CSM126-1
Feb. 2005 ist beigetreten
Willkommen auf neuen Profil
Unsere Aktualisierungen befinden sich noch in der Entwicklung. Die vorherige Version Profils ist zwar nicht mehr zugänglich, aber wir arbeiten aktiv an Verbesserungen und einige der fehlenden Funktionen werden bald wieder verfügbar sein! Bleibe dran, bis sie wieder verfügbar sind. In der Zwischenzeit ist Bewertungsanalyse weiterhin in unseren iOS- und Android-Apps verfügbar, die auf deiner Profilseite findest. Damit deine Bewertungsverteilung nach Jahr und Genre angezeigt wird, beziehe dich bitte auf unsere neue Hilfeleitfaden.
Abzeichen6
Wie du dir Kennzeichnungen verdienen kannst, erfährst du unter Hilfeseite für Kennzeichnungen.
Rezensionen26
Bewertung von CSM126-1
I think that, deep down in the darkest, slimiest part of their heart, everyone likes Jerry Springer just a little bit. While his show is undeniably offensive and stupid, it also gives us a chance to see that, relatively speaking, most of us have it real good. When you look at the trailer park livin', dollar whiskey drinkin', incest lovin' people on the Springer show, it makes even your worst day seem like a walk in the park. Jerry is performing a public service, and we should be grateful. He ditched a political career to host the show, just for us.
What we should not be grateful for in any way is the piece of garbage movie "Ringmaster". "Ringmaster" shows what life is like for people who wind up being guests on the show, or so they would like us to think. The movie follows the pre-requisite Springer story line: Love triangles. One triangle involves Connie, her daughter Angel, and her husband Rusty. The other involves Starletta, Vonda, and Demond. When the two hapless groups meet up in LA, their lives intertwine and collide head-on, all culminating in an explosive episode of the Springer show. It's like what "Short Cuts" would be if Robert Altman had had a severe crack habit.
"Ringmaster" is true to the show, as it is stupid and offensive from start to finish. It also makes me very glad that I don't live in the squalor it's characters do. But the movie has a problem. It's billed as a comedy, but it just isn't very funny. What laughs there are to be had are few and far between. Maybe some people watch this and laugh non-stop. If you think blow jobs and rape are funny, well then I guess you're one of those folks. Personally, I laughed two or three times and spent the rest of the movie in utter awe of the agonizing horrors of white-trash life.
The Jerry Springer Show just isn't meant to make the leap from TV to the silver screen. What's funny in an hour long show (less, when you count commercials) isn't necessarily going to be funny in a ninety minute movie. Movies have to tell a story, and that's something else "Ringmaster" has trouble with. The story is threadbare. There are so many plot holes and continuity errors that any attempt at telling a cohesive narrative is quickly put asunder. And even if there weren't such problems, how much fun can you pull out of a story of stereotypical people in a stereotypical story? Even the Hollywood formula couldn't make this better. "Ringmaster: is so bad, it even screws up the best part of the Springer show: the Final Thought. Somehow, even the smartest and simplest aspect of the show wound up blowing harder than the slutty women the film is built around.
The worst offender in all of this is Springer himself. He's such a bad actor that he can't even play himself convincingly. Watching Springer play Springer is sad. It's like he was going for a 'What if Woody Allen played Jerry Springer' vibe, and he failed. Miserably. He went to the trouble of producing this disaster, the least he could do is try to make it just that much better.
Not that I'm saying everyone else in this movie put in an award worthy performance. Just the opposite. They all suck. Not so surprisingly, no one in this movie went on to greatness. The best any of them was did was Molly Hagan landing a job on a Nickelodeon sitcom. Apparently, Nickelodeon has no problem with hiring a woman who starred in the most vile film of the '90's to star in a children's program. It makes you wonder what kind of things the other adults on that channel have done in their pasts.
Here are my Final Thoughts: What we have here is a group of people with no self respect and a man with money to burn, who have met and put their resources together to produce a film that shows how much they hate themselves and how little they think of the intelligence of their viewing audience. Should we accept people who make movies that treat us like severely brain-damaged lumps of goo? I say no. Somewhere out there, in this crazy, mixed up world, there is a perfect movie for each of us. We just have to keep looking for it. Until next time, take care of yourselves and your loved ones. And don't ever watch "Ringmaster".
