Penelope picture image

Penelope

There is a lot of films that are modern takes on Fairy Tale or more precisely fairy tales with a modern setting. Placing a Fairy Tale type story is tricky, you have create certain atmosphere to make it believe for the setting but you can’t have the movie take itself that seriously, I.E. it has to know its place and not be a brooding Twilight-shit storm of a mess.
One such movie with a Fairy Tale modern setting is 2008’s Penelope. It’s by accounts a nice movie and by that I mean pleasant but not really super memorable either.

Christina Ricci as Penelope and James McAvoy as Johnny/Max Penelope picture image

Christina Ricci as Penelope and James McAvoy as Johnny/Max

Penelope tells the story of super elite Penelope who due to a family curse has pig nose. This causes her mother to keep her apart from the world and even goes as far to fake her daughter’s death. The only was to break the curse is to have one of their own kind accept her.

So her parents, or really just her mother, Jessica had rich other blue blood young men to win her heart but all are scared off by her nose. One man tell the papers about Penelope and he is dubbed crazies. He and a newspaper gut then you a in debt blue blood named Max to get a picture of Penelope to prove both them right.

However Max and Penelope bond and when she reveal herself to Max she miscontrue him not wanting to marry her to break the curse for him finding her ugly instead of him being unable to break it as he not really Max the rich blood blue but just Johnny some guy.

So Penelope leaves home and makes some friends. But the she sells her own picture to the news guy. The city then falls in love with Penelope and the first blue blood then is made to marry Penelope in order for people to like him and to break Penelope’s curse even though he can’s stand her cursed face. Penelope can’t go through with it and decide she likes herself curse and all which breaks the curse.

Penelope then becomes a teacher and a popular halloween costume. She then learns the Max/Johnny couldn’t undo the curse but it’s ok because they are in loves.

Christina Ricci as Penelope Penelope picture image

Christina Ricci as Penelope

Ahh, the beautiful ugly, I know you well. Jolie Laide is a French expression that means the psychical flaws are embraced as a part of the person’s overall beauty. Quasimodo, The Phantom, The man who laughs and the Beast fall into this concept but to a more extreme degree.
However all these are dudes, Penelope is a lady with the ugly trait and she has to embrace it to be herself. It’s a weird moral, when she loves herself it makes her look normal despite the point that she wasn’t really all that ugly in the first place. It’s a weird little moral that is really mixed up in its scope. Love yourself and then you’re normal? I don’t it feel like it was sincere in its sentiment but presented badly. Though I do like that it a female who is the Jolie-Laide even if her deformity is still adorable.

Christina Ricci as Penelope and James McAvoy as Johnny/Max Penelope picture image

Christina Ricci as Penelope and James McAvoy as Johnny/Max

I give this movie credit, it explains the fairy tale elements well while mixing it into the modern world. Like why can’t Penelope get a nose job? Because some weird reason that it lodged into brain and will kill her. Instead of being a Princess locked in a tower, she’s a blue blood socialist from an old family kept away from the world.

There is some stuff I don’t think work out that super well, like Penelope in real world and how well she deal with it and makes friend. But it could have been that part wasn’t as interesting as it should have been.

Christina Ricci as Penelope Penelope picture image

Christina Ricci as Penelope

There nothing wrong with this movie as a whole but nothing about really stands out. It’s cute but there anything really interesting? No. It should have been, the characters are all likable in their ways and it acted well but it just alright.

Perhaps if the technical were more stylish it would have stood out. As they were they were just okay. I remember Penelope’s nose and like two costumes but that is it. I give the movie had like a kid like sense of style like clothing from Anthropologie. It has the calculated DIY feeling but is really commercial and basic but trying to be cutesy. I didn’t hate it, I like stuff from Anthropologie, I can’t afford it but I like it but doesn’t make for a good style in a movie with nothing else really going on save for a pig nose and Peter Dinklage in an eyepatch.

 Christina Ricci as PenelopePenelope picture image

Christina Ricci as Penelope

I want to say Penelope is charming but it’s clunky in its storytelling, delivery and style. Really it’s just lukewarm.

Clue 1 and Clue 2

Into the Woods Picture image

Into the Woods

Here is a conversation I had with this movie right after I wanted it.

Me: You can’t have your characters sing/say how they feel, that makes me feel angry!
Into the Woods: Look, what do you want?
Me: I want my two hours back!

This is common info but I have to say it anyway, Into the Woods is a 2014 musical fantasy movie based on the musical of the same name by Stephen Sondheim. It’s a parody of classic fairy tales as multiple fairy tale characters meet in the woods, get it?

Apparently this movie was in development for a long time, like early 90’s but it wasn’t till the  another musical that this movie got the interest of Rob Marshall, director of Chicago.

As you might be able to gauge from my conversation with Into the Woods, I didn’t care for this movie, but you would be wrong, I utterly loathed it.

 Emily Blunt as The Baker's Wife, James Corden as The Baker and Daniel Huttlestone as Jack Into the Woods Picture image

Emily Blunt as The Baker’s Wife, James Corden as The Baker and Daniel Huttlestone as Jack

The “story” goes that this Baker and his wife want a baby but they can’t for some reason. Reason comes busting through their door in the form of a witch who tells them that it was a curse that was put of the baker’s family for his father stealing her vegetables so that the family tree would stop. However he also stole some magic beans which cursed the witch into be old and ugly. So she makes the Baker and his wife get some items, A white cow, a red cape, a gold shoe and yellow hair. And they have to find them in the woods.

Lucky all the characters they meet in the wood have the items they need. Jack an idiot, has the cow. The Baker and wife trade the beans which they happened to find in the Baker’s pocket. Jack uses the bean to climb up the beanstalk and steals from the giant to get his cow back. Red Riding hood, a kleptomaniac with a sugar addiction has the red cloak. The Baker at first tries to steal it from her but she gives it to him after he saves her and her granny from the pedophile wolf. The Baker’s wife then runs into Cinderella, a shy insecure girl who just wanted to go to festival a.k.a the ball. The Barker’s wife tries really hard to get that shoe. The Baker’s wife gets it when on the third night of the festival Cinderella runs away from the prince and she just lets her have it. The barker’s wife also get Rapunzel’s hair, who is locked in a tower and no real personality what so ever. She is locked up there by the same witch who they are getting the items for. Rapunzel is also the baker’s little sister too and his also mixed up in a love story with random prince #2. The hair turns out a bust since the witch can’t have touched the items, that’s a rule and then cow died so Baker had to get another and covered it with flour. But it’s really whatever since the witch just brings the cow back to life and the use corn silk. So yeah wife gets pregnant instantly and witch gets pretty and happy ending for Cinderella for her prince seems to come but then LADY GAINT attacks. She is pissed for Jack killing her husband and robbing them and he’s the good guy.

