Change Your Image
mrpancake_2000
Reviews
Moulin Rouge! (2001)
On second thought...
I really, truly loved this movie when I originally saw it. I saw it twice in the theaters, and both times it was a really unforgettable cinematic experience. However, upon seeing this movie again, it is just, in my opinion, a little overdone. Personally, I think it would have been much more tolerable if it had been cut a considerable amount of time, but the love story gets very ...meh...to me. Although many wont agree, Nicole Kidman is, at best, and overrated actress. Ewan is a little better, but I don't see the "wow" factor everyone else sees. His voice is certainly better than Nicole's. I think the cinematography and direction is really good, but I just think this movie doesn't have quite the power to make me want to watch it multiple times. There can be too much of a good thing. I'm giving it a 2, to even out the 10 I gave it before I discovered it, well, annoyed me. What bothers me most is when people assume it started a musical revival that paved the way for Chicago. Not true. It isn't as if Chicago wasn't going to be made before Moulin Rouge came out. It was like 20 years in the making. Chicago was better because it keeps at a good length, with a great storyline and better acting and voices.
The 75th Annual Academy Awards (2003)
Classier than normal
Steve Martin was great this year, and as much as I like Whoopie Goldberg as an actress, I wasn't too impressed with her hosting in years passed. Steve Martin was hilarious, or at least as much as he could be without being "distasteful." The only joke I felt was rather inappropriate was about Secretary with Maggie Glygenhaal, in which he said something to the extent of women begging on the floor and that putting them in their place. To me, it wasn't too offensive, but I could tell some people in the audience were less than enthusiastic about his comment. I hope to see him for many years to come. As for the actual ceremony, it seemed a lot classier than normal, which was a breath of fresh air. I enjoyed that, except the security was ridiculous. I am happy with CHICAGO's win, but would have liked to see FRIDA, ADAPTATION., FAR FROM HEAVEN among the nominees and would have been happy to see any of those win. Great to see Chris Cooper win, and would have loved to see Meryl win, but Catherine Zeta-Jones did a great job in CHICAGO, so kudos to her. I was only disappointed in the Best Actress win with Nicole Kidman. I think she is rather overrated as an actress, but good nonetheless. Her win for THE HOURS was a severe disappointment to me, even though I knew it would happen. I just hope she doesn't win for quite a while because it really bothered me she won this year. I would have LOVED to see Salma Hayek win for FRIDA, but it wasn't really in the cards. FRIDA was the most overlooked movie of the year missing out in major categories it should have been nominated for (Supporting Actor, Picture, Cinematography, Screenplay, Direction...). This was a great year for movies and a great year for the Oscars as well.
Frida (2002)
ONE OF THE BEST...
I really loved this movie. I think it was very close to perfect, with only a few minor problems. It bothers me people say they don't like this movie because it doesn't chronicle Kahlo's live exactly. Since I don't know much about her, I didn't really have any expectations. Salma Hayek was absolutely mesmerizing as Frida, and it seemed she really was her character. I would have LOVED to see Salma Hayek win for FRIDA, but it wasn't really in the cards. Alfred Molina was spectacular as well, and I would have also enjoyed seeing him win, let alone be nominated. Supporting (minus Molina, who seemed more of a lead in many ways) characters were strong, but had such small parts I can't really give any critique on their performances. FRIDA was the most overlooked movie of the year missing out in major categories it should have been nominated for (Supporting Actor, Picture, Cinematography, Screenplay, Direction...). Julie Taymor did a great job directing this masterpiece, which is cleary a spectacle to the eye as well as to the mind. For the few minor problems, the only one that bugged me was the amount of nudity. It seemed almost unnecessary at some places, but was still rather tasteful (i.e. not having huge, graphic sex scenes complete with noise...[ahem, Halle Berry, and to a lesser extent, Diane Lane]) This really was probably my favorite movie of the year, along with CHICAGO, but for very different reasons. This was a great year for movies and a great year for the Oscars as well. I hope Hayek gets more good work in the future and maybe...a win?
The Hours (2002)
I finally realized something important...
Nicole Kidman is extremely overrated as an actress. She was so far below par of any of the other actors/actresses in the movie. She tried to do what she couldn't pull off...in any sense of the word. Her facial expressions and silent moments that were supposed to say so much...simply didn't. Meryl has mastered that. Julianne Moore was the best part of the movie by far. Her scenes were especially gripping, especially in comparison to the horrible performance by Kidman. Nicole's time will come...maybe not in this lifetime, but eventually that she can pull off a decent acting job. Maybe instead of her one dimensional performances, she should take some of that huge amount of money she earns and takes acting classes. Meryl should have been nominated for this, to accompany the one she got for Adaptation., but the award should go to Salma Hayek for Frida, but since that is virtually impossible, it should go to Julianne Moore for Far From Heaven, then Renée Zellweger for Chicago...and I can only assume Diane Lane did a better job in Unfaithful. Hell, Mariah Carrey probably did a better job in Glitter.