75groucho
Iscritto in data lug 2003
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.
Distintivi2
Per sapere come ottenere i badge, vai a pagina di aiuto per i badge.
Recensioni20
Valutazione di 75groucho
Gee, maybe that's not fair. Maybe it's just that the Irish have a better heritage of articulating hard times. "Juno and The Paycock" is the epitome of tales of woe and suffering from the Irish urban poor during The Troubles of the early 20th century. The family has all the stereotypical travails: Joblessness due to alcoholism, joblessness due to labor union strikes, involvement with the Republican Army, and all these problems fall across the shoulders of the long-suffering mother, Juno.
If such a thing can be imagined, it gets worse. The family believes they will fall into some money, so they (foolishly) run up debts. This begins the 'comic' part of the film's tragi-comedy structure. When hopes prove to be false the family is devastated.
A relentlessly downbeat story that sees an interlude of clearly false hopes followed by a tragic ending, is considered a chestnut of the Irish playwright Sean O'Casey. For viewers, anyone who can't understand the thick Irish brogues on the equipment used in an early talkie will have no chance to understand the dialogue.
Worst of all the nature of the story really doesn't suit the talents of even a young Alfred Hitchcock. Even by that point in his career, he had begun to make compelling suspense pictures and this film is not in his wheelhouse. Even taking exception for budget and circumstances that would have obligated him to take on this film as an early sound project, "Juno and The Paycock" does little to distinguish the work of Sean O'Casey and even less for Hitchcock. It should be avoided, even by Hitchcock completists.
If such a thing can be imagined, it gets worse. The family believes they will fall into some money, so they (foolishly) run up debts. This begins the 'comic' part of the film's tragi-comedy structure. When hopes prove to be false the family is devastated.
A relentlessly downbeat story that sees an interlude of clearly false hopes followed by a tragic ending, is considered a chestnut of the Irish playwright Sean O'Casey. For viewers, anyone who can't understand the thick Irish brogues on the equipment used in an early talkie will have no chance to understand the dialogue.
Worst of all the nature of the story really doesn't suit the talents of even a young Alfred Hitchcock. Even by that point in his career, he had begun to make compelling suspense pictures and this film is not in his wheelhouse. Even taking exception for budget and circumstances that would have obligated him to take on this film as an early sound project, "Juno and The Paycock" does little to distinguish the work of Sean O'Casey and even less for Hitchcock. It should be avoided, even by Hitchcock completists.
The first movie with Fibber McGee & Molly, Edgar Bergen & Charlie McCarthy, and The Great Gildersleeve was "Look Who's Laughing". It was a cute little outing set in the FM & M hometown of Wistful Vista. This one is one too many. The plot is a little too contrived and the scenes uninspired, even by the relaxed standards of a cheap movie inspired by a radio sitcom.
The early scene as Fibber McGee and Molly try to enjoy a second honeymoon at a shabby lakeside resort and the scenes as Bergen & McCarthy try to camp out in the country are good. Other than that, the rest is "strictly from hunger" as the saying used to go. It's a brisk tale about how the McGees want to take the rest of their second honeymoon at a nicer resort than they can afford, so they run up a bill they can't pay. Then Molly's ex-boyfriend offers a way out: help him sell an investment in a synthetic gasoline concoction to Edgar Bergen.
Above all, the pacing of the film is way too harsh. Beyond that, the musical sequences are lame and the closing chase is perfunctory. This is clearly a cheap cash-in sequel.
That said, some will enjoy it. It's wholesome entertainment and will be well-received by most of those who are into the original radio characters. But those who like "Look Who's Laughing" will probably find this to be a weak follow-up.
The early scene as Fibber McGee and Molly try to enjoy a second honeymoon at a shabby lakeside resort and the scenes as Bergen & McCarthy try to camp out in the country are good. Other than that, the rest is "strictly from hunger" as the saying used to go. It's a brisk tale about how the McGees want to take the rest of their second honeymoon at a nicer resort than they can afford, so they run up a bill they can't pay. Then Molly's ex-boyfriend offers a way out: help him sell an investment in a synthetic gasoline concoction to Edgar Bergen.
Above all, the pacing of the film is way too harsh. Beyond that, the musical sequences are lame and the closing chase is perfunctory. This is clearly a cheap cash-in sequel.
That said, some will enjoy it. It's wholesome entertainment and will be well-received by most of those who are into the original radio characters. But those who like "Look Who's Laughing" will probably find this to be a weak follow-up.
Basically it's about several different strippers that are gearing up to participate in a competition at a stripper convention in Las Vegas. The documentary filmmakers follow the girls, get their back story, and watch how things turn out for them at the big show.
In many ways, it prefigures a lot of the "reality" TV stuff that would come out twenty years later. The hook is to develop rooting interests in each of the contestants and see how it all unfolds.
To that end, "Stripper" has both good points and bad points. The good is that the production values are high and it is moderately entertaining to get invested in the dancers' ambitions. It could have been much more exploitative but tries gamely to be, well, a documentary. To a point, it succeeds. The bad is that, like much reality-based drama, many of the scenes feel manufactured and staged for the cameras. The final competition might just as well have been assembled for the purpose of making this film.
A fair amount is superficial and can't be taken seriously. It's the softest of the soft core porn, so those looking for arousal should look elsewhere. But there's more than a glimmer of entertainment and human insight to be had, especially considering that this was done a generation before every empty-souled schnook looking for attention went on reality shows and both producer and viewer alike knew what to expect.
This film does it well back before people started doing it poorly.
In many ways, it prefigures a lot of the "reality" TV stuff that would come out twenty years later. The hook is to develop rooting interests in each of the contestants and see how it all unfolds.
To that end, "Stripper" has both good points and bad points. The good is that the production values are high and it is moderately entertaining to get invested in the dancers' ambitions. It could have been much more exploitative but tries gamely to be, well, a documentary. To a point, it succeeds. The bad is that, like much reality-based drama, many of the scenes feel manufactured and staged for the cameras. The final competition might just as well have been assembled for the purpose of making this film.
A fair amount is superficial and can't be taken seriously. It's the softest of the soft core porn, so those looking for arousal should look elsewhere. But there's more than a glimmer of entertainment and human insight to be had, especially considering that this was done a generation before every empty-souled schnook looking for attention went on reality shows and both producer and viewer alike knew what to expect.
This film does it well back before people started doing it poorly.