writer with a deep understanding of how film can convey experience as well as story line, and employs cinematic accouterments to afford the audience a view from the inside of a story, with all it's confusion intact.

Can you imagine if Patricia Arquette and Steve Buscemi had offspring? Think of all the teeth... I had a little time to think of all the teeth, as this flick has a few slow spots. It also has several stand-out hilarious moments, belonging to Tia Leone and Lily Tomlin. Not between them, mind you, but they each have them... which is completely unsuprising, as they are two of the best comedic actresses out there. I want to see them in a movie with Joan Cusack. (paging Jen... there's our cast for whatever script we write) oops, again I've drifted off into my own thoughts...

Anyway, the basic premise is that Ben Stiller is an adoptee, looking for his birth parents so he can get a sense of who he is before naming his now 4 month old son. He gets distracted by a neurotic Leone and his wife, played by Arquette, is distracted by an old high school chum, now metro- homo- and somehow also bi-sexual. Leone is the adoption agency rep who is helping Stiller, only her info is wrong wrong wrong, adding up to sub-hilious hijinks. The good news is, when he does finally find his parents, they're played by Lily Tomlin (YAY!!) and Alan Alda (yay) and they're pretty damn funny. Oh and his adoptive parents are played by Mary Tyler Moore, in a very funny turn... and that guy who plays the dad on Just Shoot Me. If you catch this, be warned: the closing credits fearute MTM going down on Mr Just Shoot Me and frankly, I'm emotionally scarred.

All in all, this film is like when you order won ton soup and you get a huge bowl with one tiny but delicious won ton in it: ok, but it left me a little unsatisfied.

Nice reviews SD.

Thanks for reminding me of Aguirre. Been meaning to watch that for ages.

__________________
Virtual Reality chatter on a movie site? Got endless amounts of it here. Reviews over here

First of all, I have seen the man I'm going to marry: Vincent Regan, who plays Eudorus. He's married, I've learned, but his wife is into directors, so I'm going to need someone to distract her while I switch Kenneth Brannaugh for Vincent. I'll also need Kenneth Brannaugh.

With that said, everything about Troy is BIG. The scale is BIG. The cast is BIG. B-Pitty is HUGE. Unfortunately, bigger doesn't always mean better. The things that work best are the less-touted, more medium-sized performances, mainly Eric Bana's Hector, Rose Bryne's Brisius and Peter O'Toole's Priam. And the small performances were noticibly lacking direction. It's the little things, no matter how big the scale of the piece, that can undermine the project. Something like an extra grabbing two horses' bridles in the middle of an attack and then just standing there, waiting to hear "cut" is not cool in the middle of a film that aspires to greatness.

None of that is as big a problem as the miscasting of Pitt as Achilles. He has his moments with it. He just wasn't right for it and I'm still trying to figure out why. Oh, I know: because despite the enormous arms he grew for this, they've colored him like a girly-man. Petal pink lips and yellow hair and blue eyes... and bloodlust. It didn't come together. He didn't make it come together. Klaus Kinski he's not. By contrast, Bana's Hector is relatable, human, vulnerable at times, varied. It may even be a planned contrast that Achilles be more superficial, but Pitt's performance pays a high price if that was the idea.

The biggest problem I had though was with the direction. Peterson went back to theatrical roots in the staging of some of this, most notably the political discussions, but he should have revisited Basic Directing for a refresher on beats. There's supposed to be a build to every scene, and too many important moments are just barrelled through, making everything seem pre-ordained. It doesn't make for compelling storytelling.

Pitt wasn't the only odd casting choice. Of an array of principals, very few looked at all Greek. Hector's wife was so thin he risked lacerations just being within 2 feet of her... hardly the greek ideal. Helen, while certainly pretty, didn't seem terribly interesting. I did like that she and Bloom shared a bit of a resemblance, underlining their vanity and narcisism.

On the up side, the love scene with Pitt and Bryce was hott! The battles were good. The two-man combat scenes were positively excellent. Those jumps Pitt did were highly impressive. Not a lot of people can get that much air while toting a big sword! The stunts and fx were excellent. I very much enjoyed the Tumbleweeds of Doom. Kudos to the costumer, especially the footwear, and to the jewelry maker. I don't know what the makeup person was up to though, with all that eyeliner on everyone. We weren't in Egypt, for crying out loud!

All in all, there were some strong points, but this whole affair needed a bit more work. It could have been much improved, but it's not a painful way to spend three hours and it did introduce me to my sweet Vincent. Seriously, anybody know him or know anyone who knows him? Hook a sister up.

This is a story of self-love. It has all the trappings of a typical romance: humor and poetry and saxaphones... and the best mood-lighting of all time. You know that hour in the evening when the light turns gold and warms up everything in a rosy hue while the sky is turning a cool, dark azure? At least half of this movie happens during that hour. It's gorgeous.

