[100M] Wuthering Heights, Kiss Kiss (Bang Bang), I'm not there, Elizabeth : Golden Age
84 - Wuthering Heights (1992)
December 9th, DVD
I don't know why it doesn't work. I see some problematic points, but as a whole the adaptation has all the importants parts and it should work better than this. I think it's too close to the book, which is very symbolic and that's what doesn't work in the movie.
I'm sure that Ralph Fiennes as a teenager doesn't work, and I'm really sure his HAIR is terrible in this. Long hair doesn't suit him at all. I kept yelling him to at least tie it. It's a shame, really, because Ralph Fiennes as Heathcliff is a great idea.
* * (on a scale from 1 to 5)
85 - Kiss Kiss (Bang Bang) (2000)
December 17th, DVD
This is not the amazing Kiss Kiss Bang Bang starring Val Kilmer and Robert Downey Jr that you should see if you haven't.
Main problem, of course is that when the main character announces he wants to retire from gangster life (at the beginning of the movie) you want to hit him for not seing how bad this idea is. It's like he never saw a gangster movie.
Surprisingly, some parts (the second half) works better than I imagined, and manages to be quite touching. Stellan Saagsard is also quite good.
Of course, my only interest for seing this movie was Paul Bettany and Paul Bettany in a leather coat was great !
* * (on a scale from 1 to 5)
86 - I'm not there
December 18th, theaters
... What the hell was that ? No really ? I'm not sure I even see what the director tried to do because it's a hundred things at the same time. Weird. Really, really weird. I liked some things in the movie, but the overall impression I got is confusion. Lots. It's not even that I thought it was bad, I don't know what it wanted to tell.
I liked how the different colors and black and white storylines worked, though. The black and whites were especially pretty, although Kid!Dylan parts were gorgeous too. I'm very confused about Gere!Dylan, because the segment is pretty, but it looks like Big Fish.
I can't say it was bad, but I can't say it was good either because I feel like I missed something. If you see it, I'd like to talk about it with you because I'm just confused.
One thing that annoyed me : it wouldn't end. It's too long, especially for a movie that confusing, and Todd Haynes (*o* Todd Haynes !!) hasn't seen Lord of the Rings because he does end his movie seventeen times.
Of course, best part of the movie : CATE BLANCHETT. Even when she's average, Cate Blanchett is already very good. But here ? she's amazing. I'm kinda hoping she wins both Golden Globes she's nominated for because she deserves it. Especially for this movie, where her Dylan is not the most easy to understand (if you can understand anything from this movie) but clearly the most fascinating.
not rated
87 - Elizabeth, the golden age
December 18th, theaters
The amazing thing about the first movie was how dark, political and complex it was. I felt like it never went for the easy way, or the one that looked the coolest and it was great. This one focuses on a love triangle that is the least interesting part of it, and which makes Elizabeth looks hysterical for almost no reason (it worked when she was a young queen, but we know from the first one that she's not going to marry, so what's the point ?).
Contrary to the first movie, this one tries to look cool. Some shots are there only because they look good and yeah, the whole movie DOES look good but doesn't have the darkness and austerity of the first. I know it's a different era but sometimes the light and gold symbolism was too much.
I'm quite sad that the movie doesn't end on a fade to white when there was two great ones in the movie.
The great naval battle looks so fake. I want Master and Commander back ! Here, most of it look like 3D (good 3D, but it's still not the same thing) and since it's supposed to be the climax of the movie, it doesn't work well.
I really dislike Clive Owen and I don't know why. He has a nice voice but I wanted to hit him each time he was on screen and I'm pretty sure I wasn't supposed to since he's the romantic lead.
And the two great things from this movie (I didn't dislike it that much, it's mostly very disappointing) :
- Cate Blanchett is not as good as in I'm not there but she still kicks ass. I liked the speech to her army, she looked very impressive. And she had such a great voice.
- Costumes are, like in the first one, GORGEOUS. I love that they don't try to be cool or even good looking sometimes, especially on the hair but look so real instead, and they used famous costumes from paintings. I could watch it again only for them. I also loved how Bess costumes were always less detailed and a paler shade of Elizabeth's. Very good use of symbolism considering who Bess is compared to Elizabeth and Raleigh. And those dresses, those coats, those pretty fabrics... it's costume porn to me.
* * (on a scale from 1 to 5)
More a comparison to the first one than for itself.