Then I guess things go to shit. Cinderella and her prince aren’t working out. Jack’s mom dies. The Cinderella’s prince cheat on her with the barker’s wife and then she dies. The witch wants to give jack to giant but no one agrees with her so she just peaces out. And then Cinderella uses her birds to beat the giant and happy ever after with the baker.

Anna Kendrick as Cinderella Into the Woods Picture image

Anna Kendrick as Cinderella

So what makes this movie bad? Well lots of things but let’s just focus on the only positive I had about it. And if you read my reviews with any regularity you might think it’s the costumes but nope, I will get to that later. It would be the actors. I think all the actors try really hard to make it work while movie itself doesn’t care. They all sing well though Little Red Riding Hood’s singing style I find annoying.

Also I don’t really believe Anna Kendrick as the shy demure Cinderella, she does try but I don’t believe it but she sings it well. Really this movie should have been more about the actors conveying emotions than then telling us how they feel.

Lilla Crawford as Little Red Riding Hood Into the Woods Picture image

Lilla Crawford as Little Red Riding Hood

Which bring us to greatest sin in this movie, this movie at EVERY SINGLE turn just tells the a viewer what the characters feel through narration, dialogue and singing. I feel like a broken record but show don’t tell is a cardinal rule of movie making.

In a stage show you say a little more since there is an energy that is part of the experience but not in a movie. In fact at one point in this movie, the narrator says that Red Riding Hood is suprised but it doesn’t show in her acting and then she SAYS that she feels uneasy. Just fuck you movie.

Chris Pine as Cinderella's Prince and Billy Magnussen as Rapunzel's Prince Into the Woods Picture image

Chris Pine as Cinderella’s Prince and Billy Magnussen as Rapunzel’s Prince

This anti show don’t tell concept is a massive step further as the movie tells the audience about the things that are happening to the characters. For instance we never see Cinderella at the ball in fact we never seen Cinderella interact with the Prince at all, save for like two exchanges with them same with Rapunzel and her prince. We do see them talking about it though. In fact the princes sing about the their agony of not being with there lady loves to each other despite the fact that we never seen them together. The two princes whining constitutes more scene time then with their loves. So any character development is told to us after the fact.

This make the musical numbers boring as instead showing us what they talking about in creative ways it’s just basic editing as someone sings about what just happened. Though in one instance there is a flashback but the movie literally presented the same scene like 90 seconds before the flashback so even the flashback is boring and pointless.

I won’t say I’m an expert of musical movies but I alway want to like them. But if you’re just going have a characters sing and spin around you might as well just have then say lines. Musicals in movie form need something visually interesting to help keep attention. Climbing a tree or moving around a set doesn’t work. Play with the lightening, editing, or something. It very bad and telling that at the ten minute mark the movie becomes exhausting to watch and the first song was the most visually interesting as it moved from character to character.

Anna Kendrick as Cinderella and Emily Blunt as The Baker's Wife Into the Woods Picture image

Anna Kendrick as Cinderella and Emily Blunt as The Baker’s Wife

Speaking of lightening and sets, why does it seem like all recent live-action musical movies are gritty and dark? Why is Hollywood trying to make musical movie real life?

This worked a movie in Les Mis though I still didn’t like that movie because it was all sort of pretentious shlock, but it worked in Chicago but that movie played with Roxie Hart as she imagined the musical numbers. Considering Rob Marshal directed both Chicago and Into the Woods he should had a handle on what a musical movie good and entertaining. People wandering in a dark forest and singing about their feeling without giving a reason for them and cutting all the pesky story parts doesn’t a good movie make, I don’t care what your bubble of Hollywood says. You know Hollywood I hate to tell you this but if you’re a musical where singing is a norm to convey information you kind lost the right to give the movie a weird sense of legitimacy but making it “real.”

Then there are the costumes which I could barely see through the dark lightning of the movie. Though when you can make them out they aren’t really anything. They are just adequate at best at worse they are uninspired. Really they could have just had wearing back unitard with their role written on them and it would have had the same effect.

Meryl Streep as The Witch Into the Woods Picture image

Meryl Streep as The Witch

Into The Woods could have been a good movie if the movie cared enough to tell the story instead of reporting it through songs that were performed with ugly sets and poor lightening. It they had done more interesting things with adapting the original musical into a film it could have been so much better. Skip it but then again the movie skips itself.

Clue 1 and Clue 2

Oz The Great and Powerful picture image

Oz The Great and Powerful

Basically one day, some Disney executive smoked a joint and thought “let’s have a prequel to The Wizard of Oz” but someone told them there was already a prequel floating around called Wicked. But the executive ignored that story and decided to throw money at pretty obvious prequel story based on the Wizard’s origins without the aid of the original source material by L.Frank Baum. And the result was Oz The Great and Powerful.

If I sound like I dislike this movie, I really didn’t hate it, I mean I didn’t like it either. It does something nicely but it has a lot of flaws and the story is just typical.

James Franco as Oz and Michelle Williams as Glinda Oz The Great and Powerful picture image

James Franco as Oz and Michelle Williams as Glinda

Oz is side-show magician who is also a con-man womanizer. He wants to be a great man like Tesla Ruining, Elephant killing, reason for L.A,  Thomas Edison. One day he gets in trouble with an audience and a strongman and he escapes in hot air balloon and get sucks into tornado and lands in the whimsical land of OZ. He meets a pretty lady named Theodaora the good, a witch. She tells Oz that he is the wizard of prophesy who save the land and rule OZ. Then they get attacked by the wicked witch’s minion. As they make their way to the Emerald City, Oz flirts with Theodora and she being an innocent naive lady believes him and thinks he is going to marry her. He also meets a flying monkey named Finley who becomes Oz’s servant

At the Emerald City Oz meets Theodora’s sister, Evanora. Evanora tells Oz he needs to kill the wicked witch before he can become king. So he leaves with Finley but doesn’t tell Theodora. Evanora then starts manipulating Theodora against Oz.

