matlock2
Iscritto in data gen 2001
Ti diamo il benvenuto nel nuovo profilo
I nostri aggiornamenti sono ancora in fase di sviluppo. Sebbene la versione precedente del profilo non sia più accessibile, stiamo lavorando attivamente ai miglioramenti e alcune delle funzionalità mancanti torneranno presto! Non perderti il loro ritorno. Nel frattempo, l’analisi delle valutazioni è ancora disponibile sulle nostre app iOS e Android, che si trovano nella pagina del profilo. Per visualizzare la tua distribuzione delle valutazioni per anno e genere, fai riferimento alla nostra nuova Guida di aiuto.
Distintivi3
Per sapere come ottenere i badge, vai a pagina di aiuto per i badge.
Recensioni7
Valutazione di matlock2
William H. Macy was simply amazing in this movie. Rather than sugarcoat Bill Porter and make him into a one-dimensional character, Macy shows him with warts and all. Porter is an inspiring man with cerebral palsy who overcame great odds to become a master salesman. He also treasures his independence to the point of sheer obstinance. The film is absolutely terrific and is a true credit to the made-for-TV movie genre.
I picked up the DVD at a pawn shop (maybe that should have been my first clue) and being a big Silence of the Lambs fan, I grabbed it. After watching it, there are several problems with this movie.
Ridley Scott, while a talented director, was an awful choice to lead this film. Scott (Gladiator, Black Hawk Down) has done his best work, of late, in movies where we need to see everything -- graphically. One of the main reasons BHD worked so well is because it showed a truly realistic depiction of war. We did not need to see the gory details in Hannibal -- the exact opposite. This movie needed a director with Hitchcockian flair. Someone who realized that in a taut psychological drama, the imagination can conceive of far worse images than reality can produce. Mason Verger's face should have never been shown and my imagination could have gone to work. The scene with the boars could have been done with sound effects and shots of the actors in that scene and the final scene could be left to our collective imaginations.
The biggest difference between SOTL and Hannibal is that I am given no one to root for or identify with. In SOTL, Starling is woman in a man's world and a country rube to boot. I like her and identify with her underdog status. I never identified with Juliann Moore. She appeared to be arrogant, never has Foster's pluckiness and didn't connect with Hopkins. Go watch SOTL and see Jodie Foster's face when Lecter calls her a country bumpkin in their first seen. Watch her face for her multitude of understated emotions. Moore couldn't do that if she tried.
Gary Oldman's Mason Verger sounded like a demented Jimmy Stewart (really! listen to the cadence of his voice) and Ray Liotta mailed in this performance. Hopkins did a fine job considering the circumstances. If this movie had a better-suited director and Jodie Foster in the lead it could have been a more-than worthy successor to SOTL.
After reading some of these reviews, I wonder if MGM employees were given a bonus for posting this crap. 3 stars out of 10.
Ridley Scott, while a talented director, was an awful choice to lead this film. Scott (Gladiator, Black Hawk Down) has done his best work, of late, in movies where we need to see everything -- graphically. One of the main reasons BHD worked so well is because it showed a truly realistic depiction of war. We did not need to see the gory details in Hannibal -- the exact opposite. This movie needed a director with Hitchcockian flair. Someone who realized that in a taut psychological drama, the imagination can conceive of far worse images than reality can produce. Mason Verger's face should have never been shown and my imagination could have gone to work. The scene with the boars could have been done with sound effects and shots of the actors in that scene and the final scene could be left to our collective imaginations.
The biggest difference between SOTL and Hannibal is that I am given no one to root for or identify with. In SOTL, Starling is woman in a man's world and a country rube to boot. I like her and identify with her underdog status. I never identified with Juliann Moore. She appeared to be arrogant, never has Foster's pluckiness and didn't connect with Hopkins. Go watch SOTL and see Jodie Foster's face when Lecter calls her a country bumpkin in their first seen. Watch her face for her multitude of understated emotions. Moore couldn't do that if she tried.
Gary Oldman's Mason Verger sounded like a demented Jimmy Stewart (really! listen to the cadence of his voice) and Ray Liotta mailed in this performance. Hopkins did a fine job considering the circumstances. If this movie had a better-suited director and Jodie Foster in the lead it could have been a more-than worthy successor to SOTL.
After reading some of these reviews, I wonder if MGM employees were given a bonus for posting this crap. 3 stars out of 10.
This is a great show. Stewart has the perfect sense of humor to deal with the outrageness of his correspondents. He remains the center of sanity as reporters like Colbert, Carrell, and Rocca act in the strangest of ways. The seriousness that their interviewing subjects show is absolutely amazing. They pick on everyone equally. If the Onion had a TV show, this would be it. The only area were the show could slightly improve is Jon's interviewing technique. He doesn't match up with Conan as far as getting funny stuff out of the celebrities, but he is better than most. This show is absolutely incredible and I hope it lasts forever.