Pageviews past week

Saturday, July 19, 2014

Casino Royale (1967)

There are people in this world that can’t simply sing but try too. (Hi Mom[I miss you.]) There are also people who can’t act. Any body seen Kevin Bacon lately?) Last but certainly not least there are people who think they are funny but are not. (i.e. Tom Arnold and Rosanne Barr) The people who put this movie together are example of the final category. Let me start off this review with one a positive note. Warning: This may be the last positive thing I’ll say in this review. First off all, the fact that they put this movie together at all is a miracle. There are a litany of writers and directors mentioned in the opening credits. I believe there are four writers and six directors in the aforementioned opening credits. I’m not sure after all I only have so many fingers. Seriously though this movie was awful. I watched this film for two hours and seventeen minutes waiting for it to end or simply get better. It did not need much to become more interesting my friends. I have seen this movie before granted it was over 15 years ago but when something in you see is this horrible you as hard as you may try though you simply never forget it. I went into this movie this time and tried to forget my past biases and prejudices. As a movie critic I try to give each movie a new chance to surprise me with or excite me. This screenplay did supply me with either. The film had all the right ingredients for a good comedy. It spoofed a then popular movie series like James Bond. It has an amazing cast attached to it. It starred people like Orson Wells, Woody Allen and Peter Sellers. While Mr. Allen is the only of member cinematic trinity still breathing. These three men are by many to be gods of the cinema. In the case of Orson Wells he was God (or at lest the voice of Him.) You have all seen of course that little Mel Brooks movie he was entitled The History of the World Part One. (He was only the narrator.) As I mentioned before however this film never really lived up to it quota. There were a lot funny characters, a ton of great gags and plenty of classic scenes with comedy charisma. It (the movie) simply lacked that ebb and flow of a true comedy. The movie never came together as a whole. What a shame that is not usually the case for Woody Allen movies. I don’t really know why this film lacked any creativity. I am after all only an amateur I clearly know nothing about writing. You are after all reading this on a BlogSpot not in the New York Times or even the evening ledger. Heck at this point I would settle for that community newspaper that gets thrown on to your lawn on Wednesday mornings. (You know the one I mean the one your dog chews up and throws up in your kitchen.) I can only tell you what I’ve observed after watching over 865 movies and reviewing them. You need to be consistent. Movies are usually best when they try to stick to just one formula or way of thinking. The old adage about too many cooks spoiling a broth rings true when I see this movie. There were over a dozen men filling in the slot usually filled by just two people. (Writer and Director.) There is no doubt in my mind why this movie lacked the ebb and low I spoke of earlier. Nearly twenty-four hours have passed by after I saw this worthless movie. Still however I feel like the icky residue left behind after cleaning after your dog. For not even the power of full strength ammonia may wash away this feeling. Oh well, Thank God I still work at Acme perhaps I can go there and but something to get rid of this feeling. They do after all have a men’s room with a toilet in it. If that does not work there is always the janitors sink. Grade F

No comments:

A note from an editor!

Hi Matthew,

Thank you for the time and effort you put into this piece, especially on a Saturday morning. I can tell you definitely took good notes of everything that was going on during the event!

We still have some work to do before this piece is ready to print. Your piece has a lot of information, but it doesn’t sound like a news article. What was the point of his speech/presentation? Why was he addressing this audience? What is Vanguard? What does the company do – who does it serve? You spend a lot of time narrating (for example, how he was injured), but did not report on the purpose of the event. You can maybe mention his appearance/joking about it in a sentence or two, but do not take several paragraphs to do so. Also, I like how you mentioned where the name “Vanguard” comes from.

There are a lot of spelling errors in this piece – make sure you proof read each sentence carefully.

I know I am getting back to you a little later I hoped, and I’m sorry about that! But if you have time tonight, please go through my suggestions and try to rework your piece. You can send me what you have tonight/tomorrow morning. Please bring a copy of it to the meeting tomorrow and we will discuss it further from there.

Once again, thanks for your hard work and promptness! Remember this is a learning process, and we are all part of the Waltonian team!

Talk to you soon!

Ten Most pathetic movie stars that still have careers.

(In A - B -C Order)

1. Hayden Christensen

2. Tom Crusie

3. Kevin Costner

4. Keeanu Reeves

5. Denise Richards

6. Adam Sandler

7. Arnold Schwarzenegger

8. William Shatner

9. Sylvester Stalloan

10. John Claude Van dahm