Saw Holiday in Handcuffs last night and got a real kick out of it.It was a funny and touching film, and MellyJHart is probably my favorite actress of the early 2000s. Anyone wanting to get in the mood and see one last Christmas movie before the New Year should give it a watch! The Christmas season isn’t over yet!
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
Monday, December 5, 2011
[gallery]
happy birthday walt; you aren’t forgotten
Dear Mr. Disney,
You inspire me all the time! I have you as a constant on my list of inspirational people on Facebook (need I say more?!)—-and, you’re just something special. I think almost everyday, how can I be more like you. Thank you for sharing your gifts.
Love,
me
Friday, December 2, 2011
iamthemoviesilove started following you
Thank you so much, hello, and welcome!! :)
Glad to be part of the Tumblr community now! And I think I know why it’s called Tumblr too—-as-in “tumbler”…I literally tumble and stumble across the most amazing things on this site! Our Tumblrs are digital scrapbooks of our very own design!
And, thanks for your thoughtfulness in thanking me (I never even thought of thanking someone in a post. That’s so cool!). This whole Tumblr thing puts other such sites to shame, I must say! : - )
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Dame Maggie Smith vs. Lily Tomlin
I like them both. But, I do wonder how one can be more popular on one site than the other.
[gallery]
Bill Murray as Franklin Delano Roosevelt in Hyde Park on Hudson
I never knew this movie existed! Now, I want to see it! I just watched a documentary about FDR in my college history class. And, one of the things the professor kept saying was “I wanted you to see the ‘charm’ of the man.” And, after seeing it, I can say—-he was a heart-breaker alright—-and plenty handsome! And a political wonder-man! No wonder he was elected 4 times!!
WHAT MAKES YOU FEEL BETTER WHEN YOU ARE IN A BAD MOOD?
I think about the movies and tv shows I love, and they put me in another reality. So, then, if the other reality is a good one (hehe), I feel better. : - )
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Destined to become a Marlene Dietrich expert!
Marlene makes a great subject for a history paper anyway, esp. an American history paper, given what all she went through to become an American in the period in which she became one. Her story would resonate with so many of our forefathers.
Sunday, October 16, 2011
Ladies In Lavender (2004)
I don’t like a couple of the supporting characters, but the 2 stars of the film are wonderful, the style is lovely, the story is sweet, and the scenery and home-setting is among the most magnificent I’ve ever seen
Watch this, and I almost guarantee—-you’ll feel you’ve had a glimps of heaven too! ♥
Monday, October 10, 2011
Waiting For God (1990 - 1994) and other Britcoms I love...
Britcoms are the best! Absolutely Fabulous, Waiting for God, and most recently, I have discovered A Fine Romance! And, I love it! I’m not saying I like all Britcoms (“Fawlty Towers” gave me a headache in the first episode and I consider “Are You Being Served” to be mostly tacky and annoying), but the ones I love—-I REALLY LOVE!
My favorite so far is WAITING FOR GOD. May my elder years be just as romantic, sensual, witty, fun, and full of love! Just like the WFG couple themselves, Tom Ballard and Diana Trent! I recommend this show to everyone who has sophisticated taste but enjoys a good laugh. And, if you’re a romantic at heart, the more you watch it, the more you’ll fall in love. I did!
Sunday, September 11, 2011
Wishing to unwind with Joan Crawford and Bette Davis!
(Davis left, Crawford right)
This week is going to be tough! I’m already needing to unwind, and it’s only Monday! Would love to watch a little of The films of Joan Crawford and The films of Bette Davis, back to back. I liked them best when they were creepy, not in sad dramas, but in “campy” thrillers…starting from about the mid-1940s through to the late 1960s, I’d say. Would love to finally see Joan’s big hit, “Mildred Pierce” (1945). But, I guess I’ll let reality set-in first. Sigh…
Saturday, September 10, 2011
What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962)
What I don’t understand though, is that so many people have compared this to “Hush, Hush, Sweet Charlotte” and while I am very close to liking t hat one, I think it is to blatant about the bloody, gory side of things. So, while I almost love it, I can’t quite bring myself to add it to my list of favorites because of that. It somehow repulses me too much. But, not this one!
This one manages to scare me ans keep me guessing w/o making me straight up hate the characters. In fact, I find myself feeling for the both the sisters in this movie. And, I think that’s why I love it——because it gives me all the thrills and chills of horror and suspense, but it also pulls on the heartstrings too—- which is quite a feat for a movie of its genre. Hence, this movie top in its class! Fantastic!