On their way to a dark forest they see that city that was attacked by the Wicked Witch and they meet a China Girl. Oz fixes her broken legs and joins the party. They sees the wicked witch but she is actually Glinda the Good Witch of the North and the daughter of the original king of OZ who got murdered. Evanora is revealed the real wicked witch. Theodora then gets mad at Oz for being with Glinda, Evanora gives Theodora an apple to remove her heart and as result Theodora’s skin changes to green and she is wicked. Evanora then attacks Oz and crew. They escape with Glinda’s bubbles and they go to Munchkin land.

Oz and crew plan an attack using Oz’s skills of illusion and misdirection. They win and Theodora leaves and Glinda beats Evanora who is actually an ugly hag. Oz then rules OZ as the Wizard of OZ. The end.

The China Girl Oz The Great and Powerful picture image

The China Girl

With Oz The Great and Powerful we have three movies within the same universe that are VASTLY different in tones and style. The original 1939 movie is fun and light-hearted while the sequel Return to Oz is classic 80’s dark children faire. Oz The Great and Powerful is sort of in middle of those tones but it’s very unapologetic in its modern sense of story telling.

Like the main character who wants more from life and to be the very best like no-one ever was. There is also a prophecy about the chosen one. More than that, the movie reveals in the 3D theatre experience where it just take it’s time for the pretty CG stuff to sink in, which are fine on the whole. The China Girl was one of the best CGs I have seen in a long time. The shine and shadows on her were wonderful. She was also the only character with any sense of pathos.

Also speaking of the other movies. The 1939 movie made it clear that OZ was a dream and Return To Oz was the nightmare though it was a little more vague in Reurn to Oz. However is straight up Oz subtitle the Great and Powerful it’s not a dream, it’s real. Which makes it confusing when there  are characters in Kansas that are the basis for characters in the land of OZ  most notably Michelle Williams as Annie who is a former lover of Oz’s as well as Glinda.

Rachel Weisz as Evanora Oz The Great and Powerful picture image

Rachel Weisz as Evanora

Then we have the casting. The casting is very problematic in this movie. There is something about James Franco. I don’t know what it but I do not buy it. He seems to lack the charm and charisma that this character needs. However he is not this biggest casting mistake. That would be Mila Kunis as Theodora. Her naive innocence, which should have been core to the character was not believable but Kunis was better in that capacity than her as the Wicked Witch, which she did not pull off at all. It bordered on being silly but in a very boring way. Michelle Williams and Rachel Weisz were fine in their roles. Only the China Girl and the flying Money did the best and the were just voice acting.

Mila Kunis as Theodora Oz The Great and Powerful picture image

Mila Kunis as Theodora

This movie may seem like character driven movie but it exist more as a technical piece because once you start asking about characters and motivation there isn’t a lot there. The character that should have been interesting is Theodora but her “broken” was the most rushed and illogical turning point ever. She get a broken heart because Oz talks to Glinda, that is it. I mean yes, Evanora turned her against him but in a movie that allowed for few minutes of showing Oz travel down the river to rush a major moment was sloppy. Also the make-up for the wicked witch was beyond bad.  Theodora was wasted.

Bubble travel Oz The Great and Powerful picture image

Bubble travel

If your going to watch Oz The Great and Powerful watch it for some of the technicals, like the China Girl and some of the imagery. Don’t want it for an compelling story or interesting characters, you will not find it on this yellow or red brick road.

Since October is a theme month we going with Live-Action fairy tale-ish movies that in keep with said theme, more or less, so  Clue 1 and Clue 2

Ella Enchanted picture image

Ella Enchanted

This movie confuses me, I’m not really sure who it’s for. If I had to venture a guess I would say Ella Enchanted is for eight year girls who liked the Princess Dairies and like to shop at Claire’s. So if you fit that description you MIGHT sincerely like this movie but I can’t really imagine everyone else liking this movie. I sort of used to like this movie in a guilty-pleasure way but it’s really chaotically goofy and not in a good way as it takes itself seriously.

Anne Hathaway as Ella and Hugh Dancy as Prince Char Ella Enchanted picture image

Anne Hathaway as Ella and Hugh Dancy as Prince Char

Main plot goes a little like this, sweet little baby Ella who lives in a place called Frell gets a special gift from a well-meaning but incompetent fairy named Lucinda. Lucinda  gives Ella the gift of obedience which means Ella has to whatever she is told whether or not she wants to or if she is physically capable. Only her mother and their house-fairy know and before Ella’s mother dies she tells Ella not to tell anyone about the gift/curse.

Ella grows up to be a liberal-minded teenage and her father gets remarried to a vain woman with two daughters, meanie Hattie and dum-dum Olive. One day the handsome Prince Charmont a.k.a Char comes to Frell for a Mall opening, Ella and her pal take the opportunity to protest for Ogre’s rights which Char’s evil Uncle, Edgar is persecuting. Hattie gets mad and sends Ella off on her way but Ella then runs into Char and since she is the only girl to not fancy Char they have a snarky attraction. Hattie then finds them and sends Ella back to the mall where Ella gets into trouble because Hattie caught on to Ella doing what she is told and Hattie and Olive made her steal stuff.

Ella decides that she need to get Lucinda to take back the gift, so her house-fairy, Mandy gives her a special book named Benny who is also her boyfriend to help Ella find Lucinda as he can show people and not where they are, though looking at context Ella sees that Lucinda is going to a wedding in Giant-ville. So she off with a Book and along the way she runs into an Elf who wants to be a lawyer, some ogres and Char. They go to the wedding but miss Lucinda. Char recommends Ella looks at census stuff at the castle.

At the castle Edgar gets wind of Ella doing what she is told and orders her to kill Char when he pops the question because they are in love. Ella tries to break it off with Char and chains herself up to a tree. Her plan might have worked but Lucinda shows up, frees Ella and gives a dress for the ball. Ella goes to the ball and nearly kills Char but breaks the gift by telling herself not to obey anymore, that never crosses her mind before? To tell herself not to obey?  Ella is  arrested but her crew of oppressed magical friends help her, fight scene and Edgar inadvertently poisons himself, though doesn’t die. Ella and Char get married and they end with a song and dance number.

Anne Hathaway as Ella Ella Enchanted picture image

Anne Hathaway as Ella

Just so we’re 100% clear Ella Enchanted was based on a book of the same name by Gail Carson Levine from 1997. I haven’t read the book but from what I can gather the movie is nothing like the book, like you can’t even compare the two they are too different. So the movie wasn’t for fans of the book.