But the point of it is that we all have something (or a few things) that we allow to stand as barriers to love. The main character, CD Barnes (played with aplomb by Steve Martin) has a gigundous nose. He believes that no woman will see past it. He believes this so firmly, that when he meets Roxanne, who views the world through her telescope, where his nose is indiscernable, he is completely willing to believe that she won't love him because of it. The thing he learns though, is that the thing that makes him different is the thing that makes him special. Just when it seems that CD's love for Roxanne will be squelched by his physiogamy, the whole town is saved by his extraordinary sense of smell. Once he learns to appreciate that part of himself that makes him unique, CD is finally ready to accept the love that Roxanne could easily have had for him all along. What a hopeful notion. No wonder they call this a 'feel good' movie.

The performances are a little uneven, suffering it seems from the director's failure to recognise the very point made above. Martin's performance is a classic blend of schtick and honesty. His physical humor brings the expected lightheartedness to the story but also pulls us in and makes us hope for CD. Darryl Hannah's Roxanne is not quite as sympathetic, but she has those moments when we see a bright, vulnerable woman. Rick Rossovich is the dumb-as-dirt object of confusion for Roxanne, the pretty boy that CD believes is what she really wants. (Nobody is listening when Roxanne says she hopes to meet someone with half a brain.) Rossovich is not quite up to the task, frankly. Oh, he's dumb, but he's so genuinely awkward in the role that he's barely tolerable. It's a serious "no contest" scenario, with this guy as Chris. Give me a George Clooney, and CD has someone to contend with, at least. And Shelley Duvall plays the Voice of Reason with heart and charm.

The writing is ok, though there's a bit of choppiness here and there. That scene where CD finally learns the value of his Buick-sized honker seems shoe-horned in, as does the lengthy scene where CD matches wits with a local bully in a pub.

All in all though, it's a very lovely story. Steve Martin's performance is highly relatable and it's a nice payoff when he finally gets the girl. (sorry if that spoiled it for any of you youngsters who were in diapers when this came out).

Hey, Gg! Thank you.
I just watched Aguirre yesterday... really enjoyed it.
I'll be looking forward to hearing what you think.

Hey excellent thread!! Looks like I need to dust off my review thread and put a couple more up to keep up! Well written and concise. Hope you stick around!

__________________

If you haven't seen it (though I think I may have been the last one), bail out on this entry now. To proceed is to read spoilers.

The quibbles:
1. The b&w fight scene with all the guys went on just a bit loooong. It was like a built-in pee break, just in case you forgot that the large soda at a theater is a 5 gal drum.
2. Question: what song is Elle whistling, when she's walking into the hospital? Is that from a spaghetti western or something?
3. When Uma wakes up from her coma... what was the thing with her looking at her hands?
4. I thought Michael Madsen was Bill. And I watched it twice and still thought that.

The stuff that rocked:
EVERYTHING ELSE!!!!!! Tarentino's style is so perfectly matched to the mood of a revenge piece that it's astonishing to learn the idea came from Uma. Everyone production-wise came through in spades on this - the music, the costumes, the photography, the fight sequences, the overall art of it... There are a lot of little touches, like the cross on Elle's eyepatch, that add style and humor.

Favorite Moments/Bits:
1. The sheriff's glasses on the dashboard.
2. The Bride's fake name, and the fact that we never hear her real one.
3. Sound effects... did this win awards for sound editing? The squeek of Vernita's head sliding down the kitchen cupboard, and the crunch of the cereal all over the floor; the mosquitoe's bite sound; the metallic knock on Uma's dome when she wakes up; and the sake being dropped off-camera at the mention of the name "Hattori Hanso".
4. "Pussy wagon?! Ff****er."
5. The blood dropping on O-ren when her mother is killed and the snow falling later, when she is.

Tarentino's fourth offering is great fun to watch. The performances are truly awesome. The fighting and stunt work is excellent and those sequences are shot pretty clearly, which has to be rough. Finding out during "The Making of..." that Uma was pregnant for the filming was a jaw-dropper.

Overall, it's a fantasy with great emotional payoff - not to be taken too literally or seriously though. This story hearkens back to the Spanish revenge tragedies of a century past, a time when "pc" was not a part of the vernacular.

Thanks, Sedai!
You were one of the ones who inspired me to get this thing together.

Yeah!! This was just as fun to watch as Vol 1. The overblown nature of these characters is just as grabby is the first few we saw meet their demise. The parts fit together well - BB's "bang bang" invoking the song from the opening credits of Vol 1, for instance. The comparison of the two daughters, for another, serves to highlight the Bride's uniquely enforced sense of justice. This volume is more thoughtful than the first, with more emphasis on psychological advantage and emotional power plays, but still delivers in the fighting scenes and the enjoyment of watching the Bride overcome all obstacles to reach her goal. She's still the underdog, but look at Uma and her little muscles! She had to have worked really hard in prep for this. She looked capable of kicking some tail by the end.