Saturday, June 25, 2011
Mad About Men (1954)
Better than its predecessor!, 26 June 2011
Author: IamTheMoviesILove from United States
I saw the first film (“Miranda” 1948) last night, and didn’t care much for it. But, I saw this one tonight, and I must say that I quite enjoyed it—-a whole lot! It’s in Technicolor, and the scenery is very quint, not as fake and uppity snobby looking as in the first film. There are also many, many more shots of the mermaid lagoon in this film, which is breath-taking, for lack of a better phrase! And, the scenery, the cottage, the town, all charming! Like something right out of a story-book. Just good, old-fashioned quaintness, rather than flashy deco—-unlike the first film. That’s the main difference between the two, if you ask me. So, I can’t understand why this one doesn’t have a higher rating than just 6.2!
Like others have said, the plot is sort of dull and more than a little silly, but, nonetheless, it’s quite special. And, Margaret Rutherford gets quite a bit more screen-time in this film than the other, which makes the movie that much better, in my opinion! She steals every scene she’s in!
So, if you saw the first film, but were left wanting more, see “Mad About Men”—-it won’t disappoint. The only think I really didn’t like about it was the red-headed mermaid cousin of hers—-she was SOOOOOO annoying! But, hey, nothing’s perfect!
Thursday, June 16, 2011
You Again (2010)
Laughter and fun aside, what we’re left with is a movie which tries to be more sincere than it really is. A failure in terms of honesty, leaving the viewer to feel let-down., 17 June 2011
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I have to admit that after I watched this movie in the theater for the first time, I was swept away by the laughs, and emerged from my initial viewing with a bit of a high because of that! The entire cast was great (Jamie Lee Curtis and Sigourney Weaver were lots of fun opposite each-other!). Heck, I even added it on Facebook to my list of favorite movies! And, I told myself that I couldn’t wait to get a DVD copy to add to my personal collection!
But, then, after I did get a DVD and watched it for a second time, my feelings for the film were sorely different. I just couldn’t get past the necklace scene, and the blatantly obvious fact that Joanna didn’t seem to have changed (even though she would fool many of us into thinking she had). And, that realization was the straw that broke the camels back, for me. So, I deleted it off my Facebook and no-longer regard it as one of my favorites. And, I’m sorry to say that I’m rather embarrassed at myself for ever bragging about it to so many people in the first place, b/c it was a real disappointment in terms of why we, the audience, are supposed to ultimately like it; i.e. if the ultimate message was supposed to be about hope and how even the meanest bullies can change (which is what I was hoping for), then this film was a failure, because when it came down to it, it seemed to lack sincerity. As a movie lover, it pains me to admit this though, because I did so want to believe in the goodness of this film!
Monday, June 13, 2011
Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte (1964)
Grotesue! If you’re happy, and you know it, stay away from this film!, 14 June 2011
Author: IamTheMoviesILove from United States
With all due respect to those of you who love it, I have to say that I resent the way this movie made me feel! I watch movies to get a rush and a high of some kind, even occasionally by suspense. But, this one rubbed me wrong. After the gruesome murder scene near the beginning, I remained grossed out throughout the rest of the picture—-I just couldn’t get that scene, and the nasty take on the title song—-out of my head. And, yeah, about the song that was sang in the opening credits, I think it’s just plain gross and in bad taste! Now, I’ll admit that I know very little about horror movies from the Haze-code years (any film pre-1967), but it seems to me that “Charlotte” went a bit overboard with the overtness of violence and crudity—-for that time period, at least.
Speaking (well, typing) as someone who doesn’t really like horror movies as I don’t like being scared or grossed out, I have been known to make exceptions for the older films, because I don’t expect them to be graphic, only suggestive. So, this film was a real shocker to me! Because not only was it very graphic in parts (albeit, the visual effects pale in comparison to the level of gore that would be seen in a similar film of today, the point still stands that the intent of gore was there), but it was also very anything but suggestive in referencing it; I COULD NOT BELIEVE the lyrics to the opening song, “Chop chop, sweet Charlotte, chop off his head and hands” or something like that…just completely vulgar!
Please understand though, that my review and rating of this film is not to suggest that it is a poor piece of film-making, but rather that it does not happen to suite my personal preferences—-hardly at all! I also feel that parts of it were over-done, and that the graphic scenes were not necessary to move the story along, and therefore were, to me, in bad taste.
I’d advice everyone who believes in the cleanliness of all movies from the “Golden Age of Hollywood” to steer clear of “Hush, Hush, Sweet Charlotte,” cause it just might burst your bubble! For a similar, but perhaps “safer” sort of movie, watch 1962’s “What Ever Happened to Baby Jane”——it may leave you surprised, but not repulsed. That’s my take on it, anyway.