Also I have to wonder about the whole gift giving thing. The movie seems to indicate the giving babies gift was commonplace but we never hear anyone else talking about their gift. Maybe the book explains it but the movie doesn’t. Also is a fairy an occupation? Like what is the difference between Lucinda and Mandy. Mandy says she is a house-fairy but what does that MEAN? Do other houses have house fairies? Is she employed? Are any fairies good at the their jobs? These little things just take me out of the movie.

Cary Elwes as Edgar and Heston Ella Enchanted picture image

Cary Elwes as Edgar and his useless snake goon

There is one thing I liked about this movie but I kind of hate that I like it, the actors. There are so many actors I love who are in this movie, from Cary Elwes, Eric Ideal, Joanna Lumley, Heidi Klum, Jim Carter ect. I don’t really have a issue with Anne Hathaway, Vivica A.Fox, Minnie Driver or Hugh Dancy but most of these actors have been in things I have liked and yet they somehow are in this movie? I mean they wasted Joanna Lumley who is awesome in AB Fab. The trouble is expect for Elwes who is just chewing the scenery everyone is playing this movie fairly straight when the idea is supposedly to be taking jabs at fairy tales.

Anne Hathaway as Ella Ella Enchanted picture image

Anne Hathaway as Ella

It seems like the movie is parodying fairy-tales with it quirky stye but the basic story is being true to yourself and that is what Ella does while being perfect. I mean she is pretty and has no emotional hang-ups, she is smart and proactive. She is damn perfect that is not very interesting. The only thing that makes her interesting is her curse which is the source of most the film’s weak attempts at humor.

Lucy Punch as Hattie and Jennifer Higham as Olive Ella Enchanted picture image

Lucy Punch as Hattie and Jennifer Higham as Olive

Then we have come to another major issue with this movie, the costumes. Execpt for Ella, all the costumes are AWFUL, they are trash. I don’t know how this movie managed to make Heidi Klum look bad but they did. The movie has this weird sense of fanasty fairy tale costume but they give them weird modern cuts with gross fabric. Olive at one point has to wear a purple hoodie that is the fuzzy and glittery at a ball. Also Ella’s ball gown was a snooze.

Anne Hathaway as Ella and Hugh Dancy as Prince Char Ella Enchanted picture image

Anne Hathaway as Ella and Hugh Dancy as Prince Char

Ella Enchanted has somethings going for it like the good cast and not abysmal pacing but the humor, style, tone and plot are corny as heck. But in classic this movie let’s go out with a song which is also a clue.

The Thief of Bagdad 1940 picture image

1940 Version of The Thief of Bagdad

The first time I watched the 1940 version of The Thief of Bagdad, I recalled liking it more than the 1920’s version but when I thought about it recently I couldn’t remember why.It could have just been the superficialness of color and sound, or I might have just liked the characters better. I will say that yes I like some of the characters better but this movie has a very odd way telling the story and you can see the Disney version of Aladdin all over this movie.

John Justin as Ahmad and June Duprez as the Princess The Thief of Bagdad 1940

John Justin as Ahmad and June Duprez as the Princess

So the movie at first is told in flashback, Ahmad, a blind beggar with a talented dog tells his story to a group of ladies. In his flashback we learn that Ahmad was the king of Bagdad and the dog was a young thief named Abu. Ahmad was kept at a distance from his people by his royal vizier, Jaffar. One day Jaffar convinces Ahmad to go out among the people and Ahmad learns he is not well liked and that there a prophesy about a hero descending from the sky on a magic cloud-like thing and golden crossbow. Jaffar then has Ahmad thrown in a jail where he meets Abu. They escapes and become friends. They leave Bagdad and head to Basra.

In Basra, Ahmad sees the princess, who doesn’t have a name. Ahmad and the Princess meet and fall in love. However Jaffar also travels to Basra intent on marrying the Princess. Jaffar gives the Princess’s father, the Sultan a mechanical flying horse as he loves toys in exchange for the Princess. The Sultan concedes and the Princess flees Basra however off-screen she is captured and sold in a slave market. Ahmad then confronts Jaffar and he turns Ahmad blind and Abu into a dog which they will remain till he holds the Princess in his arms.

That ends the flashback part. As it turns out, Ahmad was brought to the house where he just told his story because the Princess ( I wish she had a name) is sleeping a sleep which she can’t wake from till Ahmad shows up. The Princess is then told there is a doctor that can cure Ahmad’s blindness so she goes and she is told the doctor in one a ship. When the Princess boards the ship with Abu, it sails away. It was all a scheme by Jaffar. Jaffar was the one who bought the Princess and cared for her while she slept. He tells her that he can cure Ahmad if he holds her which she allows and Ahmad and Abu are cured. Prior to Abu changing back to a human he stow-a-way on the boat but was thrown off and changes back to human on reaching the docks.

Abu reaches Ahmad and they go after the Princess but Jaffar conjures up a storm and they are left shipwreck. Abu finds a magic lamp on the beach and a Djinn comes out. Abu’s first wish is a sausage. The Djinn then takes Abu to get an all-seeing crystal mainly because Abu claims he can steal it but the Djinn doesn’t believe him and he does steal it and uses it to see where Ahmad is.

As that is going on, Jaffar tries to magically make the Princess love him but can’t bring himself as he want her to love him truly. He then ask her to command him and she asks him to bring her back to Basra. Once there the Princess begs her father to not force her to marry Jaffar which he agrees to but Jaffar has the sultan killed with a mechanical toy called the Silver Maid which stabs him in the heart.

The Djinn takes Abu to Ahmad and they look through the seeing crystal, which is called the All-seeing Eye, to see the Princess. Jaffar arranges for her to smell the Blue Rose of Forgetfulness which causes her to forget her love and agony. This cause Ahmad to lash out on Abu and Abu wishes Ahmad way which is his final wish and he left alone.

Ahmad appears at Jaffar’s palace and the Princess regains her memory. Jaffar then orders them both to be executed. Abu the shatters the All-seeing eye and is transported to the Land of Legend. Abu is thanked for freeing the inhabitants who had been turned to stone and is gifted a magical golden crossbow and is named the king’s successor. Abu however steals a magic carpet to save Ahmad.

As Ahmad is about to be executed as the Princess is forced to watch, Abu comes flying done on the magic carpet. This sparks a revolt. Jaffar tries to flee on the mechanical flying horse but Abu shots him with the crossbow. Ahmad and the Princess get married and Ahmad names Abu as the royal vizier but Abu peaces out on the carpet for more adventures.

So much narrative.

