sourapple
Joined Feb 2000
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews70
sourapple's rating
It's predictable, and I'm the type of person who actually likes formulaic movies. But ehh.. "The Break Up" was not for me. Although Vince Vaughn is a funny man (absolutely), he got stuck with the blandest leading lady Hollywood can think of: Jennifer Aniston.
There simply is no Jennifer Aniston movie that I liked. In "Derailed", what started as a great suspense movie (with Clive Owen, of course), ended as a disappointment. But then I said, don't' give up on Aniston. She must have talent hiding around. However, after her recent list of movies, I've lost hope.
Vince Vaugn delivers his line in his usual candor, and that's practically the highlight of the film. Oh, and Ann Margret, and of course the lovely Jon Favreau! They actually bought light to this yawn-worthy movie. It's a good thing character actors were able to deliver. I love it! Maybe a little tweak on the script and overall execution would've made this a more tolerable movie to watch.
Between last year's Hitch and The Break Up, give me Will Smith and Eve Mendes any day. They had CHEMISTRY. Vaughn and Aniston did not. They looked like kissing siblings/cousins in this movie. In my honest opinion.
Digression: Oh, Aniston! You're simply a mess.
There simply is no Jennifer Aniston movie that I liked. In "Derailed", what started as a great suspense movie (with Clive Owen, of course), ended as a disappointment. But then I said, don't' give up on Aniston. She must have talent hiding around. However, after her recent list of movies, I've lost hope.
Vince Vaugn delivers his line in his usual candor, and that's practically the highlight of the film. Oh, and Ann Margret, and of course the lovely Jon Favreau! They actually bought light to this yawn-worthy movie. It's a good thing character actors were able to deliver. I love it! Maybe a little tweak on the script and overall execution would've made this a more tolerable movie to watch.
Between last year's Hitch and The Break Up, give me Will Smith and Eve Mendes any day. They had CHEMISTRY. Vaughn and Aniston did not. They looked like kissing siblings/cousins in this movie. In my honest opinion.
Digression: Oh, Aniston! You're simply a mess.
The movie RENT is better heard than seen. I am a fan of the musical (although not yet deserving to be called a RENThead since I haven't seen the actual stage production) and I loved the new recording they did for the movie. So I'm going to refer to Rent (2005) as "the movie" and the musical as RENT :)
I didn't like how the scenes were slightly choppy and some of the musical numbers in the movie had a corny "music video" feel (What You Own), unlike other musical to movies like Chicago. The movie gives off the feeling of a copy-paste version of the Broadway production. I am only basing this from the original Broadway cast recording, since I've never seen it on stage.
The movie also became somewhat comical because most of the lines in the movie were originally sung in the obc recording. So I kind of guessed what they were going to say next. The least they could've done was change the lines.
In my honest opinion, I think it's the fault of Chris Columbus (as usual). He ruined Harry Potter by staying too faithful to the book. He also ruined RENT for also staying too faithful to the musical. I love that he didn't cut a lot of songs from the actual musical, but overall the movie was a slight mess. Baz Luhrmann or Rob Marshall could've done a better job than this guy, hey, even that guy who directed The Phantom of the Opera would've been a good choice.
Chris Columbus doesn't have the artist in him to make a good film. He failed to capture any of the emotions RENT has. Columbus should stay away from material that he doesn't have a clue on. He should stick to his usual formula of Home Alone and Mrs. Doubtfire.
But hey, I enjoyed it because I *finally* saw the movie! And it was fun seeing the original actors perform as if I was watching them on stage. Pascal, Rapp, Martin, Thoms, Menzel, Diggs (character was not developed that much), Heredia and Dawson were a great cast. However, they were overshadowed by an awful director.
No day but today!
I didn't like how the scenes were slightly choppy and some of the musical numbers in the movie had a corny "music video" feel (What You Own), unlike other musical to movies like Chicago. The movie gives off the feeling of a copy-paste version of the Broadway production. I am only basing this from the original Broadway cast recording, since I've never seen it on stage.
The movie also became somewhat comical because most of the lines in the movie were originally sung in the obc recording. So I kind of guessed what they were going to say next. The least they could've done was change the lines.
In my honest opinion, I think it's the fault of Chris Columbus (as usual). He ruined Harry Potter by staying too faithful to the book. He also ruined RENT for also staying too faithful to the musical. I love that he didn't cut a lot of songs from the actual musical, but overall the movie was a slight mess. Baz Luhrmann or Rob Marshall could've done a better job than this guy, hey, even that guy who directed The Phantom of the Opera would've been a good choice.
Chris Columbus doesn't have the artist in him to make a good film. He failed to capture any of the emotions RENT has. Columbus should stay away from material that he doesn't have a clue on. He should stick to his usual formula of Home Alone and Mrs. Doubtfire.
But hey, I enjoyed it because I *finally* saw the movie! And it was fun seeing the original actors perform as if I was watching them on stage. Pascal, Rapp, Martin, Thoms, Menzel, Diggs (character was not developed that much), Heredia and Dawson were a great cast. However, they were overshadowed by an awful director.
No day but today!
Being a FRIENDS fan, I was curious on how the cast handled their career after the hit series. I'm not a fan of Jennifer Aniston, but since she had her share of fanfare publicity these past few weeks, I grabbed the chance to get advanced tickets to this movie. It was, sadly, a complete waste of money.
No spoilers, just comments on the film. Clive Owen,as always, is dashing and sexy. But there is no chemistry between him and Aniston. Owen shines more than Aniston. And when I see Aniston on the secret, I hear "Rachel Green! Rachel Green!".
Although Jennifer Aniston's role is interesting, she played it in a "Rachel Green-on-Valium" kind of way. She's too pretty, and she's too talked-about that one can't help see the gossips/rumours instead of the character she attempts to bring to life. Maybe it's the script as well, I didn't find it that good.
Story and cinematography was interesting, directing so-so. Actors, so-so as well. A few minor changes in the script and the actors (hint hint) it would've been a better film.
No spoilers, just comments on the film. Clive Owen,as always, is dashing and sexy. But there is no chemistry between him and Aniston. Owen shines more than Aniston. And when I see Aniston on the secret, I hear "Rachel Green! Rachel Green!".
Although Jennifer Aniston's role is interesting, she played it in a "Rachel Green-on-Valium" kind of way. She's too pretty, and she's too talked-about that one can't help see the gossips/rumours instead of the character she attempts to bring to life. Maybe it's the script as well, I didn't find it that good.
Story and cinematography was interesting, directing so-so. Actors, so-so as well. A few minor changes in the script and the actors (hint hint) it would've been a better film.