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Manhattan (1979)
Love it or hate it, this movie has *something*…, 9 June 2011
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
The first time I saw this movie, I didn’t like it…
Then (see *UPDATE* at the end), I changed my mind…
I tend to instinctively know what movies I’m gonna like, and those I won’t. So, it’s a rare thing for me to watch a movie I consider one of the “worst.” But, it just so happens that last night was one of those nights for me. Woody Allen’s “Manhattan” I watched for the first time last night, it and was, without a doubt, one of the most boring movies I’d ever seen! And, though I typically have no gripes with a May-December romance of sorts, something about Woody’s relationship w/ the 17-18 year-old girl in the film didn’t sit well with me—-probably b/c she sounded like a member of Charlie Brown and the Peanuts kids——in other words, totally childish. To me, the believability and success of those sort of relationships depend on the people involved, and age is but a small detail of it. Hence, in that case, the people involved didn’t fit, and I found myself sorely irritated with them. So, how could I love the movie if I couldn’t love the people? Still, before anyone jumps to conclusions about my viewing history, let me point out that I am well-aware of “Manhattan”s reputation as a classic, and I did appreciate the scenic beauty of the film, just not the film itself.
The point is, it’s not the May-December romance aspect of the film that makes it distasteful to me, it’s the way it was handled in this particular film. There are other May-December romances that I actually am quite fond of. For example, I love the almost universally panned Lily Tomlin-John Travolta movie, “Moment by Moment” in which a young Travolta has a romance with the much older Tomlin character. And, I thought it was really sweet—-perhaps b/c Travolta didn’t sound like he could do the voice of “Charlie Brown” if ya get my drift…while young, we was not child-like, just cute, sweet, and naive—-but grown! There’s the difference. And, the scenic appeal of that movie far surpasses even that of such beautifully filmed scenes in “Manhattan.” I also like “Harold and Maude” quite a bit. And, there’s was about as big a generation gap as two people could have in a relationship!
But, given further thought, I would say that my real problem with the relationship in “Manhattan” is not as much the fact that the girl seemed terribly childish as it is that their particular relationship seemed very one-dimensional—-in this case, totally sex-based. There was no real sense of camaraderie between them, just a liking for fooling around together. The problem is not that they liked sex, it’s that, as the viewer, I got the feeling that one was being taken advantage of for the other’s temporary enjoyment, as it was established early on that Woody’s character had no intent of getting real serious about the girl. So, with such shallowly developed characters, I, as the viewer, could not sympathize with them. That’s why it’s bad, in my opinion. Whereas, with H&M, the viewer is offered a look at the build-up to their relationship. So, however odd, viewers are given the opportunity to understand where that bond is coming from. That’s why I actually am touched by H&M. Had Woody done similarly w/ “Manhattan,” I may have been touched by it as-well.
The ending particularly stunk, in my opinion, as it showed just how shallow Woody’s character actually was; he really didn’t care about the girl, just whether he’d be happy or not! This sort of character would have been fine in a movie of another genre, but was a bad fit in a movie that was essentially sold on the premise of being a (however odd) romantic comedy. Cause there is nothing comedic—- OR romantic—-about being a cad!
Shallow characters, all around! Good filming, good music, good visuals. But, the bad script ruined it!
UPDATE: Saw it again on HBO and one again was drawn in by the good visuals, music, and relaxed simplicity of it. Except, this time, I rather enjoyed it! This time, I realized that if Mariel Hemingway wasn’t so childish-sounding—-if she seemed just a little older/more mature, I probably wouldn’t be bothered at all. For the record, I love the sort of May-December “forbidden romance” stuff—-it was just that Meriel was a little too much on the child-like side if things. But, nothing’s perfect. Overall, it was rather good the second time around. Yes, I’ve decided I like it.
Friday, June 3, 2011
The Incredible Shrinking Woman (1981)
A film with a strong message of precaution, cloaked in campy comedy!
I remember first seeing the movie when I was very young, and hadn’t seen it again until about a week ago. I’m in my 20s, so it was already considerably a classic by the time I saw it anyway. I had forgotten just how much I enjoyed the movie. And, it may well be that I enjoyed it more as an older person than I did when I was a kid. Because I can understand some of the humor that would have went straight over my head all those years ago. And thinking about it these days, I would say that that is the real beauty of the film — that it manages to be both naughty and nice, in a very subtle, understated way.
I also loved that it had a campy, yet natural appearance about it. So many highlights and undertones of the film, like an abstract painting. I especially love the way the beginning scenes of the film establishes the setting as a part of worry free America, dreamy suburbia, it put me on cloud nine just watching the first scenes! You got the sense that Pat Kramer lead a very happy-go-lucky life, that her and her husband weren’t overly romantic nor were they overly serious or in a rut. They just had fun with each other and loved each other. I also got the sense that the children (albeit a little spoiled) were allowed to be children. And although the message was supposed to be one of inverted idealism, the way I experienced those scenes as the viewer was bliss! So, I commend the film for not being too “on the nose” about its message, while still getting the point across.