Sabu as Abu The Thief of Bagdad 1940

Sabu as Abu

This movie is presented with a lot of narrative and to be fair it could have a lot more. I would have loved to seen the Princess’s journey but the movie wasn’t about her it was about Abu’s adventure saving Ahmad who was in love with the Princess and Jaffar’s scheming. It’s a little weird but that the titular character is spend a fair chunk of time on the side and the other characters are not concern with him. The heart of the movie centers on Ahmad’s and his dilemma but it’s Abu who saves the day. It defiantly a weird direction to go in.

June Duprez as the Princess and Conrad Veidt as Jaffar The Thief of Bagdad 1940

June Duprez as the Princess and Conrad Veidt as Jaffar

Despite all the narrative, there isn’t a lot of character development in this movie. None of the character grow and change. They are all static. They are likable enough but they don’t have  any arcs. Personally, I enjoyed the interactions between Jaffar and the Princess over Abu and Ahmad.

June Duprez as the Princess The Thief of Bagdad 1940

June Duprez as the Princess

I got to say, I found the Princess a interesting character. Yes, she is a damsel in distress but she did try to take her life in her own hands as she ran away and does resist Jaffar. She tries to be an active player. I wish she had gotten more screen time and a name.

Sabu as Abu with Rex Ingram as the Djinn The Thief of Bagdad 1940

Sabu as Abu with Rex Ingram as the Djinn

I think this movie much like the 1920’s movie was more for style. This movie is impressive for the 1940’s and it did some great chromo work. You can see a clear style over substance in scenes like the Silver maid and Abu stealing the All-seeing eye. These scenes go on for a while but instead of character development it just a neat scenes to look at.

Also the costumes were lovely. Ahmad main costumes is like a reversal of Disney’s Aladdin costume. But for me everything the princess wore was like beautiful.

June Duprez as the Princess The Thief of Bagdad 1940

June Duprez as the Princess

The 1940 version of The Thief of Bagdad is an entertain movie that while doesn’t have the most development characters and the plot is all over the place is fun to watch and enjoyable.

Clue 1 and Clue 2

This version is so unremarkable. Nothing about this movie stands out in way that is appealing. It is one of the most tepid movies I have ever seen. It’s so bland and that is slightly amazing. Typically movies have something about that makes them standout even if its negative point but this is so under-whemling, that at 25 minutes I felt we should have been at the thrity  minute mark and nothing happened.

Marc-André Grondin as Gywnplaine and Emmanuelle Seigner as Josiana The Man Who Laughs picture image

Marc-André Grondin as Gywnplaine and Emmanuelle Seigner as Josiana

The plot does follow the book, though it has it differences. Like Barky just seems to want to keeps his position, Josiana is aged and is Gywnplaine’s cousin (I think) and they do sleep together which causes Dea’s depression and suicide by arsenic. Homo does very little and he not really a plot point like in the book. The movie puts a lot of focus one the performances of  Gywnplaine, Ursus and Dea.  Gywnplaine  tries to quell his love for Dea not because of the blindness but because of their sister/brother being raised together  relationship. Barky doesn’t send Ursus and Dea away in fact he brings to  Gywnplaine and Dea hears Josiana and  Gywnplaine going at it. Also no David and the Queen wasn’t present or seem to care about screwing over Josiana.  That is all the differences I care to recall.

So how is this movie unremarkable. Well first off the acting. If these people were acting they either were directed terribly  or they didn’t care. I also thought the casting on Dea and Josiana were way off. Dea is supposed to be a celestial ethereally young lady and do not get me wrong, the lady they cast is lovely but she had the wrong type for the role. She seemed earthy and natural. Mary Philbin was better cast. I hate to even say this but the lady who played Josiana was too old. I thought Josiana was supposed to be like Esmeralda, careful and full of life. This women just seemed like a bored housewife. It was a decision the filmmaker made that I neither get nor like though she was the best actress so there is the tradeoff.

Marc-André Grondin as Gywnplaine and Christa Théret as Dea The Man Who Laughs picture image

Marc-André Grondin as Gywnplaine and Christa Théret as Dea

The we have the colors, or rather lack of them. This movie likes grey, black and white. So the acting is dull and boring and so is the color palette. I won’t say that movies can’t have this style but you need to make it visually interesting and its not. The shots are pretty basic and when it tries to have an interesting shot it just seem like uninspired.

Marc-André Grondin as Gywnplaine The Man Who Laughs picture image

Marc-André Grondin as Gywnplaine

The costumes were also boring but what is really was flat,  Gywnplaine’s make-up. It literally looked like they just drew on red paint to make his smile. This make him humanized but it looks so lazy. I can’t see why people would find it fascinating the same way as the 1928 version.

 

Also the music was inappropriate. At ending where Dea and  Gywnplaine die the music during the credits is like super happy and carnival-esque. It was like a slap in the face.

At least Homo was a wolf but that is the only positive thing.

One more thing, I don’t want to give the impression that I know a ton about art history on a whole but at one point in the movie Barky brought out portraits of  Gywnplaine’s parents. The first one was of his mother and it was a John Singer Sargent Portrait of the Duchess of Sutherland. Lovely portrait but it took me right out of the movie.

 

Do not recommend this version.  Just watch the 1928 version.

 

Full Disclosure, I couldn’t actually watch this movie, I tried but the trailer told me everything I could ever need know about this version and then someone on IMDB gave the specifics.

The Who Laughs 1966 Poster picture image

The Who Laughs 1966 Poster

This version seems precious.

You can watch the trailer here, http://www.tcm.com/mediaroom/video/466045/Man-Who-Laughs-The-Original-Trailer-.html

Where do I even start?  What were the screenwriter and the director smoking with this movie? First, The Man who Laughs is not an Adventure Novel. Oh, that just brought a smile to my face.

I mean what is this movie? There is nothing of the novel to be seen in this trailer but my god is this not the best one minute and thirty nine seconds? I feel like the movie’s craziness just leeches off the screen.

Apparently someone did see it according to a post of IMDB and here some core differences, so SPOILERS;

-Dea’s mother didn’t die and travels around with Dea, Ursus and Gwynplaine. And here I thought they cut Ursus as he didn’t seem to be in the trailer. (This is a weird change but it seems harmless, misses a point but whatever.)
-Gwynplaine is the royal court executioner and not a mountebank. Though he says cool lines and such before he axes people. (But still why? It’s just No, that is stupid.)
-Gwynplaine and Josiana sleep together (That is BS but we’ll see this change again.)
-Apparently Barkilphedro and soldiers gang rape Dea. (That is just awful, F-U movie, you ruined it. You had this stupidity that was darling and now it’s all gone. I hate you.)
-Gwynplaine keeps his title and gets sugery to correct his deformity and Dea’s eyes get magically fix. (This movie should be destroyed!)
source

Well it seems like this movie had some idea of a story they wanted to make, some Royal Court intrigue but they needed a source for characters so they attached the Man who Laughs. This movie seems like a Fan-Fiction.

