Change Your Image
autryld
Reviews
Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (1968)
Great movie for the family
This movie is on my A list of best family flicks. After reading some of the user comments, I naturally felt prompted to reply to some of them.
This is a fantasy and NOT a comedy. There are many things to laugh or smile at including all the mildly slapstick moments. All the while, the dialog is delivered more or less straight. While on the subject of dialog, I turned on subtitles to find out what the Prime Minister was saying. His lines are bit goofy but mildly funny.
If you don't like musicals, perhaps you shouldn't watch this movie. Let your kids watch it! My family loves musicals and we lament the fact that there are not many produced any more. Please note that the music for this movie was scored by Sherman and Sherman, who also scored Mary Poppins.
If you think 144 minutes is too long for a movie, please note that there's an intermission in the middle. You also have the pause or stop button at your command. The movie only drags for me when Sally Ann Howes sings "Lonely Man". It's a wonderful song, but it doesn't seem to belong in the movie. If you take notice of where they put this scene, it especially seems not to belong. On the bright side, it does highlight Ms. Howes' wonderful voice.
It's a wonderful movie. Grab the movie and enough popcorn for the duration and see it with your loved ones. Parents of young children may want to watch the child catcher scene prior to letting their kids watch it. Although Robert Helpmann's treatment of the child catcher is mild compared to the Wicked Witch of the West from the Wizard of Oz, some users commented that as children, he frightened them.
Task Force (1949)
Typical bloodless war movie, but great.
I thought I saw all of Gary Cooper's war movies, but I just caught this one today on TMC. As others have stated, Brennan and Cooper are a great pair and they were a very good pair in this movie. Except for the typical lack of bloody wounds (in forties war movies), it was impressive that the dramatic detail in this movie was more accurate than usual for this genre. The movie did a great job depicting the interaction in the CIC (combat information center) and elsewhere on the ships. However unusual it seemed, transitioning from black and white to color to show plot transition (The Wizard of Oz notwithstanding) was effective for me. Deep down, I think it might have been a way to sneak in color war footage. As I am also a Jane Wyatt (Spock's mother) fan, she was great as Scott's (Gary Cooper's character) wife. Although it did seem to be a bit incongruous that she dressed as well as she did considering her situation. (Sorry, you'll have to see the movie.) Summary: Whether or not you've seen Midway, see Task Force.
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
Read the book first.
I missed Farmer Maggot, Tom Bombadil, his wife and the Old Willow. Not to mention the High Elves that Frodo and Sam encountered on their long hike to Buckland. Admittedly though, Tom Bombadil was not instrumental to overall plot. However, knowing the original story it seemed rather strange when the weapons the Hobbits obtained in the Barrow-Downs adventure were substituted for some apparent junk that Strider just happened to be hauling around. I still enjoyed the movie, however. All the suspense, danger and action are there. Some folks might prefer the movie if for only one reason -- it simplifies the complexities of the book. Personally, I believe that one should read the book first.
Why read the book? So much supporting material is left out of the movie, you will have a better grasp on the movie after you read it. You will also appreciate why the movie was only three hours long!
First, it has to be said that the "Lord of the Rings" is three part story, NOT a trilogy. Tolkien describes everything in this story in the most minute detail. Throughout the book he often explains the story and past or future events using parenthetical commentary (sometimes without parentheses). Some have said that putting everything on film would have added thirty minutes more to the "Director's cut" (Jackson doesn't like the term). Personally, I believe it would have required two more hours. As someone else mentioned, Farmer Maggot is missing as a 'real' character along with Tom Bombadil and the Old Forest trek. Also missing is the passage of the many years that go by from Bilbo's departure until Frodo's. Lots of dialogue is missing. Parts two and three will be missing elements of the story, too.
Readers of LOTR will have a much better insight into the movie and enjoy it much more as well. Reading the book has helped me understand why the plot was changed and also helped me enjoy the movie as well. I've watched it so much now, my DVD's laser has nearly burned through the disk (for the non-techies, that's an attempt at humor).