It wasn’t a preachy sort of film, but there was definitely a moral to it. To me, the moral seems to be a cautionary tale against the dangers of greed and materialism. But, what I love about the way the film presents it is that it doesn’t make materialism seem all bad. On the contrary, you get the sense that life is indeed easier with certain items on hand, and a certain way of being. So, when considering the moral of the story along with the easy breezy feeling that the viewer gets in the opening scenes of the film, the message seems to be one of precaution, but not prohibition. Because nowhere in the film did they say that TV and perfume or any of that stuff was bad. In fact, they didn’t even really imply it. Furthermore, they sort of embraced it at certain points!
So, yes, I like the film for being moral but not preachy. It seems to say “There’s nothing wrong with having a little fun. There’s nothing wrong with taking it easy. Just don’t overdo it.” And for me, the cherry on top was the gorilla. Even though it was silly, cause the gorilla seemed to represent the idea that animals deserve equal respect and care against those dangers too.
I highly recommend this film for all comedy lovers, and for enthusiasts of 1970s and 1980s cinema. It is quite a gem of its time— and yet, because of the continuing relevance of its message, has managed to be also *timeless*.
Moment By Moment (1978)
The charm is in its simplicity!
I have just recently become acquainted with this film through Netflix, and must say that I love it. In fact, I am proud to admit that I actually love it for many of the same reasons that many people bash it! I love that it is a May-December romance of sorts, I love that Strip is so clingy and child-like in his way with words—-that makes him all the cuter in my opinion, and makes his relationship with Tomlin’s character all the more sensual, due to his mushy childishness being a nice contrast to her detached, poker-faced demeanor, at first. Yes, it’s a flawed film. I’m not blind to that. But, that doesn’t make it totally unlovable!
I just really liked the movie, and thought that it was very sweet—-yes, even and especially the love scenes! So, I don’t agree with hardly any of the critics on this one. Also, I’ve read somewhere some disdain for the alleged lack of visual beauty in this film, but I beg to differ! Nearly the entire film was shot on location, on beach-front property, in a rather mansion-like house! How beautiful can you get?! So, I love the film! Yes, it was simple. Yes, it was dull. And, yes, it was decidedly silly and childish in parts. But, those aspects, to me, are part of its charm. And, I find it hopeful that Netflix has it streaming. Because maybe that interest is an indicator that an official DVD release may be in the near future; I would love to have my own copy of this little movie! I think I can safely say that it is now one of my favorites. While it is by no means Oscar-worthy or epic, so what?! Its a simple love story. And, some of us like em’ like that!
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
On a Clear Day You Can See Forever (1970)
Less colorful than it appears…, 18 May 2011
As much as I wanted to enjoy this film, it just bored me. I found myself needing to take frequent breaks from it, just to get through the first half. And, I didn’t even make it through the second half! I began watching this movie because of an initial intrigue that I had for the plot. And, while I do commend the film for the visual effort that was put into it (lavish costumes, often lovely scenery…), and while I do appreciate the production of the film as an admirable endeavor to extort a well-intended plot-line (reincarnation is never an easy subject to tackle, not even in the movies—-so kudos to this film for trying…), I must pan it for being unable to capture my interest and keep it. In sum, I would say the film is well-intended, but tries to be more than it is. At first glance, it comes across like one of those blockbuster, big-budget musicals, but this one is all air and no substance, like an inflated balloon that falls flat. Not even the high notes in the few songs in the film could keep it afloat… a movie only a Barbra fanatic could love.
Hollywood Singing and Dancing: A Musical History (2008) (V)
Good attempt at covering an entire genre…in only 108 minutes!, 18 May 2011
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
This is perfect for a documentary, as far as being the right blend of entertaining and educational! And, another huge highlight of this particular DVD is the fact that it is a high-quality production; visually and audio-ably pristine. Good selection of clips, great selection of interviews, tip-top sights and sounds—-a real treat for the senses! I do have one big gripe with it though, and that it seemed to ignore some valid points in favor of some exaggerated points. For example, at one point, it said that Meet Me in St. Louis (1944) was really the first movie-musical in which the songs were part of the story/incorporated into the plot-line (it was said that before that movie, musicals were just a compilation of song and dance numbers on stage). And, Vincent Minnelli is credited with the change. However, accepts that claim as fact obviously knows very little about 1930s musicals! Examples of 1930s musicals in which the songs are incorporated as part of the plot-line development include: Showboat (the original), Love Me Tonight (1932) and That Girl From Paris (1937), just to name a few. Don’t get me wrong, I am a big Minnelli fan! Its just that I’m also a big fan of said films, and I think it is a sad injustice for them not to be recognized and given the credit they deserve! Because obviously, they were a bit ahead of their time. Other than that though, this is a five-star documentary, that I would recommend to any classic-film lover!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)