If it wasn’t for the some BIG plot changes like Dea and the very stupid happy ending it would seem like hilariously naive version but it seems more waste of the original source material and I didn’t even like the original source material but this movie seems like crap-poo, no wonder you can’t watch it.

Also it takes place in Italy instead of England and it’s the Borgias. So wrong place and time. That doesn’t bother me, just saying. Though I did like the Showtime show of The Borgias.

La Belle et la Bete Jean Cocteau 1946 picture image

La Belle et la Bete

Guys, I can’t do it, I think movie broke me. I’m not sure I have a single negative thing to say about Jean Cocteau’s 1946 movie La Belle et La Bete, not even like a snarky nitpick… well maybe, let’s find out if can I say anything bad against this beautiful surreal movie.

Josette Day as Belle and Jean Marais as The Beast La Belle et la Bete Jean Cocteau 1946 picture image

Josette Day as Belle and Jean Marais as The Beast

Before the film even starts the director asks the viewer to keep a childlike mind, that’s no problem for me. The movie proper starts with a former wealthy family trying to get by. The family consists of a father, three daughters and a son. Two out of the three daughters would rather pretend they still had their former wealth and are in fact shallow bitches. The third, Belle, is fairly content to do housework. She has an admirer, Avenant, a friend of her brother. Avenant wants to marry Belle but she declines stating she can’t leave her father.

They then get news that one of the father’s ship was recovered. When asked what she wants back from the trip, Belle asks for a rose. However the ship’s stocks was seized leaving the father with nothing. As he goes home with nothing for any of his children he stumbles on a haunting castle, where he’s well feed. Before leaving he picks a rose for Belle but the Beast appears and demands his life. The father begs and tells him it was for his daughter. The Beast tells him that he can live if his one of daughters dies in his place. The Beast allows him the use of his horse, Magnificent, and he goes home. He tells his children that he will go back to die but Belle sneaks off with Magnificent to die in her father place.

Belle enters the dreamlike castle and faints at the sight of the Beast. The Beast carries her to her room and her clothes transform into regal splendor, ah the costumes are so pretty. When she comes to the Beast tells her that every night she should dine with him. At dinner the Beast tells her Belle that she is in command of the every night the beast will ask one question, Will she marry him. She refuses him.

Belle over time becomes accustom to life with the Beast though she refuses to marry him every night and suggests that they should remain friend but Belle wants to see her father again. Through a magic mirror that the Beast has, she sees that her father is deathly ill. The Beast left Belle go back to her family. He gives her a magic glove that can teleport her there and a magic key that is to a pavilion which is the source of his power. If she does not return in a week, he will die.

Belle returns home sees they are living in poverty because of the brother’s money loaning. Her family is envious of her riches and conspires to steal the key, which they do. He brother and Avenant also steal Magnificent as the Beast sent him to retrieve Belle as she was convinced by her sisters to stay longer. However the Beast also sent the magic Mirror, Belle uses it to see the Beast’s sorrowful face. She uses the glove but realizes she forgot the key and tries to find but can’t find it anywhere. Belle returns to Beast and finds him dying. As he is dying Belle’s brother and Avenant break into the pavilion the Beast spoke of called Diana’s Pavilion, a place that no one can enter. They scale the walls and break the glass ceiling. Avenant tries to go into it but is shot by an animated statue of Diana and turns into a Beast and dies. The Beast then transform in a handsome Prince who looks like Avenant. He tells Belle that he was turned in a Beats because his parents didn’t believe in spirits and his being a Beast was their revenge. Belle tells him she loves him and the fly away to his kingdom where she will be a queen.

Josette Day as Belle and Jean Marais as The Beast La Belle et la Bete Jean Cocteau 1946 picture image

Josette Day as Belle and Jean Marais as The Beast

If you recall in my Thief of Bagdad review, I said that the characters is this movie were compelling even though they are presented simply and they are. I think this comes down to the acting. Belle is presented as earnest, sweet girl who does stand her ground. Her attachment to the Beast does come through albeit subtlety. Throughout the movie she refers to The Beast as “La Bete” or “The Beast.” When she comes back to him after seeing her family she start calling him “Ma Bete” or “My Beast.” It’s subtle but powerful.

The Beats too is subtly done. You can tell that he walking a very thin line between being a beast and acting like a human. It’s a little different than other versions where he starts acting beastly and through love starting acting like a human. It’s a nice take and it’s acted wonderfully by Jean Marais, who also played Avenant.

Josette Day as Belle and Jean Marais as The Beast La Belle et la Bete Jean Cocteau 1946 picture image

Josette Day as Belle and Jean Marais as The Beast

The only real criticism isn’t really a criticism since by the film’s own admission things don’t make sense, that the plot is meant to be simple taken at face value. So when the Beast tells us things about his power or when  smoke raises off of him after killing things, it’s not explain, it just emotional.

While I do like when things are explain, most movies tend to bog down the narrative with exposition that sometimes it can ruin a movie. With this movie, it’s not really important that we know how the Beast’s power work and why Avenant transforms into a beast. The passing line about how he was transformed into a beast was just the right amount of exposition. Explaining thing too much wouldn’t have advanced the plot of a girl and a Beast falling in love nor would helped the surreal style and mood, if anything it enhanced it.

Josette Day as Belle La Belle et la Bete Jean Cocteau 1946 picture image

Josette Day as Belle

This movie gives us a very dreamlike surreal style with its special effects and camerawork. I mean it’s just a lovely movie to watch. I really love the part when Belle first enters the castle, it’s just so dreamlike. But what I really love are the costumes. They were designed by Lavain. They are very grand and beautiful. The Beast’s make-up is great. Everything about this movie is just so pretty.

Josette Day as Belle La Belle et la Bete Jean Cocteau 1946 picture image

Josette Day as Belle

One thing that bugs is because the movie is presented so simply with an emphasis on the style, I feel there is a lot to take on a symbolic nature. Like because we’re told to take it simply, there is something else to be gained from more than just the mood or effects. Like I’m suppose to take this on pretentious, intellectual level, like maybe it’s Belle’s sexual awakening or the movie is about the collapse of society and our collective inability to communicate on a metaphysical level blah, blah, blah.