Tarentino did a number of nifty tricks with this two-parter, but I especially enjoyed one part of the structure in Vol 2: Taking a long siesta between release dates was a gamble. The audience has time to cool off and you risk your central character losing their sympathy. Enter Budd: reformed, it seems. Peaceful, even when provoked, he's beat his sword into a plowshare, or at least a pawn shop, and I was feeling a little sorry for him when NinjaUma showed up. Then we see him bury her alive and you know... I wasn't feeling so sympathetic any more. That sequence did a great job of reviving my will to see asses kicked. That Tarentino kid's kinda smooth.

I'm kind of glad I didn't see Vol 1 til last weekend, as seeing them for the first time a few days apart was pretty cool. Kill Bill is great fun to watch. It's a different world and the people are not like anyone you know... hopefully. It's not a world I'd want to live in, but it's certainly fun to visit from the safety of my sofa. Don't go in looking for a lot more than that. Sunday School's down the hall. But do be ready for a good time.

This "remake" is the resurrection of the first Dawn...'s tagline, but apart from that and people holing up in a mall against flesh-eaing zombies, it's a whole new show. It's also such a well-done example of the genre, that there too: whole new show. I've seen a splattering of zombie flicks in my day, and went into this one expecting Cheese.. I was very pleasantly suprised. Universal did a fine job, raising Romero's baby. The opening sequence alone established it as far superior to any movie of it's ilk, and that's probaby the true test for this genre: if you can get past the gratuitous opening sequence of nice, happy people in a f'ed up world getting killed by Whatever and not think to yourself "well, at least it's just a matinee priced ticket", you're sitting pretty. And I was. All the usual elements are there, but most of the cheese has been held.

Gone is the awkward dialogue, all the worse for it's delivery by non-actors.

Gone is the embarassing gimp-gait of the zombies - these are track star zombies, and suddenly they're scary. They also seem to have a clearer focus than zombies of byegone eras, and for that director Zack Snyder deserves a nod.

Gone is the painfully overdramatic and clunky soundtrack: this one is excellent and if you're listening carefully, it provides some comic backup to the unfolding events.

Gone too, are several highly predictable stock scenarios in the zombie genre, praise be. Others, among them the much-touted "social commentary" of the original, are relegated to their proper place within a streamlined story. Huzzah!

So what's left?
Well, we have a fairly classical array of characters, many more than the original, which apparently featured just four people. And they're played by actual gosh-darnit actors! I'm still reeling from the shock of it.

We also have a story line that is a little thin, but for the most part, the tension builds and the story moves along nicely. There's one rather roughly shoehorned-in scene with a girl and a dog, that accomplishes a few things, but it had the feel of a 3am rewrite. For the most part though, the characters are well-sketched and we get to care a little about several of the central ones.

And we have some positively AWESOME special effects. The pyrotechnics are just spectacular. I twice felt like cheering for things that blew up. The stunts are amazing. The head-splats against the van when the old lady showed up with her crew were just excellent. There's also a face that gets half blown off that was some great sculpting. And the blood dried like blood. All-around awesome job by the Fx team.

I especially liked the ending. The story continues through the closing credits, in a manner evoking Blair Witch and the fast-take scenes from The Ring, lending creepiness to the fate of the characters. Like 28 Days Later, we have the use of digital video, to world-disintegrating effect.

Oh, and it's all sandwiched between some of the best opening and closing titles in memory. I don't know why, but I love when those things are done well. The bar has been raised in this genre. It was high time, really, but all the ketchup-blood and clumsiness in the past made it all the more fun to see this done up right.

Woah. I missed this thread- I really love the blunt style you have with your reviews and I look forward to reading more!

__________________
I am moved by fancies that are curled
Around these images, and cling:
The notion of some infinitely gentle
Infinitely suffering thing.
T.S Eliot, "Preludes"

I laugh now, at the whimsical trailers... "Oh look, how funny... a car stuck in a tree!" Then, a good two hours in, once your ass is at one with the theater seat, they reach into your chest and give your heart a good, tenderizing <SQUISH!!!> I was woefully short on kleenex.

The thing is, I got the feeling that important points in the story around the beautiful, touching part were sadly lacking. This movie seems to miss greatness by just l---x---l that much. Personally, I had a little trouble relating to Crudup's poutybitterboy character. Ok, your dad told a lot of stories a lot of times. You weren't beaten or belittled, so like... lighten the hell UP already.

The treatment was gorgeous, though, in typical Burtonesque creepy lovliness. Speaking of which, whatup with the veins in Helena Bonham Carter's neck?? I was actually distracted by them! One day, the Reanimation on that chick is going to wear off and she's just going to fall into little quivvering pieces.

Anyway, favorite moments: the shot of Crudup's character swimming in the pool, as shot through the window with the pool at bust level on the reflection of his mom. (aww!) and the moment when Lange crawled into the bathtub fully dressed. (awww!!)

Overall, this is an entertaining movie, and the end is beautiful, but it just doesn't connect like I think it could have.

Hey, Glitter!
Thanks for the encouragement.
Yeah, I calls 'em as I see's 'em.
It's just one chick's opinion, anyway, right?