Today’s specials:
- The New York Times reports on the Kids with Cameras exhibit. If you’ve seen Born Into Brothels, you’ll want to see this…
- Peter T. Chattaway groans over The Great Raid. (But Phil Boatwright at Crosswalk calls it the best film he’s seen all year. Hmmm.)
I’ve gotten puke-sick of people using the Matrix as a Christian allegory. It was cute the first six years…
And, Gooooooo, ArcFire!!
(Five Iron Frenzy has a song called “Handbook for the Sellout” about a band losing its base of fans simply because it’s becoming popular. Obviously AF has been super-hyped the last 1/2 year. Waiting for that backlash…)
I’m still quite upset that Halle Berry was allowed to run all over (and kill) Rosamund in the last James Bond film. She was far more interesting…and I like her.
I haven’t seen this one yet (I did enjoy the book when I read it in college). I’ll probably see the BBC miniseries before this film, but I found this interesting:
Sighs Matter
http://tinyurl.com/dna6h
Rosamund is one of the reasons I actually kinda liked Doom. >:)
And your remark about Winona Ryder is interesting, since Mark Steyn made a similar comparison: “. . . even in our present-tense culture, the latest Pride and Prejudice seems to have turned up a little sooner than anybody needed it. It’s a full decade since Colin Firth emerged from the lake in the BBC adaptation and I suppose to the young person his name may evoke only the prematurely middle-aged dull stick from recent Richard Curtis offerings. And presumably Keira Knightley was available and her spirited coltishness won’t last for ever. She reminds me here of Winona Ryder’s Jo in the ’94 Little Women, a film that captured a young actress’s girlish spirit at its peak. Aside from her shoplifting trial, Miss Ryder has given few memorable performances since, and one hopes Miss Knightley is more fortunate.”
I enjoyed the film up until the last half-hour, where the scenes between the two leads began to look like the cover of some trashy romance paperback, with Mr. Darcy’s unbuttoned shirt, walking through the mist, etc. It became obvious to me at that point that the film was made with a certain sex clearly in mind.
Well, I’ll forgive them that because Mr. Darcy is one of the most virtuous and admirable romantic heroes in literature, and if they want to equate that with sexiness for young ladies, well… we could use a lot more of that rather than what USUALLY passes as “sexy” these days. (I’m looking at you, Matthew McCounaughey, Colin Farrell, Ashton Kutcher, and, dear heavens, Usher.)
FWIW, the North American version has an extra eight minutes at the end that were not in the original British version, precisely because the British test audiences found that part of the film too “mushy” and “sweet”. Rumour has it that the longer version will soon be released over there, though, following the success of that version over here.
I’ve read about those eight minutes, but watching the film I was amazed. Where did they find EIGHT MINUTES to cut? I can think of only a minute or two I’d excise.
Nice review! It won me over, too. Check out my review at Catholic Fire.