The movie seems to WANT you to read into more and I don’t want to, though I bet lots of film scholars have but that is just what they do.

Josette Day as Belle and Jean Marais as The Beast as a human Prince La Belle et la Bete Jean Cocteau 1946 picture image

Josette Day as Belle and Jean Marais as The Beast as a human Prince

La Belle et la Bete a beautiful movie that offers compelling character and stunning effects, if you haven’t figured it out, I really love this movie. It also has left a impact of films, like Gaston from the Disney version is based on Avenant, in fact they were going to call him Avenant and there is a piece of conceptual art that is pretty a straight copy. And the 2004 The Phantom of the Opera copied the candelabras. Heck, even I used elements of this movie in a novel I wrote for NaNOWriMo*. There are also many others homages and tributes to the movie, there also was semi-remake back in 2014, that we’ll get to and I have a lot of choice words for that movie.

Josette Day as Belle La Belle et la Bete Jean Cocteau 1946 picture image

Josette Day as Belle

Because clues are fun, Clue 1 and clue 2

*Novel coming someday, maybe.

1924 The Thief of Bagdad picture image

1924 The Thief of Bagdad

According to AFI’s movie list, which I take super-duper seriously (sarcasm), the 1924 The Thief of Bagdad is listed as the ninth greatest fantasy movie. At Ten is Big and at Eight is Groundhog Day, see list here.

As it is, The Thief of Bagdad was a lavish production speared-headed by Douglas Fairbanks, who starred, produced and wrote the general story. It has also been remade a few times but the most notable is the 1940’s version, which we’ll get to someday…maybe next month…who knows?

So this movie has a good reputation but does it really hold up to it? Meh, yes and not really.

Douglas Fairbanks as Ahmed, the Thief of Bagdad threatening Anna May Wong as the Mongol Slave with Julanne Johnston as The Princess sleeping 1924 The Thief of Bagdad picture image

Douglas Fairbanks as Ahmed, the Thief of Bagdad threatening Anna May Wong as the Mongol Slave with Julanne Johnston as The Princess sleeping

The movie starts with a wise guy giving us a lesson which is “Happiness must be earned.” That’s a nice one. Then we are introduced to a thief who steals things he wants. He gets his hands on some magic rope and decides to steal from the palace. There is falls in love with the princess and wants to take her, so he poses as a Prince as with the Princess’ birthday is coming up and she must marry, hmmm that sounds fimilar.

The Princess has the choice between three princes, One from Persia, one from India and one from Mongolia, I guess. The Mongol Prince and yes no one has a name so I have to call him, The Mongol Prince but I’m going to call him TMP*, the Persian one will TPP and the Indian one will be TIP, we clear? Good! So TMP wants to marry the Princess so he can rule Bagdad and he will not accept failure, he is our token villain.

One of the Princess‘ slave tells her a prophecy from the Sands of Mecca that she will wed the Prince that first touches the Rose Tree in the garden. As The Princes arrive she watches them to see who touches the tree. The first one is TIP, who has a glower that the Princess doesn’t fancy, he passes the tree which pleases the Princess. TPP is next, he is too fat for the Princess and again he passes the tree. TMP is the third and his look scares the Princess, he also passed the tree. The Thief then appears claiming to be Prince Ahmed from Arabia, the Princess likes Ahmed and hopes he touches the tree. The thief stole what he needed to look like a Prince and I’m not sure if his name is Ahmed or a lie but I’m just going to call him Ahmed because it nice one person got a name in this movie.

However one of the Princess’ slave, who is a Mongol, tells TMP about the Princess’ superstition of the tree and he goes to touch it but before he can Ahmed is thrown from his horse into the rose-tree. So the Princess picks him to marry which pisses TMP off but he keeps his cool as the Mongol slave told him he was thief as he threaten her when he broke in. Ahmed puts his plan into action to kidnap the princess but he is overcome by her innocence and love that he can’t steal her. It then comes out that he isn’t a Prince and the ruler wants his executed but the Princess bribes the guard to free him and to buy time from marrying she tells the Princes that she will marry the one who brings about the rarest treasure within seven moons. Is that a week or a month? But before TMP leaves he has one his servants to stay in Bagdad to build an army within the city.

Ahmed goes through a dilemma as his “take thing” outlook on life seems wrong. He goes to a Mosque where he advised to become a prince by going to get treasures.

The next chuck of the movie are the dudes getting treasures. TPP gets a flying carpet, TIP gets a crystal ball and TMP gets a golden apple that can cure anything even death. Ahmed goes on adventures where he fight stuff, goes underwater, gets a flying winged horse and he gets a cloak of Invisibility and a magical box that can create whatever he wants, like anything, so basically he is a fucking god at this point.

Before heading back to Bagdad, TMP has the princess poisoned so he can save her life. However he works together with the other princes so no one can agree who saved her life. TMP then conquers Bagdad with his army and orders the Princess to marry him. But Ahmed scooped in and creates a huge army and saves the day and he flies off with the Princess.

A Dragon Lizard Monster 1924 The Thief of Bagdad picture image

A Dragon Lizard Monster, so cute!

The reason why this movie is so well regarded is because of the special effects. Which is a little weird saying from the vantage point of 2010’s where the movie going public is generally pretty jaded towards special effects but the fact that they did all this stuff with trick photography and practical effects are awesome. Sure, it looks fake but there is realness and grit that makes it believable versus CGIs where audiences’ eyes are trained to see the computer images and it reads as fake.

Douglas Fairbanks as Ahmed, the Thief of Bagdad and Julanne Johnston as The Princess 1924 The Thief of Bagdad picture image

Douglas Fairbanks as Ahmed, the Thief of Bagdad and Julanne Johnston as The Princess

I won’t say that the plot isn’t fun, it’s not that interesting. Perhaps I’m at a disadvantage as I have seen Aladdin and Aladdin had to taken inspiration from this movie as well as the 1940’s version and the The Thief And The Cobbler. We have seen this story play out a thief who fall for the princess, heck that is my favorite video game. I think the real trouble with this movie is that the characters are just not even remotely interesting, aside from Ahmed who gets a slight arc none of the characters have any personality. The bad guys are bad and the good guys are good. That is it.

