brownrecluse62
जन॰ 2003 को शामिल हुए
नई प्रोफ़ाइल में आपका स्वागत है
हमारे अपडेट अभी भी डेवलप हो रहे हैं. हालांकि प्रोफ़ाइलका पिछला संस्करण अब उपलब्ध नहीं है, हम सक्रिय रूप से सुधारों पर काम कर रहे हैं, और कुछ अनुपलब्ध सुविधाएं जल्द ही वापस आ जाएंगी! उनकी वापसी के लिए हमारे साथ बने रहें। इस बीच, रेटिंग विश्लेषण अभी भी हमारे iOS और Android ऐप्स पर उपलब्ध है, जो प्रोफ़ाइल पेज पर पाया जाता है. वर्ष और शैली के अनुसार अपने रेटिंग वितरण (ओं) को देखने के लिए, कृपया हमारा नया हेल्प गाइड देखें.
बैज7
बैज कमाने का तरीका जानने के लिए, यहां बैज सहायता पेज जाएं.
रेटिंग1.8 हज़ार
brownrecluse62की रेटिंग
समीक्षाएं5
brownrecluse62की रेटिंग
On the surface, this is an incredible movie. A very successful musical in modern times is something one might not expect. "Chicago" is almost everything you could want in a movie musical -- it's a stylish, sexy, sensational powerhouse bursting with cynicism and immorality. It's a delightfully dark story, as well as a rather insightful look at the justice system. The film is superbly made on all fronts -- it's brilliantly directed, with a smart, fast-paced screenplay, spectacular cinematography, and amazing production and costume design. The acting is superb, with surprisingly good musical performances from all five principal actors.
However, the film is also a sad statement about movies today. Brilliant as it is, one can't help but notice what it lacks, in comparison with the classic musicals of old. Those movies had a wonderful way of being easygoing and pleasant, yet at the same time powerful, rousing, and energetic. "Chicago" is not in anyway easygoing. It's powerful and rousing, but its constant over-the-top motion is beyond energetic -- it's frenzied. The film constantly gives the impression that its makers were trying very hard. The classic musicals like "Singin' in the Rain" conveyed an almost effortless charm, which is just about lost by today.
Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying that nothing should have moved in "Chicago". Quite the contrary - the motion of the camera and of the dancers put together is extremely powerful. However, in the old musicals, the power would come from the dancers alone. Today we no longer have dancers who act; we have actors who dance, and their dancing alone isn't quite enough to hold the movie up. However, the editing overcompensates greatly. It's good editing, but there is far, far too much. This is frantic, overdone, rapid-fire cutting, and it tends to give me a headache. It helps to heighten the kinetic energy of the movie, but it also deprives you of an opportunity to really take in the excellent visuals. The movie tends to cut away before you can really appreciate what you are seeing. "Chicago" demands repeated viewings in order to fully comprehend everything that is so obscured by the editing.
In short, watching "Chicago" is like having your head in a pinball machine for two hours -- but it happens to be an exceptionally brilliant and beautiful machine. You never get to focus on any part of it for very long, but everything you see looks great as you are whisked along from one image to the next.
The musicals of today sadly cannot become the classic musicals of yesterday. While watching today's musicals, we'll just have to accept their new-millennium shortcomings. But with that in mind, "Chicago" is about as good as they get.
However, the film is also a sad statement about movies today. Brilliant as it is, one can't help but notice what it lacks, in comparison with the classic musicals of old. Those movies had a wonderful way of being easygoing and pleasant, yet at the same time powerful, rousing, and energetic. "Chicago" is not in anyway easygoing. It's powerful and rousing, but its constant over-the-top motion is beyond energetic -- it's frenzied. The film constantly gives the impression that its makers were trying very hard. The classic musicals like "Singin' in the Rain" conveyed an almost effortless charm, which is just about lost by today.
Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying that nothing should have moved in "Chicago". Quite the contrary - the motion of the camera and of the dancers put together is extremely powerful. However, in the old musicals, the power would come from the dancers alone. Today we no longer have dancers who act; we have actors who dance, and their dancing alone isn't quite enough to hold the movie up. However, the editing overcompensates greatly. It's good editing, but there is far, far too much. This is frantic, overdone, rapid-fire cutting, and it tends to give me a headache. It helps to heighten the kinetic energy of the movie, but it also deprives you of an opportunity to really take in the excellent visuals. The movie tends to cut away before you can really appreciate what you are seeing. "Chicago" demands repeated viewings in order to fully comprehend everything that is so obscured by the editing.
In short, watching "Chicago" is like having your head in a pinball machine for two hours -- but it happens to be an exceptionally brilliant and beautiful machine. You never get to focus on any part of it for very long, but everything you see looks great as you are whisked along from one image to the next.
The musicals of today sadly cannot become the classic musicals of yesterday. While watching today's musicals, we'll just have to accept their new-millennium shortcomings. But with that in mind, "Chicago" is about as good as they get.