What we should not be grateful for in any way is the piece of garbage movie "Ringmaster". "Ringmaster" shows what life is like for people who wind up being guests on the show, or so they would like us to think. The movie follows the pre-requisite Springer story line: Love triangles. One triangle involves Connie, her daughter Angel, and her husband Rusty. The other involves Starletta, Vonda, and Demond. When the two hapless groups meet up in LA, their lives intertwine and collide head-on, all culminating in an explosive episode of the Springer show. It's like what "Short Cuts" would be if Robert Altman had had a severe crack habit.
"Ringmaster" is true to the show, as it is stupid and offensive from start to finish. It also makes me very glad that I don't live in the squalor it's characters do. But the movie has a problem. It's billed as a comedy, but it just isn't very funny. What laughs there are to be had are few and far between. Maybe some people watch this and laugh non-stop. If you think blow jobs and rape are funny, well then I guess you're one of those folks. Personally, I laughed two or three times and spent the rest of the movie in utter awe of the agonizing horrors of white-trash life.
The Jerry Springer Show just isn't meant to make the leap from TV to the silver screen. What's funny in an hour long show (less, when you count commercials) isn't necessarily going to be funny in a ninety minute movie. Movies have to tell a story, and that's something else "Ringmaster" has trouble with. The story is threadbare. There are so many plot holes and continuity errors that any attempt at telling a cohesive narrative is quickly put asunder. And even if there weren't such problems, how much fun can you pull out of a story of stereotypical people in a stereotypical story? Even the Hollywood formula couldn't make this better. "Ringmaster: is so bad, it even screws up the best part of the Springer show: the Final Thought. Somehow, even the smartest and simplest aspect of the show wound up blowing harder than the slutty women the film is built around.
The worst offender in all of this is Springer himself. He's such a bad actor that he can't even play himself convincingly. Watching Springer play Springer is sad. It's like he was going for a 'What if Woody Allen played Jerry Springer' vibe, and he failed. Miserably. He went to the trouble of producing this disaster, the least he could do is try to make it just that much better.
Not that I'm saying everyone else in this movie put in an award worthy performance. Just the opposite. They all suck. Not so surprisingly, no one in this movie went on to greatness. The best any of them was did was Molly Hagan landing a job on a Nickelodeon sitcom. Apparently, Nickelodeon has no problem with hiring a woman who starred in the most vile film of the '90's to star in a children's program. It makes you wonder what kind of things the other adults on that channel have done in their pasts.
Here are my Final Thoughts: What we have here is a group of people with no self respect and a man with money to burn, who have met and put their resources together to produce a film that shows how much they hate themselves and how little they think of the intelligence of their viewing audience. Should we accept people who make movies that treat us like severely brain-damaged lumps of goo? I say no. Somewhere out there, in this crazy, mixed up world, there is a perfect movie for each of us. We just have to keep looking for it. Until next time, take care of yourselves and your loved ones. And don't ever watch "Ringmaster".
Were it a chocolate bar, Tim Burton's "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" would be dark and bitter. Just the way I like it. Staying closer to the source material than the 1971 version did, "Charlie" gives Roald Dahl fans reason to rejoice. No longer is Willy Wonka the sunny, cheery twit that Gene Wilder crafted. In the hands of Johnny Depp, Wonka is a twisted, depraved, and sadistic man. He takes great pleasure in the thought of putting spoiled children through pain and suffering, and he doesn't mind admitting that he hates grown-ups of all stripes. This is how Wonka should be.
Another improvement over the original is the Oompa Loompas. Their original back story, not told in the first film, is told here. Also they sing the songs from the book, not that garbage from the first film. The musical numbers are inspired, ranging from Bollywood musical to rock and roll to pop ballad. Deep Roy, who plays every Oompa Loompa, does a fantastic job of giving the characters life and making them a little scary even if they are only one foot tall.
We also have Tim Burton's stunning vision to bring the quirky tale to life. The factory is a candy-colored den of nightmares with boiling hot rivers of chocolate and torturous uses for seemingly benign candy making machinery. But the interesting thing is that Burton makes the factory as pathetic as it is menacing. Willy's mechanical greeters at the gate explode and his pipes burst and the very mention of the word "parents" brings everything to a screeching halt.
