I will admit that viewing a 1952 film from a 2007 perspective might be clouding my opinion. Julie Harris' "Frankie" is overplayed and ruins the entire piece. I attempted to look past the fact that she is supposed to be only 12. C'mon, even in 1951/52 Julie could never pass for a 12-year-old, maybe 18. Directors often ask the audience to suspend their beliefs and imaginations - but this is too much to ask regarding Ms. Harris. Yes, the dialog is effective. It is interesting considering certain episodes within the film. For instance, 10-year-old John Henry's proclivities toward cross-dressing. Daring I must say for the time? Ms. Walter's presentation (considering she had to buffer the over-dramatic Harris) is excellent. Little Brandon also holds his own. Maybe as a stage presentation it worked - but as "one of the great films" in cinema history - forget it.
Reviews
4 Reviews
Little Miss Sunshine
(2006)
Over rated highly
26 July 2007
Just caught this on HBO. What am I missing here? This is one of the most overrated pieces of crap I've ever sat through. Alan Arkin won an Oscar for this? He walked through this. The film is a waste of time. The little fat girl - is just that - a little fat girl with no talent - and she was nominated as well - for what - how loud she could scream? Don't waste your time. The 15-year old teen boy is the only character that is written with any substance at all - and has no dialog until the middle of the film. Silence is golden. It is not funny. It contains no social comment although it attempts to confront the indignities of having small children compete in beauty contests. Again, don't waste your time. Imagine, this was also nominated for Best Picture of the Year - what am I missing?
The Man Without a Face
(1993)
2nd time around
31 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Saw this Gibson epic about ten years ago. Caught it last night on HBO and maybe it is just time or the political environment - but - this is a subtle story of pedophilia "grooming" masquerading as some sort of summertime coming-of-age, angst and misfortune melodrama.
If you are reading this little review of mine - I think you've probably read some of the others - so I will not bore you with the plot. However, young Nick Stahl, who gives a great performance, as does Mr. Gibson, meet under unusual circumstances and Nick "picks" Gibson to be his summertime tutor in order to pass a tough exam for military school.
This first time I watched I would and did agree with most reviews that it was a "heartwarming" episode of two people coming together, learning more about themselves and in the end after great angst proceeding along life's highway with a better sense of self.
However, it is a the clever slight of hand that I discovered watching it a second time.
Gibson's character is a mess. Due to a very questionable relationship many years previous in which a young boy is burned to death - he serves time in jail - for exactly what is never exposed - unless I missed it. Remember this is 1960 and sexual abuse was buried way deep. When Nick's character is asked by his mother if he has been "touched" - Nick says yes. This motivates the mother to report Gibson to the local authorities. I now believe Nick was "touched" and welcomed the sexual attention. The audience is fooled into believing that Nick's character is "misunderstood" and being "touched" was only a minor handshake or pat on the back. Nick's character is much smarter than that. Even in 1960 - being "touched" meant fondling and other sexual activity.
Gibson's character was slowly grooming Stahl's character into a homosexual relationship. Boylove it is called. It would have been more palatable and more realistic if the sexual nature was explored intelligently. Instead, it is covered up with digging holes and passive/aggressive behaviours. While I personally believe it is a very dangerous road (illegal in most cases) to travel for an adult to explore physical sex with an underage minor, especially one as vulnerable as Stahl's character - it is an unfortunate reality that transcends all demographics.
I still would recommend this film - but watch with eyes wide open!
If you are reading this little review of mine - I think you've probably read some of the others - so I will not bore you with the plot. However, young Nick Stahl, who gives a great performance, as does Mr. Gibson, meet under unusual circumstances and Nick "picks" Gibson to be his summertime tutor in order to pass a tough exam for military school.
This first time I watched I would and did agree with most reviews that it was a "heartwarming" episode of two people coming together, learning more about themselves and in the end after great angst proceeding along life's highway with a better sense of self.
However, it is a the clever slight of hand that I discovered watching it a second time.
Gibson's character is a mess. Due to a very questionable relationship many years previous in which a young boy is burned to death - he serves time in jail - for exactly what is never exposed - unless I missed it. Remember this is 1960 and sexual abuse was buried way deep. When Nick's character is asked by his mother if he has been "touched" - Nick says yes. This motivates the mother to report Gibson to the local authorities. I now believe Nick was "touched" and welcomed the sexual attention. The audience is fooled into believing that Nick's character is "misunderstood" and being "touched" was only a minor handshake or pat on the back. Nick's character is much smarter than that. Even in 1960 - being "touched" meant fondling and other sexual activity.
Gibson's character was slowly grooming Stahl's character into a homosexual relationship. Boylove it is called. It would have been more palatable and more realistic if the sexual nature was explored intelligently. Instead, it is covered up with digging holes and passive/aggressive behaviours. While I personally believe it is a very dangerous road (illegal in most cases) to travel for an adult to explore physical sex with an underage minor, especially one as vulnerable as Stahl's character - it is an unfortunate reality that transcends all demographics.
I still would recommend this film - but watch with eyes wide open!
Bewitched
(2005)
shoot these people (Mr. Ferrell first)
29 May 2007
This film has got to be the worst waste of talent in the past decade. I'd heard and read that it was bad - understatement! Will Ferrell has absolutely no ability as an actor, whatsoever! I try to understand how and why casting directors, directors, producers even use him. He is not funny. They could and should have hired Gary Coleman or Keanu Reeves - and they would have been ten times, no -100 times better than Mr. Ferrell. Co-starring him next to Nicole Kidman is like putting an retarded ape with a parakeet. I will never pay or waste my time watching Ferrell again. Coincidentally, I watched (or slept through) most of "Stranger than Fiction" - another disaster saved only by Emma Thompson and Dustin Hoffman.
Michael Caine and Shirley MacClaine are totally underused. Kidman does her best to hold up Ferrell - but I don't think even Katherine Hepburn coming back from the grave could do this bomb justice. I've appreciated Ms. Epron's work in the past - she must have been on downer meds for this one. Stay away, stay far away from Bewitched.
Michael Caine and Shirley MacClaine are totally underused. Kidman does her best to hold up Ferrell - but I don't think even Katherine Hepburn coming back from the grave could do this bomb justice. I've appreciated Ms. Epron's work in the past - she must have been on downer meds for this one. Stay away, stay far away from Bewitched.
Tell Your Friends