jeffgramny
A rejoint le janv. 2004
Bienvenue sur nouveau profil
Nos mises à jour sont toujours en cours de développement. Bien que la version précédente de le profil ne soit plus accessible, nous travaillons activement à des améliorations, et certaines fonctionnalités manquantes seront bientôt de retour ! Restez à l'écoute de leur retour. En attendant, l’analyse des évaluations est toujours disponible sur nos applications iOS et Android, qui se trouvent sur la page de profil. Pour consulter la répartition de vos évaluations par année et par genre, veuillez consulter notre nouveau Guide d'aide.
Badges2
Pour savoir comment gagner des badges, rendez-vous sur page d'aide sur les badges.
Avis3
Note de jeffgramny
Was I the only person who was disappointed in this film? The movie is such an obvious attempt to recapture the narrative and sexual tension of "A Place in the Sun" that I am surprised Woody Allen got away with it. The scene around the ping-pong table in the beginning (by the way, how many British aristo families play ping-pong?)is a weak imitation of Montgomery Clift and Liz Taylor around the billiards table.
Woody Allen is free to cannibalize his own "Crimes and Misdemeanors," but George Stevens (director of "Place") and Theodore Dreiser (author of "An American Tragedy" -- the book on which "Place" was based)are probably spinning.
Also, the film is about 30 minutes too long. If Meyer's cell phone went off one more time, or if Johannson screamed "But you said you were going to tell her!" once more, I was gonna scream.
Woody Allen is free to cannibalize his own "Crimes and Misdemeanors," but George Stevens (director of "Place") and Theodore Dreiser (author of "An American Tragedy" -- the book on which "Place" was based)are probably spinning.
Also, the film is about 30 minutes too long. If Meyer's cell phone went off one more time, or if Johannson screamed "But you said you were going to tell her!" once more, I was gonna scream.
This was such a refreshing, charming movie -- a small film that doesn't pretend to be any bigger. It follows the old Hollywood formula of "beginning, middle, end," and does so with just the right touches. Dennis Quaid is evocative of James Garner some 20-30 years ago -- and that's quite a compliment, Dennis. As for Topher Grace, it is rare to see such a sensitive, restrained performance in such a young actor. Hopefully he won't get suckered into a succession of forgettable roles.
As for the story line, is it believable? Speaking as a middle-aged male with a couple of decades in the corporate workplace, I would say most emphatically, "yes." One minor criticism -- and this may have been the result of post-production editing -- is the almost superficial treatment of Ann and Alex Foreman's reaction to Ann's pregnancy. Ditto for the daughters. Were we to believe that a middle-age couple (he is 50+, she is mid- to late 40s), not to mention their two teenage daughters, just accept as a matter of course, with no evident angst, the prospect of yet another little Foreman on the way? Maybe that would have worked in "Father Knows Best."
But this was minor nit to pick. This is a must-see for any middle-aged guy in the corporate workplace who feels threatened by 20-somethings fresh out of school.
As for the story line, is it believable? Speaking as a middle-aged male with a couple of decades in the corporate workplace, I would say most emphatically, "yes." One minor criticism -- and this may have been the result of post-production editing -- is the almost superficial treatment of Ann and Alex Foreman's reaction to Ann's pregnancy. Ditto for the daughters. Were we to believe that a middle-age couple (he is 50+, she is mid- to late 40s), not to mention their two teenage daughters, just accept as a matter of course, with no evident angst, the prospect of yet another little Foreman on the way? Maybe that would have worked in "Father Knows Best."
But this was minor nit to pick. This is a must-see for any middle-aged guy in the corporate workplace who feels threatened by 20-somethings fresh out of school.
While the 2004 remake of "The Manchurian Candidate" is ensemble acting at its finest, Meryl Streep seems to be having a bit too much fun playing the villainess Eleanor Prentiss Shaw. She doesn't have the same blood-curdling constitution as did Angela Lansbury.
"What was I supposed to do, call a MEETING?" she exclaims as her wimpy male colleagues in the shadowy Manchurian Global upbraid her for ordering someone killed without consulting them. Problem is, she was radiantly glowing when she uttered the line, which produced laughs in the NYC theatre I was in.
When she showers Liev Schreiber with overly affectionate kisses and hugs, one again suspects Meryl was having a bit too much fun on camera with someone she finds quite attractive -- don't we all? -- in real life.
On its own, the 2004 remake is fine cinema. But the problem with all remakes is the inevitable comparison with original. And sadly, as much as I like the 2004 version, my vote goes with Angie Lansbury and Laurence Harvey.
"What was I supposed to do, call a MEETING?" she exclaims as her wimpy male colleagues in the shadowy Manchurian Global upbraid her for ordering someone killed without consulting them. Problem is, she was radiantly glowing when she uttered the line, which produced laughs in the NYC theatre I was in.
When she showers Liev Schreiber with overly affectionate kisses and hugs, one again suspects Meryl was having a bit too much fun on camera with someone she finds quite attractive -- don't we all? -- in real life.
On its own, the 2004 remake is fine cinema. But the problem with all remakes is the inevitable comparison with original. And sadly, as much as I like the 2004 version, my vote goes with Angie Lansbury and Laurence Harvey.