Willy, as it turns out, had a dentist for a father, and thusly never knew the joy of candy until he ran away. And when he tried to return home, Willy found that his father had left and taken the house with him. So Willy locked himself away inside his factory, where he developed a complexion so pale that he actually seems to absorb light like a black hole. He retains the maturity of an infant and the mentality of a candy-addicted twelve-year-old, making him a societal pariah even though everyone adores his confections.
No, Willy Wonka is not a pleasant character. He's not meant to be. He's meant to be a depraved freak who learns to grow up with the help of the world's most mature little boy, Charlie Bucket. Freddie Highmore is incredible as Charlie. He gives the character so much emotional weight that he easily blows the previous incarnation of Charlie right out of the water. Depp hand-picked Highmore for the role, and it's obvious why. Highmore shows the potential to be as talented an actor as Depp, with just as glorious a career.
"Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" is a film that will put a smile on the face of older fans of the book, and nightmares inside the minds of young newcomers. And that's how Roald Dahl would want it. The story may be bitter and dark, but it will leave a good taste in your mouth. This is one of the year's finest and perhaps Tim Burton's best.
PS: Some folks might say Depp fashioned Wonka after Michael Jackson. I say Jackson fashioned himself after Wonka. Either way, they're both kind of sad.
Another improvement over the original is the Oompa Loompas. Their original back story, not told in the first film, is told here. Also they sing the songs from the book, not that garbage from the first film. The musical numbers are inspired, ranging from Bollywood musical to rock and roll to pop ballad. Deep Roy, who plays every Oompa Loompa, does a fantastic job of giving the characters life and making them a little scary even if they are only one foot tall.
We also have Tim Burton's stunning vision to bring the quirky tale to life. The factory is a candy-colored den of nightmares with boiling hot rivers of chocolate and torturous uses for seemingly benign candy making machinery. But the interesting thing is that Burton makes the factory as pathetic as it is menacing. Willy's mechanical greeters at the gate explode and his pipes burst and the very mention of the word "parents" brings everything to a screeching halt.
Willy, as it turns out, had a dentist for a father, and thusly never knew the joy of candy until he ran away. And when he tried to return home, Willy found that his father had left and taken the house with him. So Willy locked himself away inside his factory, where he developed a complexion so pale that he actually seems to absorb light like a black hole. He retains the maturity of an infant and the mentality of a candy-addicted twelve-year-old, making him a societal pariah even though everyone adores his confections.
No, Willy Wonka is not a pleasant character. He's not meant to be. He's meant to be a depraved freak who learns to grow up with the help of the world's most mature little boy, Charlie Bucket. Freddie Highmore is incredible as Charlie. He gives the character so much emotional weight that he easily blows the previous incarnation of Charlie right out of the water. Depp hand-picked Highmore for the role, and it's obvious why. Highmore shows the potential to be as talented an actor as Depp, with just as glorious a career.
"Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" is a film that will put a smile on the face of older fans of the book, and nightmares inside the minds of young newcomers. And that's how Roald Dahl would want it. The story may be bitter and dark, but it will leave a good taste in your mouth. This is one of the year's finest and perhaps Tim Burton's best.
PS: Some folks might say Depp fashioned Wonka after Michael Jackson. I say Jackson fashioned himself after Wonka. Either way, they're both kind of sad.
"Wedding Crashers" is an oddity. It's a film I appreciate, but not one I particularly like. It has all the makings of a great comedy: witty dialogue, raunchy humor and Owen Wilson, a genius actor. All these pieces mesh perfectly, and yet I just was not thrilled. By the end I had the odd feeling that my soul was completely drained, and I lurched to my car like a zombie.
The film makes good points about the nature of relationships and expertly satirizes guys like it's titular characters, men who go to weddings uninvited to score chicks. There was even a wonderful scene early on featuring costar Vince Vaughn delivering a rapid-fire speech about the "does she or doesn't she like me" nature of first dates that deserves applause as a short masterpiece.
The real failing, I think, is having Owen Wilson's character, John, fall in love. The first portion of the film, showing John and buddy Jeremy actually crashing weddings is hilarious and quick paced. Then John meets Claire Cleary, falls in love, and goes on the worn-out mission of one-upping her secretly evil boyfriend, Sack. The laughs quickly fade in favor of straight-up romance, returning only occasionally to liven things up. Jeremy's story line of being raped by his obsessive wedding date and, later, her gay brother is good stupid fun in the style of "There's Something About Mary" and other films of its ilk. The main story, which amounts to John making moon-eyes at Claire and Claire returning the sentiment as Sack schemes, would be an average romantic movie on it's own, but it drags down what was a great comedy.