Douglas Fairbanks as Ahmed, the Thief of Bagdad 1924 The Thief of Bagdad picture image

Douglas Fairbanks as Ahmed, the Thief of Bagdad

Lack of characters with good personalities mixed with a plot that is a trope makes for a movie that took me three days to finish, though one day I was busy and didn’t have time so really two days. So really this movie is all about the technicals, they are what makes this movie enjoyable.

Julanne Johnston as The Princess with her servants looking at the Princes 1924 The Thief of Bagdad picture image

Julanne Johnston as The Princess with her servants looking at the Princes

I will say they did meet their moral about Happiness being earned as Ahmed and the Princess do work for it. Ahmed is more active about gaining treasure for his happy ending but I do give the Princess a little credit as she frees Ahmed by telling her servant to bribe the guards and her idea to buy time was a good one even though her servant told to her buy time but she did go for it. So there is something to her.

Douglas Fairbanks as Ahmed, the Thief of Bagdad and Julanne Johnston as The Princess flying off together 1924 The Thief of Bagdad picture image

Douglas Fairbanks as Ahmed, the Thief of Bagdad and Julanne Johnston as The Princess flying off together

I don’t really want to say that because The Thief of Bagdad is a silent movie that is the reason why the characters and plot really aren’t there and that is why the pacing is weird, seriously most of this movie is set-up then treasure then the epic resolution is maybe 5 minutes but this movie seemed like it was the spectacle, for the effects, which seems a little weird when reviewing classic 1920’s silent movie, it seems like films haven’t changed that much.

Though some movies  do have amazing technicals and while they do have simple characters somehow the film makes them appealing and maybe we’ll see that next time, clue 1 and clue 2.

Sojin Kamiyama as Cham Shang a.k.a The Mongol Prince a.k.a TMP 1924 The Thief of Bagdad picture image

Sojin Kamiyama as Cham Shang a.k.a The Mongol Prince a.k.a TMP

*According to Wikipedia, TMP had a name, Cham Shang or maybe that was were he was from….. I’m confused, though it seems that is his name. Ok, so the hero and the villain get names but Fuck the Princess getting a name, pffft.

The Princess Bride picture image

The Princess Bride

Fair warning, this review is a gush-fest. If you want a movie that causes pain wait till next week and here are two clues for the next review, clue 1 and clue 2.

As for The Princess Bride there isn’t much to say. It was based on a book of the same name by William Goldman in 1973 and made into a film in 1987 by Rob Reiner. On it’s release it was a modest success but its has a legacy of being a cult movie. It’s also a DAMN quotable movie. Heck look up the word inconceivable on google and you will get the movie.

I did read the book many years ago and while it was enjoyable I think the movie is better, the book is also weird if I recall.

Cary Elwes as Westley and Robin Wright as Buttercup The Princess Bride picture image

Cary Elwes as Westley and Robin Wright as Buttercup

The story is pretty simple. Westley and Buttercup are young lovers but one day Westley goes off and is presumed dead. Five years later Buttercup is forced into an engagement to Prince Humperdink. Humperdink then hires Vizzini, a genius Sicilian, Inigo, a fencer out for revenge and Fezzik, a kind giant with a gift for rhymes (I know what a a cliche), to kidnap and kill Buttercup in order to start a war with a rival country. However the Dread Pirate Roberts follows them and defeats all of them and runs off with Buttercup. The pirate turns out to be Westley who took on the alias of the Dread Pirate. However Buttercup and Westley are caught by the Prince and his henchman the not very nice Count Rugen.

Westley is tortured and is mostly dead but Inigo and Fezzik get a miracle and storm the castle on Buttercup’s wedding day. Inigo gets his revenge for the murder of his father on Count Rugen who killed him and Buttercup and Westley are together. The whole story is told as a book a grandfather is reading to his grandson.

Mandy Patinkin as Inigo Montoya The Princess Bride picture image

Mandy Patinkin as Inigo Montoya

Typically when I review a movie I have to ask myself what was good about the movie as a general opener but with The Princess Bride it’s more of a question of what is bad and I’m hard press to have a negative.

I guess one thing is that film is very filmy. You can tell the stuntmen from a mile away and your blind. The sets look fake and there are tons of Anachronisms. Like the British discovered Australia in 1606 but the tone of the movie have a Renaissance quality. Even given those flaws they actually add to the atmosphere of fun swash-bucking fantasy romance. And characters more than make up for anything.

Wallace Shawn as Vizzini, Mandy Patinkin as Inigo Montoya and André the Giant as Fezzik The Princess Bride picture image

Wallace Shawn as Vizzini, Mandy Patinkin as Inigo Montoya and André the Giant as Fezzik

The characters are one of the main highlights of the movie which is necessary since the story is fairly simple, which is fine. All the characters are interesting unique and memorable. A lot of that comes from the writing, everyone gets good lines. I just love these characters, argh damn you movie. Even SUPER minor characters are memorable like the king and the impressive clergy man  with his “mawwiage speech.”

Wallace Shawn as Vizzini with Robin Wright as Buttercup at the Battle of Wit The Princess Bride picture image

Wallace Shawn as Vizzini with Robin Wright as Buttercup at the Battle of Wit

Maybe it’s all the mold I have breathed in cleaning my basement and the exhaustion of it has melted my brain but I can really find a fault with this movie. I mean I guess the ending song is a prime example of 80s cheesy and Buttercup, the titular character is not the most interesting. But she is brave and once she knows her true love is alive she doesn’t lack conviction. I suppose agmonst the other kickass characters and quotes she isn’t that memorable but she is likable enough, I don’t have an issue with her.

Robin Wright as Buttercup with Chris Sarandon as Prince Humperdinck and Christopher Guest as Count Rugen The Princess Bride picture image

Robin Wright as Buttercup with Chris Sarandon as Prince Humperdinck and Christopher Guest as Count Rugen

Also since I’m a costume person, the costume are very nice. Everything is one point and looks like the character actually have wore the clothes and have lived in them, which is rare on films. And props for Buttercup’s wedding gown being blue.

Cary Elwes as Westley and Robin Wright as Buttercup The Princess Bride picture image

Cary Elwes as Westley and Robin Wright as Buttercup

So let us don our holocaust clocks and grab a M.L.T sandwich and watch The Princess Bride because it inconceivable how fun this movie is. I keep using that word, I don’t think it means what I think it means.

Billy Crystal as Miracle Max and Carol Kane as Valerie The Princess Bride picture image

Billy Crystal as Miracle Max and Carol Kane as Valerie