posted by
revdorothyl at 02:01am on 10/01/2006 under movie reviews
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Just a quick note on my recent movie-going adventures:
Do see:
"Casanova" -- fun, fun, fun! Heath Ledger and Venice, for cryin' out loud, in a glorious period romp (well, if you don't let the threat of the Inquisition bring you down too much, as most of the characters in the movie do not). Great supporting comedic bits by Jeremy Irons and Oliver Platt, especially, and a feast for the eyes that kept me in stitches a good deal of the time. I'm really glad I saw this on the big screen.
And to be avoided, like a particularly pernicious pox:
"BloodRayne" -- Barely watchable, and apparently the best thing that can be said for it (according to the review on the Sci-Fi Weekly website, which I read too late) is that it doesn't suck as completely as director Uwe Boll's previous video-game-derived movies did.
I actually felt PAIN for the actors (including Ben Kingsley and Billy Zane, obviously fighting not to show their chagrin at the two-dimensional supporting characters and wooden expositional dialogue they're stuck with), who sometimes seemed to be "phoning it in" just out of sheer frustration and desire to distance themselves from a script desperately in need of further re-writes (or less re-writes, depending on who's to blame for its current non-living-and-not-in-a-sexy-way condition). The lead actress did her best with the role of Rayne, and the fighting/action sequences were at least not boring (certainly not in comparison to the "plot/character/exposition" sequences), but there wasn't anything on that screen (including special effects) that Buffy hadn't already done better on the small screen.
All things considered, I'd like my $6 and my two hours back, please.
Do see:
"Casanova" -- fun, fun, fun! Heath Ledger and Venice, for cryin' out loud, in a glorious period romp (well, if you don't let the threat of the Inquisition bring you down too much, as most of the characters in the movie do not). Great supporting comedic bits by Jeremy Irons and Oliver Platt, especially, and a feast for the eyes that kept me in stitches a good deal of the time. I'm really glad I saw this on the big screen.
And to be avoided, like a particularly pernicious pox:
"BloodRayne" -- Barely watchable, and apparently the best thing that can be said for it (according to the review on the Sci-Fi Weekly website, which I read too late) is that it doesn't suck as completely as director Uwe Boll's previous video-game-derived movies did.
I actually felt PAIN for the actors (including Ben Kingsley and Billy Zane, obviously fighting not to show their chagrin at the two-dimensional supporting characters and wooden expositional dialogue they're stuck with), who sometimes seemed to be "phoning it in" just out of sheer frustration and desire to distance themselves from a script desperately in need of further re-writes (or less re-writes, depending on who's to blame for its current non-living-and-not-in-a-sexy-way condition). The lead actress did her best with the role of Rayne, and the fighting/action sequences were at least not boring (certainly not in comparison to the "plot/character/exposition" sequences), but there wasn't anything on that screen (including special effects) that Buffy hadn't already done better on the small screen.
All things considered, I'd like my $6 and my two hours back, please.
(no subject)
(no subject)
However, I'm sort of glad I saw it when I did, since it was only in the theaters here for a single week, and I'd have probably felt deprived if I'd missed the opportunity to see it for myself.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
I've caught bits and pieces of the 'original' BloodRayne on TV since I wrote my initial review, and those brief glimpses confirmed my initial opinion that it was un-watchable tripe, and that only my innate desire to 'be nice' made me second-guess my bad review.
Thanks for the encouragement!