The acting is hit-or-miss. Vince Vaughn is superb as the beleaguered Jeremy. His physical comedy is tempered with his verbal wit to perfectly balance the two. Isla Fisher is also great as Jeremy's obsessed wedding crashing victim Gloria, who goes all out to get her man even though he's decidedly done with her.
Owen Wilson, one of my favorite actors, is listless and dim as John. Romance is not Owen's thing at all, and it kills me to say he was horribly bad. But that's what it is. Rachael McAdams and Bradley Cooper are stereotypical and mundane as Claire and Sack. They phoned in their performances and, man oh man, it shows and it hurts.
Christopher Walken, who is normally hilarious, is forced to check his comedic persona at the door to play the straight-laced Commerce Secretary Cleary. Walken could have saved this film if he'd been allowed to show his zany side.
I really do appreciate every aspect of the film. It has great comedy, fair enough romance, and some brilliant acting to cover for all the bad stuff. I just can't bring myself to give it a fresh rating. Maybe romance and comedy just don't belong together (that would explain "Just Married" and every Julia Roberts film aside from "Sleeping with the Enemy"). I thought 'this is pretty good', but I didn't feel it.
"Wedding Crashers" is what you'd call an 'aborted masterpiece'. It starts strong, and then shoots itself dead half-way through. The second half of this film reminds me of a line from Errol Morris' "Gates of Heaven": "There's your dog. Your dog's dead. But where's the thing that made it move? It had to be something...didn't it?" This dog died too soon, and I'm not sure what happened to the thing that made it move in the first place. It's a captivating mystery.
The film makes good points about the nature of relationships and expertly satirizes guys like it's titular characters, men who go to weddings uninvited to score chicks. There was even a wonderful scene early on featuring costar Vince Vaughn delivering a rapid-fire speech about the "does she or doesn't she like me" nature of first dates that deserves applause as a short masterpiece.
The real failing, I think, is having Owen Wilson's character, John, fall in love. The first portion of the film, showing John and buddy Jeremy actually crashing weddings is hilarious and quick paced. Then John meets Claire Cleary, falls in love, and goes on the worn-out mission of one-upping her secretly evil boyfriend, Sack. The laughs quickly fade in favor of straight-up romance, returning only occasionally to liven things up. Jeremy's story line of being raped by his obsessive wedding date and, later, her gay brother is good stupid fun in the style of "There's Something About Mary" and other films of its ilk. The main story, which amounts to John making moon-eyes at Claire and Claire returning the sentiment as Sack schemes, would be an average romantic movie on it's own, but it drags down what was a great comedy.
The acting is hit-or-miss. Vince Vaughn is superb as the beleaguered Jeremy. His physical comedy is tempered with his verbal wit to perfectly balance the two. Isla Fisher is also great as Jeremy's obsessed wedding crashing victim Gloria, who goes all out to get her man even though he's decidedly done with her.
Owen Wilson, one of my favorite actors, is listless and dim as John. Romance is not Owen's thing at all, and it kills me to say he was horribly bad. But that's what it is. Rachael McAdams and Bradley Cooper are stereotypical and mundane as Claire and Sack. They phoned in their performances and, man oh man, it shows and it hurts.
Christopher Walken, who is normally hilarious, is forced to check his comedic persona at the door to play the straight-laced Commerce Secretary Cleary. Walken could have saved this film if he'd been allowed to show his zany side.
I really do appreciate every aspect of the film. It has great comedy, fair enough romance, and some brilliant acting to cover for all the bad stuff. I just can't bring myself to give it a fresh rating. Maybe romance and comedy just don't belong together (that would explain "Just Married" and every Julia Roberts film aside from "Sleeping with the Enemy"). I thought 'this is pretty good', but I didn't feel it.
"Wedding Crashers" is what you'd call an 'aborted masterpiece'. It starts strong, and then shoots itself dead half-way through. The second half of this film reminds me of a line from Errol Morris' "Gates of Heaven": "There's your dog. Your dog's dead. But where's the thing that made it move? It had to be something...didn't it?" This dog died too soon, and I'm not sure what happened to the thing that made it move in the first place. It's a captivating mystery.